Kevin's Watch

I bought the DVD of "The Dead Zone" on a whim yesterday.

I saw this movie once back in the '80s, shortly after reading the book, and at the time I thought it was OK.

But as I write this I'm watching it. And (despite the presence of Christopher Walken) it is truly, truly dreadful.

Does anyone disagree? Does anyone have any other dishonourable mentions?

Rose Red sucked!

I think The Dead Zone is one of the better (if not the best) film adaptations of King's books.

Like I said, I'm watching The Dead Zone as I write. And it has gotten better as it has gone on (Johnny just met Greg Stillson).

But it has nothing on the book. No ice-hockey accident at the age of 5. No regurgitated hot-dogs at the fair. No Stillson kicking a dog to death because it's owners dared to be away when he was selling bibles door-to-door. The crash didn't even involve Johnny's own students.

I read the book once about 20 years ago and I remember those scenes distinctly.

I thought, unlike many others, that The Stand was a much better adaptation than this.

edit: The latter parts of the movie are actually quite good. The first parts are the only scenes in which I've ever seen Christopher Walken really struggle.

Well, for one thing Rose Red is NOT an adaptation of anything, but an original script written by King for television like Storm of the Century.

Heh heh--I remember when SOTC first aired, and a lot of idiots online kept saying "The novel was sooooo much better" when THERE WAS NO NOVEL.

Anyway, I was very disappointed with Kubrik's The Shining because it gutted out the heart of the story. Instead of a good but flawed man unable to defend himself against an Evil Place, his film was about an evil man finding his spiritual home.

I rather liked The Dead Zone as a film, but I'm at a disadvantage not having read the book.

Rose Red was fun, and genuinely intriguing in terms of the character interactions.

There were excellent "bits" in the mini-series of IT but some really serious flaws, one of them inherent. Quite simply, is is very hard to make a giant spider look scary for very long. Really superb cast, though.

It's been a long time since I read TDZ, so I can't really comment on the similarities or differences between the book and the film. I thought both Walken and Sheen were excellent in the film.....Come to think of it, I really can't think of a single misstep in the film.

And it's David Cronenberg fercryinoutloud.

Zahir wrote:Well, for one thing Rose Red is NOT an adaptation of anything, but an original script written by King for television like Storm of the Century.
Rose Red was fun, and genuinely intriguing in terms of the character interactions.

It was written directly as a movie script, eh? Okay I'll buy that.
It was still physically painful for me to watch. IMHO of course.

I haven't seen Rose Red and from the reactions, I don't think I will. I like to watch movies that have been adapted from books with the mindset that it was ADAPTED. It is NOT the book. I find it interesting what changes they make and how the movie stands alone. On that note. I liked Deadzone. I think King's worst adaptation was Pet Semetary. That was just a bad movie.

I loved the novel of Firestarter. From the experiment on the psychic enhancing drugs on. The movie left me cold.

The Dead Zone, the film, is excellent. I've never read the book, so I can't really make comparisons.

I also have to disagree with someone above and say The Shining, the film, is just a bloody brilliant masterpiece. Much, much better than the book, in fact.

Pet Semetary is about the only other film adaptation of a King story which I really like (again, I think this is also better than the book). On the whole, though, I think most other King film adaptations have been kind of cheap and uninspired, or vaguely tedious.

Apt Pupil.

I loved the short story. It had an edge to it. Them movie did not at all capture just how sick and twisted the kid became as in the story, i.e. luring the homeless people with promises of sex and food to the house and killing them there. I think that he even killed his teacher in the story, but not in the movie.

Even the end, in the story he went down picking everyone he could off from a hilltop with a rifle...in the movie, nothing of the sort. I think that he just 'walked off into the sunset' so to speak.

It has been years...many years...since that I have read the story, maybe there are some things that I don't correctly remember. But as I remember the story vs. the movie...absolutely terrible adaptation that never stuck to the utterly evil persona that the kid turned into.

Montressor wrote:Pet Semetary is about the only other film adaptation of a King story which I really like (again, I think this is also better than the book). On the whole, though, I think most other King film adaptations have been kind of cheap and uninspired, or vaguely tedious.

I hated the book, but I hated the movie just as much so... Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single King movie that was worth the celluloid. Don't think I've seen the Dead Zone though, but on the whole, I agree with Montressor's view of them.

--A

Maximum Overdrive was the worst of the mainstream ones. I have to believe all the sequels to The Mangler and Children of the Corn are the worst.

Zapp Brannigan wrote:Maximum Overdrive was the worst of the mainstream ones. I have to believe all the sequels to The Mangler and Children of the Corn are the worst.

Oh hell yeah. Especially that one in a city where a giant corn monster creates havoc with some teens at the end. This movie has to be seen just for the worst special effects in a monster movie ever. I seem to recall moments where the monster was picking up teens (who looked amazingly like immobile barbie dolls) and throwing their already lifeless forms about.

I'm a fan of Dead Zone movie (and tv) version. Liked Rose Red (good not great), and Storm of the Century about equally.


The worst film I've seen is Riding the Bullet. But I never read the story and it just may be I don't like the story.

The Lawnmower Man.

I haven't seen that since it came out, but I don't remember it being that bad.

Something Broken wrote:The Lawnmower Man.

I tend to agree with Cail.
I own the dvd. Its not a fantastic film but its really not all that bad, however if you mean it is a bad adaptation of the book then I can't argue about that since I haven't read it.

It bore no relation to the Stephen King short story. Wasn't a bad flick if you treat as not adapted from King work.

It would be like calling a movie Lord Foul's Bane and making it a romantic comedy about a bakery.

I would not have called it the worst adaptation, if it had even had one scene where a little goat bodied man stripped naked to crawl around in someones back yard eating all the grass and rodentia and the someone.