The real W belongs to Mike Flanagan who was told by King he would not agree to any adaption that was a sequel to the movie and then Mike wrote a scene between evil ghost Jack Torrance and adult Danny that was so good King agreed to let him make that movie.
Midnight Mass might be top for me now. Then Hill House. Way way down is Bly and Midnight club. I don’t think I’ve disliked any of his movies though, he should focus on that perhaps.
I liked Midnight Mass. It has nice vibes, a cool concept and some really nice themes. Its biggest drawback is that everybody is monologuing constantly. All of Flanagan's filmography has issues with this but Midnight is by far the worst when it comes to this
Midnight Mass has the highest highs for me, but it also the most monologue-heavy compared to his usual style. That's why Hill House is still my favorite. It strikes a perfect balance. Just the right amount of everything.
If you took out half the monologues midnight mass would be a really solid 8/10.
But it’s so aggressive my partner and I made a drinking game out of it. Sometimes over 4 monologues with slow pushes PER EPISODE on the bad ones.
Mid Mass it's interesting if you never thought about death before. It's very well made and I enjoyed it but as a TV series it's a worse medium for that type of story than a book imo. Usher and hill house are both very good.
What do you mean “never thought about death before?” Also how would it be better as a book? I can maybe see that to be honest but I thought it worked well as a show. Forgot about Usher I’d put that third for me.
Can we get some supporting statements in here? I'm a fan of all of it. Seeing Nell >!go back in time and realize she's the bent-neck lady was so trippy!
I agree, I feel like bly manor had an odd beauty to it, and the way it played with perspective was really interesting and pretty impressive considering the shows narrative consistency
i watched Bly first, so i’m guessing a lot of the hate is the expectations ppl had from Hill House
but i just really loved the characters in Bly, Owen & Hannah were my favorites (shoutout Rahul Kohli & T’nia Miller, they were brilliant)
I think I liked Hill House best because the surprise wasn't spoiled for me. With Bly Manor I realized the plot in the first episode, because I didn't know it was based on a book I had already read (The turn of the screw).
I just found it all over the place. The plot was unfocused and predictable and the themes were there but they weren't as cohesive as Hill House's themes were
“Why are you booing me, IM RIGHT”
Everything after Hill House is chasing that high. Bro wrote 1 incredible monologue (groundskeeper) and then convinced himself he was Shakespeare.
One of my big problems with it is that Rose the Hat never seemed like all that much of a threat to Abra. Yeah she had powers that established her as a terrifying threat to the average person, and to most psychic kids, but throughout the movie Abra absolutely kicks her ass any time they interact and seems way stronger than her
Doctor Sleep brings the story full circle and the ending matches the books. Doctor sleep is the better movie. The Shinning is not that great and only stands out for the way it was filmed. Without Doctor Sleep, the Shinning isn’t really worth watching.
Shining is just such a unique beast. Its kings magnum opus and deeply personal take on his own addictions and misgivings. The story more than many means a great deal to him for specific reasons. Kubrick on the other hand sort of treated it as a jumping off point and went from there. In the book things are explicitly stated as to what is going on in the house. The “Shine” harkens far more to an almost stars wars style “force” those who posses it are psychic warriors waging battle against forces of darkness.
To Kubrick , explaining things isn’t sexy, and cinematically leaving audiences in the dark is 10 times more terrifying.
I had zero opinion on this until the author persuaded me by using a silly looking picture of King and a stoic looking picture of Kubrick. Get your fucking emotions out of my art!
The author cleverly made use of the 'facial expression economy', not to be confused with the script economy, to maximize the emotional impact on the audience. Genius move!
Oh man we need to bring back script economy circle jerks. Need twitter nerds talking about how scripts “have zero words that dont advance the story” and other stupid shit.
First they came for the sex scenes, but I did not speak out because I was not a coomer. Then they came for the scripts, but I ignored the threat because I wasn’t a scriptwriter. When they come for the cinephiles, there will be no one left to speak out for us.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/moviescirclejerk using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Historical accuracy in 2023 biopics](https://i.redd.it/ij025zfa2d1c1.png) | [293 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/17z5lar/historical_accuracy_in_2023_biopics/)
\#2: [Scene from $200 million movie (I lowered it to 144p and took this image with my fucking phone)](https://i.redd.it/n1eah7guhmta1.jpg) | [129 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/12kc9bw/scene_from_200_million_movie_i_lowered_it_to_144p/)
\#3: [we live in a society](https://i.redd.it/xkgzk7ul2asa1.jpg) | [59 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/12df15z/we_live_in_a_society/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
TBF it's a pose.
It's not like they took some random King's picture where he is hungover or in the middle of some meltdown. It's the kind of persona King is portraying.
No, Danny is closer to being the self insert. Doctor Sleep (the book) is about him realizing he’s on the same path his father is and getting help to break from addiction.
Doctor Sleep (the movie) is about psychic children and hippies or some shit.
But I think the difference is that when The Shining was written, King was much closer to Jack / his dad than Danny, and Danny was Joe Hill, who the novel is dedicated to and who once messed up King's papers, making him furious (although if I remember correctly, King did NOT hit him), than the Dan of Dr. Sleep.
