|
Blade_of_tyshalle posted:And that's not even counting That Scene. I've only read the last few pages of this thread, but what is "that scene"?
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
"That Scene", from IT is a 13 year old gang bang in the sewers in graphic detail, supposedly to power themselves up or some such before the big boss fight. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:26
|
|
|
Auryn posted:See, that confuses me a little. The supernatural elements are very downplayed. The book is quite bleak and ends in Bachman's signature bittersweet way, with heavy emphasis on the bitter. And at many points, the protagonist's frustration practically leaps off the page. Despite that, like most of the Bachman books, it actually ends in a satisfactory manner, which is more than I can say for 2/3rds of King's books written as King.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:32
|
|
I have read and loved The Long Walk, Rage, Thinner and The Regulators. So obviously I enjoy his style. Is The Dead Zone comparable to any of the Bachman I've enjoyed? Can you describe the Bachman-book structure you mean? Because while Bachman certainly writes books with much fewer supernatural elements, the style is still unmistakeably King in my mind. His voice just comes through. It was especially evident in The Regulators. I guess I just don't see any extraordinary differences in style. I'd be fascinated to hear another viewpoint on this, of course!
|
Auryn posted:After some digging, I realized I'd never read Firestarter, The Dead Zone, The Running Man, Roadwork or The Dark Half and I think I should get started with it. Can anyone recommend which one to start with? I should mention I haven't read the dark tower series yet, but I have little interest. Should I go for it??? Depends on what you're looking for. It's been a loooong time since I read The Running Man, so I offer no opinion of it. The Dark Half is the weakest of the above. There were ways he could have made it interesting, but the climax of the story is within the first 50 pages. There are still some good bits here and there, but nothing to sustain much interest. Roadwork is good if you're in a 'gently caress authority' mood. The Dead Zone is more supernatural than the Bachman books, but it's only a setup for moral/ethical questions. The supernatural has to be there for the plot to work, but it's overall not a supernatural plot. Firestarter. I liked that one, though it's not his best-written work. Just a girl and her ability to set things on fire and the people trying to control it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:43
|
|
|
Auryn posted:I absolutely love The Shining for a few reasons. It is one of King's earlier works and was heavily edited (as far as I heard, please correct me if I'm wrong)... I hadn't heard that or at least I don't remember it, but would like to hear more if anyone else can elaborate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:58
|
|
|
Auryn posted:Anyway, Under the Dome had a very interesting premise, I was psyched as hell to read it. There were some good characters, but I really thought the plot just fell apart at the end. They could have done a lot more with it. For example, they could have made it actually turn out to BE a military experiment that the military denies involvement in. I would have been happier with GOD DID IT than aliens not mentioned in this book until right now did it. I mean, I'd have to reread to be sure, but I don't remember ANY foreshadowing of aliens. I LOVE King but a deus ex machina is a piece of poo poo no matter who writes it, unfortunately. And thats what the aliens were.If I'm wrong, don't hesitate to tell me! It's still not a very satisfying resolution to have them beg the interdimensional kid to "lift the glass off the ant hill" by showing sad childhood memories.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 08:45
|
|
|
SalTheBard posted:I've only read the last few pages of this thread, but what is "that scene"? The scene that really isn't that big of a deal in relation to King's body of work but this thread would have you believe made everybody vomit then throw their book down in disgust. Thematically it sort of makes sense although it's a pretty woeful idea and is written poorly. But the way people go on about it...
