true, actually, i was really impress to the new IT adaptation (i watched it with my friend) because it was scary for me (and for him, my friend)Except this new film version of 'It'. I was really impressed by how well it was done. I did not like the tv mini series. As far as other film adaptations, Pet Semetery was probably the closest that Hollywood came to matching the book. In the movie version of 'Cujo'I was so glad that I had read all of his books before I saw the movies. The only drawback to that is that those of us that read the books first usually think the film adaptations aren't so good. My best friend will talk about how awesome those movies are but she's never even had a book in her hand that wasn't forced there....lol.the boy was saved at the end.....in the book he dies minutes before his father showed up.
I'm not sure which series you are referring to,(on second look I see the you are in the 11/22/63 thread, shame on my stupidity....I didn't finish watching it, but I didn't think it was terrible) but Stephen King has every right to allow adaptations to be made. As far as I know, he retains large percentage of creative control over his adaptations. He has been known to say even he isn't crazy about how some have turned out, but the fact is, some people do not read. Stephen King is a creative genius (in my not-so-humble opinion), and the world has a right to see his creations come to life on screen! Visual media is an an important medium for art in today's culture. Books are great, but the amount of work that goes into an adaptation is staggering, and is art in its own right. Some miss the mark, but others invite a whole new audience into the universe we love so much.for selling out to Hollywood. I suspect that the high ratings from this series are from those viewers who did not read the book. This bullcrap series bastardizes the story.