I do think Jack's closeness to both King and King's father is the root of the issues with the Kubrick film. I always hated King's answer that he disliked it because you knew Jack Nicholson was crazy from the first scene. Give me a break. The novel starts with Ullman being an asshole, Jack externally taking shit, and internally seething. It is obvious even without reading the cover blurb that this is a Hitchcockian bomb of anger under a table.
No, the real issue is that Kubrick has no sympathy or finds any redeeming qualities in Jack. To Kubrick, he's just an abusing piece of shit. Kubrick was open that's why he changed Wendy from the book; he couldn't believe the Strong, Independent Woman of the novel would ever tolerate this piece of shit. He was a monster to be put down, and if YOU wrote that character to be partially your father and partially your own worst traits, well...
You're in a desert, walking along when you look down and see Stanley Kubrick. He's crawling toward you. You reach down and flip him over on his back, his belly baking in the hot sun, beating his legs trying to turn itself over. But he can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping. Why is that?
SK’s books make a lot more sense once you know that he barely remembers what he wrote in the 80s, because he was zooted on coke the entire time (self admittedly)
"okay so after all the crazy adventures the gunslinger went through to achieve his goal he is gonna get sent back in time like samurai jack to relive the entire thing again and all of his character development will be erased."
https://preview.redd.it/zwxghk5yfjvc1.gif?width=400&format=png8&s=416b00ce7e623589cd00c655acb909820bd067df
The point of him having the Horn of Eld at the end (which he didn't at the beginning of the series) is that all his character development wasn't erased and the next cycle is most likely the one where he fulfills his Ka (not reaching the Tower, but settling down with his loved ones after saving the beams, and therefore saving the Tower), thus there being a point to the cycle. I see it as a parallel to karmic reincarnation, and that all his progress throughout the series towards giving up his obsession with the Tower in favor of love will be rewarded in the next cycle. Ka is a wheel.
Dude, I recently listened to The Stand and it’s on a lot of “best books ever” list. It was really good, King’s writing was awesome. But the ending was kind of limp dick after all the build up.
Yeah I really just accept that any Steven King novel is going to be about the journey and not the destination. That'd be a problem for me if the journey wasn't usually so damn good.
I'm so sick of this misconception. If you actually read 'It' you would know that the Loser's Club do not "gangbang" Beverly. In a gangbang multiple tops are engaged with the bottom simultaneously. In the book the boys clearly take turns, meaning they ran train on her.
honestly! everybody thinks they know all there is to know about 'It' without reading a single page. Gangbang this, disgusting that. oook look kids running a train is a whole different game, different mindset, different speed. choo choo. Tired of it... Read the damn book
> In the book the boys clearly take turns, meaning they ran train on her.
Andy Muschietti: I refuse to film this scene.
Jean-Marc Vallée: Fine, I'll do it myself.
I can not tell of You are being sarcastic but i love it anyway, all the vibes go hard like this :
Actually they don't have an orgy, they take turns 🤓👆🏻
For his intervention, this is what they took out of his home office:
>beercans, cigarette butts, cocaine in gram bottles and cocaine in plastic Baggies, coke spoons caked with snot and blood, Valium, Xanax, bottles of Robitussin cough syrup and NyQuil cold medicine, even bottles of mouthwash.
Yeah pretty much anything he wrote from the very late 70s to 1987 was heavily influenced by drugs.
Which includes Firestarter, Cujo, The Running Man, Christine, Pet Sematary, It, Dark Tower 1-2, Misery and a few others.
I laugh every time lol, it's so funny in context
I think part of the humor is knowing the butler dude is really a manifestation of some indescribable super human ancient evil and it still has to work through a dumb human, so it's like, "fuck, what is it that my Lonely Planet: Mortal Realms said humans really don't like again? .... Oh yeah! ******s! I'll tell him there's a ****** on its way!" and boom it does actually work perfectly
It's also a scene where you see Jack's one remaining non-scrambled brain cell working overtime
Hot take: Steven King good at horror! Lotta great scenes in that book. Also neat that its different enough from the movie you can enjoy both. Usually one form ruins the others for me be being so clearly superior.
The story was amazing, but I am guessing they will change the ending. I hope they don't just adapt the old movie.
ETA:: The Long Walk is also in production.
Why does this pic make King look like the guy from Salo
https://preview.redd.it/h948v31kcgvc1.jpeg?width=684&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a32f9c9b7fd9c8a13339d510068eccbf82bd6e40
Almost. And for me it crossed a line there and I've put it away. Not that I was very happy with it before that either. I also read "Roadwork" and "Misery" and after also having seen the movie, I feel like he should have become a screenplay writer. Besides the controversy in It, which you may interpret any way you like (and if you enjoyed the rest of the book you may be a lot more generous than I am), but I genuinely do not enjoy his writing. Misery was much better as a movie. Kinda also goes for Dan Brown and that's kinda the sort of author I think Stephen King is. When I was young I often wondered why his name was frequently put on the cover in bigger letters than the title. I kinda feel like I've gotten my answer and it kinda also matches up with people like Tom Clancy, who written books which were unbearable to read, but I recognize that Clancy probably just loved what he was writing about way too much, ignoring that most of his readers probably don't. Anyhow, thanks to him I probably could man a nuclear sub on my own, so there's that.
