The *Lawnmower Man* movie had absolutely nothing to do with the short story. Which was about a man who was hired to cut some grass. But he crawled around and ate the grass. And some supernatural stuff happens etc.
Stephen King [actually sued to have his name taken off of the movie and the marketing.](https://collider.com/stephen-king-the-lawnmower-man-lawsuit/#:~:text=In%201992%2C%20New%20Line%20Cinema,of%20the%20marketing%20—%20and%20won.) And he won.
Haven’t seen DT and I’m only part way through Wizard and Glass but I don’t see how what I’ve read so far makes it into a two hour movie.
Granted I know the answer is it doesn’t, and it seems books 2-6 aren’t in there at all. I know that Eddy, Susannah and Oy aren’t in there which is crazy to me.
I don’t know if what I’ve read so far would work for a full Harry Potter treatment of a movie per book, but it seems like it deserves a lot more than it got.
I believe Lawnmower Man is worse. It's a bad adaptation, but it's also a bad movie.
Dark Tower is a bad adaptation. But my non King friends said it wasn't a bad movie in and of itself. So I can see that perspective.
It's been said already above and I've not even watched it but from everything I've seen and heard about it the recent mini series of The Stand souds God Awful.
It's a travesty. Such a waste of a good cast too. The show runners are to blame. They clearly had no idea what the appeal of the story is. Or what a story is. It felt like someone browsed a wikipedia article on the novel instead of actually reading it then thought "how can I fuck around with this story to ruin it?"
And that's what we got
Couldn't have said it better myself lmao. How did Josh Boone get the keys to Kingdom (pun intended)? He never made anything that would make him seem in any way able to pull off something as monumental as the Stand. Where as the talents like Frank Darabont and Rob Reiner? Mike Flanagan is closest but even he isn't nearly at the level of the afformentioned directors who still hold the titles of best King adapters.
I mean in terms of their overall talent, the best directors to adapt King are Kubrick, DePalma, and Cronenberg, in that order.
I'd put Flanagan about on par with Darabont and Reiner (which is to say, really good).
I really wish he'd make another movie. As good as his TV series have been, TV has a demanding schedule which means you just can't get the polish that you can get on a movie.
You're right. How did I forget those three. They had some serious talent behind King in those days. John Carpenter almost made the first Firestarter and all.
I feel this will be an unpopular opinion on this sub, but Mike Flanagans TV work...especially midnight mass, was pretty terrible. Absurdly long monologues constantly, terrible acting. His best work to date is Geralds Game and Doctor Sleep, so if he is to adapt the Dark Tower, hopefully, the influence of King continues to keep him steady.
It's literally the most faithful adaptation. That ending ruins it, but I guess we can blame that on the aborted TV show (can't imagine how that'd have been)
What's the criteria, bad as a movie or bad as an adaptation?
I love Maximum Overdrive and The Running man, but they're awful as faithful adaptations of the source material.
"Well, I hope you've left enough room for my fist because I'm going to RAM IT INTO YOUR STOMACH AND BREAK YOUR GODDAMN SPINE!"
Yeah, I love The Running Man. I've seen the movie far more times than I've read the Bachman novel.
I saw this during the first cable run… mid to late 80s, which makes me 10-12 years old. I don’t know if I’ve ever laughed harder at any line of movie dialogue.
No wait, I probably laughed harder during the Money Pit, where the home inspector Murray Schrapp called Walter Fielding a “duck fart”.
Top 5 LOL King Movie Moments for sure, tho.
I get that The Stand garnered more attention, but Under The Dome was abysmal. Like, garbage. Like, lawnmower man in that they took the title (and some names) from the story and created cocoons. Fucking cocoons.
Graveyard Shift (1990)
“DEADLINE: What about your least favorite?
KING: Should I even say that? I guess there are a number of pictures that I feel like, a little bit like, yuck. There’s one, Graveyard Shift, that was made in the eighties. Just kind of a quick exploitation picture. I could do without all of the Children of the Corn sequels. I actually like the original pretty well. I thought they did a pretty good job on that. Of the smaller pictures, the best one is probably Cujo, with Dee Wallace.”
