tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post6749107202591308257..comments2023-10-23T00:04:35.356-04:00Comments on The Vault of Buncheness: STEPHEN KING: ONE READER'S ASSESSMENTBunche (pop culture ronin)http://www.blogger.com/profile/11831085937894725459noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-35429676241396491232013-09-14T17:54:25.027-04:002013-09-14T17:54:25.027-04:00I remember reading the mass market paperback fo SA...I remember reading the mass market paperback fo SALEMS LOT when it first came out. It was my first exposure to Stephen King and the font and back cover of the book gave no indication that it was even a vampire tale. I remember reading quite a bit of it and people asking me what it was about and I said, "I don't know whats going on in this town, but this book is great!" Then i backtracked to CARRIE and read ecah of his new books as they came out....through CUJO and thats when I just lost interest and never read him again. It's kinda odd to realize just how short my love of Stephen King really was! (Although DOLORES CLAIBORNE is one of my all-time favorite films and Kathy Bates is much better in it than in MISERY--but, oddly, I've never wanted to read it.) Thanks for the great write-ups on books. I somehow stumbled on your blog and can't stop reading (Modesty Blaise! the Falconhurst potboilers! A Feast Unknown!...). You;re very entertaining.Kevinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-165377310227921942013-03-26T20:55:31.548-04:002013-03-26T20:55:31.548-04:00One question: I hope someone can answer this. In C...One question: I hope someone can answer this. In CUJO, did Cujo eat the rabbit? On page 19, it says, "but he [Cujo] could smell rabbit. Hot and tasty. Dinner is served" while on page 303, it says, "The rabbit was unable to get out and it starved to death in slow, soundless misery." I have a Signet 1982 copy. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-8331477477379558422011-03-23T20:24:28.965-04:002011-03-23T20:24:28.965-04:00Illuminati-
I read the original version of THE ST...Illuminati-<br /><br />I read the original version of THE STAND over thirty years ago, but I can tell you that the "director's cut" version is the better of the two. Loads more characterization and smaller incidents that only add to the epic's dire scope. To bad he didn't do anything about that ridiculous ending, though.Bunche (pop culture ronin)https://www.blogger.com/profile/11831085937894725459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-81167448997641097062011-03-23T03:17:17.294-04:002011-03-23T03:17:17.294-04:00I agree with you completely on Pet Sematary.To me,...I agree with you completely on Pet Sematary.To me,that and Misery are his best works. While Pet Sematary is the perfect horror story which played with emotions, Misery played with your mind.<br /><br />Regarding Dark Half, the novel had potential and it was good in the first half. But, the endless soliloquies and the dragging plot made it dreary. There simply wasn't anything happening in the second half. It might have been a good novella, but that's it. The novel is not worth shit.<br /><br />I found Shining good at the starting and liked it's plot, but to me it just missed the point and it felt bloated . King's greatest disadvantage is never knowing when to finish a book and go on rambling (Pet Sematary was an awesome exception) .<br /><br />Never read The Stand and It. I'll be reading Salem's Lot shortly and look forward to it.<br /><br />And one question for those who have read both the versions of The Stand. <br />Could you which is better? I got the original in a second hand book shop and I will be reading it soon. But all the rantings of his fans about the uncut being better is making me dubious.Thanks in advance guys.ILLUMINATIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11401438228549360167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-75986995042093016872007-08-07T19:51:00.000-04:002007-08-07T19:51:00.000-04:00Late to the party, but I had to point out a small ...Late to the party, but I had to point out a small error about "Gerald's Game"--in the book the husband dies during sex, he doesn't leave the wife. Not that it really mattered because the book sucked, but just wanted to bring that to your attention. Having had a boyfriend who loved Stephen King I've read the vast majority of his books, most of which I wish I hadn't. The only King mainstays in my library are the Bachmann books and the expanded version of "The Stand," the latter of which entertained me at a time when my life was going to hell.Laser Rocket Armhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12332672587425641355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-91273460186917032622007-04-22T19:42:00.000-04:002007-04-22T19:42:00.000-04:00I have to say something since no one else seems to...I have to say something since no one else seems to notice. Everyone who is upset with King's later work usually feels this way because they want some of his truly horrifying tales. The problem is there are so many who will not read his work because he started off solely writing horror stories. If they would read some of his later work, his list of fans would have probably only shifted, instead of slowly dropping off.<BR/><BR/>Just something I feel more people need to realize.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-51735575093754831462007-04-09T18:11:00.000-04:002007-04-09T18:11:00.000-04:00hey, i gotta say that one of kings best works is t...hey, i gotta say that one of kings best works is the long walk from the bachman books (which are all pretty decent when you get down to it). and i got to disagree with the professor about eyes of the dragon, mainly because i was probably 10 or 12 when i read it (if not a bit younger) and it had me from go, come on, political intrigue and flatulant royalty? what can be wrong with that. and i'm not just saying that cuz i went to high school with one of his kids.<BR/>-big mikeAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03355910486330865971noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-16874363435282513292007-02-22T15:44:00.000-05:002007-02-22T15:44:00.000-05:00Man, you have more guts that I do -- I could not r...Man, you have more guts that I do -- I could not reread <I>Pet Sematary</I> -- I barely made it through the first time, because it kept me up all night.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-59064785853839901882007-02-21T03:00:00.000-05:002007-02-21T03:00:00.000-05:00i love s. king, i have all the books you mentioned...i love s. king, i have all the books you mentioned. the only one i haven't finished was hearts in atlantis and i started it about 6 months ago, bored the hell out of me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-58997766279355628582007-02-20T21:58:00.000-05:002007-02-20T21:58:00.000-05:00It's strange, and a little bit awful perhaps to sa...It's strange, and a little bit awful perhaps to say this, but once king got off the nose candy, his work began to take a decline. Like you, I think that "Pet Sematary" was perhaps his scariest piece of work (along with "Apt Pupil" which did it with nothing but pure psychology--the best way to do it!) and I understand your misgivings about "It" but it is still among my all-time favorites.