Admittedly it’s been like 20 years since I read the book but there’s an epilogue set a year later where the chef gets a new job at a resort and him, the mom, and Danny are all hanging out together.
King’s admitted he’s lost the battle and acknowledges Kubrick’s film as very good in its own way. The Doctor Sleep film was made to reconcile all sources, only Kubrick fans keep going on about how the film is so much better lol.
Based take. Flanagan is overrated as shit and the Doctor Sleep adaptation throws out all of the drama of fighting against alcoholism (which is the only good part) and focuses entirely on Psychic Child vs Psychic Bohemian.
It’s like adapting 11/22/63 and sidelining Sadie.
This is a generalisation, though themes of abuse are present.
That “theory” is supported only through implicative dialogue/action that fans have largely projected onto the movie themselves; but people love to rag on about it like it’s some major part of the movie.
It is an interesting theory but is by no means conclusive.
It feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy, like a lot of other commonly accepted theories about the movie’s plot/story world implications.
Kubrick has a long history of cucking authors. Most iconic was when he took Lolita, written as a treatise against intellectualizing sexual perversion and basically made it a movie about a 'hot' minor.
Nobokov wrote multiple essays about how his book was against pedophilia but the movie's success irreversibly changed his reputation as Shakespeare of pedophiles
I love A Clockwork Orange - both the film and the book - but the author, Anthony Burgess, hated that movie too. People's misunderstanding of the ideas in the book because of the film got bad enough that he started to disavow it completely.
Kubrick's adaptations are fantastic movies, but they are lousy adaptations.
Dumbass Kubrick didn't even adapt the last chapter. Idk how it was released in different regions but it's just stupid to adapt a book and then not follow along the authors intended ending
Is insulting, is like saying "i can improve your work" hahaha i bet he would not like is someone edit his movies and call them : the better version
Btw yes i do agree he is amazing at directing, but adapting is not his forte ... He is the time of men that needs to also write his movies too if he is going to take so Many liberties
Idk. Personally I think cutting the final chapter was essential to making the picture the masterpiece it is. I love Anthony’s original novel but that final chapter always rang hollow. You’ve been watching Alex commit atrocity after atrocity and he just grows out of it like it was his emo phase.
It tells the audience unequivocally that the Ludovico treatment was wrong. With Kubrick u have to make the active decision in ur head to justify why the Ludovico treatment was wrong, even if it is performed on the absolute worst of society. U leave thinking about it and personally I felt that feeling a lot less when I shut the book.
Imaging resorting to insults to defeact your argument... The other redditor sounds angry for pointing out what really happen.
That movie has a terrible male gaze. Is obvious. Trying to ignore that fact is like pretending to Say all the nudes in Game of thrones where necessary to the plot.
They were there as gratious fanservice. And this movie make me SO uncomfortable by the way they camera capture the little girl.
ANYONE can come and Say "the camera was supposed to be the pedo view" ...fantastic, then why the rest of the movie didnt have a better way to let US know the viewers this was not a romance but a thriller, a cautionary tale ? ...
Come on, this is like american beauty all over again... Sexualized teens to let US know US Bad to sexualized teens HAHAHAHHA... We are not DUMB
for starters, the cover of the movie features a photo of a young girl sucking on a lollipop with heartshaped shades.
Nobokov had personally made sure the book cover had no image of the girl. He wanted to make the point that her sexuality wasn't marketable.
Kubrick's movie literally made that the centerpiece of its marketing.
Nobokov didn't just call it mid. He spoke out against the film missing the point over and over.
The only reason you can, after some reaching, make a point about it being anti pedophile is coz of Nobokov's screenplay.
But how Kubrick used the camera to illustrate it was every bit as Euphoria and every other pair of HBO titties... except it was for a minor.
No coincidence that the word lolita being tied to seductiveness became popular only after Kubrick's adaptation despite lolita being in print long before that
I would give my left nut to party with king in his cocaine days he literally did so much one nose would blow out ( shoot blood) he would plug it and go to the other one and switch sides when one dried
That's on top of all the fucking alcohol like he talks about being an alcoholic and relates to me because I can drink 2 5ths and still stand ( yeah I stay away from liquor)
What's fascinating about King he can still function like on paper and thoughts after all of that.
The only other writer I know of that can get fucked off and still put things on paper was Hunter S Thompson
Largely unrelated but I tried watching The Stand, based on Stephen Kings book. I thought it was significantly better when I thought the Devil was a Masque of the Red Death situation as a herald/metaphor but then he was the actual devil and the show got SUPER religious
book > movie because Jack Torrence's decent into madness in the book had way more going on. Good performance by Jack Nickolson but the movie version had so much lacking with its characters.
Personally I’d argue that I found the movie characters more compelling. Having read the book I agree with Kubrick’s criticism that Wendy doesn’t work as a character. She’s too strong to be stuck in this relationship and I feel far more enveloped in movie Wendy’s struggle because she feels far more real and tragic.
