Which is Better? 11/22/63

I definitely tried to do a weekly thing with the comparison of the TV show and the book, I really did. However, as the show progressed, I found myself disliking it immensely to where I stopped watching it. I didn't catch up, nor did I watch the finale. I saw all that I needed too.

It blew. 

To be fair, adaptation of King's books don't really do that well as TV shows. Other than The Shining and IT, I don't even think movies do a good job either. My husband really enjoyed it, but he also read the book four years ago, so he was a bit hairy on the details.

What I really disliked about the TV show is the fact that they glossed over a lot of really good plot points, and focused on making time travel spoooooky. What King does really well in this novel is the ability to make things creepy without it being over the top. In the first episode, Jake Epping calls... someone, I think his parents? and a car crashes into the telephone booth moments after Jake hangs up the phone. The dead woman says something creepy about Jake being not wanted there.

Which... ugh. It would have been way more effective to actually just follow the book and show Jake going through, do all the things with the Dunning family (which by the way, Josh Duhamel was an excellent choice for Frank Dunning), then go to 2011 with Al Templeton, and discover that alternating time didn't really do much for Harry Dunning. This would have shown that time has a funny way of doubling back and righting itself. Then could have been a montage of him going back to that time and shooting Frank Dunning at the grave site.

I also hated the fact that the show made up a male character to basically his sidekick, instead of Sadie, because apparently a woman can't be both his accomplice and his on screen romance. Nope, she has to be the innocent love interest and not be scarred by anything. Also, this same male character, (What's is name, George?) also wants to rescue Marina, Oswald's wife. What I found so fascinating about the book is the length Jake Epping is willing to go too in order to succeed at his mission. Allowing Marina to be beaten on the reg by Harvey to ensure the timeline isn't altered is morally ambiguous, which is something the writers just blew past by having George agonize over Marina and Harvey having sex. Ugh. Boring and overdone. via GIPHY

I also thought they blew past the Yellow Card Man, which scared the crap out of me when he went back and found him dead. I was curious to know what that meant and how Jake's actions would affect the timeline. Nah. Just had a weird scene where the Yellow Card Man was almost ran over by Jake when he's driving.

I know a lot of people had problems with James Franco playing Jake Epping/George Amberson (Or Jake Amberson), but I thought he wasn't the problem. I liked him... it's everything else that was the problem. If the book was cheesier, or I just didn't enjoy the book that much, I probably would've enjoyed the show more. As it stands, though, don't bother watching the mini-series. The first episode was cheeky because there were lots of montages of James Franco walking through the 50's time period... but after that? Totally sucked. 

The Bookish Binger: The Kill Floor, 11/22/63

My husband and I had a discussion about this episode last night. I think my stance is affected by the fact that I've read the book recently, where as he read it a few years ago. He thinks that it's the right about of cheese, horror and camp that only Franco and Hulu could provide. He thinks in terms of King's adaptations, it's a pretty good one.

Me, on the other hand.... I think this Jake Amberson character is kind of a doofus. An impulsive doofus that makes really horrible and silly mistakes during the course of an episode that leaves you wondering how he ever survived in 2011 where everything made sense? He makes this rash decisions and without a headspace in which to tell it in, me, as the viewer, just feels embarrassed for him and wonder how the heck this guy is going to save President Kennedy.

Now, George Amberson/Jake Epping in the book also makes ill-timed and horrible decisions. But what I thought during the book was that, well, those types of decisions anyone could make. It was realistic, and there were some decisions that occurred that the reader didn't even realize it was a mistake until later.

I think the one flaw about the show so far is the fact that they killed Templeton way too early. I like the flashbacks of them talking, but I liked in the book he had more of a presence. I thought Al prepared him more for the time traveling. I get why Jake and Al had clippings in a book that showed JFK's assassination, but man, Jake was careless with it. It was like he just threw it wherever he wanted too instead of putting it in safe keeping. I thought for sure in the book he kept better care of it.

It was interesting how they combined two characters into one (the bartender and... the older man. I don't remember his name) and had him find the clippings. I'm not sure how they are going to utilize him, but I'm interested to see.

