There Are Other Worlds Than These: Reflections on the Dark Tower Movie

by Robin Furth

At 4:19 pm on a hot August afternoon, I climbed into my father’s old VW to drive to Bangor, Maine. I was so nervous that my stomach was in knots. For the last seventeen years of my life, I’ve been traveling with Roland Deschain and his ka-tet, sharing their khef and ka. Now, for the first time, Roland was coming to the big screen.



Pulling out of my dirt driveway and onto the empty Surry road, I looked up. Circling above the car were two crows. For the next three miles, those crows soared ahead of the car like a supernatural cavalcade. “Oh my God!” I said to my husband. “It’s Roland and the man in black!” Only when we reached the Ellsworth turnoff did those crows veer into the pinewoods, but they’d told me all I needed to know. It would be all right. We were on the Beam, and the Tower awaited us...


In his introduction to my Dark Tower Concordance, Stephen King did me a great honor: he named me Roland Deschain’s Boswell. But with every honor comes tremendous responsibility. As Roland’s biographer and as the steward of his ka-tet, I have been duty-bound to stand and be true. I have traveled with our gunslinger into so many worlds and onto so many levels of the Tower: first as sai King’s Research Assistant, then as a Consultant and co-writer for Marvel’s Dark Tower series, and most recently as a Consultant for the Dark Tower film. One of the most profound lessons I’ve learned while leaping from world to world and from medium to medium is that moving from words to images is not just an act of translation but of transformation. In order to condense a huge universe into a small space, you have to reach into the center of that universe and grab its heart. For me, this is what the Dark Tower film has done.


As Constant Readers know, before The Dark Tower movie was made, many other valiant filmmakers had set off to join Roland on his quest. In 2007, J.J. Abrams famously optioned the series for nineteen dollars, and soon after, two other studios took up the banner of Gilead. Yet in each case, they were forced to cry off. Why? Because, as the man in black tells Roland at the end of The Gunslinger, “size defeats us.” And when it comes to size, it doesn’t get much bigger than the Dark Tower universe.


Roland’s quest is one of mythic proportions. Weaving together Sergio Leone’s Spaghetti Westerns, Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, and Arthurian Romance with King’s own personal brand of apocalyptic fiction, the 5,000 page saga loops through time and space and worlds. Characters die in one book, only to be found again in another, but on alternate versions of Earth. To make matters even more daunting, the Dark Tower is the heart of King’s creative universe, and contains all the other worlds and characters of his making.


So how can a filmmaker capture the essence of this vast mythology that has grown and morphed over eight novels and forty years? Should he begin with The Gunslinger, which is the first slim volume of the series and which--as Stephen King himself has said--is quite different from the later books? Or should he move chronologically through Roland’s life? Then again, should he begin with the über-tale of Mid-World’s ancient past? In the case of the scriptwriters Akiva Goldsman, Jeff Pinkner, Nikolaj Arcel, and Anders Thomas Jensen, they decided to take a risk. Rather than transferring one of King’s novels onto film, they chose to create a sequel to the books--one steeped in the mythology of Mid-World--whose structure reflects that of King’s magnum opus.


As Dark Tower junkies know, Roland’s journey to the Tower is a time loop, a quest that is both endlessly repeating and endlessly varied. He is searching for the Tower, but his ultimate purpose is the redemption of his soul. The Dark Tower movie records one of those journeys, and it is both similar to and different from what we have experienced before. Longtime fans will see so many characters and places that they both love and fear: the Dutch Hill Mansion, the Great Old Ones’ mechanical portals that connect the multiple Americas and the multiple worlds (no magic doors here), and they will be plunged into a Mid-World where the gunslinger-knights have been defeated and where the wreckage of war litters the Mohaine Desert. Thanks to the superb skill of Director Nik Arcel, Roland’s world is gritty, dark, and brooding.


Just as the Dark Tower novels encompass all of King’s other fiction, The Dark Tower movie pays homage to the greater King cannon. Throughout the film there are Easter Eggs that refer to King’s other novels. And when we stumble across a tribe of Mid-World’s inhabitants, they remind us a little of the folken of Calla Bryn Sturgis, the Manni of Manni Redpath, and the denizens of River Crossing, but this multiracial group surviving in a ruined wasteland also make us think of Stephen King’s other apocalyptic fiction.


