...awkward dialogue or dated phrasing IMO...What are "creaks"?
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
...awkward dialogue or dated phrasing IMO...What are "creaks"?
Well, the OP mentioned sK works. Most of the movies are not his works.
I know what you mean about the cheesy and awkward "second class" adaptations. But weirdly I've grown to enjoy them. I now think of it as a style in itself, with its own demands: Bad acting (number one), studio like settings, funny monsters etc... I think I've seen the best in the genre not so long ago: An 80s adaptation of The Mangler. Oh My, that was something.I seriously can't think of much, but as for the movies, ahhh that is where my bickering starts, LOL.
I don't like how so many of the movies come off as cheesy.. Almost embarrassing to be seen watching, lol. Two prime examples of this for me, are The Langoilers and Riding The Bullet, although there are many for me. The newer version of The Shining as well... I never could get past the kid they casted as Danny... I don't want to sound like a meanie but I just couldn't stand looking at that kid! That was worse then Shelley in the original for me, LOL!
Then you have the big name hits, like Christine, Pet Semetary, etc.. Seems like so many great things could have been done over the years with some of the movies, but they just turned out cheesy and awkward, in my opinion. I realize budget has to do with it and some were made for TV, but come on now...
Well, I don't mean to seem correcting. I guess I'm just defending the idea that sK isn't necessarily responsible for the movies, which seems to be a misconception sometimes.I know I just wanted to throw that out there..... My mistake.
Correct. In publishing, the movie rights are hardly are ever kept by the author. They are usually controlled by the author's agent and obviously licensed to the highest bidder. For the not so popular titles, such as early short stories and the like, the demand by major studios is not high, therefore the rights are sold to lesser film companies and the results are the "cheesy" adaptations with poor production qualities and c-list actors.Well, I don't mean to seem correcting. I guess I'm just defending the idea that sK isn't necessarily responsible for the movies, which seems to be a misconception sometimes.
...and maybe it's just me, but some of these "cheeseball" products that end up on one's TV or in a local cinema are some of the best efforts BECAUSE they are so bad...well done bad, is entertaining to me....Correct. In publishing, the movie rights are hardly are ever kept by the author. They are usually controlled by the author's agent and obviously licensed to the highest bidder. For the not so popular titles, such as early short stories and the like, the demand by major studios is not high, therefore the rights are sold to lesser film companies and the results are the "cheesy" adaptations with poor production qualities and c-list actors.
Absolutely! Like the William Castle movies of the 1950s, such as The Tingler....and maybe it's just me, but some of these "cheeseball" products that end up on one's TV or in a local cinema are some of the best efforts BECAUSE they are so bad...well done bad, is entertaining to me....
Everything is King's fault! Oh, wait, that's in another thread, isn't it.....Well, I don't mean to seem correcting. I guess I'm just defending the idea that sK isn't necessarily responsible for the movies, which seems to be a misconception sometimes.
Its everywhere.Everything is King's fault! Oh, wait, that's in another thread, isn't it.....
He's apparently one of those artists people like to distrust. Maybe he's a kinda love-him-or-hate-him type.Everything is King's fault! Oh, wait, that's in another thread, isn't it.....
Its everywhere.
....Oh yeah!...bad with a capital "Gack!"...but you just HAD to love it!....another one I lump in there, that was so excruciatingly awful that I've loved it ever since-Them!...Absolutely! Like the William Castle movies of the 1950s, such as The Tingler.
I respectfully disagree about 'Detta Holmes. Having worked in a really bad neighborhood, I think he actually 'channeled' an 'Detta-like spirit and caught her essence perfectly. There is still massive amounts of anger and distrust between cultures for history....the only thing that King has done that ever really grated on me, and this may harken back to an earlier post-is what I felt was the over the top "nasty" 'Detta Holmes....way to much stereotyped slanguage and carrying on...the point could have been made without so much vileness...
....Oh yeah!...bad with a capital "Gack!"...but you just HAD to love it!....another one I lump in there, that was so excruciatingly awful that I've loved it ever since-Them!...
...agreed and understood, I just thought it was pushed to hard...I respectfully disagree about 'Detta Holmes. Having worked in a really bad neighborhood, I think he actually 'channeled' an 'Detta-like spirit and caught her essence perfectly. There is still massive amounts of anger and distrust between cultures for history.
Do you have a link to the segment?
And is alcohol at a range really such a bad thing? A shooting range is not a public place. What's wrong with putting some personal responsibility on the owner? We don’t prohibit car keys in bars, and if you think about it the only reason for having your car keys in a bar is to drive home after drinking alcohol. You can kill someone just as easily driving drunk, probably more so because as many of us know drunks are notoriously bad shots.
Especially with Under the Dome - while not an actual movie, it is based on his book.Well, I don't mean to seem correcting. I guess I'm just defending the idea that sK isn't necessarily responsible for the movies, which seems to be a misconception sometimes.