possibly the worst stephen king adaption yet?

[Danny]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0450385/

1408, for those that havent read it is a short , 4 ,maybe 5 chapter long story in the collection of Kings works called "everythings eventual", and this took me about 15 minutes to read and i seriously have no idea how this can be made into a full length feature film, sounds kinda like , to quote the lord of the rings "butter scraped over too much bread" to me.
im also surprised this one whent striaght past aint it cool without em noticing.

im looking forward to romeros adaption of from a buick 8 way more. and i hear theres talks between King adn Romero for romero to adapt Cell, least according to one of my horror sources, though i could have sworn it was allready ebing adapted, but it just makes sense to ahve the guy who inspired it and it was dedicated to to direct it.

[LouCipherr]

I think the ONLY way Cell will end up being a movie worth watching is if King himself is involved.

I still stand by what i've always said: if King isn't involved in his book-to-screen adaptations, it won't be worth a sh*t. The only two exceptions to that rule are Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. Other than those two, every single one of the adaptations that he didn't have his hands in sucked horribly.

That being said, I still wonder WTF he was thinking with that whole Kingdom Hospital stuff. That was horrible on a level he's never accomplished before. I guess ya can't always hit a home run with everything you do. :)

About 1408 - a fantastic read, but I have to agree hellsing, I have no freakin' idea how they'd capture that almost-acid-trip-like story into a movie. It would have to have on boatload of CGI to make it happen, and that right there would turn me off.

I guess we'll see, but I don't have high hopes for 1408. I hope I'm wrong.


...and John Cusack??? In a Stephen King movie? :rolleyes: Give to me a large break.

[zombie04]

The only two exceptions to that rule are Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile. Other than those two, every single one of the adaptations that he didn't have his hands in sucked horribly.


I think we can soon add The Mist to that list. Anything King that Darabont does is gold. Here's to hoping for 3 in a row.

[Danny]

hey kingdom hospital was the ****, i loved that show, but spielbergs taken was better.

[bassman]

...and John Cusack??? In a Stephen King movie? :rolleyes: Give to me a large break.

What's wrong with John Cusack? I think he's an awesome actor and it seems from the trailer that he knows how to play this character well. The trailer makes me want to check it out. Could go either way from there, though.

[LouCipherr]

I think we can soon add The Mist to that list. Anything King that Darabont does is gold. Here's to hoping for 3 in a row.

I'll believe it when I see it. :D I'm VERY excited to see the adaptation of The Mist to the big screen. I remain 'cautiously optimistic' that it will be a good film. My fingers are crossed.



hey kingdom hospital was the ****, i loved that show, but spielbergs taken was better.

Really? Man, I watched the first 3 episodes of Kingdom Hospital and it, to me, was just horrible. Apparently lots of other people felt the same way 'cause it seemed like it was cancelled quite quickly.

I dunno, I watched those first episodes and was just lost. That's not the Stephen King I know. I've been reading his books for around 20 years now and I just could not stand KH. Maybe I didn't give it enough time to sink it, who knows, but my initial impression after those first 3 episodes was "SH*T! NEXT!" :lol:

I see they released it on DVD with ALL of the episodes, including the ones not aired after it was cancelled. Maybe I should give it another shot.

[MikePizzoff]

What's wrong with John Cusack? I think he's an awesome actor and it seems from the trailer that he knows how to play this character well. The trailer makes me want to check it out. Could go either way from there, though.

Agree'd. I thought this movie looked like it'd be worth seeing in theater's... let's hope it is.

[LouCipherr]

John Cusack may be a great actor - and I agree, he is for certain films - but keep him in movies like Serendipity.

IMO, he doesn't belong in a Stephen King movie. Maybe he'll prove me wrong with this one, but until then...

BTW: I heard Room 1408 read as an audiobook on the Blood & Smoke audiobook King released a while back. That and the 10 O'clock people really freaked me the hell out. :D

There was another story on that audiobook about a waiter in a restaurant that kinda went.. well.. nuts. That was a great story too.

*scurries off to find the title*

"Lunch at the Gotham Cafe'" - that was the name of it. Weird, but great story too.

[ProfessorChaos]

i saw the trailer for this and i think it'll be worth the time.

btw, can anyone name the movie based on a stephen king story that john cusack had a role in?

"Stand By Me"

i think the worst king adaptation has to be "the lawnmower man", which was totally untrue to the actual story

[Danny]

y'know kigndom hospital aired in its entierty over here in teh u.k, guess it was just more popular over here, i for one really enjoyed it, it doesnt pick up till later on in the series, when all the smoke and mirrors stuff just comes right out and then carrys on, too bad the ending hinted at a 2nd season, guess since it wasnt popular in the us it was ****canned.:(

[MikePizzoff]

John Cusack may be a great actor - and I agree, he is for certain films - but keep him in movies like Serendipity.

