Stephen King -- Books or Movies?

[actor]

Posted: 10/5/06 at 9:37pm

In your opinion, are Stephen King's books better than his movies? Or are his movies better than his books? Which are scarier?

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 10/5/06 at 10:37pm

I have never read his books, I don't think he has a lot to do with the films though. He seems like nice guy though.

He wrote a really cool episode of the Xfiles once.

My favorite films based on his work are:

Misery
Shawshank Redemption
The Shining (Kubrick version)
Carrie (wish I could see the musical)

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 1:41am

His books. Then again, he's my favorite author. I've read everything he's written, and loved all of them for different reasons.

As for his movies...

"Carrie" - Classic, with legendary performances by Spacek and (the Oscar-worthy) Piper Laurie.

"Salem's Lot" - Flawed, but has some creepy moments. The window scene, anyone? Oh, and it stars James Mason, so it's automatically a must-see.

"The Shining" - One of the scariest movies ever, and definitely the best film from his books. Oddly enough, it's also the least faithful of the bunch.

"Misery" - Freaky ****, with Bates and Caan doing exceptional work. I'm convinced that no one could play Annie like Bates.

"The Dark Half" - Underrated and deliciously gory. Timothy Hutton makes good on his Oscar win with a fun performance as both the hero and the villain.

"Cujo" - Good for a scream or two, but not a favorite of mine.

"The Langoliers" - Crappy version of a good short story. Some of the worst special effects I've ever seen.

"It" - Okay... The second part of this movies sucks. Sucks. But, the first half has some really, REALLY chilling stuff going on. Tim Curry is awesome (and unrecognizable) as Pennywise. "Hiya, Georgie..." *shudder*

"Rose Red" - Started off well but, by the end, it was a mess. Nancy Travis was good, and there were some great scenes.

"The Night Flier" - Actually, a very underrated movie. Really well-done and consistently scary. One of the best, and no one's heard of it.

"Dreamcatcher" - Wow. In my opinion, the most disappointing. The novel is a genius and frantic concoction of his best works, and he pulls it off like a charm. The movie is really good... until the monsters show up. After that, it's trash. A shame. Jason Lee is the standout, but this one just doesn't work.

"Secret Window" - The twist doesn't work as well as in the short story, but it's very entertaining and creepy. Depp is brilliant, and makes it worth seeing all by himself.

Haven't seen "Dolores Clairborne" or "Children of the Corn" recently enough to comment, but I remember liking it. I'm anxiously awaiting "Bag of Bones", "Cell", and "From a Buick 8". Updated On: 10/6/06 at 01:41 AM

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:33am

Most def. his books! His movies (except for a hand full) are horrible.

[peach]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:41am

I'm going to go with books here, they are much scarier. I remember reading Misery during a snowstorm and getting really creeped out.

Although some of the King-based movies are excellent...

Carrie
The Shining (Kubrick's)
Shawshank Redemption
The Green Mile

Others, not so much...
Dreamcatcher
Secret Window (not bad, but could have been better. Although I like me some Johnny Depp).
Thinner



Updated On: 10/6/06 at 11:41 AM

[SorryGrateful]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:47am

I wholeheartedly believe that Stephen King books should be considered literature rather than just novels. I've discussed this with quite a few people who also believe this. Yeah, he deals with scary monsters and dark places, but the trademark of the majority of his books is his characterization of the people. He writes people, men, women, and children, so well that his books transcend just the horror genre, but do become modern classic literature. If you don't believe me, read The Bachman Books, especially Rage and The Long Walk, as well as Rose Madder, Gerald's Game, and Misery.

*hops off soap box*

And, as for the topic, I love the movies based on his books, but mostly for the cheese factor. His books are much better.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:48am

Either...it depends.

Carrie and Misery are the most even adaptations. Both books and films are great. Carrie is one of the best horror films of all time, yet the film is not faithful to the book. His characters are so well written, they are nominated, and win oscars.

Stand By Me exceeds as a wonderful film from his short story "The Body."

Delores Claiborne is a terrific film, flawed in my opinion by a too mannered J. Jason Leigh. Bates, again, is marvelous.

The Shining, is a great work by Kubrick and company, but so many changes to the story make it inferior to the book. The tv remake was exact (topiary intact...SO missing from Kubrick's version) yet had no real fright somehow.

Tho the TV film of Salem's lot was scary and good, it was nowhere near as scary as the novel, imo. Seeing Danny Glick at the window is nothing compared to reading his description.

I agree that "It" had a truly frightning first half of the movie, but that was it.

I think the biggest problem is that the rest of the films are just bad films.

While reading "Desperation" I thought, what a great film this will make! When I saw it on TV, I was so disappointed.

I'd love someone to take a stab at "Rose Madder" or the Tower series.

The most wonderful part of King's books, to me, is the story.

[erikaamato]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:52am

The books are better. He's actually a wonderful writer.