As I watched the film unfold, I realized that the term “sequel” wasn’t quite big enough to explain what the screenwriters and director had done. They had created a new version of Jake’s story; neither the tale I knew from The Gunslinger nor that recounted in The Waste Lands, but a bit of both, projected through the lens of the final book of the series, The Dark Tower. In this version of the saga, Jake is neither the son of a chain-smoking tv executive, as he is in The Gunslinger and The Waste Lands, nor is he the alternate-Earth Jake that we meet close to the end of the final book of the series. Instead he is an obsessive young artist--a quick nod to the character of Patrick Danville--living in New York City with his mom and his rotten step-dad. And like the Jake of the novels, this Jake is slowly but surely going mad...


Echoing the structure of the first Dark Tower novel, The Dark Tower movie is tight and fast paced. It is lean in ways that Roland--a man of few words who despises wastefulness--would appreciate. Also like The Gunslinger, it focuses on the bond between Jake and Roland, but the scope of that relationship--which encompasses rejection, abandonment, loss, despair, and hope--is also reminiscent of The Waste Lands.


For me, the relationship between Jake and Roland was one of the film’s many strengths, as were the actors who played the parts. From the first moment he appeared on the screen, Tom Taylor was Jake. And Idris Elba? He played the part of Roland with gravitas and dignity. From the beginning I thought he was good, but as soon as he began to fight--and I witnessed not just his preternatural reflexes but also his honed gunslinger senses--I was convinced. He became my Roland, and any difference in appearance from the character in the books was superfluous.


Amazingly, over the course of the film we see the entire progression of Roland’s character arc, a development that takes much longer in the series. Interestingly, it was my husband Mark, who is not a DT junkie, who commented on this first. Beginning as a cold, vengeful loner, Roland becomes something much greater--a knight who remembers his true quest, and a gunslinger who remembers the faces of his fathers.


And what about Matthew McConaughey? He acted the part of the man in black with a cool and cruel humor worthy of both Walter O’Dim and Randall Flagg. Twisted and manipulative but with a suave charm, he is a sorcerer who knows how to play upon his victims’ deepest fears and profoundest humiliations.


In the days since the screening, what has haunted me the most has been the power and accessibility of The Dark Towers mythology. Although I am a veteran traveler and my husband Mark is a neophyte, we were both completely drawn into the world depicted on the screen. One of our favorite film moments came soon after Jake joined Roland in the Mohaine Desert. Sitting by the fire, Jake drew a circle in the dirt, one divided by six lines. At the center of the circle, at the nexus point where all lines met, he placed a stick. He’s been dreaming of this symbol. Does Roland know what it means? Roland most certainly does. What Jake has drawn is a map of the universe. Inside the circle are all the worlds, linked by the central Tower. Lifting a large spider, Roland sets it creeping around the circle’s circumference. Beyond the edge of the universe, he says, there are monsters, just waiting to get in.../p>

Sitting in that dark theater, Mark and I were plunged into Mid-World as surely as if we had walked through one of the Great Old Ones’ doors. After viewing the film, Stephen King assured Nik Arcel that he had remembered the faces of his fathers. I most heartily agree.


Thankee-sai. I hope you enjoy the film as much as I did! Cama-a-cam-mal, Pria-toi, Gan delah: White over Red, thus Gan Wills Ever.
97 likes ·   •  41 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on August 02, 2017 19:19
Comments Showing 1-41 of 41 (41 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Reed Pendergrass (last edited Aug 03, 2017 01:55AM) (new)

Reed Pendergrass Robin, as someone who has a great attachment to The Dark Tower, it is very encouraging to read this. I think we all wanted the Ron Howard massive movie/TV show hybrid that was honestly an unrealistic dream. It's nice to read your post. I can't wait to see Roland on the big screen.


message 2: by Will (new)

Will It looks like only 18% of the critics agree with you, though. :(


message 3: by Cindi (new)

Cindi Leiter The comment about the critic really bothers me, enough that I believe that I need to remark upon it.
Critics have an opinion. OK. Everyone has an opinion. I hope that people take the time to form their own. This world has turned into a bandwagon world, where people do not explore topics, books, or movies unless they have been led there by someone they believe is more qualified them themselves. This has led to a world that follows the leader in politics and opinions, leaving the responsibility of outcomes to everyone else.
Watch the movie, read the book, research the topic. Make your own decision and NEVER leave it up to a critique to do the thinking for you.


message 4: by Tim (new)

Tim Johnson Wei Lien wrote: "It looks like only 18% of the critics agree with you, though. :("

Critics can be wrong. . .


message 5: by Tim (new)

Tim Johnson Cindi wrote: "The comment about the critic really bothers me, enough that I believe that I need to remark upon it.
Critics have an opinion. OK. Everyone has an opinion. I hope that people take the time to form ..."


