I loved the 1997 one, it kicked ass.
Now the other one...
I Nominate the other one: The Shining (1980)
Printable View
I'll second Apt Pupil. I am one of the few (at least according to what people wrote in the other thread) who liked the story, but I thought the film left a lot to be desired. The casting was well-done, the script and the direction not so much.
I'll also one-up the 1997 mini-series version of The Shining. That thing was awful.
I nominate Cat's Eye.
And wholeheartedly second Thinner.
I must add The Langoliers to this list.
Kingdom almost can't be considered a King mini series. Unlike most King stuff this was his adaptation of another persons work.
Agreed. I read the story for the first time when I was about 12 and it really took my mind to a place it had never been before. Its the evil potential of human nature at face value that is the most terrifying for me. Squashing a dove with a basket ball (movie) isn't the same as placing homeless people in ovens (book). Plus the ending was nothing like the book:
Spoiler: 12-02-2008 02:55 PMobscurejude 12-02-2008 03:22 PMAaron 12-02-2008 04:51 PMHeather19I'll third Dreamcatcher! 12-02-2008 08:54 PMBROWNINGS CHILDEI wish I could use my nomination to remove Maximum Overdrive from the list. I liked that movie. I think this is the only one that King directed himself as well. 12-02-2008 09:02 PMksmithcats'Salem's Lot Miniseries. It could have been really good (Rutger Hauer and Rob Lowe *swoon*), but what they did to Father Callahan's character was unforgivable. 12-02-2008 11:04 PMRuthfulThe Tommyknockers, The Shining (TV series), Graveyard Shift, Storm of the Century, Kingdom Hospital, The Running Man.
I would have put in The Langoliers for nomination if there weren't so many abominable Stephen King-related films in existence.
There are probably a dozen or so I've neglected to mention simply because I've either forgot them, or never watched them. But rest assured, they probably blow just the same. 12-02-2008 11:06 PMRuthful 12-02-2008 11:13 PMThe Lady of Shadowsno she's completely serious. and i forgot to second it so i'll do that now.
second cat's eye. 12-02-2008 11:13 PMBriceI'm quitting this vote. While there are plenty that aren't comparable to the stories/books they came from. I can't think of one that didn't entertain me. 12-03-2008 12:25 AMBROWNINGS CHILDEI have to agree with Brice, If there are so many abominable SK films, why do we all still watch every one that comes out. More than that we discuss how good/bad it will be for months before it comes out, and then discuss how good/bad it was for the next couple months. 12-03-2008 12:40 AMJean 12-03-2008 12:41 AMJeanThe Tommyknockers 4
Maximum Overdrive 3
The Mist 2
Dreamcatcher 3
The Stand miniseries 2
Thinner 2
The TV Miniseries of The Shining 4
The IT miniseries 5
Kingdom Hospital 2
Christine 1
Apt Pupil 2
The Shining (1980) 1
Cat's Eye 2
The Langoliers 1
'Salem's Lot Miniseries 1 12-03-2008 05:18 AMjaysonPerhaps we watch them because we are hoping that since the source material is often so good that the adaptation will be worthy of our time. Perhaps we watch them because the good ones like Shawshank and Stand By Me show us that making adaptations of King's works can be done correctly.
I don't see what the problem is with legitimate criticism. I criticize King's source material (and yes, I read every one that comes out) so why wouldn't I criticize adaptations of it. That I read it or watched it doesn't automatically make it good. 12-03-2008 05:36 AMBriceThat I'll agree with. My statement was just personal opinion; I haven't found one I didn't like...although I gave up comparing the movies to their sources long ago. There are some I don't like as much as others, but none I don't like. 12-03-2008 06:10 AMjaysonThat's completely fair Brice. Of course, I could probably still take a list of movies I like and rank them in terms of which I liked more than others, but I think it's apparent by now that I am a bit obsessed with analysis. :) 12-03-2008 06:25 AMBriceWell, I could rank them as average; or above or below average, but what I can't do is say I liked this one BEST or WORST because I do truly enjoy them all. If I'm comparing two I probably could most of the time, but not comparing them all. 12-03-2008 06:45 AMCRinVAI'm with Brice. I do not compare the cinematic versions to the books more than casually. I watch the movie versions and base my judgement on their merit alone. Some are OK, some Good, some Great. I don't understand why some people seem to make it a mission in life to bash every adaptation that doesn't strictly follow the book. I do not know of a single movie that totally follows the written word it's based on. Just not possible IMHO of course. :-)
So no vote for me! :-) 12-03-2008 07:30 AMjaysonFor me it's not a matter of how strictly they follow the source material. I love Kubrick's The Shining though it differs greatly from King's. Coversely, I am one of a very small group of people who didn't care for the movie version of The Green Mile which didn't differ from the book in any perceptible way.
In my analytical model it's not a matter of how closely an adaptation mirrors the source material but how effectively it uses the crux of the source material. What I'm saying is that I judge them in part on their own merits, and in part on their effectiveness as adaptations. I think that's perfectly fair. 12-03-2008 07:52 AMmaeThat's why I won't second The Shining (1980). But there have been some dreadful movies made from King works. 12-03-2008 07:54 AMAaronI nominate Desperation and second Christine.