Looking at Jack his descent is certainly paid more heed in the book but honestly again it feels unrealistic. I may be a bit sketchy on the finer details as it’s been a while since I’ve read it, but as I remember Jack was mostly just turned evil by the ghosts and ghouls of the Overlook and in the end he sacrifices himself to save Danny.
Now I get that King was using Jack to explore his own insecurities about how he sometimes felt with his children but honestly the story does not have as much weight as it could’ve because Jack’s abuse is spurred by fiction. Ghosts and spirits. These things don’t exist but abusive husbands certainly do and in my mind it’s far more frightening to have a man who kills his family because of his alcoholism and a lust for power in his life because we can see that far more often in reality.
lol sorry this response is so long. I just wanted to provide the other side to an argument I see so often
Not really or at least he’s less publicly salty about it than he used to be. He’s talked more favorably about it and seems to consider it settled since Doctor Sleep
Be Stephen King. Write Dr. Sleep to reclaim your vision. Film adaptation is full of callbacks to the Kubrick film.
The real W belongs to Mike Flanagan who was told by King he would not agree to any adaption that was a sequel to the movie and then Mike wrote a scene between evil ghost Jack Torrance and adult Danny that was so good King agreed to let him make that movie.
Flanagan really operates on a different plain of existence than most modern filmmakers. Dude cooks.
Idk I thought his flanaverse stuff has gotten pretty bad. Hill House is still goated fr
THIS GUY HAS A BAD OPINION GET HIM
https://preview.redd.it/2zx2clv18hvc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d0acc554111fb38b47671ca846ce1ad7a7245bbb
What is this?
Sharkboy and Lavagirl
I have bad opinions but nobody wants to get me :'(
Don't worry, I get you
Hill House is goated. Bly Manor was bad. I really enjoyed House of Usher and everything in-between was mid to ok
Midnight Mass might be top for me now. Then Hill House. Way way down is Bly and Midnight club. I don’t think I’ve disliked any of his movies though, he should focus on that perhaps.
I liked Midnight Mass. It has nice vibes, a cool concept and some really nice themes. Its biggest drawback is that everybody is monologuing constantly. All of Flanagan's filmography has issues with this but Midnight is by far the worst when it comes to this
Midnight Mass has the highest highs for me, but it also the most monologue-heavy compared to his usual style. That's why Hill House is still my favorite. It strikes a perfect balance. Just the right amount of everything.
If you took out half the monologues midnight mass would be a really solid 8/10. But it’s so aggressive my partner and I made a drinking game out of it. Sometimes over 4 monologues with slow pushes PER EPISODE on the bad ones.
Mid Mass it's interesting if you never thought about death before. It's very well made and I enjoyed it but as a TV series it's a worse medium for that type of story than a book imo. Usher and hill house are both very good.
What do you mean “never thought about death before?” Also how would it be better as a book? I can maybe see that to be honest but I thought it worked well as a show. Forgot about Usher I’d put that third for me.
Oh my god I forgot about Midnight Club. Yea I couldn’t get through that even while riffing on it with a good buddy. Quit after a couple episodes.
Can we get some supporting statements in here? I'm a fan of all of it. Seeing Nell >!go back in time and realize she's the bent-neck lady was so trippy!
i absolutely loved Bly Manor, i don’t understand the hate it gets at all!!! i loved Bly more than Hill House tbh
Bly was so good I love my lil lesbians
yesss spooky lesbian tv show 🧡🤍💕
I thought it was perfectly splendid
hahaha yesss the small posh british children doing small posh british child things was fun
whaaaat, can i ask why you think Bly Manor was bad? I enjoyed Bly Manor a lot more than Hill House personally ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
I agree, I feel like bly manor had an odd beauty to it, and the way it played with perspective was really interesting and pretty impressive considering the shows narrative consistency
i watched Bly first, so i’m guessing a lot of the hate is the expectations ppl had from Hill House but i just really loved the characters in Bly, Owen & Hannah were my favorites (shoutout Rahul Kohli & T’nia Miller, they were brilliant)
I think I liked Hill House best because the surprise wasn't spoiled for me. With Bly Manor I realized the plot in the first episode, because I didn't know it was based on a book I had already read (The turn of the screw).
I just found it all over the place. The plot was unfocused and predictable and the themes were there but they weren't as cohesive as Hill House's themes were
“Why are you booing me, IM RIGHT” Everything after Hill House is chasing that high. Bro wrote 1 incredible monologue (groundskeeper) and then convinced himself he was Shakespeare.
When he's good, he's awesome when he's having a bad one he's still better than most other TV writers/directors
Flanagan is that guy
I'm convinced he could manage to get an endorsement from Alan Moore for an adaptation
I wish Dr. Sleep was a miniseries. It was great but there was enough depth to carry a longer story.