I thought they cast Harry Dunning very well. Mr. Fergie is charming and charismatic with the right amount of dangerous, and I thought he would kill Jake with a smile on his face. I wasn't too fond of Jake going right up to him in the first scene, because affecting the timeline (and changing it for the worse) was a huge part of the book and it just seemed like TV Jake was itching to do that.

However, I had to fast forward through the cow scene. I think the show does horror very well, and whereas the book is spooky, the show is straight up horror.

Overall... I'm not a fan of the show, namely because I really liked the book. I loved how subtle it all was, and how much care and thought Stephen King put into time travel, the time travel paradox, along with all of the research he did. This just seems like... they only had brief amount of time to write the script and just went with the first draft. Then in order to lean into the cheesiness, they cast Franco.

The Bookish Binger: 11/22/63, The Rabbit Hole

I reviewed the book by Stephen King, after I saw the previews for the Hulu miniseries. I was impressed that James Franco was involved, along with JJ Abrams. I figured, at the very least, it would be entertaining, and the miniseries proves that it's not going to go on for 6 seasons (or with Abrams' track record, a good 2 seasons and miserable 2 seasons before cancelling).

Usually what I've done with TV shows is binge watch them after they all have come out, and break it up into a few posts before calling it quits. However, this time, since for the first time I'm actually watching it on schedule, I would post weekly of my reactions, feelings, comparisons between the book and the show, and my hopes for future episodes. 

What I found interesting about the book was the setup that led up to the real conflict of Epping finally thwarting the assassination of JFK. I really liked that King took his time to really sink the reader's teeth into the implications of time travel, and the disastrous outcomes of changing those events. It really foreshadowed what was to come later in the book. 

Now, when I was younger, I definitely was one to complain when movies or TV shows weren't exactly like the book and wondered why script writers didn't just work directly with the author to write something that mirrored the author's vision. Obviously, I understand now that some things can't work for TV, like King's prologue of 11/22/63 leading up to Epping leaving to save the Dunning Family. Unfortunately, it's what I liked most about the book and so for the first episode, I was disappointed because I was looking forward to that part. However, I am fully aware that if the writers just carbon copied the book into the first episode, it wouldn't be effective, and I would have still been disappointed. 

Removing myself from the book, I thought they did a good job of creating the spookiness that King so often has with his books and the theme of time always trying to right itself. The visuals of the car crashing into the telephone pole moments after Epping steps away from it is harrowing, and it conveys that time is a sentient being, and it will do anything to keep time, and its events, on track. In later episodes, due to the shock of the events in this one (the fire, the beetles, etc.), I wonder how they are going to up the ante of preventing Epping from stopping the assassination. 

My husband tells me that there has been some criticism over James Franco's performance as Jake Epping. Considering that 11/22/63 is told in first person, I feel like Franco is going to be at a disadvantage since as the reader, you put yourself as the main character. Watching someone else play Epping, maybe the viewer won't connect as well. I think he does a good job of acting bewildered and out of place, both in 2011 and when he travels back in time. I also liked the montages of Epping walking around in 1960, absolutely loving the time period. Epping in the book romanticizes the 1960s, and it definitely shows that this one does too. 

Epping in the book, makes a ton of stupid mistakes that come back later to bite him in the ass. However, it's over a period of time, so it comes off more realistic and believable. My only problem with this Epping, and it's not to the fault of Franco, is that I think the writers wanted him to make all the stupid moves in the first episode in order for them to bite him in later episodes. There is a ton of foreshadowing in the first episode, which seems rushed, but then again, the book was 800 pages and could afford to take it's time.  

I am anxious to see how they are going to portray the Dunning family murder, and if Jake will go back through the rabbit hole to see the changed outcome. I wish they hadn't killed of Templeton so quickly because there seemed to be some more story there, but maybe it'll right itself later on. 

There is another episode night, so check out my next post this week! 

11/22/63 by Stephen King

I resisted reading this book. Yes, I did. I should really love Stephen King, and I enjoyed reading The Stand, but there is something terrifying about King's books. He has a "scary" reputation, and for the longest time, I didn't want to read his books in fear that I would be scared out of my mind.

