Stephen King Books to Film Semi-Appreciation Thread

I just liked Shawshank Redemption and The Mist.

Too many of his books depend on written inner thought processes that're so difficult to film?
I've hardly even heard of his other books that haven't become movies. He's even written a television series (Kingdom Hospital), unless it was a book that they converted into a series- i'm not sure. I've talked to many book-lovers about Stephen King, and he's frequently let down most of them. Dean Koontz is better, in my opinion.
But whatever, opinions are like ********- we all got 'em. i hope.

How about Shakespeare for starters? Hemingway. Kipling. Faulkner. Raymond Chandler. Arthur Conan Doyle. Tennessee Williams. Charles Dickens. Louis L’Amour. Agatha Christie. Larry McMurty. Zane Gray. Sir Walter Scott. Jules Verne. Mark Twain. H.G. Welles. Robert Louis Stevenson. P.G. Wodehouse. James Fenimore Cooper. Edgar Allen Poe. Oscar Wilde. Alexandre Dumas. F. Scott Fitzgerald. Victor Hugo. Herman Melville. Jack London. Joseph Conrad. Ernest K. Gann. Evan Hunter, who also wrote as Ed McBain. The Brothers Grimm. Ross McDonald. Mikey Spillane. Allan LeMay. Max Brand. The folks who wrote the Bible.

I would not be a fair judge of King's writing. I've read only one of his books--Cujo--and thought it was gawd awful. I've always been amazed that most of the fans of Stephen King books I've ever encountered were young women in their teens to early twenties.

I suppose you're right, I shouldn't have even bothered, next time I want to write about something I'll be sure to check in with you first. Honestly rufnek, the word cantankerous often comes to mind when I read some of your posts. But that's cool, if you really need to point out my shortcomings feel free, they are numerous and easy to find.


And then you say this to top it off. Thanks for checking in.

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

the fact that his books have become films doesn't mean that he wrote them to be so - I still completely disagree that he did do that. Do you agree PW? I don't agree either that he lets down his readership. ok there's books that aren't as good as others but hell, even world class writer's books aren't all on a par of quality.

Opinions, yeah s'true but Dean Koontz....jeez

Of course I agree with you christine, and if we were to ask King himself I bet he would too. At least I want to believe that's true, so in my world it is. He's an author not a screenplay writer, although if he wanted to do that it wouldn't surprise me terribly if he did alright at it. That's always been the hook for me in most of his books, I feel like he wrote this book for me, I feel like he's talking to me. You can't possibly have that same thing in a film unless you have a running narration going on in the background, and then you have what? Not a movie I don't think, sounds more like a video version of books on tape.

I would like to see "Cell" come to the big screen. I know there are plenty of other zombie movies out there, but none of them tickle my fancy.

Originally Posted by Powdered Water

I suppose you're right, I shouldn't have even bothered, next time I want to write about something I'll be sure to check in with you first. Honestly rufnek, the word cantankerous often comes to mind when I read some of your posts. But that's cool, if you really need to point out my shortcomings feel free, they are numerous and easy to find.

I'm truly sorry if I hurt your feelings, Powdered Water. That wasn't my intention at all. But you asked, Is there an author that has had more of his work put onto the silver screen or the small screen for that matter? And I thought you were interested in a serious discussion rather than an endorsement of your opinion. You and I have had pleasant discussions before in this forum and occasionally may have agreed. I never thought that remark would be so offensive to you.

One thing I've noticed, this forum attracts a lot of young people who seem to think Hollywood began in 1970 and that there is nothing earlier than that worth discussing. They seem to have forgotten a lot of writers, actors, and films I enjoyed growing up. I've tried to contribute to the discussion with comments about some of those people and films.

Cantankerous? Maybe. Probably. I'm not in a position to judge that. But I've never put labels on anyone who disagreed with me about a movie. I realize I'm in a minority--in fact, I may be the minority--who didn't like 2001 or Rosemary's Baby or the recent remake of 3:10 to Yuma. But I just don't care for those films. Yet it doen't bother me if you do, or if you dislike my favorite films. An earlier discussion in this forum had something to do with not being able to respect people who disliked certain films. Now, that's a foreign concept to me because I can't imagine judging people by their taste in or distaste for certain films.

Originally Posted by Powdered Water

And then you say this to top it off. Thanks for checking in.”

Now this I don’t understand at all. I don’t know why you would be offended if I don’t read King’s books. I wasn’t discussing the quality or nature of his books, just writers whose works have been made into movies. Or was it that I observed that King’s novels seemed to very popular among young women? I certainly didn’t mean any reflection on you, not knowing if you’re male or female. I didn’t say that only young women, girls in their teens, read them. I didn’t say that doing so was good or bad. I made no judgments of all. But it does surprise me that books known for their element of horror are so popular with young women. Girls used to not go in for blood and guts, as a rule.

No hard feelings rufnek I was simply a little irritated is all. It was just a rhetorical question to get the post started. Perhaps its bad form to start an article that way, I don't know, I'm not a real writer and I've never had any real training. Of course I understand that there are authors that have had numerous movies made out of their work, I believe Shakespeare is sitting around 250 films or so.