<BR/><BR/>The Dark Tower was such a departure from what he normally did, a lot of people can't read it without going "Why the fuck is he writing this?" And I'd agree, I think he probably took the series too long ("The Drawing of the Three" is probably the one truly good book out of the series, with the best of the rest being only "pretty good"). I think he was playing around with some ideas stemming from hero quests, mythology, and maybe a little of the whole Jungian "collective unconscious" thing. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it was just a little boring (it's been 15 years, since I read "The Wastelands" and now I "get" a lot of the symbolic and conceptual stuph behind it that I didn't back then--still doesn't mean I'd be all that entertained). He's dabbled in similar means with the books co-authored with Peter Straube (both sucky), and "The Eyes of the Dragon" (also very sucky)on the notion of "double worlds" or "twinners" as he and Straub called it.<BR/><BR/>By the early '90s, it was becoming painfully obvious that King was running out of ideas. Three books in a row about abused wives? (And only "Delores Claiborne" being really all that good)? The complete left turn of "Dreamcatcher" from a group of boys with a psychic bond into a load of SF alien invasion whooey?<BR/><BR/>Of all of them, only "Bag of Bones" captured some of the stuph that King was really good at, even though I found some of the conflict resolutions a bit ham-handed or trite or both.<BR/><BR/>And wasn't he supposed to retire after the redundant nature of "From a Buick 8?" (aka I'll cover some of the same ideas as "Christine" did).<BR/><BR/>Still, when his shit was working, it was often VERY good. I still think "Misery" is wonderful stuph, and "The Dead Zone" is one of the most heroic tragedies in modern lit I may have ever read. I tend to think "The Shining" is a little overrated, but still a very compelling novel. And while "The Stand" is ponderous as hell (and totally agree with you about the climactic resolution!), it's studded with chapters of very good effect, particularly in the "Outbreak" stages of the story.<BR/><BR/>At this point I think King should be focusing his energies in the capacity he started out as: a guy who's read and dealt with an enormous amount of horror and macabre literature and film, and usually is more than capable of expounding on that knowledge (he once taught "Dracula" as a high school english lit instructor before he "made it" as a writer, and dammit if the dude doesn't know all the insides and outs on the Vampire Tale). Stop writing novels now, and start getting into the meat and bone of the literary process on a non-fiction basis. His essays in this vein have always been good over the last twenty five years.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00069928149329338560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-2675644826853941322007-02-20T13:15:00.000-05:002007-02-20T13:15:00.000-05:00Like you, I reached a point where I checked in irr...Like you, I reached a point where I checked in irregularly with Mr. King's latest works. However, I gotta say that the first chapter of "Rose Madder" (not "Rose Red," the Shirley Jackson rip-off) was immediately engrossing and transporting. The rest of the book isn't bad and it's a quick read with a satisfying ending. Also, "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" was similarly engrossing and satisfying. Short and sweet, with a couple of Taser jolts thrown in to keep 'em interesting and King-ish.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-73032761355521301102007-02-18T12:49:00.000-05:002007-02-18T12:49:00.000-05:00Jim Browski says:I just read "Cell" recently. The ...Jim Browski says:<BR/><BR/>I just read "Cell" recently. The book was described as a zombie novel, a complete misnomer. It was competent but rather uninspired. There is more scary shit in a Harriet Carter catalog than in this book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-37420527203379319852007-02-18T09:08:00.000-05:002007-02-18T09:08:00.000-05:00There's also the Bachman books, too...There's also the Bachman books, too...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-55810687698976133112007-02-18T08:12:00.000-05:002007-02-18T08:12:00.000-05:00Another good later day King novel is "The Dark Hal...Another good later day King novel is "The Dark Half". It's from 1993. Thats about half a decade after I stopped reading King because he was churning out a lot of crap. I picked up and read "The Dark Half" on a whim back then and it was as good as his early 80's stuff. <BR/> Another observation: I just flipped by some bad King movie adaptation on TV and I realized one of the reasons the movies are so relentlessly crappy. King's books often juxtapose horror with the mundane. He takes ordinary people living their ordinary lives and slowly transforms those lives into horror filled tales of terror. Hollywood is generally not good at slow transformations or the mundane. As a matter of fact mundane is the direct opposite of what Hollywood tries for. So the movies always miss the mark. <BR/> Only "The Shining" gets the slow transformation thing right but misses the mark on the mundane. Instead they use "atmosphere". Unfortunately that "atmosphere" is the same creepiness that every horror movie tries for and it makes the lead character's transformation inevitable. I'm waiting for him to go crazy the whole movie rather than being horrified by watching him going crazy. Due to the mundane atmosphere of the book you never know what's going to happen but due to the creepy "horror movie" atmosphere of the movie you know he's going to be crazy at the end. It's telegraphed all through out.Jaredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10335380869775400977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7415178.post-57006376707778437502007-02-18T05:51:00.000-05:002007-02-18T05:51:00.000-05:00Ok - I have to say that I too used to love Stephen...Ok - I have to say that I too used to love Stephen King then his ego outweighed his ability to write and it all went to Hell. I also hated the Dark Tower series but I know people who think it is amazing. Never made it through the first one either. Over time I have come to the conclusion that he should have stopped with The Stand - the original version - and retired. Bag of Bones was a lucky fluke that should have ended 40 pages before it did. I have mistakenly picked up his latest novel called "The Cell" and frankly it is The Stand revisited in many ways and I am so bored with it I probably won't finish it. My two cents.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com