I think the bandwagon universe is probably why the world "moved on."


message 6: by Adam (new)

Adam Fisher I've been reading a lot of negative reviews about the movie and was becoming slightly disheartened. I would obviously make my own judgment about what I see, but to read what you have written here fills my heart with hope again. I'll be searching for Easter Eggs for sure, and this Tower Junkie is happy to see that "Book 8" has been faithfully brought to the masses.


message 7: by ErikaShmerika (new)

ErikaShmerika Wine Wei Lien wrote: "It looks like only 18% of the critics agree with you, though. :("

Well, unless the other 82% are die-hard fans of the books, I'm not really interested in their opinions.


message 8: by Charlotte (new)

Charlotte I'm a huge fan of The Gunslinger Series. My husband and I went to the movie last night and both came home highly disappointed!


message 9: by Evgheni (new)

Evgheni I agree with Charli, except, you have to expect a bad movie...


message 10: by Chris (last edited Aug 04, 2017 12:04PM) (new)

Chris Galloso Same as Adam, I was getting discouraged and disappointed too by the reviews as my plan was to complete reading the series before watching the movie (as of now, I am at page 155 of book 7!!!). After reading the comments and the reflection, I will continue as planned, completing the books first, then watching it once it hits local theathers and forming my own opinion.
Also, I just found out the 82% of negative reviews came from Sombra corporation, to hell with those low men critics.


message 11: by Helen (new)

Helen Rhys Cindi wrote: "The comment about the critic really bothers me, enough that I believe that I need to remark upon it.
Critics have an opinion. OK. Everyone has an opinion. I hope that people take the time to form ..."


Exactly! Everyone has a an opinion and what i like, you might not like it. So people interested in movies, books, music, politics, etc, should form their opinions by seeing, listening, reading what they interested in. You can be missing something really great by following some elses opinion.


message 12: by Robert (new)

Robert The movie in itself is ok but was cookie cutted from the books and far too short. It should have been a lot better especially compared to other books that were adapted.


message 13: by Chinguun (new)

Chinguun Too massive to be made into one movie. Should be broken down to at least a dozen episodes.


message 14: by Fredrik (new)

Fredrik Forséll Charli wrote: "If there is anything I've learned watching movies based on Stephen King novels over the years it is this: forget everything you know about the novels and go into the movie expecting a good movie, n..."

I guess you're not counting Shawshank Redemption then. Or The Green Mile. Both are very true to the books.

Not to mention the movies that really destroyed a good book. The Running Man is one of my favorites, but the movie is sooo bad.


message 15: by Mary Johnson (new)

Mary Johnson As a die hard fan, I am reluctant to see the movie. Only because of past experiences. I've found that no Stephen King movie compared favorably to any Stephen King book. I enjoy his books so much that his adaptations always fall short to me. I realize there are time and money factors involved. This could prevent parts of the book from being utilized, sometimes they are my most personal favorite parts.


message 16: by Yalonda (new)

Yalonda I was so worried as casting news first starting coming out. I told myself it is an adaptation, that it is impossible to tell this tale in one feature length film, and that I had to see it. So I went to see the movie just last night and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. There were cheers and clapping as the credits rolled. I believe non-readers & Roland are well-met. I truly hope that this is only the start of bringing a complete Dark Tower series to the screen.


message 17: by Ted (new)

Ted Braunstein I'm sorry but I must disagree. Apart from a few tidbits thrown in(they felt like they were thrown in so we true fans would nod our heads and feel like we were 'in' on it) the movie was for people who didn't read the books. It was a simple good vs evil film with none of the depth(and few of the characters) or spirit. Having seen the trailers I was ready to be a little disappointed but I remained hopeful and willing to be pleasantly surprised. This is NOT MY Dark Tower. After all the studios and directors and years THIS is the best they could do? To quote another disappointment "so sad".


