Best adaption of a Stephen King story
laurence1870
Posts: 213 Forum Member
✭
Personal favourites are The Shining and Misery.
What's your favourite film adaption of a King novel or novella?
What's your favourite film adaption of a King novel or novella?
0
Comments
Shawshank is good. Pet Sematary is good. Christine is good. The Dead Zone is good. Both Carrie's are quite good. The Running Man is good - though again not very true to the book. And The Stand is good - but hard going...
But close seconds are Dolores Claiborne & The Shawshank Redemption.
And it`s garbage. Kubrick took liberties with the adaptation but in doing so he created one of the finest horror films ever made. That King whined about it just shows how myopic he is when it comes to his work. Whenever he`s involved with adapting his own work the results are almost always abysmal.
......
The Mist is the best filmed King story.
Damn, I forgot about The Mist.
Add that to my list as well please.
Best: The Shawshank Redemption. The Mist in B&W was pretty scary - I think about it sometimes when I go into the local supermarket on an evening - especially the doors that lead to the back:o
Worst: Salem's Lot - the book was much better.
ps if I was shipwrecked on a desert island with a cargo of Stephen King's books (as long as they hadn't got too damp) I would be perfectly happy for ever.
the shining film adaptation is terrible. it just destroyed anything in the book and totally pissed me off
jack was NOT a monster
carrie is great and it as well
the green mile both book and film are both excellent
I haven't read the book, but Dreamcatcher is truly terrible.
Shawshank
Bad: Dreamcatcher, The Mangler, Thinner, Hearts in Atlantis, Apt Pupil
Guilty Pleasures: Cat's Eye, Pet Semetary, IT, Cujo
It still tops the list mind. With hearty nods for The Mist, Misery, Dolores Claiborne, Carrie, The Dead Zone, and the earlier version (Soul/Mason) of Salem's Lot*
* It's TV conventions show through here and there, but it's certainly memorable.
The Shawshank Redemtion
The Green Mile
Misery
Zzzzzzz. The Shining and Kubrick for that matter are both overrated.
Completely agree with this list. If it wasn't for Tim Curry i think IT would go straight to everyone's bad list.
I'd also add 1408 to the good list.
Worst, if you can call it an adaption considering how much of the story it actually uses, has to be The Lawnmower Man. Though kudos to the makers as they managed to actually make a sequel that was even worse!!!!
Looking forward to 22.11.63 and, please, please The Dark Tower if they ever get made.
I suppose the favourite film is Shawshank, but that is just what most say, so I have another one which Brits perhaps have not seen.
Storm of the Century I found oddly stuck in the mind after seeing it. (it was a TV short series- a bit stretched out I suppose but in the end worked for me.
Well I've learnt something today.
I would have never guessed that Stephen King wrote 'The Running Man'.
A lot of people think that he's a horror writer but he's so much more.
I do wonder if he sleeps or leaves the house. He's a writing machine
These have the advantage of being novella's thus the screenplay, rather than having to cut stuff out like many King adaptations (due to time constraints) are actually able to develop and expand on the basic concept. They are actually, imho, the only cases were the adaptations are actually superior to the source material.
Although thats not to say that there haven't been a lot of successful adaptations from longer novels.
That said, in regard the OP, while The Shining is a fine film in it's own right, it fails for me in terms of being a successful adaption of the novel because it isn't really in the spirit of the source material. I tend to see it as a seperate entity.
Other notable adaptions for me: Misery, The Dead Zone, The Green Mile, Carrie, The Mist, The Stand (mini series), Under the Dome (tv series)
And the worst: Dreamcatcher, Apt Pupil, The Langoliers (mini series)
I think King tends to get pigeon holed too much as a horror writer, his output to me is lot more varied. One thing thats key in his work is that he is an excellent character writer, which I think adds a lot of reliability to his characters, hence his films that tend to do well are often those that depend on the audience identifying strongly with the main characters, and these do tend to be more drama type adaptations.
Second, the topiary garden was changed to a maze, which was rather a must: at least, in a film you could bring a hedge to life but it would be risible, and the freezing in the maze worked beautifully.
I do not agree with some critical opinion that the character of the boy and his relationship with the hotel man was radically different and the oft stated thing about the film losing the supernatural to me is just untrue, I think it can only be said by people who are unfamiliar with the book and just invent a criticism.
But the two basic points are that film can satisfactorily not do things that happen in people's minds, and that the original garden thing would not work on film because it is too daft.