IFC is showing both versions back to back for, I guess Father's Day. Makes me appreciate the differences and that both had their strengths and weaknesses. If the novel was considered one of the best horror novels ever, how can the TV version be criticized for being too true of an adaptation? And Krubrick's version with all it's changes to the source, well it's Stanley 'fu(king' Kubrick.
sharehow can the TV version be criticized for being too true of an adaptation?
Very true. Movies and books are very different ways of telling a story and require different elements to be successful. Using a book as the direct screenplay for shooting a movie isnt going to work well, the same way that writing a book that is a direct description of the scenes in a movie doesnt work well either usually.
shareRewatched the mini-series recently - dear god it's awful.
Stephen King understands what works in a book.
Stanley Kubrick understood what works in a film.
And hoo boy did his film ever work well, with so many powerful iconic images I won't even try to list them.
King wants to fancy himself a movie producer/director.
He should stick to books.