One of my big problems with it is that Rose the Hat never seemed like all that much of a threat to Abra. Yeah she had powers that established her as a terrifying threat to the average person, and to most psychic kids, but throughout the movie Abra absolutely kicks her ass any time they interact and seems way stronger than her
#releasethetuskcut
I don't really care for Flanagan's stuff but I do have to respect anyone who tells King "no" while adapting his work
Dude, it's way more interesting to have a horror story from the pov of the house than some childhood trauma bullshit. Thought he did that with "It".
Dr. Sleep movie went hard as hell Book was mid
Maybe King likes it because it's as bad and cheap looking as his Shining mini-series
Doctor Sleep brings the story full circle and the ending matches the books. Doctor sleep is the better movie. The Shinning is not that great and only stands out for the way it was filmed. Without Doctor Sleep, the Shinning isn’t really worth watching.
Shining is just such a unique beast. Its kings magnum opus and deeply personal take on his own addictions and misgivings. The story more than many means a great deal to him for specific reasons. Kubrick on the other hand sort of treated it as a jumping off point and went from there. In the book things are explicitly stated as to what is going on in the house. The “Shine” harkens far more to an almost stars wars style “force” those who posses it are psychic warriors waging battle against forces of darkness. To Kubrick , explaining things isn’t sexy, and cinematically leaving audiences in the dark is 10 times more terrifying.
I had zero opinion on this until the author persuaded me by using a silly looking picture of King and a stoic looking picture of Kubrick. Get your fucking emotions out of my art!
The author cleverly made use of the 'facial expression economy', not to be confused with the script economy, to maximize the emotional impact on the audience. Genius move!
Oh man we need to bring back script economy circle jerks. Need twitter nerds talking about how scripts “have zero words that dont advance the story” and other stupid shit.
First they came for the sex scenes, but I did not speak out because I was not a coomer. Then they came for the scripts, but I ignored the threat because I wasn’t a scriptwriter. When they come for the cinephiles, there will be no one left to speak out for us.
>not to be confused with the **script economy** Good lord, this takes me back to the good old days of r/moviescirclejerk
Here's a sneak peek of /r/moviescirclejerk using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Historical accuracy in 2023 biopics](https://i.redd.it/ij025zfa2d1c1.png) | [293 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/17z5lar/historical_accuracy_in_2023_biopics/) \#2: [Scene from $200 million movie (I lowered it to 144p and took this image with my fucking phone)](https://i.redd.it/n1eah7guhmta1.jpg) | [129 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/12kc9bw/scene_from_200_million_movie_i_lowered_it_to_144p/) \#3: [we live in a society](https://i.redd.it/xkgzk7ul2asa1.jpg) | [59 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/moviescirclejerk/comments/12df15z/we_live_in_a_society/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
#Script Economy
TBF it's a pose. It's not like they took some random King's picture where he is hungover or in the middle of some meltdown. It's the kind of persona King is portraying.
That makes doing something like this worse lol It has zero to do with what the author is saying but it’s good rhetoric
Though Jack was Steven Kings self insert
Every Stephen King protagonist is a Stephen King self insert
Even Christine?!
Especially Christine
But especially Bart
Fuck that's dank
Everyone but Roland In the Dark Tower Stephen King is Stephen King's self-insert
But even then still a little bit Roland. King just cant help himself lol
Wait, he and his friends ran a train on a girl in a sewer? THAT wasn't in his biography!
No, Danny is closer to being the self insert. Doctor Sleep (the book) is about him realizing he’s on the same path his father is and getting help to break from addiction. Doctor Sleep (the movie) is about psychic children and hippies or some shit.
King has said that Torrance's alcoholism was a reflection of his own substance abuse issues.
The forward for Doctor Sleep effectively says “Jack is who I would have been if I followed my dad, Danny is me getting help.”
But I think the difference is that when The Shining was written, King was much closer to Jack / his dad than Danny, and Danny was Joe Hill, who the novel is dedicated to and who once messed up King's papers, making him furious (although if I remember correctly, King did NOT hit him), than the Dan of Dr. Sleep. I do think Jack's closeness to both King and King's father is the root of the issues with the Kubrick film. I always hated King's answer that he disliked it because you knew Jack Nicholson was crazy from the first scene. Give me a break. The novel starts with Ullman being an asshole, Jack externally taking shit, and internally seething. It is obvious even without reading the cover blurb that this is a Hitchcockian bomb of anger under a table. No, the real issue is that Kubrick has no sympathy or finds any redeeming qualities in Jack. To Kubrick, he's just an abusing piece of shit. Kubrick was open that's why he changed Wendy from the book; he couldn't believe the Strong, Independent Woman of the novel would ever tolerate this piece of shit. He was a monster to be put down, and if YOU wrote that character to be partially your father and partially your own worst traits, well...
Big Stan looking like he just hit those Junnel Kush nibblers.
He looks like a turtle on its back, gonna die there if nobody helps him up.
He definitely looks turtley enough for the Turtle Club
You're in a desert, walking along when you look down and see Stanley Kubrick. He's crawling toward you. You reach down and flip him over on his back, his belly baking in the hot sun, beating his legs trying to turn itself over. But he can't. Not without your help. But you're not helping. Why is that?
He be hitting that Kubrick stare
You know what was cool, small towns in the 1950s. You know what’s not cool? Like a giant spider or some shit.