IMO, he doesn't belong in a Stephen King movie. Maybe he'll prove me wrong with this one, but until then...


I take it you've never seen Identity. It's a psychological thriller/horror; real good stuff. Cusack was great in that. I think he'd be fine in a King film.

[Danny]

yeah identity was a great summer horror movie trype film, with a dash of silent hill thrown in for good measure, i recommend looking it up if you havent seen it.

[Geophyrd]

They seem to be better when King's NOT involved.

Having said that...Eli Roth is going to direct Cell, from a screenplay adapted by Scott Alexander (Man on the Moon, People Vs. Larry Flynt) and Larry Karaszewski (same movies).

Cell was, IMHO, a great beginning, a boring middle (the part in the boys school was like a speeding car hitting a stationary wall with NO damn give) and a too-fast wrap up. Not for nuttin', that's kind of how I think of the movie 28 Days Later. I mean, what was Dr. Who and his buddies doing in that mansion exactly? Can't remember...but I've heard (from AICN) that 28 Weeks Later is supposed to be good and I'm very much looking forward to it.

1408 is supposed to be terrific, a great script and early word is that its the scariest movie in years. Scary...as in shaking in your seat. Don't know about you, but I can't remember the last time I was scared at the movies.

John Cusack is terrific in pretty much everything I've seen him in. All the way back to Better Off Dead to Grosse Point Blank (a personal favorite which is getting the unofficial sequel War Inc. later this year) he has consistently entertained me, made me laugh.

Also IMHO: as to bad King adaptations, there is the recent Salems Lot, Rose Red, Desperation, Riding the Bullet (better story than tv movie) and Dreamcatcher (which was both a bad movie and a bad book). Good Stephen King includes Dead Zone, Apt Pupil, The Stand (actually a good adaptation of a terrific novel), It (which I hear is being remade), Salems Lot (the originial with Hutch), Christine and The Shining (Kubrick's version which doesnt have a lot to do with King's book but was still a terrific movie).

[LouCipherr]

Things are better when King is NOT involved? I want what you're smoking.

Lets see, things he wasn't involved in:

Graveyard Shift, The Mangler 1 & 2, Riding the Bullet (he was exec. producer, but it still sucked), the Nightmares & Dreamscapes series (ugh, terrible with the exception of maybe one story), Dreamcatcher, Children of the Corn parts 1-124 :lol: Sleepwalkers, The Tommyknockers, Needful Things, The Lawnmower Man, Sometimes They Come Back, Thinner, Secret Window, The Night Flier, It (I read the book, saw the series, and HATED the series), Apt Pupil (sorry, did not care for it)... c'mon man, the list goes on FOREVER of horrible adaptations of his books when his hands aren't in the project.

Then, when he is involved, we get things like:

the mini-series of The Shining (yes, Nicholson was a batter Jack Torrence, but the mini-series King did was WAY better than Kubrick's movie version. At least King stuck to the fu*king novel's storyline!), Pet Semetary, Creepshow, Storm of the Century, The Stand, Rose Red, The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer...

One I will say he was involved in and it sucked was Maximum Overdrive. The written story, "Trucks" was much better.

And, one movie I DID like that he was not involved in: Misery - even though it deviated from the book a bit (breaking his ankles? in the book she hacked them off and cauterized them with a goddamn blowtorch!), but still, decent movie thanks to Bates.

That being said, it's obvious his direct-influence on a movie makes it much better than if he just leaves it up to someone else. So, this is what worries me about 1408. KILLER story, seems almost impossible to capture on the screen after reading the book, and King isn't involved. 2 strikes against it already, imo, but I am more than willing to give it a shot as 1408 is one of the better stories i've ever read by King.


...and the problem with Cusack is he makes me laugh too - every time I see him. That's the problem for me. How that'll fit into a King story, I dunno, it just sounds like a odd/bad combination to me - BUT, like I said, it remains to be seen.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Being a John Cusack fan I am really looking forward to 1408, so whether or not King is involved makes no difference to me. From the trailer I watched I was impressed and that is all I need to get my ass in a theater seat. (However, i was impressed with the Grindhouse trailer and concept and that turned out to be so-so for me. PT great DP horrible)

I can't believe you, Lou, of all people listed Needful Things as a bad King adaption/film. That was a great film I loved it. Even Night Flier for how low budget and cheesy it was caught my eye, but I agree with you on everything else in the bad category.

In the good you can chuck out Rose Red, and The Stand was iffy, it could go either way.

However, i am behind John Cusack and I think 1408 will probably deliver as promised.

[LouCipherr]

I can't believe you, Lou, of all people listed Needful Things as a bad King adaption/film. That was a great film I loved it. Even Night Flier for how low budget and cheesy it was caught my eye, but I agree with you on everything else in the bad category.