message 18: by Lisa (last edited Aug 06, 2017 09:31PM) (new)

Lisa I saw the movie a couple of days ago and decided to wait before giving my thoughts... I am glad that (unlike with American Gods and the tv series) I did not re-read the Gunslinger series. Instead, I avoided too many trailers and articles and tried to go in with a clear vision. I was a bit worried by the quick reviews I inadvertently saw (damn you Facebook!) which expressed disappointment, but ultimately I enjoyed the lean run time and quick pacing of the movie. I am a big King fan and have not liked a lot of the adaptations of his works, but I did like this one. This isn't a great movie, but it is good.


message 19: by Ted (new)

Ted Braunstein Mary Johnson wrote: "As a die hard fan, I am reluctant to see the movie. Only because of past experiences. I've found that no Stephen King movie compared favorably to any Stephen King book. I enjoy his books so much th..."
I would agree but there are exceptions. Misery, Stand by Me, The Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption were all adapted from his books and were all excellent films.


message 20: by Aleosd (new)

Aleosd I am disappointed with the movie. Whole gunslinger universe was crumpled in cheap average 1.5 hours action movie. So much noise about this film, expected something well-crafted like "The Shawshank Redemption" and got this third-rate western-like stuff.

Man in Black is the only role, which makes this film worth watching. Matthew McConaughey is amazing, he looks and acts like a real evil sorcerer. All the others are fake compared to him.


message 21: by Patricia (new)

Patricia I am a huge Stephen King fan and when I heard the DT was coming out in film I decided to reread the books. Just finished The Wastelands and went to see the movie last night. I have to say that I was disappointed. Ron Howard was a producer. I expected more. Not much of a social media fan so did not see reviews before the movie. I did talk to people in the theater after the movie was over who were not readers and they seemed to enjoy it.
Of course, a 1 1/2 hour movie could not do justice and the Easter eggs felt like cheap shots to me.


message 22: by Heather (new)

Heather It was an okay movie. Not the epic I was hoping for but it was well acted and the action was good. I think people built up so much hype the cannot see the movie for what it was. I refuse to hate a movie because some critic said I'm supposed to. Was it what I wanted it to be no. But its a 7 book mega universe. For a movie it was good.


message 23: by Jeremy (new)

Jeremy Silver When I first heard they were making a Dark Tower movie I was overwhelmed with excitement. My favorite book series ever was finally coming to the big screen. Then I found out it was just going to be 1 movie. Then I found out there would be no Eddie or Susanna or even Oy. Then I found out the movie was only 90 minutes long. Then I found out that 82% of critics gave it a bad review. If I hadn't heard any of these things by Saturday when I saw the movie, I would have absolutely hated it. Because my expectations had been dropped to zero, I did enjoy it, but only as a very simple action good vs bad movie. So when I say I *like it..it's with a HUGE asterisk, because to me this is one of the greatest sagas ever written. This is a story that deserves to be told over multiple movies. This is what I just don't understand...in this day and age where Hollywood pumps out 7 harry potter movies or a bazillion garbage transformer or fast and furious movies and laugh all the way to the bank, why are they not taking an amazing story like this, taking their time, making their money over years rather than just a quick hit like this? Again, the movie is ok for a typical action movie but The Dark Tower (and it's fans) deserves so much more.


message 24: by John (new)

John Mosman I always hoped for the series to be a movie, yet two things stopped me from this movie at this time. First, the story is a sequel to the series and, second my local movie guy (Dean Richards, WGN 9 Chicago) gave it a D rating. He rarely gives that rating. On a different note, I am disappointed the TV adaptation of Mr. Mercedes would require me to switch providers or pay more money. Like Star Trek: Discovery on CBS All Access (for more money).


message 25: by Paul (new)

Paul As I said elsewhere, I waited 20 years for a Dark Tower movie, and after seeing The Dark Tower, I'm still waiting.

This was a fun summer action movie. But it wasn't a Dark Tower movie. I get that it's a "sequel" and didn't go in expecting a lot of continuity with the books, but I did expect at least some semblance of similarity with character motivation and at least some attempt at world-building. A longer, slightly slower-paced movie that actually cared about the world and its characters would have been much better than what we got: a sliced-and-diced flick with just enough King callouts to make the fans happy.


message 26: by Mary Johnson (new)

Mary Johnson Ted wrote: "Mary Johnson wrote: "As a die hard fan, I am reluctant to see the movie. Only because of past experiences. I've found that no Stephen King movie compared favorably to any Stephen King book. I enjoy..."

