On 2008-02-08 00:58:27 -0800, tphile <tphile@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> We have no choice but to be selective.
> and with King, the movies are usually better than the novels, and
> faster
> I recently seen The Mist, do I still need to read the book?
Our mileage certainly does vary.
Most of the movies based on King books are bad, to my mind, and even
the good ones aren't a worthy substitute for the books. CARRIE, THE
GREEN MILE, THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, MISERY, STAND BY ME, THE DEAD
ZONE...I'm glad I saw them as films, but if forced to choose, I'd pick
the prose version. And most of the adaptations don't approach the
level of the books for me, to the point that I never bothered to see
more than a snippet of STORM OF THE CENTURY -- just enough to confirm
that it was the usual bland TV production. I got the scriptbook and
read it, and enjoyed it quite a bit in that form.
I've been waiting for a KINGDOM HOSPITAL scriptbook, but itlooks like
it's not coming, so I'll have to bite the bullet and watch the TV
version. I never did make it through ROSE RED...
And maybe it's because I read fast, but I've never considered, "I can
get through this faster" to be a virtue in reading books. A good short
book is good, a good long book is good -- and lets me explore that
world for longer, to boot.
But to each his own!
kdb
|
