Discussing books on movies … almost as good as watching them, and without the sticky floors!

Being a movie executive is not an easy way to live. If you don’t believe me, take a look at this schedule for this past Thursday that I found on a PDA that belongs to a vice president at Paramount I just totally made-up:

• 5:30 a.m.: Wake up. Poke erection into wife’s back until she gets the point. Have morning sex.
• 5:35 a.m.: Take shower. Remember to shampoo and masturbate – IN THAT ORDER!
• 5:50 a.m.: Get dressed. Hint to wife that her breasts are starting to sag and could use a lift. Suggest that she might even want to go up a cup.
• 6 a.m.: Eat breakfast. Stab myself with fork every time I get the urge to grab some bread – NO CARBS! Acknowledge presence of children.

• 6:15 a.m.: Get in car and hit the highway.
• 6:30 a.m.: Call Lucy and arrange for 10 a.m. massage. Tell her to send the Vietnamese girl with the extra firm grip.
• 6:45 a.m.: Browse through latest coverage while driving. Memorize key words that seem like they might be important.
• 8:15 a.m.: Arrive at studio. Yell at guard for taking too long to lift gate.
• 8:25 a.m.: Arrive at office. Poke erection into secretary’s back until she gets the point. Have more morning sex.
• 8:30 a.m.: Call Lucy to confirm 10 a.m. massage appointment.
• 8:35 a.m.: Have secretary get me a coffee. Hint to her that her breasts are starting to sag and could use a lift. Suggest that she might even want to go up a cup.
• 8:45 a.m.: Morning meeting. Repeat words memorized from coverage during the drive to work.
• 9:30 a.m.: Meet with talented young screenwriter working on latest blockbuster. Tell him to change everything that’s good about the script and leave in all of the stuff that’s bad. Get him out of there before massage appointment.
• 10 a.m.: Enjoy relaxing massage with full release. Take calls from desperate assholes.
• 11 a.m.: Lunch at that place with that guy about that thing starring that asshole.
• 3:30 p.m.: Arrive back at office. Take a nap.
• 4:30 p.m.: Meet with talented young director. Tell him his moving exploration of the human condition needs more titties in it. Preferably big ones.
• 4:45 p.m.: Tell secretary to arrange 9 p.m. “meeting” with the hot chick from Starbucks you promised to screen test for whatever.
• 4:50 p.m.: Tell asshole above me that greenlighting a big-screen version of ALL IN THE FAMILY with Cedric the Entertainer as Archie Bunker is a no-brainer. Suggest Tyra Banks as Edith.
• 5:15 p.m.: Call secretary into office. Tell her that it’s ironic that she’s best at the job she blows at. Laugh at own joke and have her perform oral sex.
• 5:20 p.m.: Call wife. Tell her I’m swamped at work and won’t be home until late.
• 5:30 p.m.: Leave studio. Yell at guard for taking too long to lift gate.
• 5:35 p.m.: Start driving towards Hollywood Blvd.
• 6:30 p.m.: Pick up hooker. Pay her to hold me as I weep.
• 7 p.m.: Search through dark alleys until I find the cardboard box the first screenwriter I ever fired now calls home. Poke him with stick until he starts to cry. Offer him $10 to think of a new title for latest blockbuster. When he does, write it down, but tell him it sucks so bad he’s not getting the money. Remember to suggest new title at next meeting.
• 7:30 p.m.: Dinner at that place with that guy about that starring that asshole.
• 9 p.m.: Meet with hot barista. Tell her screen test is imminent, if she does that thing you once saw in Tijuana. Promise that no one else will ever see the photographs.
• 9:30 p.m.: Leave for home.
• 11:30 p.m.: Get home.
• 11:35 p.m.: Go to sleep. Feel like you’ve made a contribution.

Reading this, it is easy to understand why so many studio folks can’t be bothered to waste their time on something previously untested. They want projects that look like sure things! And what’s surer than a movie based on a story by that guy from Maine who’s sold more books than Amazon.com? Why, nothing! Unless, of course, those stories happen to be completely unsuitable for the medium of motion pictures, but any good executive would know enough to recognize one of those when they saw it, wouldn’t they?

“The Lawnmower Man” by Stephen King

About the Story: Originally published in 1975 by Cavalier magazine, most readers first became familiar with this short story when it appeared in King’s 1978 book NIGHT SHIFT. Despite having one of the author’s typically dark endings, this particular story was probably the book’s most whimsical offering – its tone far closer to black comedy than outright horror.

It told the tale of a lazy suburbanite who decides to abdicate his lawn care responsibilities to a landscaping film called Pastoral Greenery and Outdoor Services Inc., only to discover that the man the company sends over is more than a little odd. To the homeowner’s stunned amazement, the lawnmower man turns out to be a satyr who is only too happen to eat anything his old, beat-up mower cuts up, be it grass, rodent or unhappy client.