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 10:57
|
|
|
I generally like The Dead Zone but I'm always slightly put off by the large gaps in the story where all of a sudden its years after the last section.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 14:19
|
|
|
I thought the gaps worked well. We always seemed to pick Johnny up after some event where he showed his hand and things went to personal poo poo for him and picked up when he was starting to put himself back together only to have the same thing happen to him again. I though it worked well to show just how damned he was by fate. Poor Johnny couldn't catch a break, could he? Also remember this is early King. A lot of his short stories jump forward when need be and the continuation of the story even when nothing is happening was not yet part of his work. I look at the Zone as a bunch of novellas with the same protagonist anyway. Most of the skips in time have a beginning, middle and end all of their own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
I am OK posted:The scene that really isn't that big of a deal in relation to King's body of work but this thread would have you believe made everybody vomit then throw their book down in disgust. Thematically it sort of makes sense although it's a pretty woeful idea and is written poorly. But the way people go on about it... I just realized, the reason why that section has probably never bothered me is because I read that book at 13 or so for the first time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 15:50
|
|
|
Ozmaugh posted:I hadn't heard that or at least I don't remember it, but would like to hear more if anyone else can elaborate. Auryn can correct me if the reference is to something else, but in a place or two King explains that The Shining is (unlike most of his books) hemmed in by an overarching plot or concern that he had planned from the beginning. In initial stages it was conceived as a play, specifically a tragedy (Lear is the model that gets thrown around but I've written on its implicit connections to Hamlet), and you'll notice the book itself is still highly structured -- in five books/acts, even! The novel also works like goddamn clockwork, ticking very briskly along to an obvious catastrophe (the boiler) without a lot of the tangled morass King is generally chided for. An original draft of the novel has a few extra little stories called "Before the Play" that act as a sort of prologue and establish the scene/characters (perhaps a bit more than they really need, so it's good they're cut). They were published elsewhere as a sort of standalone novella, in an anthology whose name escapes me and a highly edited version in an issue of TV Guide to tie in with the miniseries.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 17:12
|
|
|
Darko posted:I just realized, the reason why that section has probably never bothered me is because I read that book at 13 or so for the first time. I agree. The first time I read It I was probably 12 and didn't think anything of it. I decided to pick it up a few years ago while in my 20s and it seemed pretty creepy. I still enjoy most of King's books though, even with the nonsense endings. In my opinion though he will never top The Long Walk. I have never been able to start that story without finishing it in the same sitting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:Roadwork is good if you're in a 'gently caress authority' mood. I've always felt like "Roadwork" was underrated - it's a very great "state of the modern man" artifact from the 1970's recession and oil crisis, and reads even more poignantly in 2012 than it did for the past few decades. It's practically a John Updike or Philip Roth "American Guy in Crisis" novel, until it turns into an action movie caricature right at the end. Really moody, introspective stuff until that point, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 18:36
|
|
|
I think you might be overpraising Roadwork a little. Sure it aspires to be those things but it just never really gets there for me. It's a re-telling of Bartleby with the main character just refusing to act and as the world moves on around him the disconnect isn't really all that interesting really. It's not a bad novel but to compare it to a John Updike is giving it a little too much praise I think. The acid scene and everything that follows is very formulaic as are the characters themselves: The lonely hitchhiker, the tough gangster with a heart of gold and the main character himself who seems to swerve between Bartleby and a schizophrenic anti-hero through no reason other than it serves the story to have him act a certain way. One moment he is not reacting to the world and that would be a neat idea, but then King has him snap into a different persona whenever he needs him to act to get the story rolling and it took a lot of that sense of inertia away for me. Had he just stayed in the house, not bought the explosives or gun, not done anything to try and fix things with his wife, just sat there as unmovable as rock, then that might have been a lot more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 21:52
|
|
|
Auryn posted:"That Scene", from IT is a 13 year old gang bang in the sewers in graphic detail, supposedly to power themselves up or some such before the big boss fight. Not to nitpick and definitely not defending King's choice on how to illustrate the bond between the Losers, but the scene happens after the 60's era Losers have that "big boss fight" the first time. They get lost and whatever sort of magic bond the kids had was starting to fray. Bev decides she has have sex with all them in order to re-establish that bond. After that they make it out. Also, she apparently completely blocks out the memory since there's a part in the 80's portion where she blurts out something about "ALL OF YOU" as if she's just now remember what happened when they were all lost. That scene always comes up. For better or for worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
Aren't all their memories of childhood - especially that part of it - lost to them at the start though? Even physical reminders like the cuts from the broken glass and Bills stutter only return once Mike calls them and reminds them. And they only really remember when back in Derry and walking about the town or talking about what is happening. Also; poor Stan 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 23:02
|
|
|
Yeah, they gradually get memories back as they returned to Derry, although they get practically all in the meeting with Mike, from what I recall. Outside of Stan, who apparently got it all immediately and killed himself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