As for broadway86's comments, I agree on most of them, but I have to say I disliked Dreamcatcher as a book...so of course, I didn't even bother with the movie.

I'd like to also mention:

Christine - decent movie, great book
The Dead Zone - I actually like this movie, though most don't. Great book.
Pet Semetary - Scary movie. Very scary book.
Cat's Eye - based on some of the stories from Night Shift. Pretty good movie. Prefer reading the stories myself.
The Dark Half - Good movie. Great book.
Firestarter - Good movie. Better book.
The Green Mile - Great movie. Great book(s). Pretty equal footing.
The Shawshank Redemption (based on the short story "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption" from Different Seasons) - I love this movie. And I loved the story. I think these two are equally good.
Stand By Me (based on "The Body," also from Different Seasons) - Again, fantastic movie. Fantastic story. Pretty equal. Maybe horror is harder to get right on screen than these more "thoughtful" stories...

Anyway, I guess that's it for now... But yeah, in general, I prefer the books. =)

[erikaamato]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:54am

And, obviously, I started writing that post right after spidey's. Sorry for an repetitions or duplicate sentiments. :-P

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:55am

With the amount of work he's had done in both mediums, it's too much of a mixed bag to say one has worked better than the other overall. When curious, stick with the creator's actual creation and read the books.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:56am

I forgot to mention "Shawshank Redemption" and "Green Mile."

Both great books/stories and films...Shawshank, I prefer the film...GM, I prefer the books...but very equal, excellent adaptations.

I think that his horror storytelling is so scary, and his ability to manipulate your imaginations makes any true vision less scary...maybe.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 11:57am

I myself am not really much of a Stephen King fan. Although, I did see Stephen King's 'IT'. Only because two of my favorites actors are in it. R.T. and (the late) J.R. And don't forget his mini series like Kingdom Hospital(I think that's what it's called,(correct me if I'm wrong) I myself never saw it but heard about it. And also 'Nightmares And Dreamscapes: From the stories Of Stephen King'. Some of the stories were ok. But my fav was 'Autopsy Room Four'.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:04pm

"The Stand" is great as well. The movie's okay (except for some of the casting choices - MOLLY RINGWALD??!!), but I really enjoyed the characterization in the novel.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:09pm

I forgot they even did that tv version of The Stand, SA...forgettable compared to the novel.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:30pm

Stand By Me, Shawshank and Green Mile are the only film versions of his books that I felt faithfully captured the original stories both in content and tone. While some other films were good (Carrie, The Shining, Misery, etc.), they strayed too far from the books and were fun to watch, but missing so much fascinating and vital information. In every case, I have always preferred the books to the films. Stephen King is America's best living storyteller and his characterization, voice, and tone will keep him as one of America's best for generations to come.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:37pm

Here are the Stephen King movies that I love:

1) "Stand By Me"--One of my all time favorite movies
2) "The Dead Zone"--I love the book, movie, and t.v. show
3) "Carrie"--One of the greatest horror movies ever made
4) "The Shining"--Even though I prefer the book and a lot was changed for the movie, I still love it.
5) "The Green Mile"--I cried for a good 20 minutes after watching it.
6)"Misery"--Again, one of my favorite movies


And that's about it.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:39pm

Spidey, no Shawshank?

I loved that film.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 12:40pm

It's a good movie, but I have seen it so many times that I am sick and tired of it.

[broadway86]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 2:05pm

Thanks for reminding me, erika! How did I forget these?

Christine - Ehh, it was okay.
The Dead Zone - Martin Sheen was great, movie was decent.
Pet Semetary - Book was scary as hell. Hated the movie. Some good moments. The zombie was f ucking scary.
Firestarter - Same as Chritne.
The Green Mile - Very, very good. Duncan deserved the Oscar, imho.
The Shawshank Redemption - Masterpiece.
Stand By Me - An old favorite of mine.

[actor]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:32pm

I haven't seen Carrie yet, but I've read the book. Does it follow the book's storyline?

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:35pm

There is simply no question that his books are infinitely better than the films. CARRIE, DOLORES CLAIBORNE AND SHAWSHANK are possible exceptions. But, that's it.
Updated On: 10/6/06 at 03:35 PM

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:36pm

The books are better and scarier, simply because your imagination is able to scare you more than someone else's vision on the screen.

I have some guilty pleasure King flicks, besides the "good" ones, I enjoy Cat's Eye and Firestarter, and Pet Sematary just because 2-year-old Miko Hughes is absolutely stunningly fabulous.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:40pm

I agree, Rath. I think Miko is the best actor in that movie and should have gotten some award for it, even IF it was just a horror movie.

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:40pm

CARRIE the movie tells the story in a much more linear fashion than the book. It doesn't use the courtroom testimonies and what not. That being said, the sequence of events is pretty close to that of the book.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 10/6/06 at 3:41pm

It's amazing to me that they were able to find him, and yet couldn't find a decent child actor to play his sister. That little girl was appallingly bad.