• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Film sequel to 'The Shining' gets green light, "DOCTOR SLEEP", Akiva Goldsman writing

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://bloody-disgusting.com/movie/...doctor-sleep-getting-feature-film-adaptation/

Warner Bros. has tapped Academy Award-winning screenwriter Akiva Goldsman to adapt Stephen King’s Doctor Sleep, the sequel to the horror classic The Shining, The Tracking Board is reporting.

Goldsman is also a writer and producer on Sony’s adaptation of King’s The Dark Tower, as well as Paramount’s Rings.

Originally published in 1977, “The Shining” follows Jack Torrance, his wife Wendy and their son Danny and their lives at the haunted Overlook Hotel. While there, the hotel possesses Jack and he slowly takes over the hotel and torments Wendy and Danny.

“Doctor Sleep” takes place years after the events at the Overlook Hotel and focuses on the the now middle-aged Danny who is still traumatized. He’s followed in his father’s footsteps and has problems with anger management and alcoholism. He soon gives up drinking and settles in a small town in New Hampshire. While there, his psychic abilities start to resurface and he develops a psychic link with a 12-year-old girl named Abra Stone who he must save after he discovers her life is being threatened by a tribe of paranormals led by a man named Rose the Hat.

Jon Berg and Jon Gonda will oversee for Warner, while King will serve as an executive producer on the project. No release date has been set.
 

Azzanadra

Member
I could see this as being a direct sequel to Kubrick's film simply because this is focused on Jack and his (mis)adventures, and so I hope that it is a faithful adaption. They wouldn't even need to reference The Shining much other than the common elements across the book and film, as it wouldn't be necessary. Count me in!

In all honesty I thought The Shining movie was a mediocre adaption of an excellent book, and so I hope this movie fares better.
 
Should maybe point out for those unaware that this doesn't mean it is a sequel to the Kubrick movie, which was very distinct from its source material.
 

Epcott

Member
Will be interesting to see if they decide to play this as a sequel to Kubrick's Shining, or make it independent and more faithful to the novels.
 

Azzanadra

Member
Should maybe point out for those unaware that this doesn't mean it is a sequel to the Kubrick movie, which was very distinct from its source material.

Like I said in my original post, they can perfectly co-exist because the book doesn't really indulge too much in the details of The Shining other than the really common elements like Danny has powers and that
Jack is dead
 
Whoaaaaa, I didn't know there was a sequel to The Shining.

I HATED the original, but I'm down for a sequel. Looking forward to it!

EDIT: Wait, the writer for Batman Forever and Batman & Robin is gonna write this? Wow, just like that the magic is gone.
 
In all honesty I thought The Shining movie was a mediocre adaption of an excellent book, and so I hope this movie fares better.

Nah, it wasn't mediocre. It is one of the most suspenseful films out there. It's just not a faithful adaptation (which in this particular case I commend)
 
I could see this as being a direct sequel to Kubrick's film simply because this is focused on Jack and his (mis)adventures, and so I hope that it is a faithful adaption. They wouldn't even need to reference The Shining much other than the common elements across the book and film, as it wouldn't be necessary. Count me in!

In all honesty I thought The Shining movie was a mediocre adaption of an excellent book, and so I hope this movie fares better.
The second time I watched it (which was the time I realized I hated it), I saw it with a fan of King's work, which was his first time. He disliked the movie too for it not being too faithful to the book (with additional criticisms to Kubrick's direction, which I agreed with). Since I never read the book, it was a pretty enlightening experience and provided me an alternate perspective!

I did read about half of It, though. Didn't like the miniseries though :p
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
I could see this as being a direct sequel to Kubrick's film simply because this is focused on Jack and his (mis)adventures, and so I hope that it is a faithful adaption. They wouldn't even need to reference The Shining much other than the common elements across the book and film, as it wouldn't be necessary. Count me in!

In all honesty I thought The Shining movie was a mediocre adaption of an excellent book, and so I hope this movie fares better.

No its a masterpiece that didnt care about being faithful to the book. I like the book a lot but I dont care that Kubrick wasnt aiming for a strict adaptation.
 

Akahige

Member
Weren't they doing some sort of prequel called 'Overlook Hotel' with the director of 'One Hour Photo'?

That could have been interesting I suppose but entirely unnecessary like this, but I am a fan of that director.
 
While there, his psychic abilities start to resurface and he develops a psychic link with a 12-year-old girl named Abra Stone who he must save after he discovers her life is being threatened by a tribe of paranormals led by a man named Rose the Hat.

I don't know anything about the book, but this right here sounds stupid as shit, lol.
 

Azzanadra

Member
No its a masterpiece that didnt care about being faithful to the book. I like the book a lot but I dont care that Kubrick wasnt aiming for a strict adaptation.

It was worse off for not being a strict adaption. For one, as King says, its quite misogynistic considering the Wendy in the book was a strong female character. Jack is also made into some cookie cutter psychopath spouting one-liners rather than the deeply conflicted and nuanced man he is in the book. Kubrick substituted caricatures for characters.
 

Horse Detective

Why the long case?
I really want a good suspense/horror book. Especially having loved Alan Wake and wanting a novelization.

Guess this won't be my choice.
 

Alavard

Member
I honestly loved the book, but there was probably no real reason to write it as a sequel to The Shining. He could have written the same story with a different protagonist.
 

.JayZii

Banned
The book has lots of internalized psychic shenanigans going on and a lot of the actual visuals could easily come across as very hokey and just lame. The creepiest part would never, ever be put into a mainstream film.

It would need a really good director to pull off a film adaptation well. Not getting my hopes up for Stephen King movies after the whole "It" adaptation fell through last year.
 

Keri

Member
I honestly loved the book, but there was probably no real reason to write it as a sequel to The Shining. He could have written the same story with a different protagonist.

The connections to The Shining were the best parts of the book (in my opinion). I didn't really dig the concept of a roving band of monster people hunting psychic children, but I was interested in seeing the continuation of Danny's character and some of the elaboration on the original story. I really would have preferred a full return to the Overlook (like a new hotel built in its place with some of the same ghosts).
Obviously, there was a bit of that at the end (which I loved), but I wish it was the whole book.
 
Please, don't. Doctor Sleep was borderline awful, and I say that as a huge Stephen King fan. I read literally everything he turns out, and The Shining is my favorite novel.

This is going to be atrociously bad.
 
I think "Academy Award-winning screenwriter" and "Academy Award-winning screenwriter for a fucking Ron Howard movie" carry rather different connotations
 

Hazmat

Member
I wonder if it will toss out Kubrick's movie and confuse the hell out of audiences by following the novels. My money is on this getting a (bad) script and ending up in development hell.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom