Stephen King

What do you think of his comics?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=i454o7ijabI
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/bwriter)
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Clive Barker's are better

I didn't like American Vampire
I did like the Dark Tower adaptations, even if they were just re-hashes of what happens in the books.

That Lawnmower Man adaptation remains one of the best things ever.

I like Skinner Sweet a lot but his section of American Vampire is kind of weak.

>adaptation
>rehash
YOU DON'T SAY

They should be 800 pages long and full of fluff, like his novels.

this, Stephen King is overhyped trash. He can make a good sentence but he can't make anything flow. His novels are all chopped up to hell, he only writes a few paragraphs before he cuts to something else. He's terrible

he really only lent his name and an idea to AV.

and srsly? He is a novelist, ALL of the comics are adaptations of his books.

I LOVED Creepshow

Thomas Disch and Lucius Shepard were much better.

Stephen King is great. He's remarkably creative and mind-bogglingly prolific, and his influence on not only the horror genre but on the modern novel can't be overestimated.

Like any writer (or anything that exists in the physical universe) he has flaws. His books are often longer than necessary, some of them are much lower-quality than others, and his plots rely on fate a bit too often. But he's indisputably one of the greats.

Saying things suck is easy. I'd go so far as to say it's cowardly, because it's so much safer than admitting you like something and opening yourself up to criticism. Far better to exaggerate your dislike, implying that nothing can meet your high standards! You're like a 14-year-old afraid to say what music he likes in case people make fun of him.

N was great:

youtube.com/watch?v=i454o7ijabI

he has no sense of pace, and can't make plot and story flow cohesively so instead he just cuts and pastes pieces together to make a story. Something can be popular and not good user

And as far as actual horror goes, King is absolutely abysmal. It shows how little people think of the genre when a talentless retard like him could be so acclaimed.

Do you like all the extended underage sex scenes he writes?

You should actually read some Stephen King sometime. You might like it.

All one of them?

From a Buick 8 is my favorite book of his. A Lovecraftian Police Procedural. Just a bunch of small-town cops trying to make sense of this predatory wormhole in the shape of a car; attempting to apply rote bureaucracy to keep such a horrific force contained.

>his influence on the modern novel

Well, they're for the most part shit, so I guess that counts. :^)

I did, I read IT when I was about 10, which was weird for me. I've also read The Stand, Pet Sematary and the Different Seasons collection. That's enough for me.

Shows what you know. He's written at least 3 - IT, that one with the little boy getting raped in Four Past Midnight and the dream sequence in Apt Pupil.

>imfuckingplying publishers aren't desperate for the next Steven King and don't try and shape their writers to be like him
>Implying New Weird (one of the more popular genres of modern fiction) isn't heavily influenced by him as much as the Vandermeers claim it's all Lovecraft
Fuck off casual

>Close adaptations now count a rehashes

I wonder what was going through his mind when he was writing THAT scene in "It". Likely drunk or drugged off his ass.

Yes. Re-hash as it contains a lot of new/original material which was mentioned but not covered in the books, mixed with the straight adaptation of the novels events.
Like the whole battle of jerhico or the fall of gilead. Or the expanded backstory of Eddie and his brother.
Or the Little Sisters, which I didn't know was a short story until after reading the comics.

Admits they've only read 3 novels.
>shows what you know, here's these three other examples i quickly sourced from wikipedia to show my deeper knowledge.

I think he gets off on kids and that permeates just about all of his work.

So it's not at all a rehash then? Sounds like an adaptation to me

All hail Stephen King!

...of the lesbians.

>You have to read all his books to have an opinion
Do you listen to every single one of a band's songs before deciding you don't like them?

Fuck you buddy if three novels and a short collection isn't enough for you nothing will be.

>Here's me being all superior and deflecting from the fact that what you said is still correct and upholds your point why do the literary agents keep sending me form rejections

so what amount of new material does something have to have before it's not considered an adaptation anymore?

You're right user, I just got pissy over the way you phrased it, as it came off super condescending.
My bad.

Nothing

>all modern novels are shit
K

If it's presenting current material it's an adaptation, no matter what. It can be an adaptation with new material, but that part is an adaptation. It's not a rehash, because the entire intent is to adapt.

A Star Wars graphic novel that includes A New Hope with some new scenes: adaptation.
The Force Awakens: rehash.

