HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
  • LibraryThing
  • Book discussions
  • Your LibraryThing
  • Join to start using.

Bag of Bones on A&E

King's Dear Constant Readers

Join LibraryThing to post.

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

1Madcow299
Dec 13, 2011, 6:52am Top

A&E made a two part mini-series of Bag of Bones starring Pierce Bronson. Watching a bit on DVR and thinking it's very odd and deviates from the book in unusual ways, first of which, using a British man to play a new englander. As this is one of my favorites from King, I am interested to see if it's decent at all. Anyone else watching this?

2sebago
Dec 13, 2011, 11:28am Top

I loved this book but am not enjoying the mini series. As you said MADCOW299 it deviates from the book - so much seems to be left out. I will watch the second half tonight but do not have high expectations. :(

3StefanY
Dec 13, 2011, 12:39pm Top

I have it recorded on my DVR, but haven't watched it yet.

4Madcow299
Dec 13, 2011, 1:15pm Top

I watched the first half and it isn't bad. For a King TV movie, below The Stand's quality, but certainly above something like the Langoliers or the more recent version of the Shining. They captured the creepiness of the story and house well. Max Devore looks like the evil SOB he is. I like Sarah and the music. But the richness of the story seems to be left out and some of the changes they made were just weird and unnecessary. I think a 6-hour mini-series instead of 4-hour might have helped. And dear God can someone teach Pierce Bronson how to run and not look like a schmuck. He was James Bond for Pete's sake. Overall though, worth watching.

5sebago
Dec 13, 2011, 3:54pm Top

Madcow299 I agree.. and how to laugh.... what the heck is that he is doing? lol.

6cal8769
Dec 13, 2011, 9:41pm Top

I have it recorded but am looking forward to watching it. I haven't read the book in years so maybe the variations won't bother me to much. I know when I do reread the book I will be very annoyed!

7Madcow299
Dec 13, 2011, 10:21pm Top

I just read it this summer and the yeah that probably hurt my opinion. Although I think the second half was better than the first. Definitely worth watching.

8beeg
Dec 13, 2011, 11:21pm Top

I watched it as well, but can't remember the story at all other than the magnets on the refrigerator, I don't remember loving the book. Another one that needs a re-read to see if it gets better.

9cal8769
Dec 14, 2011, 4:08am Top

I'm waiting for the group reread here. I have several King books just waiting for their turn.

10RoryOConnor
Dec 17, 2011, 5:54pm Top

I watched it when it was on last night and was disappointed. One of the things that bothered me was Pierce Brosnan age, he couldn't pass for anywhere near 40, but Devore was good.

11TheBentley
Dec 18, 2011, 12:11am Top

Bag of Bones was one that I loved, and I know that's unusual among King fans. I have now watched the whole thing consecutively (thank you, DVR), and the changes were just wrong--they undermined the meaning and intention of the book. Unlike everyone else, I liked Pierce Brosnan in the part (and Mike Noonan IS kind of a dork, so I think that was intentional). I thought the first half was better than the second. The characterization material was good, but the climax and resolution all came in about half an hour and "the shooting" (no spoiler there, so please nobody clarify that for folks who haven't seen it) was so abrupt as to be corny. I think they might have wanted to make a longer film and got squeezed. I really wanted this one to be good because it's very "do-able" as a mini-series, and I was really disappointed.

12cal8769
Dec 20, 2011, 3:42pm Top

Very disappointed. I love Pierce Brosnan usually but he fell flat in this story. I also think that he was too old. His grandfather was raised in New England, his brother (who also looked pretty old) didn't have an accent at all and Noonan had a British accent and I don't think that Brosnan is anything close to being booky or nerdy enough to be Noonan.

You do have to love a good tree whipping though, I got a chuckle out of that.

13beeg
Dec 20, 2011, 4:57pm Top

a most excellent tree

14StefanY
Dec 21, 2011, 11:18am Top

We watched this over the past couple of days. I was not thrilled. I didn't remember a whole lot of the story since I read it so long ago, but it just didn't feel right to me. Overall, I was happy with the casting and acting, but the storyline just didn't flow and I found myself pretty bored. I KNOW that didn't happen when I read the book. Anyway, I was pretty disappointed and it left me wondering why King is so difficult to successfully translate into film. (There are some exceptional films made from King material, but there are some exceptional turds as well!)

15TheBentley
Dec 22, 2011, 11:49pm Top

Thank you, StefanY. That's a good description: "the storyline just didn't flow." I can get past accents--especially if you have a few actors who can "set the scene" with really good ones (I think of Becky Ann Baker in "Storm of the Century" for instance), and a New England accent is particularly difficult. I think King is really dependent on internal monologue and characterization--most especially in his "haunting" books and that makes them REALLY HARD to film. And I have to agree with the assessment of the tree whipping. I loves me a good tree whipping--a la The Wizard of Oz or Harry Potter--and that was chuckle-worthy....

16beeg
Jan 3, 2012, 8:30am Top

Ents! don't forget Ents! they kick ass

Group: King's Dear Constant Readers

394 members

4,977 messages

About

This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.

Touchstones

No touchstones

Help/FAQs | About | Privacy/Terms | Blog | Contact | APIs | WikiThing | Common Knowledge | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | 89,471,389 books! | Top bar: Always visible