Best Stephen King Film Adaptation

[broonage]

I still think The Mist was one of the best horrors in a long long time!

[TyneBridges]

It's hard to choose the best King adaptation as there are now a few good ones around. I think my choice would be Carrie for the way it captures the essence of King - I'm sure he wishes he'd had the knives flying into Mrs White in the book, rather than Carrie simply stopping her heart. Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie both give brilliant performances, and I can't think of anyone in the supporting cast who's less than good. Pino Donnaggio's score (strongly influenced by Bernard Herrmann) I also consider one of the most effective film scores ever.

The Dead Zone is very restrained for David Cronenburg and all the better for that. I feel it's a worthwhile film, but lacking the emotional power of the novel.

The Shawshank Redemption and The Mist are both great adaptations as well, although the ending of The Mist is too bleak for me. I know it was sanctioned by King himself, but I'd have preferred them to leave it unresolved, as in the novella.

I'm starting to feel quite lonely in my hatred of Kubrick's The Shining. The novel is probably in my top ten of books and I feel that Kubrick simply threw away most of the important elements. Admittedly it looks great but, as Jack Nicholson's Torrance is clearly insane from the start, there is no character or story development. Nicholson gives a one-note performance that looks great in the trailers, but does anyone in the audience really believe in him as a character, or in him and Shelley Duvall as a couple? Shelley Duvall's performance is pretty bad, a character ready to descend into hysteria at a moment's notice, and Danny Lloyd comes across to me as completely expressionless. Scatman Crothers seems very capable as Dick Hallorann but is completely wasted as a character by being killed off before he has a chance to help. Seriously - does anyone really care about the characters as they're presented in the film?

The TV miniseries is derided for reasons I don't understand. Will no-one admit that Steven Weber gives a great performance as Jack, that Rebecca De Mornay is a much more convincing Wendy and that Courtland Mead is a vastly more sympathetic Danny than Danny Lloyd?

I honestly feel that people are blinded by Kubrick's elevated reputation when they look at his version of the story. I would say it's easily the worst King adaptation because it ignores what the novel is about - a basically decent man undergoing a slow disintegration, precipitated by supernatural forces.

[Gojirosan]

Originally Posted by TyneBridges

The TV miniseries is derided for reasons I don't understand.

Because it's absolutely awful?

[Baseball Fury]

That it is indeed! I remember being excited when I first got it because people had been going on about it being truer to the book (which I love) than Kubrick's version (which I love more), paying £25 (!) for it from the local Blockbuster, getting home, slapping it on and it making NO SENSE whatsoever. After the end of the first episode, I turned the disc over, started up the next one... which turned out to be the first one (stupid double sided discs!).

After that, I left it alone for about 2 years as I was pissed off, and then I finally watched it... and it was shit. Campy and missing all hint of isolation and fear, it was just pants.

The only bit I remember liking was when he was reading all the papers in the boiler room.

[Nosferatu@Cult Labs]

I've only read the book once, but think Stanley Kubrick and Diane Johnson did an excellent job with the adaptation, stripping the story down to its basic elements and putting in new spin on things which, in my opinion anyway, makes Kubrick's film more intriguing and rewarding on repeated viewings than King's novel, something I am not really in a rush to read again.

In terms of the miniseries, the less said, the better although I watched it before reading the novel so will probably revisit it at some point.

[Demoncrat]

regardless of which side of the fence you fall on, kubrick's film still has one of the all time trailers IMO.

[Wes]

I think Cronenberg's adaptation of Dead Zone is fantastic... a far better film than the book which is like so many other King books, overlong. The film kept all the best stuff and threw out the filler. I like Storm of the Century as well. Some cringe-worthy CGI aside, it's got a great winter atmosphere... I must revisit it again now that the evenings are drawing in...

I love the youtube video of The Stand series with the Crowded House tune...

[Slippery Jack]

Originally Posted by Baseball Fury

After that, I left it alone for about 2 years as I was pissed off, and then I finally watched it... and it was shit. Campy and missing all hint of isolation and fear, it was just pants.

...and one of the most annoying child performances of ALL TIME, as I recall. It's a problem when you actually want Danny to get butchered . . .

[TyneBridges]

The TV version of It is a real curiosity. The first half is great, with believable characters, sympathetic acting and a particularly creepy performance from Tim Curry. In the second half of part two, it's almost as if the whole production team lost interest and gave up. The effects are poor and all feeling of tension and danger is lost. They have the creepy clown gloating "What makes you think you can ever see my true form?" and then (if you believe the novel) you rapidly see a badly-realised giant spider which is the closest possible representation of its true form, and is killed off very easily. The cheesy ending is taken directly from the novel - probably the one of King's books most in need of editing - and is also a damp squib. Baffling.

On the TV adaptation of The Shining, I guess I and almost all of the previous posters will just have to agree to differ.

[broonage]

I really like the Deadzone tv series