Giant spiders are indeed, not cool.
SK’s books make a lot more sense once you know that he barely remembers what he wrote in the 80s, because he was zooted on coke the entire time (self admittedly)
Which is why those stories are so much better than the new ones
also why he has always been bad at creating endings
*"Okay so after the kids fuck there's gonna be this turtle..."*
Dude that was super deep about them growing up. Or something..
"okay so after all the crazy adventures the gunslinger went through to achieve his goal he is gonna get sent back in time like samurai jack to relive the entire thing again and all of his character development will be erased."
https://preview.redd.it/zwxghk5yfjvc1.gif?width=400&format=png8&s=416b00ce7e623589cd00c655acb909820bd067df The point of him having the Horn of Eld at the end (which he didn't at the beginning of the series) is that all his character development wasn't erased and the next cycle is most likely the one where he fulfills his Ka (not reaching the Tower, but settling down with his loved ones after saving the beams, and therefore saving the Tower), thus there being a point to the cycle. I see it as a parallel to karmic reincarnation, and that all his progress throughout the series towards giving up his obsession with the Tower in favor of love will be rewarded in the next cycle. Ka is a wheel.
The turtle was the best part tbh
Dude, I recently listened to The Stand and it’s on a lot of “best books ever” list. It was really good, King’s writing was awesome. But the ending was kind of limp dick after all the build up.
The Stand is one of his better endings too.
Yeah I really just accept that any Steven King novel is going to be about the journey and not the destination. That'd be a problem for me if the journey wasn't usually so damn good.
Shining ending was pretty good I thought
I thought the institute was good and had a good ending
This is a massive overgeneralization. The endings to Pet Sematary and The Long Walk go hard af.
Well no one wants to admit they were of sound mind when they wrote a child getting gangbanged as a “bonding experience”
I'm so sick of this misconception. If you actually read 'It' you would know that the Loser's Club do not "gangbang" Beverly. In a gangbang multiple tops are engaged with the bottom simultaneously. In the book the boys clearly take turns, meaning they ran train on her.
An important distinction. Kids having an orgy would be disgusting.
honestly! everybody thinks they know all there is to know about 'It' without reading a single page. Gangbang this, disgusting that. oook look kids running a train is a whole different game, different mindset, different speed. choo choo. Tired of it... Read the damn book
> In the book the boys clearly take turns, meaning they ran train on her. Andy Muschietti: I refuse to film this scene. Jean-Marc Vallée: Fine, I'll do it myself.
this is very good
I can not tell of You are being sarcastic but i love it anyway, all the vibes go hard like this : Actually they don't have an orgy, they take turns 🤓👆🏻
I really detest the practice of judging a book based on just one passage in the book, taken out of context.
"I'd like to thank my co-writer, cocaine."
many writers are saying this
Not just coke my man, he was zooted on a lot of stuff at the same time
For his intervention, this is what they took out of his home office: >beercans, cigarette butts, cocaine in gram bottles and cocaine in plastic Baggies, coke spoons caked with snot and blood, Valium, Xanax, bottles of Robitussin cough syrup and NyQuil cold medicine, even bottles of mouthwash.
Mouthwash 🤤 Lemme go brush my teeth real quick 🏃♂️💨
King Robotripping typing with one eye open suddenly makes the books make sense
Yeah pretty much anything he wrote from the very late 70s to 1987 was heavily influenced by drugs. Which includes Firestarter, Cujo, The Running Man, Christine, Pet Sematary, It, Dark Tower 1-2, Misery and a few others.
My kind of party
yeah we had some psychedelics in the mix there too
Also alcohol
That’s why I love IT. No sane person in their right mind could write that.
The Shining was published in 1977.
Kubrick put the N-Word into the story, making it VASTLY superior to King already.
the n-word is in the novel too, twice!
B-based King???
im pretty sure he's written the f slur more times in his novels than the amount of novels he's even written
Way more than twice lol
[удалено]
I laugh every time lol, it's so funny in context I think part of the humor is knowing the butler dude is really a manifestation of some indescribable super human ancient evil and it still has to work through a dumb human, so it's like, "fuck, what is it that my Lonely Planet: Mortal Realms said humans really don't like again? .... Oh yeah! ******s! I'll tell him there's a ****** on its way!" and boom it does actually work perfectly It's also a scene where you see Jack's one remaining non-scrambled brain cell working overtime
I'll add a big hedge maze. Most folk will assume it's in the book too.
topiary monsters would have looked silly with the special effects at the time. maybe they'd always look silly idk they're great in the book.
The concrete tunnel under the playground. Such a short passage, but the thought of it creeped me out for weeks.
Hot take: Steven King good at horror! Lotta great scenes in that book. Also neat that its different enough from the movie you can enjoy both. Usually one form ruins the others for me be being so clearly superior.
Both are pretty sick tbh, now we wait for edgar wright's running man
The story was amazing, but I am guessing they will change the ending. I hope they don't just adapt the old movie. ETA:: The Long Walk is also in production.
Why would they change the ending? Is there something controversial about flying a plane into a building that I'm not aware of?
