...
Show More
Wow, what a major disappointment. The first 4 DT books were great, and some of King’s best works. It's just too bad that King waited so damn long to finish the last 3, and also too bad that he seemed to be in such a rush to do so.
I actually did like #5. It didn't progress Roland's quest to the Tower much, but it was a good story . I quickly went to book 6 and found a fairly boring book, though at least it was shorter. Reluctantly, I picked up book 7. I got halfway through and stopped. Many things were starting to frustrate me with it, and I had other things to read, so I put it on hold. For over two years. After reading the negative reviews I was considering never finishing it, and just leaving the series in my mind with what little sense of wonder and mystery it had left. Of course I picked it up again. I was right the first time.
*Spoiler warning. If you don't want to know what happens, please skip this.*
I really think that King copped out on this one. First off, Stephen King including himself as a series character was one of the worst things I have ever read. What a bunch of self indulgent crap! I really lost faith after reading that in book 6.
The Crimson King was hugely disappointing. Instead of the biggest bad guy in the universe, with the ability to topple the Tower and end all worlds, Roland gets to him and he’s a decrepit old Santa looking man pelting grenades at him and cackling madly. What?
Patrick the Artist: The biggest last minute “save my ass” plot device I’ve ever read. With the ability to draw things into and out of existence, this gives King free reign to get himself out of any plot holes he needs to, such as draw the Crimson King and then erase him, allowing Roland to get to the Tower without harm.
The Dark Tower: Well, it’s real. Does it hold the answer to all the world’s questions? Is there any explanation as to why it’s there or where it came from? Nothing of the sort. It is a monument to Roland and his life, each level containing a different piece of his life. What happens when he gets to the top? (this isn’t a joke, I promise you) He gets sucked back all the way to the beginning of the first book, forgetting what happens with a hint that this time around, things may be different (he was supposed to blow the Horn of the Eld at the base of the Tower, but lost it as a kid. This time he has it.) Did we really read through seven long books to find out that the next time around, in another seven books that don’t exist, Roland may succeed?
In a way, Stephen King reminds me a George Lucas. Lucas got so full of himself after the original Star Wars trilogy that he thought he could tackle another trilogy with no help in writing or directing it. He had complete creative control and there was no one to stand over his shoulder and say, "hey, this is kind of stupid. I don't think people are going to like it." And even if he did, would he listen to them? I think King has gotten to be almost the same way. He's one of the most successful writers on the planet, why should he ultimately care if people won't like this book. He even warns the readers before the last chapter to stop reading, because they will be disappointed, and to simply enjoy the book for the journey getting there. As if he were trying to make you feel bad for not liking his non-ending.
As you can see, I didn't like this book, almost solely due to the ending. As usual, King's prose is good, his characters (even Patrick) are well realized and loveable, and Roland's nearly endless journey is page-turning. There was so much potential here. But alas, this is what we have. Would I recommend the Dark Tower books to others? I would say read the first one, which could be a stand alone. If you want to read the whole series, than by all means do so, it's one hell of a journey, but with such an ending, I would almost rather not have made the journey at all.
I actually did like #5. It didn't progress Roland's quest to the Tower much, but it was a good story . I quickly went to book 6 and found a fairly boring book, though at least it was shorter. Reluctantly, I picked up book 7. I got halfway through and stopped. Many things were starting to frustrate me with it, and I had other things to read, so I put it on hold. For over two years. After reading the negative reviews I was considering never finishing it, and just leaving the series in my mind with what little sense of wonder and mystery it had left. Of course I picked it up again. I was right the first time.
*Spoiler warning. If you don't want to know what happens, please skip this.*
I really think that King copped out on this one. First off, Stephen King including himself as a series character was one of the worst things I have ever read. What a bunch of self indulgent crap! I really lost faith after reading that in book 6.
The Crimson King was hugely disappointing. Instead of the biggest bad guy in the universe, with the ability to topple the Tower and end all worlds, Roland gets to him and he’s a decrepit old Santa looking man pelting grenades at him and cackling madly. What?
Patrick the Artist: The biggest last minute “save my ass” plot device I’ve ever read. With the ability to draw things into and out of existence, this gives King free reign to get himself out of any plot holes he needs to, such as draw the Crimson King and then erase him, allowing Roland to get to the Tower without harm.
The Dark Tower: Well, it’s real. Does it hold the answer to all the world’s questions? Is there any explanation as to why it’s there or where it came from? Nothing of the sort. It is a monument to Roland and his life, each level containing a different piece of his life. What happens when he gets to the top? (this isn’t a joke, I promise you) He gets sucked back all the way to the beginning of the first book, forgetting what happens with a hint that this time around, things may be different (he was supposed to blow the Horn of the Eld at the base of the Tower, but lost it as a kid. This time he has it.) Did we really read through seven long books to find out that the next time around, in another seven books that don’t exist, Roland may succeed?
In a way, Stephen King reminds me a George Lucas. Lucas got so full of himself after the original Star Wars trilogy that he thought he could tackle another trilogy with no help in writing or directing it. He had complete creative control and there was no one to stand over his shoulder and say, "hey, this is kind of stupid. I don't think people are going to like it." And even if he did, would he listen to them? I think King has gotten to be almost the same way. He's one of the most successful writers on the planet, why should he ultimately care if people won't like this book. He even warns the readers before the last chapter to stop reading, because they will be disappointed, and to simply enjoy the book for the journey getting there. As if he were trying to make you feel bad for not liking his non-ending.
As you can see, I didn't like this book, almost solely due to the ending. As usual, King's prose is good, his characters (even Patrick) are well realized and loveable, and Roland's nearly endless journey is page-turning. There was so much potential here. But alas, this is what we have. Would I recommend the Dark Tower books to others? I would say read the first one, which could be a stand alone. If you want to read the whole series, than by all means do so, it's one hell of a journey, but with such an ending, I would almost rather not have made the journey at all.