It’s a slight, amusing story with a plot that is easily undone if you think about it too much – not so much because of the overt fantasy element than the piss-poor business model with which the story presents us. Despite this, it is actually one of the book’s more memorable tales. Having not revisited NIGHT SHIFT since I first read it in junior high school, “The Lawnmower Man” and “Strawberry Spring” were always the two stories I first recalled whenever anyone mentioned it – the latter for its haunting twist ending and the former for its overall weirdness.

Why the Story Defies Adaptation: It depends on the nature of the adaptation. Though I have not seen the 1987 short that is considered one of King’s famous “dollar babies” (a group of several different short films based on King’s work made by amateurs/students with the author’s blessing), I have no problem believing it is a successful adaptation, since it only runs 12 minutes long. That’s about all the screen time this particular story can handle without having to stray from King’s original plot.

To make the film as a full-length feature, a screenwriter would have to invent so much new material that eventually the finished product would bear so little resemblance to the original, that the money spent for the rights to adapt it would have been better spent on something more important like 11 a.m. massages.

About the Movie: When New Line released STEPHEN KING’S THE LAWNMOWER MAN in 1992, it amounted to the greatest act of marketing chutzpah the decade had ever seen. During the development of a virtual reality movie with FLOWERS FOR ALGERNON-like elements called CYBER GOD, someone at the studio realized they could greatly improve its market viability by giving it the title of the Stephen King short story they had never been able to successfully adapt into a feature-length script. To justify the title switch, the script’s mentally handicapped main character now made his living mowing lawns, but that was as far as the filmmakers went and the finished film bore not even the slightest resemblance to King’s story.

Not surprisingly, King was more than a little pissed off about this and sued the studio to have his name taken out of the title. Despite King’s winning two different court rulings in his favor, New Line released the film on video with his name still in the title and it was only after a third ruling that awarded the author $10,000 a day and all profits from sales of the video for every day his name continued to be attached to it, that the studio finally relented.

Despite the controversy over its title, the film proved to be a hit for the studio and its success briefly threatened the world with the possibility of Jeff Fahey’s big-screen stardom, but in the years that followed, its reputation has fallen largely due to its dated computer effects, lame sequel and overall suckiness.

We Suggest: That you thank whatever deity you believe in that Jeff Fahey managed to go back to direct-to-video where he belonged.

“The Mangler” by Stephen King

About the Story: Like “The Lawnmower Man,” “The Mangler” first appeared in print in the pages of Cavalier before being reprinted in NIGHT SHIFT, but unlike the other story, “The Mangler” was a much more personal story for King – one based upon his own life experience.

In his memoir/writing guidebook ON WRITING, King describes how as a young newlywed, just out of college, he worked at an industrial laundry feeding linens from local restaurants into large and frequently dangerous machines. Such was his antipathy for the job and the machinery that made it possible it was only a matter of time before he sat down and turned it into a tale of horror.

Written in 1972, “The Mangler” tells the story of a weary detective investigating a series of strange deaths at an industrial laundry exactly like the one King once worked at. It turns out that the deaths are the result of a large and extremely dangerous laundry press that is possessed by an ancient and exceedingly nasty demon.

Despite King’s obvious emotional connection to the setting, “The Mangler” is actually one of NIGHT SHIFT’S weaker selections. Despite his best efforts, King is never able to transcend the fact that his titular monster is an immovable machine in the middle of a factory, which ultimately robs the piece of its tension.

Why the Story Defies Adaptation: Now if Stephen Fucking King can’t make an immovable piece of industrial hardware frightening, what chance does Skippy the Screenwriter have? Also, like “The Lawnmower Man” the story’s plot is too slight to be successfully adapted into a feature-length script, even with significant reinvention on the part of the filmmakers.

About the Movie: Following the important and iconic success of his breakout hit THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, director Tobe Hooper managed to prove with each subsequent film just how much of a fluke his masterpiece really was. By the time he attempted to adapt “The Mangler” into a 1995 feature film, he hadn’t had a genuine hit in 13 years and his most recent work had all been for television.

When it was released, THE MANGLER did not end his downward spiral. Despite starring horror-movie icon Robert England as the evil, decrepit owner of the factory in which the Mangler went about its evil ways and the addition of a conspiracy plot in which the local rich folks willingly sacrificed their daughters to the possessed machine for some vague reason, the movie suffered from the exact same problem the original story did and proved to be a major bore. Amazingly, the movie did eventually do well enough on video that it inspired two completely unrelated sequels, neither of which featured King’s name in the credits.

We Suggest: That you also avoid THE SHAFT, the 2001 remake of a 1983 Dutch film called DER LIFT. Despite starring Australian hottie Naomi Watts, one can’t avoid the fact that it’s about the murderous adventures of a killer fucking elevator. –Allan Mott

Buy it at Amazon.
Discuss it in our forums.