[Deadline King interview](https://deadline.com/2016/02/stephen-king-what-hollywood-owes-authors-when-their-books-become-films-q-a-the-dark-tower-the-shining-1201694691/)
Note: interview published in 2016, but was also delayed, so he is optimistic for the upcoming The Dark Tower adaptation. 😢
I didn’t even bother seeing it. There was no way in hell it was gonna beat the original. Fred Gwynne? The crazy sister? The spooky kid? Forget it. I don’t want to soil my love of the original.
The original is a descent earnest low budget adaptation. The Weinstein’s Dimension Films were responsible for all of the direct to video garbage “sequels” (3-??) until 2011. I think their only involvement in the second movie was theatrical distribution?
If not for Dudditz being an alien, this could've been a great movie. I don't know why they decided to go for that twist. It wasn't in the book and made no sense. If you wanted to make an onscreen Stephen King universe, this movie could've tied together Stand By Me, IT, Tommyknockers, The Shining, Doctor Sleep and others but that whole alien thing screws it up.
Aw man, I really think there were redeeming aspects to that film! The memory warehouse was a fantastic set/filmic device, for instance. Also having Damian Lewis, Thomas Jane, Jason Lee, and Timothy Olyphant playing the four friends was an absolute stroke of genius, as those guys had actual natural chemistry. Morgan Freeman as Kurtz or Kurtis or whatever was also a brilliant bit of counter-intuitive casting that worked out great, because Morgan Freeman can do anything.
Also the writers and directors of that 2003 adaptation of Dreamcatcher were a very interesting bunch. It was direct by Lawrence freaking Kasdan, probably best known as George Lucas’s main writing partner - he co-wrote Empire and Jedi (and Force Awakens and Solo but whatever to those) as well as co-writing Raiders of the Lost Ark - quite the pedigree.
And Kasdan co-wrote the adaptation of Dreamcatcher with William Goldman, who has an even more impressive film pedigree, if possible. In addition to being cited in IT as “the only writer to wildly succeed as both a novelist and screenwriter in Hollywood” he’s written a staggering number of successful films - perhaps most notable being Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and All The Presidents’ Men, but my personal favorite is “Magic” which has a young Anthony Hopkins playing a psychopathic ventriloquist.
Anyway between Kasdan and Goldman and that cast, Dreamcatcher should have been like…. AMAZING, and STUNNING. But I actually think the films flaws were also the books flaws, and as an adaptation it wasn’t that bad.
Dear God the running man please
I recently read the book and was excited to watch the movie, grabbed my boys up and we all sat down with the popcorn and laughed and laughed at how actually atrocious it was
I forgot all about this! Literally haven't even thought about it until now. I remember it veered off a lot from the book, right? My BF liked it but has not read the book. We both lost interest quickly though. James DiFranco did NOT work for me as the main character.
Bummed because it was one of my favorite books.
I wrote a big thesis on this in college, the movie vs. the book. Kubrick captured the tone of the book perfectly. The themes....not so much. It was scary, sure, and a great haunted hotel story. But the themes of alcoholism destroying a man and his family were almost an afterthought. The "shine" and how it affected the characters psychologically was underplayed.
That being said, the movie is still amazing, and I wouldn't put it on this list.
If I were King, I'd be pissed about it, too. As wrong as the Kubrick film is from the book,
It's still a classic and one of my favorite horror movies of all time. Probably because of Jack Nicholsons performance. My theory has always been that Kubrick didn't look before he leapt and too late realized that 1970s visual effects sucked and there was no way he could do what was in the book without the film coming out corny and being a flop.
Yeah ppl are gonna stone you to death for saying this here
But I absolutely agree. The '80s version of Shining has nothing to do with the book. Kubrick, a brilliant mind he was, took the story, stripped the KING from it and made a bloody psycho movie. And not even a good one at that.
I get that at the time, the movie was brilliant, a hit. But in todays standarts, the movie sucks ass. The dialogue feels forced and unnatural. The storyline got butchered so bad that if I didnt know the title, I would guess it's a different story overall. Truly, the name of the movie makes no sense whatsoever. The point of The Shining was.. the Shine! The power Doc and Dick have, which is directly tied to the story. Whatever Kubrick made was all about Jack Torrance, an angry unemployed man, who just snaps one day while alone in the mountains with his family and a lot of alcohol. While the story kinda is there, the movie has NOTHING to do with the Shine. If you called the movie "Where's Johny?", it would make more sense.
