As a hugely prolific author and one of the world's best-selling writers, it is hardly surprising Stephen King's stories have been in demand for adaptation since the beginning of his career. I was first introduced to his work via film rather than books when I was about 10 years old and, as a die-hard horror movie fan, saw some of his classic adaptations such as Christine, Cujo and The Dead Zone. I then turned to his books for a further fix and was hooked. Up until recent years, I had read pretty much all his output. although I am not really a fan of his fantasy work, so there are now a few gaps in my consumption of his work.
Given my love of movies, I have also seen almost every adaptation of his work, and I have to say they are hit and miss. Some of the earlier adaptations suffer from budget constraints, while others simply don't seem to understand the source material at all. As someone who spends their life writing about showbiz and entertainment, including movie reviews, I am well placed to rank these adaptations. I have based this list on faithfulness to the source material - after all, any flick bearing Stephen King's name should at least resemble the story - and the overall quality of the movie, which is why The Shining doesn't get a look in. King himself is not a fan and was involved in the production of a 1997 mini-series, which is far more faithful to his work. So, without further ado, here in my opinion, are his nine best adaptations.
Thomas Jane stars as Wilf James, a farmer whose wife reveals she is going to sell their land and move to the city. He convinces his son to help him kill her and they toss the body in their well, but soon, her spirit seems to return to haunt Wilf.
With echoes of Edgar Allen Poe's The Telltale Heart, this stays very loyal to the novella's plot and atmosphere and. Just like the source material, it maintains the ambiguity of whether the supernatural events are real or a figment of Wilfred's deteriorating mental state.
" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-portal-copyright="Netflix" data-licensor-name="Netflix" />It is claustrobhobic and full of jump scares - just like the book. It does omit the supernatural elements of the book and changes to ending to somethign more palatable (the book's ending is heartbreaking) but overall it captures the essence of the original story and is helped hugely by using a real dog and practical effects. (Seriously that canine should have won an Oscar for his menacing performance.)
Netflix has recently sparked controversy with its decision to remake the movie, potentially using computer-generated imagery (CGI) for the killer dog, and I personally think this is a huge mistake. This version is fantastic, and while a CGI dog may look "glossier", it won't generate the same looming fear.
" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-portal-copyright="Getty" data-licensor-name="Getty" />It stars Tom Hanks as a death row prison guard during the Great Depression who witnesses supernatural events following the arrival of an enigmatic convict (Michael Clarke Duncan). The film has been hugely acclaimed and was a massive box office success. It was nominated for four Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor for Duncan, Best Sound, and Best Adapted Screenplay.
It takes you on an emotional roller coaster, just like the source material, and has one of the most unforgettable third acts of any King adaptation.
" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-portal-copyright="UIP" data-licensor-name="UIP" />This was one of the few changes made to the book in which she actually amputates his foot in a gruelling passage. Overall, though, it is very faithful to King's vision and a truly terrifying picture.
While the torture she inflicts on Paul is more violent and visceral in the book the movie's rating would most likely have been considerably compromised if they included it all. Moviemakers also changed the ending, but it is still satisfying and feels true to the novel.
" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-portal-copyright="Publicity Picture" data-licensor-name="Publicity Picture" />One of the issues with adaptations of King's work is that the stories are often so full and rich that key elements get removed to accommodate movie and TV running times. That's why his short story adaptations tend to fare better on screen, as they don't require such a severe edit.
This is based on a novella titled Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption published in the 1982 collection of four novellas called Different Seasons. Two of the other three stories were also adapted for screen making it a very lucrative work for the writer.
This remains very true to the story, although in the original story, he doesn't change his poster from Rita Hayworth to other famous sex symbols. The core plot, characters, and major themes are intact, and they even use some dialogue directly from the book.
It is wonderfully cast, with Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman's chemistry keeping viewers glued. It is beautifully shot and quite simply a brilliant movie. Even if you are not a fan of King's work, this is a fabulous flick that frequently tops best film lists, and this one is no exception.
" data-has-syndication-rights="1" data-portal-copyright="Castle Rock Entertainment" data-licensor-name="Castle Rock Entertainment" />