True. 1970 might even be too far back. And I understand what you're trying to do. Look I'm not perfect so you can either forgive me or not if I get a little snappy sometimes when I feel I'm being disparaged is all. And it may simply be that I'm being overly sensitive, and you weren't in the least trying to be that way.



You know you are old timer.

But I've never put labels on anyone who disagreed with me about a movie.

Seriously? C'mon everybodies doing it. It's fun, next thing you know you'll be calling some newbie and idiot.

Look, I'm not really offended. I guess I just don't understand the need to "weigh in" with an opinion on a topic when you yourself admit that you've only read one of his books. And you didn't like it to boot. The main purpose of this thread (to me) was to talk about a body of work and maybe even to compare and contrast between the films and his books.

I swore off of Stephen King books after Cujo. The cover alone freaked me out. The movie sucked.

Salem's Lot was a pretty good book. The original movie, with the levitating child vamp, really gave me nightmares though.

Gerald's Game, pulled me back to reading a King book but way dissappointed me. I was all ready for some kinky sex. I mean, hello, handcuffs on the cover.

Nope, there was no such thing. There was only resentful, or unaware of the resentment, sex.

Then there was the bulk of the book.

I really identified best with the dog character. That was so affecting and sad to me.

So I'm curious, what did you really enjoy about it? Why did you find it awesome? I always like to find out from others why they liked something I didn't.

__________________
Bleacheddecay

Hey, King did The Fly? Really?

I've only watched the movies below and not read the books.

Carrie was fun.
So was Christine.
Pet Sematary was a scary idea for me.

Apt Pupil was a pretty good film IMO. I didn't realize King had written it until I looked up his books. I still haven't found The Fly though.

Didn't much care for these movies:

Oh yuck! I really didn't enjoy Secret Window at all. It had Johnny Dep in it too. How could you mess that up?

The Lawnmower Man

The Mist

I've deliberately avoided many of the other King movies. I have rules about watching potentially scary movies.

Either I must go with a group that will joke on the movie or I can only watch during daylight hours which gives me time to clean my mental palate before bed.

According to wiki it was a short story written by George Langelaan, back in 1957.

Good to know. Thanks. I didn't think King had done The Fly it didn't feel like a King creation to me at all.

I'd like to see the "Dark Tower" series be given a chance on film. Who do you think would be a good Roland, PW?

__________________
If God had wanted me otherwise, He would have created me otherwise.

Johann von Goethe

I've spoken with Mr. Toose about this a bit and the obvious choice for me of course would be that Eastwood guy. By the time they get something like this off the ground though he may be so old that he wouldn't want to do it. He's like 73 now isn't he? My next choice would be Tommy Lee Jones. In fact after watching his last two western type roles I kind of think he would be a perfect for it.

I don't know though, I really hold these books on a pretty lofty pedestal, there's a very large part of me that hopes they never get "made". If history has shown us anything its that for sure and for certain not every great book gets a director like the Coen's or Peter Jackson to try and put it on the screen. I realize of course that there is a contingent of King fans out there that don't like The Dark Tower books but I think they are possibly the best stuff he's written. They just agree with me on a lot of levels. To this day Wizard and Glass is the only book I've read where I actually called in sick to work and read the whole book that day. I don't know if that means anything to anyone else but it sure (the book) made an impression on me.

One thing I've learned from movies about trials and lawyers: Never ask a question that you don't already know how it will be answered. But I'm not upset over our disagreement, and I'm glad that you don't bear any grudge either.

As for slapping labels on folks, I really try not to be that judgmental; I've known too many people who seemed to be one way when I first met them and yet turned out to be something quite different. I really don't understand labeling or name-calling over a difference of opinion. Everyone has a point of view; doesn't mean one opinion is right or wrong or more significant than another, although I sometimes wonder if some participants in this forum are old enough to have an opinion. Just kidding, kids!

I don't read King's books, but I have seen some of the movies made from his books. I'll bet you've read fewer of Ian Fleming's books (another prolific writer who was very popular in his day) than the number of James Bond movies you've seen. Yet that wouldn't disqualify you from discussing those movies.

But it seems to me that whether or not I read his books has little to do with discussing the numbers of books written by various authors. And I only owned up to not being a Stephen King fan in a spirit of "truth in advertising," so to speak.

If I had to choose one book as the worst book I have ever read, it would have to be Dean' Koontz's Lightning. Simplistic writing, obvious allegory, boring characters... terrible stuff. I have never given him another chance. The guy has an abysmal reputation on most literary sites...




Ok so... that means they were written with film in mind because...all film is either really good or really terrible? Huzzuh?? So...say he wrote something really good... that makes him a disappointment? If it's really good it has to be made into a film? If it's bad it has to be made into a film? I am just trying to pull some sort of cogent point out of your post... Care to clarify?

__________________

I love steven kings work, Its amazing. I love "Rose Red" that is great book/film

__________________

~In the event of a Zombie Uprising, remember to sever the head or destroy the brain!~

...and Dreamcatcher that was awsome also