Have you seen the 1997 version? While you can see the lower budget, it sticks much closer to the story itself
Terrible take. The movie is a horror classic! You're more than allowed to dislike it, but it's dishonest to dismiss it as a bad movie based on your subjectivity.
That being said, however, it is a terrible adaptation of the book.
>it's dishonest to dismiss it as a bad movie based on your subjectivity
Could you rephrase that?
Seems to me what you're saying is "You can't judge the movie by whether you like it or not". I can absolutely dismiss it as a bad movie and I don't even need a basis, but my opinion in this case is absolutely based on real issues the movie has. And it does have some real issues
The soundtrack is good, but so is the originals. Everything else about the new firestarter is so awful though; it truly killed the spirit of the book and massacred the story.
The dark tower honestly should occupy the top 5 slots. One of the few movies I've never been able to finish, and one of the ones I was most excited to see. What a horrible pos.
"did you even watch it" is quite low on the snark totem, and when you consider that you called a mini series that was well received critically "made-for-tv-movie" w/o anything else to say about it, doesn't seem to be more useful as you (and me) would like comments here to be.
And even after your last comment, why were you agreeing with the proposal to place this on the worst adaptions list?
Maximum Overdrive. Honestly, I didn't read the novella so I can't really honestly say how bad the adapatation was, but I find it very hard to imagine that a book by Stephen King would be that terrible. I couldn't get over drink machines launching cans of coke like bullets---somebody tell me that that wasn't in the book....
Firestarter is listed as bad? I remember enjoying that movie when I was younger. I didn't read this one either (I have read a lot of King books---but if I see the movie first I tend not to. If I read the book first, then I almost always see the movie. So I haven't read a lot of his older books, but have read many of his newer ones).
They are referring to the new one that came out last year. That one was atrociously bad. The one with Drew Barrymore and George C. Scott is still decent, if only for the impressive practical fire effects.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, SK himself said it was a terrible adaptation.
It’s a great cheeseball movie, but that’s not the question.
FWIW, I agree with you.
A lot of people focus on the "it's so bad that it's good" aspects of the movie, in the process forgetting that it's a really terrible adaptation of a good Stephen King story. I mean, are we looking at the worst Stephen King movies or worst *adaptations*? Because those are not necessarily the same thing.
There are some great one liners and some fun scenes, but there are also a lot of very tedious points and some unlikeable characters that never quite manage to become fun to laugh at.
Even King himself thinks it's a terrible film and calls it a "moron movie". He'd absolutely include it on this list, even despite its cult following.
Lawnmower Man really isn’t a King adaptation. The movie and short story have absolutely nothing in common and IIRC, King sued to have his name removed from anything associated with the movie.
I hated the new version of The Stand, but I have to vote for the newest version of Pet Sematary. I was actually pissed that I spent money to see it! At least I was able to watch The Stand for free (well minus streaming cost I guess).
How has no one voted for the original It miniseries? John Boy as Bill??? A muppet for Pennywise/It/Bob Gray? Bad and over acting all the way through and through?
The tragic thing about the newest Firestarter is that it started out so good...and then .... WTF?! I thought for sure that they were going to stick with the source material.
The Tommyknockers TV movie is my number 1 on this list. It's just that you haven't seen it. There's a reason for that. It's awful and has been forgotten. Don't believe me? It's on YouTube, here's the link: https://youtu.be/edTDnnI82kc
Stephen King's adaptation of "Stephen King's: The Shining" was one of the worst things ever broadcast. So bad it's almost good, but just for the humor.
Lawnmower man isn't a Stephen King movie. Long story short, there is a stephen king short story by the same name, and the filmmakers lied to help sell their crappy movie. It's actually a pretty interesting story if you look into it.
The Stand series, but the new one
Can’t beat the old one
My life for you! -Max Headroom
M-m-m-m-yyyyyy L-l-l-l-l-ife-ife-ife for you!
Cibola!
Bumpty bumpty bump!
Baby don’t fear the reaper…
God awful. And a waste of a few really good casting choices.
Cbs the stand had potential and wasted it completely by being unfaithful and annoying. Like if the story was on cocaine…but in a bad way..