Ted wrote: "Mary Johnson wrote: "As a die hard fan, I am reluctant to see the movie. Only because of past experiences. I've found that no Stephen King movie compared favorably to any Stephen King book. I enjoy..."

Sorry Ted, you are correct. I should change my wording. Your examples are definitely exceptiions to my comment. Slapping my hands!


message 27: by Patti (last edited Aug 09, 2017 11:14AM) (new)

Patti I enjoyed the books. Not the movie, but I'm not a Matthew McMonaughey fan in the first place. I don't think it's possible to make a Stephen King Movie for a series of books in the first place. I really enjoy the ones that come on the tv for nights at a time. I feel they can actually give you a better sense of the characters you've loved and hated in the books. :D


message 28: by [deleted user] (new)

I am a major King fan however, historically speaking, his best adaptions to film, are the stories that hStephen had very little to do with (control) during the change to the screen vs the novel. In my opinion, the more Stephen gets involved in the film making process, the worse the film adaption is. I think in his case, he is better off allowing the film types to do their job without much interference (the original Shining as an example) besides, cramming 8 books into a 90 minute or so film destined it to the reviews it got.


message 29: by Cranky (new)

Cranky Squirrel I have to agree with the critical consensus of this film. It was bad. No, it was worse than bad--it was boring. Even most of the so-called "fresh" reviews struggled to praise the film more than calling it "mediocre." I'd take Ed Wood level film making incompetence over a by-the-numbers Hollywood action film any day.

It was bad enough that Roland's myopic quest for the Tower was reduced to a Young Adult interest story in which a misunderstood youth turns out to be savior of the universe. It's a common Hollywood trope that hopes to sell tickets to the PG-13 film-going demographic. However, it isn't even a good example of this type of film. The kid saves the world story has been done much better elsewhere.

I understand this was meant to be Roland's next round on the wheel of Ka. Given that, the story could have changed in myriad ways and still been compelling. I never would have guessed that Roland's next trip would be so dull and look like a second-rate Superhero movie. If the book series were anything like its movie version, there'd be only one book (because I can't imagine fiction readers demanding more of this) and it would have been forgotten years ago. There never would have been a movie.


message 30: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Evgheni wrote: "I agree with Charli, except, you have to expect a bad movie..."

This is such a sad, close-minded way of looking at things. Yes, you're entitled to your opinion, as we all are, but why in the world would you go into something EXPECTING it to be bad? Of course you can expect it to be different from the books since they almost always are, but to have such negative expectations is just, well, sad.


message 31: by Jeremy (new)

Jeremy Silver Sarah wrote: "Evgheni wrote: "I agree with Charli, except, you have to expect a bad movie..."

This is such a sad, close-minded way of looking at things. Yes, you're entitled to your opinion, as we all are, but ..."


Expecting the movie to be bad was the only way for hardcore fans of the books to actually attempt to enjoy it! I enjoyed the movie to a point (see my previous post) but if I didn't know as much negative stuff as I did going in, my expectations would have been very high and i would have totally hated it.


message 32: by Pedro (new)

Pedro Paiva Erika wrote: "Wei Lien wrote: "It looks like only 18% of the critics agree with you, though. :("

Well, unless the other 82% are die-hard fans of the books, I'm not really interested in their opinions."


A good movie is a good movie, independently of the book . If it can't stand on its own and relies on the book, it is bound for failure. You have to assume that the typical moviegoer (like the typical critical) didn't read the books and still deliver a good piece of cinema. Additionally, you have to assume that die-hard fans of books we'll be seeing it as well and satisfy them, in the process. That's why adapting popular, good books is extremely hard and a good portion fails.


message 33: by erin (last edited Aug 10, 2017 08:11AM) (new)

erin isntrad I quite agree with you. I have been defending this movie against so much hate and negativity. This movie was really like a new version of The Gunslinger. The story is focused on Roland, Walter, and Jake. I like Jake's new story, I loved seeing the beam breakers (although I always imagined the attack being on the beams, not the Tower itself), and I loved all the Easter eggs. For me, the movie did a great job of introducing us to this world, its mythos, and the characters while also leaving me wanting more....much like The Gunslinger novel did. There is so much more story to tell, but on its own, it still has a beginning, middle, and end. If this is it...if the tv show and/or the rest of the movies don't happen...I feel like this movie stands well enough on its own....much like The Gunslinger novel.


message 34: by Sarah (new)

Sarah Erin wrote: "I quite agree with you. I have been defending this movie against so much hate and negativity. This movie was really like a new version of The Gunslinger. The story is focused on Roland, Walter, and..."


