/lit/ - Literature

Don't read it.

read it

>>1211867
why?

I never finished this one, I ended up getting tired of Stephen King and it's still sitting on my shelf with a bookmark to this day.

It seemed pretty decent, however. I've noticed that his early novels tend to be much more tightly plotted than wheat is written later on.

Read it. If there's such a thing as an overall satisfying King novel, it's probably Pet Sematary.

A brilliant scene from the (mostly rubbish) movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tOEWRusMjg

>>1211911
The Shining is his best book. The problem is everyone's seen the movie, so they don't care about the book

>>1211949

Some of it impressed the hell out of me, some of it I really hated, most of all the ending. There should have been more of Jack mooching about in the deserted playground, or getting drunk on invisible scotch. It's a slightly above-average read.

>>1211949
I want to second this. Prehaps my opinion can be written it off because it was my first 'king book and therefore has sentimental value... but The shining always struck me as one of his more structured works. The Ending scene where Father Overpowers posession to save the son was a very elegant act of drama. I also enjoyed the fact that king provided an exceptionally coherent story background for a change, where Dannys presence to supernatural events was a trigger regardless of if the reader was aware of it or not
tl;dr: I liked it

>>1211949
the movie was SHITE compared to the book! That is how awesome the book is!

The Shining was good, though I preferred the Kubrick movie (so sue me).

Definitely read Pet Sematary. That's one of the three or four books I recommend when people say they want to read Stephen King.

>>1212717
I shall sue you give me your name and address and be sure to bring a good lawyer!

The book is pretty good, but it has the usual lack of quality in the ending thats common with King.

its good (the first half may seem to drag on but once you get to the 2nd half, you'll realize why) and the people who complain about the ending are the ones who would rather have everything explicitly written out instead of left to the imagination because they have no imagination.

>>1212896
>the people who complain about the ending are the ones who would rather have everything explicitly written out instead of left to the imagination because they have no imagination.

It's well established that King leaves nothing to the imagination.

>>1211949

Fuck that. The movie was sub par compared to the Book. I want my hedge animals goddammit!

>>1212904
>greentext before blacktext makes post carry more weight

All I ever hear about with PS is how he copped out and gave it an R. L. Stine ending.

>>1212908
The hedge animals were in the movie, weren't they? Except in the movie, it actually showed them moving, which wasn't as scary as getting paranoid about them, starting to leave, turning around and imagining them closer, eventually realizing they ARE closer, etc.

>>1212922

>Except in the movie, it actually showed them moving,

The fuck movie did you watch?

If you have the book around, it's well worth reading. Definitely one of King's better and more unsettling novels.

>>1212936
Oh duh, you're talking about the film. I was thinking of the mini-series. I didn't really like either one so I get them mixed up sometimes....although, it has been awhile...I think I'm gonna go watch the film now.

>>1211863

That cat's about to sneeze.