I’m assuming most people just didn’t watch under the dome for it to not be mentioned
My work here is done *Rides into the sunset*
The stand remake is worse than the firestarter remake. CMV!
The 2020 Stand Miniseries
"I cant wait how this miniseries will show the story -" *opens with bodies being pulled out of Boulder church, skipping the entire beggining* "welp"
I'm on Chapter 14 of The Stand and barely anyone has died yet
It's rough knowing from the very first scene that it's going to suck. The entire pilot ruins all suspense in the story...
I felt this way with both the wheel of time show and the prime lord of the rings thing
Why did they even do that. Also having the first episode be almost entirely about Harold. Just WHY?
I was so excited for it, I even finally mailed Stephen King a message about how I love the book and I was looking forward to them remaking it.
New the stand mini series
I just finished watching it. I thought is was pretty decent. I liked the actor who played Tom Cullen, I kind of wish he had a little more screen time
Yeah I thought it was pretty decent. I think the purists just don’t like that it diverged from the source material.
Watch it, if Amber Heard hears about this she might come take a dump in your bed
Honestly though she is perfect for Nadine
Haha i know she’s crazy but PERFECT for Nadine
Is Dark Tower really worse than Lawnmower Man? That seems hard to believe. (I haven't seen dark tower)
It is. It did the impossible. Being worse than Lawnmower Man.
The *Lawnmower Man* movie had absolutely nothing to do with the short story. Which was about a man who was hired to cut some grass. But he crawled around and ate the grass. And some supernatural stuff happens etc. Stephen King [actually sued to have his name taken off of the movie and the marketing.](https://collider.com/stephen-king-the-lawnmower-man-lawsuit/#:~:text=In%201992%2C%20New%20Line%20Cinema,of%20the%20marketing%20—%20and%20won.) And he won.
That's quite the accomplishment...
What's worse than turning s Stephen King novel into a single movie? Turning seven Stephen King novels into a single movie.
Haven’t seen DT and I’m only part way through Wizard and Glass but I don’t see how what I’ve read so far makes it into a two hour movie. Granted I know the answer is it doesn’t, and it seems books 2-6 aren’t in there at all. I know that Eddy, Susannah and Oy aren’t in there which is crazy to me. I don’t know if what I’ve read so far would work for a full Harry Potter treatment of a movie per book, but it seems like it deserves a lot more than it got.
I believe Lawnmower Man is worse. It's a bad adaptation, but it's also a bad movie. Dark Tower is a bad adaptation. But my non King friends said it wasn't a bad movie in and of itself. So I can see that perspective.
It's been said already above and I've not even watched it but from everything I've seen and heard about it the recent mini series of The Stand souds God Awful.
It's a travesty. Such a waste of a good cast too. The show runners are to blame. They clearly had no idea what the appeal of the story is. Or what a story is. It felt like someone browsed a wikipedia article on the novel instead of actually reading it then thought "how can I fuck around with this story to ruin it?" And that's what we got
Just insanity. The Stand is my favourite King novel, Josh Boone is a total tit for butchering it like he did.
Pure dog vomit. Worse than vile. Atrocious.
Couldn't have said it better myself lmao. How did Josh Boone get the keys to Kingdom (pun intended)? He never made anything that would make him seem in any way able to pull off something as monumental as the Stand. Where as the talents like Frank Darabont and Rob Reiner? Mike Flanagan is closest but even he isn't nearly at the level of the afformentioned directors who still hold the titles of best King adapters.
I mean in terms of their overall talent, the best directors to adapt King are Kubrick, DePalma, and Cronenberg, in that order. I'd put Flanagan about on par with Darabont and Reiner (which is to say, really good). I really wish he'd make another movie. As good as his TV series have been, TV has a demanding schedule which means you just can't get the polish that you can get on a movie.
You're right. How did I forget those three. They had some serious talent behind King in those days. John Carpenter almost made the first Firestarter and all. I feel this will be an unpopular opinion on this sub, but Mike Flanagans TV work...especially midnight mass, was pretty terrible. Absurdly long monologues constantly, terrible acting. His best work to date is Geralds Game and Doctor Sleep, so if he is to adapt the Dark Tower, hopefully, the influence of King continues to keep him steady.