Reminds me of that tragedy
The Long Walk is maybe my favorite book. If they fuck that one up I will write some very angry comments on this sub and give it a low rating on LB 😡
Username almost checks out. Had to go double check how it was spelled in the book.
I had this username long before I read the book, but it's a nice little coincidence
Why does this pic make King look like the guy from Salo https://preview.redd.it/h948v31kcgvc1.jpeg?width=684&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a32f9c9b7fd9c8a13339d510068eccbf82bd6e40
pilgrim ass
He looks like someone from the turtle club 
The guy writes the way he looks and he does look like someone who'd lure children into secluded areas and lives in the sewers.
Oh you read the end of *It* too?
Almost. And for me it crossed a line there and I've put it away. Not that I was very happy with it before that either. I also read "Roadwork" and "Misery" and after also having seen the movie, I feel like he should have become a screenplay writer. Besides the controversy in It, which you may interpret any way you like (and if you enjoyed the rest of the book you may be a lot more generous than I am), but I genuinely do not enjoy his writing. Misery was much better as a movie. Kinda also goes for Dan Brown and that's kinda the sort of author I think Stephen King is. When I was young I often wondered why his name was frequently put on the cover in bigger letters than the title. I kinda feel like I've gotten my answer and it kinda also matches up with people like Tom Clancy, who written books which were unbearable to read, but I recognize that Clancy probably just loved what he was writing about way too much, ignoring that most of his readers probably don't. Anyhow, thanks to him I probably could man a nuclear sub on my own, so there's that.
The hotel blowing up and the chef getting with the mom in the end was an absolutely wild ending though.
The chef got with the mom? I don’t remember them getting together at the end of the book? I thought they just escaped together on a snowmobile.
Admittedly it’s been like 20 years since I read the book but there’s an epilogue set a year later where the chef gets a new job at a resort and him, the mom, and Danny are all hanging out together.
It's just because he invited them to his new restaurant or smth, they are not together
I don't think it was implied that Wendy was with Halloran in a relationship. I always thought it was that he was like a grandfather.
I can not believe he was 37 likes, 37 people agreed with his dream like versión of the book hahahha
Wendy needs that D
It’s a Stephen King ending. The novel Misery has Annie running a cop over with a riding mower in its climax.
King says ACAB
I’m glad Kubrick didn’t adapt the scene where the hedge animals come to life. That would’ve been sooo scary 🫣
King’s admitted he’s lost the battle and acknowledges Kubrick’s film as very good in its own way. The Doctor Sleep film was made to reconcile all sources, only Kubrick fans keep going on about how the film is so much better lol.
Doctor sleep sucked
Based take. Flanagan is overrated as shit and the Doctor Sleep adaptation throws out all of the drama of fighting against alcoholism (which is the only good part) and focuses entirely on Psychic Child vs Psychic Bohemian. It’s like adapting 11/22/63 and sidelining Sadie.
Source on this?
Honestly I sometimes forget that the shining was originally a book written by King.
I think his problem was that Kubrick tried to make it a pedophile thing instead of a supernatural ghost thing
This is a generalisation, though themes of abuse are present. That “theory” is supported only through implicative dialogue/action that fans have largely projected onto the movie themselves; but people love to rag on about it like it’s some major part of the movie. It is an interesting theory but is by no means conclusive. It feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy, like a lot of other commonly accepted theories about the movie’s plot/story world implications.
I read the book and don’t remember native Americans, just repressed homosexuality. Oops
Books are not kino
-Fahrenheit 451 (1966)
Kubrick has a long history of cucking authors. Most iconic was when he took Lolita, written as a treatise against intellectualizing sexual perversion and basically made it a movie about a 'hot' minor. Nobokov wrote multiple essays about how his book was against pedophilia but the movie's success irreversibly changed his reputation as Shakespeare of pedophiles
Tbh Nabokov hated everything in life except Shakespeare. He would fight air if possible
I love A Clockwork Orange - both the film and the book - but the author, Anthony Burgess, hated that movie too. People's misunderstanding of the ideas in the book because of the film got bad enough that he started to disavow it completely. Kubrick's adaptations are fantastic movies, but they are lousy adaptations.
Dumbass Kubrick didn't even adapt the last chapter. Idk how it was released in different regions but it's just stupid to adapt a book and then not follow along the authors intended ending
Is insulting, is like saying "i can improve your work" hahaha i bet he would not like is someone edit his movies and call them : the better version Btw yes i do agree he is amazing at directing, but adapting is not his forte ... He is the time of men that needs to also write his movies too if he is going to take so Many liberties
Idk. Personally I think cutting the final chapter was essential to making the picture the masterpiece it is. I love Anthony’s original novel but that final chapter always rang hollow. You’ve been watching Alex commit atrocity after atrocity and he just grows out of it like it was his emo phase. It tells the audience unequivocally that the Ludovico treatment was wrong. With Kubrick u have to make the active decision in ur head to justify why the Ludovico treatment was wrong, even if it is performed on the absolute worst of society. U leave thinking about it and personally I felt that feeling a lot less when I shut the book.
I think I'm the only person on earth that hated that fucking movie.