Its been ages since reading IT but I think Stan just couldn't handle the pressure and checked out before the memories came flooding back. Even in the flashbacks theres mention of Beverly (I think) moving to take the glass from Stans hand because he is making a wrist-slitting action with it. Guy just liked things to be ordered and sane. And nothing about Derry was. Now that I think of it there's a brilliant page or two about Stans thoughts on what reality should be around the section when Eddie goes into hospital after having his arm broken that addresses that and it goes a long way to explaining why a grownup Stan wouldn't have been able to put his childhood persona back on once he got back to Derry. Dude was too invested in forgetting and couldn't handle the pressure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
I really, really like Stephen King. I love the way he writes about mundane poo poo while making it sound interesting. I also happen to be a fast reader. Having said all of that, I'd say I could read just about anything King could write and find myself feeling content. I think that I am literally one of those people ridiculed for being willing to read his shopping list or whatever. He just writes in such a down-to-earth manner that I get swept up in what he's writing. The parts that people complain about insofar as him droning for dozens of pages on end don't phase me because of the aforementioned writing style coupled with the fact that I generally breeze through it fairly quick. A few people before me have said that he writes as though he's standing next to you, telling the story in person. That's a drat good explanation if you ask me. Having said that, I found Lisey's Story, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon, and Eyes of the Dragon to be ultimately forgettable. The Black House was the very worst, though, since I loved The Talisman and was horrified to see the thing co-opted into a mediocre story that tried to wedge as much Dark Tower bullshit into it as possible. I'd rather Jack Sawyer's last appearance be trying to save a drunk from himself in The Tommyknockers than in that piece of poo poo. Insofar as That Scene in It goes, I'm among the crowd that was pretty young when I first read it. I didn't find it odd at all, considering that the kids needed to reconnect and sex (so far as people that young are concerned) seems to have magical connotations all on its own. *edit* Does anyone remember what book or story made reference to Cujo, what with the protagonist seeing a pair of glowing, disembodied eyes in a barn accompanied by an other-worldly growl? *edit2* Nevermind, I just remembered that it was in Needful Things. A Terrible Person fucked around with this message at 07:14 on Jan 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:11
|
|
|
Needful Things makes repeated references to Cujo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 08:55
|
|
|
Just finished rereading Under the Dome for the first time. Originally read it ~2 years ago. I found it a lot better the second time around. Auryn posted:Anyway, Under the Dome had a very interesting premise, I was psyched as hell to read it. There were some good characters, but I really thought the plot just fell apart at the end. They could have done a lot more with it. For example, they could have made it actually turn out to BE a military experiment that the military denies involvement in. I would have been happier with GOD DID IT than aliens not mentioned in this book until right now did it. I mean, I'd have to reread to be sure, but I don't remember ANY foreshadowing of aliens. I LOVE King but a deus ex machina is a piece of poo poo no matter who writes it, unfortunately. And thats what the aliens were.If I'm wrong, don't hesitate to tell me! There is actually some foreshadowing about it being aliens, specifically one conversation with Colonel Cox. Finding a possibly alien device was part of Barbara's mission. I thought the dome being created by alien children was kind of stupid on my first read, also. However, I really came around to it on the second one. My take on the book is that it's really just about how badly people screw things up. It's emphasized over and over and over again how many supplies the town either has or should have, plenty to last them a good long time under the Dome. Barbara has the capacity to be a quality leader, authority from the outside, and a clear mission to find out what was going on. It's also pretty clearly stated that the alien device was in an obvious location. It's on a high area that overlooks everything and is surrounded by creepy animal corpses and a huge barrier that glows brightly at night. Hell, a kid guesses the location of the device without even seeing it. Without all the evil that was in the people of the town the source of the Dome would have been discovered and some solution figured out at some point. It's good that it was something stupid like alien kids because that makes all the actions of Rennie and company a million times worse. If it was a government conspiracy that would make everyone, even the worse characters, into nothing but victims who make things worse for themselves. Unthinking, uncaring, all-powerful aliens being the cause of the Dome highlights the fact that it's the people who really screw things up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 12:21
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:Aren't all their memories of childhood - especially that part of it - lost to them at the start though? Even physical reminders like the cuts from the broken glass and Bills stutter only return once Mike calls them and reminds them. And they only really remember when back in Derry and walking about the town or talking about what is happening. I can understand adult Stan's mind set, Killer clown/Space spider is back to kill me and my friends, nope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 16:42
|
|
|
Ridonkulous posted:I can understand adult Stan's mind set, Killer clown/Space spider is back to kill me and my friends, nope. Especially after repressing it for, what was it, 35 years? Side note, I was thinking about Blaine's destruction in Wizard and Glass...and suddenly I realized that all Eddie did was Star Trek the drat thing; kinda like how Kirk and Co destroyed the army of androids with illogical behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 23:06
|
|
|
I was in a thrift store this afternoon and saw a copy of Needful Things. I already have a copy of it, but it's 250 miles away, this was 50 cents and this thread has made me want to reread it. Also found a copy of Full Dark, No Stars, which I haven't read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:Also found a copy of Full Dark, No Stars, which I haven't read. Read it. If there's one thing King still does well it's short stories.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 02:18