Yay!! It's so nice to see something POSITIVE regarding this movie from another fan. I couldn't agree with you more. I am NOT an expert on the series by any means but I definitely know what I like. My husband and I loved the movie, especially the Easter Eggs! We went into it knowing that it was going to be more of a continuation than a remake.
I liked the story line, the effects, and thought that both Idris Alba and Tom Taylor were perfect choices. And Matthew McConaughey as the Man In Black? Whew. Perfectly sinister.
I look forward to there being either another movie or a TV series in the future but if there isn't, as you said, this movie does stand well enough on its own.


message 35: by Jean (new)

Jean Mary Johnson wrote: "As a die hard fan, I am reluctant to see the movie. Only because of past experiences. I've found that no Stephen King movie compared favorably to any Stephen King book. I enjoy his books so much th..."

Sometimes something is better left in our imaginations. I still didn't see it, am unsure. But I loved the series. Jake was very important, he was the first to understand the planes of existence and the fate of the Rose in the pocket park The movie is still playing in my area.


message 36: by Blackbird (last edited Aug 10, 2017 01:15PM) (new)

Blackbird What can you expect when Hollywood tries to cram 7 books into a 2 hour movie? This. So, the Ka Tet is halved, it's got a gee whiz coming of age boy / surrogate father relationship. Matthew McConnahaughy was better than I thought, even good, but I wished wished for Christopher Walken as Walter O'Dim. When the movie opened I saw produced by Tet Corporation, with the Turtle logo, and I got chills. Kind of petered out from there. OK movie, captured a little bit of the flavor of the books, changed the story a lot, (a lot), but the bow is tied and the present is opened, so that's that. SK doesn't have to sweat over Book 7 of the Dark Tower expectation like he did, because the movie is done. Could I have done better? Not in one movie. No Sheemie either. Well, Bombadil didn't make PJ's LOTR, so painful cuts had to be made.


message 37: by Wendi Sustaire (new)

Wendi Sustaire I started reading the DT series in the 80's and eagerly anticipated each sequel, (even the one that took a decade). I was terribly afraid of watching the movie, since that usually does not turn out well. However, my husband talked me into going yesterday and it was actually really good. I think they did the right thing, making the movie a sort of sequel instead of trying to use one of the books. The spirit of the movie was amazing, it was indeed like being transported to Mid-World.
I personally give it three our of five stars. It didn't make me want to get up and leave the theater like other book adaptations I have tried to watch, *cough cough* Percy Jackson. It wasn't amazing, but I'd watch it again just to see him speed load his revolvers one more time.


message 38: by Teresa (new)

Teresa Ted wrote: "I'm sorry but I must disagree. Apart from a few tidbits thrown in(they felt like they were thrown in so we true fans would nod our heads and feel like we were 'in' on it) the movie was for people w..."

I agree. I was sorely disappointed. Maybe I just expected too much.


message 39: by Teresa (new)

Teresa Jeremy wrote: "When I first heard they were making a Dark Tower movie I was overwhelmed with excitement. My favorite book series ever was finally coming to the big screen. Then I found out it was just going to be..."

YES!! This was also a huge problem I had when hearing they would make it into a stand alone movie. They could have made a TON of money had they made it into at least 3movies, maybe more. I feel like they threw away so many possibilities.


message 40: by Nat (new)

Nat I mean come on, idris elba played roland, they had a sick cast and a ginormous budget going for them, how did they still screw it up?


message 41: by Leonard (new)

Leonard Smith A black Roland, not a problem. This is one group of artists interpreting a series of stories, and maybe one, stand alone movie is not enough. It would be nice if it were more and who,knows. It has to make money, so this is what we have. The essential story is rather simple.


back to top