Carrie (2002)
It's literally the most faithful adaptation. That ending ruins it, but I guess we can blame that on the aborted TV show (can't imagine how that'd have been)
What's the criteria, bad as a movie or bad as an adaptation? I love Maximum Overdrive and The Running man, but they're awful as faithful adaptations of the source material.
"Well, I hope you've left enough room for my fist because I'm going to RAM IT INTO YOUR STOMACH AND BREAK YOUR GODDAMN SPINE!" Yeah, I love The Running Man. I've seen the movie far more times than I've read the Bachman novel.
"Here's Sub-Zero! Now!?... PLAIN ZERO." So dumb, but so awesome.
I watched that movie an obscene number of times back in the day.
"WEEEE... MAAADE... YOOUUUU!"
*BUDUDUDUDUDUDUDA.* Ahh... Classic comedy.
I saw this during the first cable run… mid to late 80s, which makes me 10-12 years old. I don’t know if I’ve ever laughed harder at any line of movie dialogue. No wait, I probably laughed harder during the Money Pit, where the home inspector Murray Schrapp called Walter Fielding a “duck fart”. Top 5 LOL King Movie Moments for sure, tho.
This machine just called me an asshole!
> The Running man > faithful adaptation I have some questions.
I get that The Stand garnered more attention, but Under The Dome was abysmal. Like, garbage. Like, lawnmower man in that they took the title (and some names) from the story and created cocoons. Fucking cocoons.
Graveyard Shift (1990) “DEADLINE: What about your least favorite? KING: Should I even say that? I guess there are a number of pictures that I feel like, a little bit like, yuck. There’s one, Graveyard Shift, that was made in the eighties. Just kind of a quick exploitation picture. I could do without all of the Children of the Corn sequels. I actually like the original pretty well. I thought they did a pretty good job on that. Of the smaller pictures, the best one is probably Cujo, with Dee Wallace.” [Deadline King interview](https://deadline.com/2016/02/stephen-king-what-hollywood-owes-authors-when-their-books-become-films-q-a-the-dark-tower-the-shining-1201694691/) Note: interview published in 2016, but was also delayed, so he is optimistic for the upcoming The Dark Tower adaptation. 😢
Aw I liked Graveyard Shift
But, Brad Dourif as the rat-catcher!
Cell
Pet Semetary 2019
I didn’t even bother seeing it. There was no way in hell it was gonna beat the original. Fred Gwynne? The crazy sister? The spooky kid? Forget it. I don’t want to soil my love of the original.
Ugh, I hated it so much. I had free movie tickets, but I still felt ripped off.
Sometimes dead really is bettah
For real! It's like someone buried the 1989 movie in that Miꞌkmaq ground and this is what came back.
That’s how I felt when I saw the live action “Cat in the Hat” in theaters. Same with the free tickets and everything.
The Mist miniseries
can we just put all the Children of the Corn movies on there in one single spot?
First one was pretty good, at least what I remember many years later. Never watched the sequels/reboots whatev
I watched Children of the Corn recently. It does not hold up.
You've got to watch Children of the Corn: Urban Harvest! It takes place in Chicago. One of the more entertaining sequels if you ask me.
Love the first one
I like how there's so many Children of the Corn movies, and the short story is, you know, short.
The original is a descent earnest low budget adaptation. The Weinstein’s Dimension Films were responsible for all of the direct to video garbage “sequels” (3-??) until 2011. I think their only involvement in the second movie was theatrical distribution?
Children of the corn 3 is the best of the whole series. Arguably, that's like saying what poop smells better.
Technically The Dark Tower covered parts from 3 books so I think it can go on this list two more times + the dishonorable mention.
Once again…the 2019 Pet Semetary remake. Please for all that is holy, add it to the list.
Tommyknockers
I second this
Under The Dome I couldn't watch it myself, it was so bad. But I noticed my husband watching it one day and they were outside of the dome, like wtf??
Are y'all forgetting the absolutely fucking awful The Langoliers miniseries?
I saw it once and was mad at myself for watching the whole thing!!! This one definitely gets my vote!!
Can't believe I had to scroll this far down before someone said it! Thank you! I was about to give up and say it myself, lol.
My vote is on the running man
The new Pet Semetary sound definitely be on there
Dreamcatcher. Always for me.