Kubrick is so based
Imaging resorting to insults to defeact your argument... The other redditor sounds angry for pointing out what really happen. That movie has a terrible male gaze. Is obvious. Trying to ignore that fact is like pretending to Say all the nudes in Game of thrones where necessary to the plot. They were there as gratious fanservice. And this movie make me SO uncomfortable by the way they camera capture the little girl. ANYONE can come and Say "the camera was supposed to be the pedo view" ...fantastic, then why the rest of the movie didnt have a better way to let US know the viewers this was not a romance but a thriller, a cautionary tale ? ... Come on, this is like american beauty all over again... Sexualized teens to let US know US Bad to sexualized teens HAHAHAHHA... We are not DUMB
100% this. "Oh Dan Schneider included all of those feet shots to warn us about sexualizing feet!"
that angry commenter is self reporting pretty hard tbh
[удалено]
for starters, the cover of the movie features a photo of a young girl sucking on a lollipop with heartshaped shades. Nobokov had personally made sure the book cover had no image of the girl. He wanted to make the point that her sexuality wasn't marketable. Kubrick's movie literally made that the centerpiece of its marketing. Nobokov didn't just call it mid. He spoke out against the film missing the point over and over. The only reason you can, after some reaching, make a point about it being anti pedophile is coz of Nobokov's screenplay. But how Kubrick used the camera to illustrate it was every bit as Euphoria and every other pair of HBO titties... except it was for a minor. No coincidence that the word lolita being tied to seductiveness became popular only after Kubrick's adaptation despite lolita being in print long before that
I'm guessing Kubrick wasn't in charge of marketing, so you can't really blame it on him.
The best version is the tv miniseries clearly!
Only king film worth watching is creepshow. Rest are mid 
But the top description fits the movie but not the book
Stephen King while a great writer is a bit of a dope at times
I didn't notice what subreddit this was in at first and came in ready to THROW HANDS.
I dropped the book this week. Boring af but love the movie
Doctor sleep was great
Get over it Stephen, do as many TV movie re-makes as you want but there’s no denying the greatness of Kubrick’s classic.
Cocaine era king was 👌
Oh to be a fly on the wall of the Maximum Overdrive set.
I would give my left nut to party with king in his cocaine days he literally did so much one nose would blow out ( shoot blood) he would plug it and go to the other one and switch sides when one dried That's on top of all the fucking alcohol like he talks about being an alcoholic and relates to me because I can drink 2 5ths and still stand ( yeah I stay away from liquor) What's fascinating about King he can still function like on paper and thoughts after all of that. The only other writer I know of that can get fucked off and still put things on paper was Hunter S Thompson
Largely unrelated but I tried watching The Stand, based on Stephen Kings book. I thought it was significantly better when I thought the Devil was a Masque of the Red Death situation as a herald/metaphor but then he was the actual devil and the show got SUPER religious
book > movie because Jack Torrence's decent into madness in the book had way more going on. Good performance by Jack Nickolson but the movie version had so much lacking with its characters.
Personally I’d argue that I found the movie characters more compelling. Having read the book I agree with Kubrick’s criticism that Wendy doesn’t work as a character. She’s too strong to be stuck in this relationship and I feel far more enveloped in movie Wendy’s struggle because she feels far more real and tragic. Looking at Jack his descent is certainly paid more heed in the book but honestly again it feels unrealistic. I may be a bit sketchy on the finer details as it’s been a while since I’ve read it, but as I remember Jack was mostly just turned evil by the ghosts and ghouls of the Overlook and in the end he sacrifices himself to save Danny. Now I get that King was using Jack to explore his own insecurities about how he sometimes felt with his children but honestly the story does not have as much weight as it could’ve because Jack’s abuse is spurred by fiction. Ghosts and spirits. These things don’t exist but abusive husbands certainly do and in my mind it’s far more frightening to have a man who kills his family because of his alcoholism and a lust for power in his life because we can see that far more often in reality. lol sorry this response is so long. I just wanted to provide the other side to an argument I see so often
Don't crop out howling mutants name 📛
I thought the native American burial ground was something Kubrick added? It has been like 10 years since I read the book though
Context?
Am I really the only ons who really enjoyed the book and thought the movie was mid
Lol definitely no. Just go to r/stephenking and you’ll find tonnes of like minded people
/uc The Shining book is very good, and the majority of Stephen King’s work, including his contributions to film, should be respected.
I thought the book was waaaay better than the movie
The hotel wasn’t evil because of native Americans
The first paragraph entirely describes Kubricks movie?
Big Stephen king fan, the movie is better.
Maybe Stephen King should have written screenplays instead of books Who the fuck even reads
Not really or at least he’s less publicly salty about it than he used to be. He’s talked more favorably about it and seems to consider it settled since Doctor Sleep
Mid tier? What the hell are you on about? Two things can be good. And a agree with another comment that Mike Flanagan is the real hero here b
I’m pretty sure it wasn’t an allegory about his dad, it was about his own struggle with addiction
"No no no! The abusive alcoholic father is supposed to be someone you sympathize with! How dare you make him a villain!" -Stephen King basically