It's more than just new scenes though. It's like 3 whole story arcs that are never covered in the novels.

I get your point, I just don't agree with it user.

How is it a rehash if it's new scenes? It's an adaptation plus new material.

he is saying you cited an example from a book you didnt read, so that info came from googling.
Pretty sure he isnt saying you havent read enough. . . .

That's the exact definition "Here's old stuff and new stuff mashed together"

That's exactly what I was saying user. I could have probably phrased it better to not be as confrontational.

They adapted the book into a comic for people who haven't read the book. Then they did new stories. How is this hard for you to figure out?

Steven King is too inconsistent. All of his works are usually cluttered messes with moments of genius, but ultimately fail to stick with the reader after they put the book down. Stanley Kubrik wrote a better Shining than the actual Shining.

I've been very clear in my reasoning user. How is it this hard for you to figure out?
It's like you're purposefully being obtuse and just going "nuh uh" instead of reading my posts.

Because words have meanings

Language evolves user.
That's why I can call you a faggot and not mean you're gay or a bundle of sticks.

but since you brought up words having meaning:
re·hash
verb
rēˈhaSH
1.
put (old ideas or material) into a new form without significant change or improvement.

he put the old idea and material (the novels) into a new form (the comics) without significant change.

The theme of the book is the transition between childhood and adulthood, chidren who have been mentally damaged by misfortune dealing with aforementioned change, what makes some kids wisen up and not be shit while others have no chance, and how throwing a monster that uses adults like tools and feeds on children reacts when faced with kids who are neither.

Teenage sex is part of growing up too fast. Bonding rituals are a children's thing.
So they do both. They swear a blood oath like children of the 50's who saw it on TV would, but also all lose their virginity. The two together makes them cemented at the midpoint between childhood and adulthood, so the monster will have no ability to control or desire to consume them.

The point is reinforced in the book when the kids are playing Monopoly but talking like adults, which disturbes Bill's mother because she sees them as both more wisened than her but still childish.

All that's true user...but to be fair, King wrote IT during his heavy drinking and drug use days so user could be right as well.

I think King can be good, when he keeps things tight. Misery is very good, and the Shining which is relatively short by his standards. But he is one of those writers who are just too famous, there isn't an editor willing to do an editor's job and tell him to cut things or make things flow better.

I am so sad that the dark tower movie was a disgrace. I fucking loved the actor that played roland.

Back to tumblur nigger lover

I think his kid writes better comics

He's good at smalltown stuff and character driven moments. That's why his short stories or shorter novels based on minimal anecdotes are usually his best. Different Seasons was great, for instance, and one of the few rare cases where the adaptations were good but the originals were even better (except Stand By Me, maybe). Apt Pupil is also the only case where a movie's ending is actually weaker than the one King originally wrote.

>Likely drunk or drugged off his ass.
Yeah, like with most of his 80s books. Some of them turned out ok though.

That's not what I said. I like a lot of New Weird, I'm just saying that King is a lot more influential than people give him credit for

>That cover
Deja Vu

The thing about S. King is that the quality of his work correlates reversily to the how well known/popular it is. The more adaptations and fame his books have, the worse they are compared to his other work.

I've made a point out of trying to absorb as much of the classics both modern and old as I can in my lifetime. And I gotta say that whenever I've tried to get into a King book I get bored. Most of them are several times longer than necessary because he just loves shitting out words. He may be called incredibly prolific and productive, and I admit that he can produce large amounts of well crafted text. But he doesn't come up with ideas in proportion to text. Whats the point of having scary novel of 800 pages there aren't more than 80 pages worth of ideas in it?

Agree, horror should be short. The only scary thing that was ever long was Rosemary's Baby

>I like a lot of New Weird
My condolences.

yeah but that was also kind of a mystery too. Horror can be long if the mystery is engaging.

This looks great!

I prefer his kid, Joe Hill.
He jumps the shark like dear old dad, but he sets up a world view in his books and graphic novels so that if the character accepts or rejects the reality so too will you. This is an aspect of King's that always felt muddled to me.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/bwriter)

I was stoked when his GN Horns was turned into a movie, but the movie is just no good.

His son's comics are superior

Storytime?

>remarkably creative
Wew lad

I like some of his short fiction, but his longer work leave me feeling kind of soiled and hungover- not unlike the comics of Garth Ennis.

Trump is bad. Now read about my child orgies.