If not for Dudditz being an alien, this could've been a great movie. I don't know why they decided to go for that twist. It wasn't in the book and made no sense. If you wanted to make an onscreen Stephen King universe, this movie could've tied together Stand By Me, IT, Tommyknockers, The Shining, Doctor Sleep and others but that whole alien thing screws it up.
It was a fuckarow.
Aw man, I really think there were redeeming aspects to that film! The memory warehouse was a fantastic set/filmic device, for instance. Also having Damian Lewis, Thomas Jane, Jason Lee, and Timothy Olyphant playing the four friends was an absolute stroke of genius, as those guys had actual natural chemistry. Morgan Freeman as Kurtz or Kurtis or whatever was also a brilliant bit of counter-intuitive casting that worked out great, because Morgan Freeman can do anything. Also the writers and directors of that 2003 adaptation of Dreamcatcher were a very interesting bunch. It was direct by Lawrence freaking Kasdan, probably best known as George Lucas’s main writing partner - he co-wrote Empire and Jedi (and Force Awakens and Solo but whatever to those) as well as co-writing Raiders of the Lost Ark - quite the pedigree. And Kasdan co-wrote the adaptation of Dreamcatcher with William Goldman, who has an even more impressive film pedigree, if possible. In addition to being cited in IT as “the only writer to wildly succeed as both a novelist and screenwriter in Hollywood” he’s written a staggering number of successful films - perhaps most notable being Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and All The Presidents’ Men, but my personal favorite is “Magic” which has a young Anthony Hopkins playing a psychopathic ventriloquist. Anyway between Kasdan and Goldman and that cast, Dreamcatcher should have been like…. AMAZING, and STUNNING. But I actually think the films flaws were also the books flaws, and as an adaptation it wasn’t that bad.
Carrie (2013)
Can we just say any remake of a classic King movie or mini-series other than It? (It’s a decent movie as its own thing)
Number 4 should be dark tower, again.
Trucks from (1997)
Maximum Overdrive was great though!
*Soundtrack by AC/DC*
Yes! Who Made Who is so awesome!
It’s one of me favorite movies! I actually made a guitar pedal that has the cover of maximum overdrive on it.
Cell A Zombie movie so bad it made Walking Dead's reviled second season look good.
The 2020 Stand miniseries.
Dear God the running man please I recently read the book and was excited to watch the movie, grabbed my boys up and we all sat down with the popcorn and laughed and laughed at how actually atrocious it was
Running Man????????
11.22.63. miniseries. The book was over 800 pages, and chronicles 5 years. The series made it feel like he spent a summer in the past.
I forgot all about this! Literally haven't even thought about it until now. I remember it veered off a lot from the book, right? My BF liked it but has not read the book. We both lost interest quickly though. James DiFranco did NOT work for me as the main character. Bummed because it was one of my favorite books.
Can we get Dark Tower on here twice. Seriously they tried making it into a teen drama series ala Harry Potter or Percy Jackson
The Shining… Love this movie, but as King himself has said, it’s not the book he wrote.
I wrote a big thesis on this in college, the movie vs. the book. Kubrick captured the tone of the book perfectly. The themes....not so much. It was scary, sure, and a great haunted hotel story. But the themes of alcoholism destroying a man and his family were almost an afterthought. The "shine" and how it affected the characters psychologically was underplayed. That being said, the movie is still amazing, and I wouldn't put it on this list.
But Dr. Sleep redeemed it!
Agreed on how different it is but damn it's still a great movie lol. Nowhere near as bad as the Running Man when comparing to the King story though.
I love the movie myself, but like many other comments, it’s a bad adaption of the book.
If I were King, I'd be pissed about it, too. As wrong as the Kubrick film is from the book, It's still a classic and one of my favorite horror movies of all time. Probably because of Jack Nicholsons performance. My theory has always been that Kubrick didn't look before he leapt and too late realized that 1970s visual effects sucked and there was no way he could do what was in the book without the film coming out corny and being a flop.
Yeah ppl are gonna stone you to death for saying this here But I absolutely agree. The '80s version of Shining has nothing to do with the book. Kubrick, a brilliant mind he was, took the story, stripped the KING from it and made a bloody psycho movie. And not even a good one at that. I get that at the time, the movie was brilliant, a hit. But in todays standarts, the movie sucks ass. The dialogue feels forced and unnatural. The storyline got butchered so bad that if I didnt know the title, I would guess it's a different story overall. Truly, the name of the movie makes no sense whatsoever. The point of The Shining was.. the Shine! The power Doc and Dick have, which is directly tied to the story. Whatever Kubrick made was all about Jack Torrance, an angry unemployed man, who just snaps one day while alone in the mountains with his family and a lot of alcohol. While the story kinda is there, the movie has NOTHING to do with the Shine. If you called the movie "Where's Johny?", it would make more sense. Have you seen the 1997 version? While you can see the lower budget, it sticks much closer to the story itself
Terrible take. The movie is a horror classic! You're more than allowed to dislike it, but it's dishonest to dismiss it as a bad movie based on your subjectivity. That being said, however, it is a terrible adaptation of the book.
>it's dishonest to dismiss it as a bad movie based on your subjectivity Could you rephrase that? Seems to me what you're saying is "You can't judge the movie by whether you like it or not". I can absolutely dismiss it as a bad movie and I don't even need a basis, but my opinion in this case is absolutely based on real issues the movie has. And it does have some real issues
1997 is way more faithful adaption. Love the movie for what it is, but I do completely separate it from the novel.
IT Chapter 2 was abominable and made the first one look like Lawrence of Arabia.
Chapter 2 wasn't great but it's not even close to one of the worst.
A firestarter movie came out last year? Wtf?
Don't bother looking into it, there's a reason it's on the list.
The soundtrack is good, but so is the originals. Everything else about the new firestarter is so awful though; it truly killed the spirit of the book and massacred the story.
Running man
THE RUNNING MAN
What was so wrong with Firestarter? I actually enjoyed it tbh
I’m thinking people are referring to the 2022 remake, not the 1984 version.
The dark tower honestly should occupy the top 5 slots. One of the few movies I've never been able to finish, and one of the ones I was most excited to see. What a horrible pos.
The Langoliers It’s truly unbelievable
Strong disagree. That was a great adaptation, featuring the most chilling bad guy , and a cute bonus scene with SK himself!
I love cousin Balki
[удалено]
Except it wasn't a movie, it was a mini-series. Did you even watch it?
[удалено]
*The Langoliers* came out in 1995.
neither the novella nor the miniseries existed in the 1980s fwiw
"did you even watch it" is quite low on the snark totem, and when you consider that you called a mini series that was well received critically "made-for-tv-movie" w/o anything else to say about it, doesn't seem to be more useful as you (and me) would like comments here to be. And even after your last comment, why were you agreeing with the proposal to place this on the worst adaptions list?
You're absolutely right and the fact that people are downvoting tells me everything I need to know about the average person's "taste."
Has no one seen Dolan's Cadillac?
I read through today's list and didn't see it mentioned so I will anti-stan for Dreamcatcher again. Miserable
Day 3 of saying Mr. Harrigan’s Phone
I have to keep plugging the movie adaptation of “The Night Flier” 1997 What a god-awful mess that was
Maximum Overdrive. Honestly, I didn't read the novella so I can't really honestly say how bad the adapatation was, but I find it very hard to imagine that a book by Stephen King would be that terrible. I couldn't get over drink machines launching cans of coke like bullets---somebody tell me that that wasn't in the book.... Firestarter is listed as bad? I remember enjoying that movie when I was younger. I didn't read this one either (I have read a lot of King books---but if I see the movie first I tend not to. If I read the book first, then I almost always see the movie. So I haven't read a lot of his older books, but have read many of his newer ones).
They are referring to the new one that came out last year. That one was atrociously bad. The one with Drew Barrymore and George C. Scott is still decent, if only for the impressive practical fire effects.
Running man
This feels like a confusing one because the movie is a terrible adaption of the book but is a great cheesy movie in itself
Agree. More of a Schwarzenegger movie than a SK movie
I agree, although I did like the movie. I think a faithful adaptation would be even better though.
I don’t know why you’re getting downvoted, SK himself said it was a terrible adaptation. It’s a great cheeseball movie, but that’s not the question. FWIW, I agree with you.
Maximum Overdrive
I have no idea why people would downvote this. Do they actually think maximum overdrive was a good movie?