I also stumbled onto the IT movie when I was much too young to watch it and it was so scary I couldn't sleep for weeks. Now that I think about that, I think that movie single handedly kept me away from his books all these years.

Finally, a weird side note, I remember in school, at some point, there was a discussion about Stephen King and that he "had ghost writers" to write his books for him and that there was no way he could have written all of those books himself. I seriously think this was a conversation in elementary school, but maybe it was middle school? I don't even know how those books came up, or why a bunch of kids were discussing the merits of King's work. Odd what you remember. I no longer think that, btw.

Anyway, our (Josh and I's) first Christmas together, 4 years ago, when we were just boyfriend and girlfriend, I got him this book. It was on his wishlist and it had just come out. I think it's a cool gift for someone to get you a new book on the book shelf. They are normally expensive and not usually in paperback. He read it, and told him that it was so good, but incredibly sad.

And I just... avoided reading it. Along with the fear of being scared out of my mind, my continued association of the IT movie and scared to go to sleep for a week with Stephen King, I also don't like reading sad books. When my husband says something that is "really sad," I know it's super sad and not me thinking it's just sad, so I don't want to read it.

However, Hulu is coming out with an 8 part miniseries of the book with James Franco, and of course, I have to do a "Which is Better?" review of the show versus the book. So that meant I found the hardback I so lovingly gave my husband 4 years ago, dusted it off and began reading.

The story is about a man named Jake Epping, who recently divorced his alcoholic wife. His wife paints him as an unfeeling man who doesn't cry, and a man that doesn't cry can't have feelings. This sort of writing, a first person point of view discussing the perception of another character is tricky and King has the chops to do it. The reader is then introduced to a man named Al Templeton, who overnight, looks like he's knocking on death's door. He shut down his diner, which for years, sold food for disturbingly low prices, so low that it was widely speculated that he killed pets or his food was rancid. He calls Jake, and tells him to meet him at the bar. He has something to show him, which is a pantry that leads to another time period. From there, Al wants Jake to do one thing; stop the assassination of JFK.

I am particularly impressed with King's research into late 1950s and early 1960s. He did an extensive job of researching Oswald's whereabout, his philosophies and more importantly, the events leading up to that fateful day. I was also fascinated with Oswald's origin story, so to speak, and as a horror writer, King expertly touched on his psychotic, smothering mother as one of the fuses to be lit that led up to his decision to assassinate Kennedy.

My only gripe with Al's mantra that Kennedy surviving would fix everything, and it might have been
ignored because as a character stated in the book, "people see what they want to see," is that Civil Rights Acts were passed due to the combination of Kennedy's death and the whole country mourning along with LBJ's powerful personality. Before that, it was going to be almost impossible. Maybe Al thought, naively, I think, that it would still be passed regardless.

I enjoyed reading Jake's interpretation of the culture during that time as a man traveling back in time to live it. I'm unsure if King deliberately did this, but I felt like the "Land of Ago" was a bit too romanticized. That everything was perfect and everything was wholesome and joyful, and it may have just been Jake's perspective of the time because he was in love.

However, and I'm not sure if it would truly fit into the story, because it's the experience of a white man during the late 1950s and early 1960s, I wish there more about the struggle for civil rights in any capacity. Any mention of segregation, or voting rights was sort of an afterthought and it seems to be largely ignored. Now, it might be because many white people in the south that lived in isolated towns like Jodie wouldn't really talk about the marches or the struggle, or any conversation would steer in one, anti-civil rights way.

Finally, the science fiction and fantasy elements of the book appear in the right amount. I love King's explanations of time travel, and the appearance of the Yellow Card Man and the drive of time to "right itself" is done in the way only King can do it. I also loved the silent horror of the book that isn't in your face but lurking in the shadows as you read. You know the character is playing with fire, and things he doesn't understand, but you are powerless to stop it.

I don't want to give too much away because I think if you like fiction, historical fiction, time travel fantasy with a dash of thriller thrown in, this would be a good book for you, and I wouldn't want to spoil it. Read this book as soon as you can. You won't regret it.