For ages films from Stephen King novels were inferior; one dimensional horror. Three of the best were from short stories or series - Shawshank Redemption; Stand By Me and The Green Mile. At last Hollywood seems to have realised he's a brilliant writer with much more than just good stories (a bit like Dickens). I thought the new movie based on his novel (which, of course, I read when it was released) was terrific; frightening but more than simple horror. Go see it.

JK2006 wrote:
For ages films from Stephen King novels were inferior; one dimensional horror. Three of the best were from short stories or series - Shawshank Redemption; Stand By Me and The Green Mile. At last Hollywood seems to have realised he's a brilliant writer with much more than just good stories (a bit like Dickens). I thought the new movie based on his novel (which, of course, I read when it was released) was terrific; frightening but more than simple horror. Go see it.

I have almost all them over the decade's on planes to pass the time 99% are great - however his latest novel is shite.

I think The Dead Zone (1983) is pretty good, with a great cast. But then, I'm biased, as Christopher Walken is one of my favourite actors. The trailer and the film itself are on YouTube.

Of the Stephen King novels I've read, I've wondered if he writes them with an eye to them being made into films, or if they just lend themselves particularly well to being adapted for the screen, if not always particularly well.

Yes The Dead Zone was good and I agree with you on Walken. I think Stephen just writes great stories, as Charles Dickens did. It always amazes me - every year I try to reread a Dickens novel and every year I adore it. Oliver Twist is worth rereading - way superior to any film or musical; likewise A Tale Of Two Cities.

Good tips. It's been years since I read those, but I remember particularly enjoying A Tale of Two Cities.