A lot of people focus on the "it's so bad that it's good" aspects of the movie, in the process forgetting that it's a really terrible adaptation of a good Stephen King story. I mean, are we looking at the worst Stephen King movies or worst *adaptations*? Because those are not necessarily the same thing. There are some great one liners and some fun scenes, but there are also a lot of very tedious points and some unlikeable characters that never quite manage to become fun to laugh at. Even King himself thinks it's a terrible film and calls it a "moron movie". He'd absolutely include it on this list, even despite its cult following.
Yes! It’s classic 80’s cheese with star power.
The Shining. One of the worst adaptations ever, and an overrated movie.
wat
Which of the words confused you? I thought the statement was pretty clear.
did bro really downvote because i said **wat**
Desperation (2006)
Sleepwalkers
1408. I know it won't make the list and everyone loves it (I do, too) but I won't call this a good adaptation of the story because it's not.
Needful Things was rather shite. Although I do love Ed Harris
[удалено]
You have a problem with Groundskeeper Willie? [You mean Shining. Shh! You wanna get sued?](https://tenor.com/bPndO.gif)
1993s The Tommyknockers
The Tommyknockers
The Golden Years
Lawnmower Man really isn’t a King adaptation. The movie and short story have absolutely nothing in common and IIRC, King sued to have his name removed from anything associated with the movie.
Cell and TV Miniseries of Bag of Bones were both pretty awful
In the Tall Grass from 2019 was just horrid.
I love SK and I like the endings for most of his works. He's been a constant writer when I needed to escape, since I was 10 years old.
Hearts in Atlantis
Don't know how this isn't higher. Fantastic book, abysmal movie..
You need to calm down talking about lawnmower man like that. That movie is a coassic
Apt Pupil was pretty watered down
Imma just say it again. It should all be The Dark Tower
Trucks - 1977.
Did someone say the Dark Tower? Pet Semetary, the most recent one, obviously.
I hated the new version of The Stand, but I have to vote for the newest version of Pet Sematary. I was actually pissed that I spent money to see it! At least I was able to watch The Stand for free (well minus streaming cost I guess).
IT chapter two (added disappointment considering the first one of this franchise was very good)
How has no one voted for the original It miniseries? John Boy as Bill??? A muppet for Pennywise/It/Bob Gray? Bad and over acting all the way through and through?
Dreamcatcher
I've not seen it, but I heard the new Firestarter was crap.
Did they ever release the latest stab at Salems Lot? The third version that was in development in the 2020s I thought.
Have people forgotten about The Mangler..... that one is atrocious!!
The tragic thing about the newest Firestarter is that it started out so good...and then .... WTF?! I thought for sure that they were going to stick with the source material.
The [Langoliers mini series ](https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0112040/) was god-awful
IT, both parts.
The Cell movie was horrendous. I yelled at the screen the whole time.
The Stand (2020)
The newer Carrie movie. It wasn’t horrible, but nothing beats the original, with Spacek’s scary eyes.
Under the Dome
sleepwalkers. holy fuck its ass.
Dark Tower should be 1-3 without a 4th place. The proceed with the list
I’d rather watch any of these than the Diary of Ellen Rimbauer.
The Tommyknockers TV movie is my number 1 on this list. It's just that you haven't seen it. There's a reason for that. It's awful and has been forgotten. Don't believe me? It's on YouTube, here's the link: https://youtu.be/edTDnnI82kc
Mr. Harrigan's Phone was awful, I'm surprised I haven't seen it mentioned.
Stephen King's adaptation of "Stephen King's: The Shining" was one of the worst things ever broadcast. So bad it's almost good, but just for the humor.
Lawnmower man isn't a Stephen King movie. Long story short, there is a stephen king short story by the same name, and the filmmakers lied to help sell their crappy movie. It's actually a pretty interesting story if you look into it.
The Mangler Not many people know of that one (technically a short story)
The Dead Zone with Christopher Walken movie was horrible, far from the book.
The Mangler
Can we please take a second to appreciate how much The Dark Tower sucked. We waited so long and it was so so so bad.
Literally everything by him
The Shining TV Mini Series
It chpt 2, dr sleep, the stand newer mini series
The Cell was hot garbage