Dj, have you READ Needful Things? If you had (and by your statement, I know you haven't :p) you would know how much was left out of the film that was imporant to the story. I think the guy who played Leland Gaunt (Max von Sydow) was fantastic, as well as Ed Harris as Sheriff Pangborn, but as far as novel-to-screen adaptation, it fell short.

Rose Red is iffy, sure, but it's better than 90% of what's on the "bad" list now isn't it? :p

You have to remember, i've been reading his novels for 22 years. While I realize it's hard as hell to turn a novel into a movie, I think when King is involved, he does a better job since he is the one who wrote the books and he knows best what's pertient to put in the movie and what's considered "throw-away" material in the book. ;)

[Geophyrd]

the opinion war. Yours' is (are) the only valid opinion(s).

[bassman]

I haven't seen you mention "The Dark Half", Lou. I know Romero wrote the screenplay, but being that he and King are buddies, I think King probably had his fair share of input.

I've heard many people say they didn't like the film, but I found it to be quite good...

[DjfunkmasterG]

I own it on DVD, so I dig The Dark half, but the book is 100% better.

[Danny]

i didnt care for the dark half myself, i just couldnt get the strange case of dr. jeckyl and mr hyde out of my head when i watched it.

my favourite king adaptions would be.

The shining
The Stand
Pet cemetrey
Christine
IT
and the longoliers.


Running man sucked balls, id much rather see ,out of all the bachman books (which im currently reading between posting right now;) ) the long walk get adapted, rage was good but hell, get a few props and enough people and any student with enough people could probably make a film based on that one.


in fact, adn a few people on here may like to hear about this, King has this "dollar baby" thign going were, for the sum of one us dollar, which is like a pound-fifty he grants students permission to adapt his short stories into student films, and honestly ive been temtped by this myself, if i had to do one, the easyiest for me would probably be riding the bullet but id probably like to do somethign i bit different, maybe the road virus heads north that one seems more suited to my crappy, shakey directing style.

[capncnut]

My favourite King book was Salems Lot... the film wasn't as scary (except for when the Glick boy comes back) but it was ok. I think the best King film conversion has to be Carrie, hands down.

[LouCipherr]

the opinion war. Yours' is (are) the only valid opinion(s).

:rolleyes:

Oh for the love of...

I wasn't trying to "win" anything. There is no winning when it comes to opinions. I just stated that IN MY OPINION, that's how I see it, and I backed it up with some film titles unlike yourself.

I did this because cannot understand how anyone can say King being involved in his own book-to-screen adaptations make them worse when if you take a look at the list of these adaptations, it speaks volumes to this subject, and to me, it's pretty self-evident. You see it differently, and that's totally cool, but don't bitch just because someone doesn't agree with you. If you really think that King being involved in his own film adaptations makes it worse, how about backing up your opinion with some examples like I did? If you do then all of us could discuss them. Then maybe I can post that you've won the opinion war. :lol: :p

Relax. It's just a message board, and I think we all know this is just my opinion and I never ever claimed to know everything. Actually, I don't know jack sh*t, I just know what I like and having been reading Stephen King novels since I was about 14, not to mention watching all of the movies that are adaptations to those stories. Can I at least claim I have some experience and knowledge on the subject?

Look how passionate the people here on this message board are about all things GAR. That's me and my Stephen King. It's passion for something you love.

So, compile that list of what you consider to be crappy King adaptions he's involved in, then we can get a discussion going - isn't that what message boards are about?

*takes a deep breath*

moving on...


Y'know what bassman? You're right, I didn't mention the Dark Half. To be honest, I didn't because it's been YEARS since i've seen it, and although I remember the book like I read it yesterday I don't remember the details of the film or even if I liked/hated it. That must mean I was indifferent. :) It's been a long while, and my brain ain't what it used to be. The short-term memory loss has caught up with me. :D I'll have to go back and re-watch that one. Dj liked the book, and I have to agree, it was a great read.

hellsing - i can't agree more. Running Man sucked horribly. Thanks, i'll add that to my 'all knowing opinion' list :lol: Yes, The Long Walk would be a great one for someone to take on. Oh, and I completely forgot the Langoliers. I liked it, but the ending when they came and were destroying the planet - the cgi was a bit corny, but I did kinda like the movie. That's on my so-so list. :lol:

Capn - are you referring to the original Salems Lot? Did you by any chance see the series they did of that a few years ago? How about the series they did of Carrie?

[DjfunkmasterG]

I never ever claimed to know everything.


I do and I live a richer existence because of it. :D :p

[LouCipherr]

I do and I live a richer existence because of it. :D :p

:lol: :lol:

Then he should be bitching at you. :D

Ok, that's it, I'll say it: I AM THE GOD OF ALL THINGS STEPHEN KING! BOW DOWN TO ME AND... ummm... i dunno, TIE MY SHOES!

or something. :lol: