I just can't for the life of me understand why they thought it was a good idea to start the story in medias res and tell it via flashbacks. I very rarely review shows/films I didn't like (it's just not interesting to me) but this unnecessary approach to one of my favorite stories irks me so much I just have to get the frustration out of my system - so please excuse me for ranting.
Why - just why? The Stand is a tale about an epic - linear - journey the same way The Lord Of The Rings is: or would you have thought it clever to introduce Legolas, Aragon and Gandalf when they stroll around in Minas Tirith shortly before their final battle against Sauron and then tell the audience via flashbacks how they got there?
The most intriguing aspect of the story told in The Stand is following the characters from the relative normalcy of their lives before the virus strikes to the at first slow but then quickly accelerating unraveling of society until total meltdown happens and the protagonists eventually head into literal Armageddon.
It's an epic journey; witnessing it from the beginning to the end in chronological order is the whole point. It's also how the characters' arcs are set up: they're on a journey too, in more than one way; as their world transforms, they do too. A flashback structure very much defeats the purpose of the whole premise and sucks every ounce of tension out of the narrative.
I get that there are books that are very hard to adapt without changing the structure, but The Stand is decidedly not one of those. In fact, most of King's novels offer the perfect narrative structure for a direct adaptation into a film or mini series, and if you look at the best films based on his works - Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Misery and The Mist - they all tell straight-forward, linear stories the way King put them on the page.
So come on, it's not rocket science: just follow the book! Rant over.
Why - just why? The Stand is a tale about an epic - linear - journey the same way The Lord Of The Rings is: or would you have thought it clever to introduce Legolas, Aragon and Gandalf when they stroll around in Minas Tirith shortly before their final battle against Sauron and then tell the audience via flashbacks how they got there?
The most intriguing aspect of the story told in The Stand is following the characters from the relative normalcy of their lives before the virus strikes to the at first slow but then quickly accelerating unraveling of society until total meltdown happens and the protagonists eventually head into literal Armageddon.
It's an epic journey; witnessing it from the beginning to the end in chronological order is the whole point. It's also how the characters' arcs are set up: they're on a journey too, in more than one way; as their world transforms, they do too. A flashback structure very much defeats the purpose of the whole premise and sucks every ounce of tension out of the narrative.
I get that there are books that are very hard to adapt without changing the structure, but The Stand is decidedly not one of those. In fact, most of King's novels offer the perfect narrative structure for a direct adaptation into a film or mini series, and if you look at the best films based on his works - Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Misery and The Mist - they all tell straight-forward, linear stories the way King put them on the page.
So come on, it's not rocket science: just follow the book! Rant over.