Hollywood's Stephen King

by Tony Magistrale

Book Overview

For the past three decades, Hollywood has faithfully adapted much of Stephen King's fiction into film. Of the many major films that have been made, not one has lost money. Part of this may be explained in terms of King's own popularity in American culture; he has been, after all, a best-selling writer since the late 1970s. But more interesting is what this cinematic fascination reveals about postmodern American culture. In the first overview of Hollywood's...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0312293216
• ISBN13: 9780312293215
• Release Date: November 2003
• Publisher: Palgrave MacMillan
• Length: 233 Pages
• Weight: 0.70 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.7" x 5.5" x 8.3"

Customer Reviews

Hollywood's Stephen King

Tony Magistrale brings up some very good points throughout the book that I think most Stephen King Fans will agree on. I have enjoyed the book immensely.

Overanalyzing Stephen King

In Hollywood's Stephen King, author Magistrale is best when talking about how the movies based on King's works differ from the works themselves. When he evaluates movies that are very close to the stories as written, he tends to get bogged down in literary criticism, which is not what this book is supposed to be about. The interview with King at the beginning of Hollywood's Stephen King is one of the best parts of this book. In it, you get the impression that King writes his stories on an emotional level, aiming to grab the reader and shake him silly. As a college graduate and former English teacher, he can probably sling the lit crit with the best of them, but he seems to be aiming primarily for entertainment rather than edification. To analyze King's stories may be to find things in them that aren't really there. In fact, Magistrale delves into psychoanalysis of King from time to time, talking about what makes him tick. This type of speculation leads nowhere. On the other hand, Magistrale's discussions of the films and how different directors and screenwriters have adapted them is quite interesting. He even takes on Carol Clover and her book, Men, Women, and Chainsaws. Although I agree with Clover in this case, Magistrale makes a good case for his argument. In this book, Magistrale wisely limits himself to examining about twenty films and series based on King's novels, novellas, and short stories. He notes that the best adaptations have been on his shorter works, which allow a director to add to the story rather than be forced to subtract. Carrie, Misery, The Shawshank Redemption were all short stories or novellas rather than full-length novels. It isn't necessary to have seen many of these movies or to have read much King at all to enjoy the commentary in this book. In fact, I didn't even realize that The Shawshank Redemption was based on a King story until I read this book. For a book based on a college course, this short volume is surprisingly readable and entertaining.

very good with a few flaws

This is a very good book that serves as a valuable addition to the canon of works exploring the phenomenon that is Stephen King. I would heartily recommend it to people who are King fans and who also like to read critical analysis of his stories. This book focuses on the films that have resulted from King novels and stories. Magistrale's best readings here are of Kubrick's "The Shining" and Darabont's "The Shawshank Redemption" and "The Green Mile," but he has something interesting to say about pretty much every movie he covers (which is not every single King film, unfortunately). There are a few places where the book falls down a bit, though. For example, Magistrale seems to be convinced that the only version of Tobe Hooper's "Salem's Lot" that is commerically available is the truncated version released to theaters overseas. In fact, his entire criticsm is based on that edition. I've owned the complete four-hour version (three hours, actually, since the commericals aren't included) on DVD for several years. It's readily available from any online mercant, and has been for a long time now. How that simple fact managed to slip by Magistrale is a mystery to me, but it is the sort of ridiculous error that makes me wonder how many other things he might have gotten wrong. Also, for a book that, I think, tries to be a critical overview of Stephen King movies, there are far too many digressions to discuss how things were done in the novel on which the respective movie was based. If one of Magistrale's points is that the King film canon is deserving of serious critical attention, then it is a disservice to constantly return to a discussion of how the novels are different. Still, this is one of the better books of criticism I've read on the subject of Stephen King. I recommend it.

Red Blooded Criticism

Magistrale is one of those academics who has made a whole career writing about the work of a living author. It must make the author awfully uneasy thinking of all those people whose living literally depends on the products of one's brain. King must respect him, however, because he gives him his time and an awfully frank interview which opens up the book on a happy note. King has been treated both well and badly by Hollywood, and he must know that some of this bad treatment is his own fault. Though some fans think otherwise, people who like movies know that when King is in charge of adapting his own work (or even worse, writing originals for the screen) the results are almost always dire. Can't figure it out, how a man whose writing is so perfectly "cinematic," whatever that means, can have so literal and unimaginative a film sense. Oh well, at least we have the novels on the one hand and Rob Reiner, Brain De Palma, Stanley Kubrick and Frank Darabont (among others) to re-imagine King's work and make it come alive on the big screen. Save us from the Mick Garrises of the world! Magistrale manages to make sense of some of the complexities of the film universe, and he can explain in high toned English why a film like CARRIE might be good and THE MANGLER unredeemably mediocre. I like the way he arranged the films into different categories, so there is a body of proto-feminist films, like DOLORES CLAIBORNE, and then a body of "high-tech gone awry" films like CHRISTINE and the beyond belief bad MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE. Magistrale is a highly intelligent man and his writing is not pretentious at all. He is the type of writer you'd like to know as a friend.

good read

At first glance I thought this might be tiresome because it is literary/cinema criticism and I was immediately transported back to a college English class. Surprise, I couldn't put it down! Stephen King is a genius. Tony Magistrael has made a career of studying horror with an emphasis on Stephen King's writings and film adaptations of his work. You can't help but appreciate King's craftsmanship and the volume and variety of his work. Magistrael's enthusiasm makes me think reading books I've avoided because I thought they would scare the crap out of me, might really be fun after all. I'm buying Misery today. And then, I'll watch the movie.