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:The problem with that is it isn't a town we know and have read about over the past two novels. Watching Castle Rock explode all over the place and everything just going up in flames and bullet-holes was an amazing way to end the readers relationship with a town. I'm pretty sure that something like this has already happened to Mid-world. Marten Broadcloak / Flagg has already ruined what little remained of order in society. Keep in mind that Flagg came pretty close to ruining Delain, Gaunt wrecked Derry, Marten Broadcloak dismantled Mid-world. I used to think that they were agents of the Crimson King, back when the Crimson Kid was something to be feared instead of ridiculed. vwee hee hee
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 02:38
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:Read it. Please be right about this, because I so want to go get this on the Kindle app right. loving. now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 03:10
|
|
|
Static Rook posted:I disagree with the "the middle is boring because it has to be" opinions for a couple of reasons. Mainly: it didn't have to be boring. I didn't think it was boring at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 06:24
|
|
|
Re-watching The Stand miniseries as I go through the book. I saw it on TV when it first came out but evidently I had forgotten that Molly Ringwald is absolutely dreadful in this. I don't like Fran anyway but ugghhh
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 09:32
|
|
|
hatelull posted:Please be right about this, because I so want to go get this on the Kindle app right. loving. now. Of course, there's a couple stories that drag a bit (the man can't hit a home run every time), but the entire book is worth it for N. If you read one story, make it N.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 10:00
|
|
|
Ensign_Ricky posted:Of course, there's a couple stories that drag a bit (the man can't hit a home run every time), but the entire book is worth it for N. If you read one story, make it N. You're thinking of Just After Sunset, not Full Dark No Stars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
zedar posted:You're thinking of Just After Sunset, not Full Dark No Stars. Oh dammit. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
Ozmaugh posted:Re-watching The Stand miniseries as I go through the book. I feel like only a few people played their parts really well. The guy who played Flagg just didn't feel scary enough. Tom Cullen and Glen Bateman were great. Molly Ringwald was horrible and I felt like having Rob Lowe play a deaf mute was kind of waste of his talents. Overall though, the entire mini-series just didn't capture the feel. I think they really need to redo it for HBO or Showtime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:30
|
|
|
Full Dark is worth the price for Fair Extension. God that's horribly hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:Full Dark is worth the price for Fair Extension. God that's horribly hilarious. I really liked most of Full Dark. The first story felt like it went on a lot longer than was necessary, but the other three stories are enough to make up for it. And even the first story had it's great moments.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 00:28
|
|
|
H.P. Shivcraft posted:Auryn can correct me if the reference is to something else, but in a place or two King explains that The Shining is (unlike most of his books) hemmed in by an overarching plot or concern that he had planned from the beginning. In initial stages it was conceived as a play, specifically a tragedy (Lear is the model that gets thrown around but I've written on its implicit connections to Hamlet), and you'll notice the book itself is still highly structured -- in five books/acts, even! The novel also works like goddamn clockwork, ticking very briskly along to an obvious catastrophe (the boiler) without a lot of the tangled morass King is generally chided for. I think this could possibly be what I'm remembering. It's also possible it's someone's opinion I heard once and then assimilated as fact, who knows. It definitely seems like a more polished and edited book to me. quote:There is actually some foreshadowing about it being aliens, specifically one conversation with Colonel Cox. Finding a possibly alien device was part of Barbara's mission. I should probably reread this because I plowed through it the first time; I apparently missed a lot of things. I do a lot of rereading of King's books for some reason but I haven't picked this one up again yet. I usually enjoy his books more on the second time through because I'm not rushing to find out what's going to happen. I find him to be re-readable in a way that no other author is to me. Auryn fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Jan 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 04:11
|
|
|
Boofchicken posted:I feel like only a few people played their parts really well. The guy who played Flagg just didn't feel scary enough. Tom Cullen and Glen Bateman were great. Molly Ringwald was horrible and I felt like having Rob Lowe play a deaf mute was kind of waste of his talents. Overall though, the entire mini-series just didn't capture the feel. I think they really need to redo it for HBO or Showtime. Tom was great, but Nick was written poorly in the screenplay so it's not even a question of wasting Rob Lowe's talents. The only positive is that Gary Sinise pushes Stu to be a bit more likable. I just never really cared about either of them (despite all King's efforts to give her an extra shove in the way of character development, she never gets beyond sounding like a teenager pretending to be an adult and King can't make up his mind when it comes to what Stu's supposed to be like). Nick Andros and Larry Underwood are far more interesting. I like Ralph a lot, too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 04:16
|
|
|
Ozmaugh posted:Tom was great, but Nick was written poorly in the screenplay so it's not even a question of wasting Rob Lowe's talents. Flagg was awesome in the mini-series. When I first saw it, I was like "what the hell, that's nothing like I imagined him!" but in retrospect, a jean jacket wearing jolly dude is perfect for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 15:33
|
|
|
Darko posted:Flagg was awesome in the mini-series. When I first saw it, I was like "what the hell, that's nothing like I imagined him!" but in retrospect, a jean jacket wearing jolly dude is perfect for him. Its been a while since I read The Stand, but I thought Flagg was explicitly described as a jeans-n-jacket kind of guy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 15:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
Ozmaugh posted:Tom was great, but Nick was written poorly in the screenplay so it's not even a question of wasting Rob Lowe's talents. Isn't she only like 21, 22 though? I mean, that's not a teenager, but certainly not far from it and I have known plenty of early twenties people who still act like immature brats, world ending plague not withstanding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 19:23
|
|