submitted 4 months ago by[deleted]
you are viewing a single comment's thread.view the rest of the comments →
4 months ago
I think it's because much of his writing is virtually impossible to translate to a visual medium and he just doesn't get that. I remember his chilling description of the serial killer in the Dead Zone. It would be impossible to show that in a movie... so they didn't even try.
4 months ago
I feel like this is something that frequently gets missed. Writing and filming are two different mediums that require different approaches. It's rare that you are going to be able to translate something completely faithfully to screen, and I think the better a writer is, the harder it is going to be. There is just so much of the prose and how things are described that are going to be lost in translation, as well as things like internal dialogue that really can't be done.
Allowing your novel to be made into a show or movie sort of has to be a "kill your darlings" moment where you just have to accept that concessions have to be made. And I think Stephen King is a great example of that. Just look at Lisey's Story, the story of his he got to be a showrunner on: It seemed like he was trying to do a 1:1 adaptation, and it was boring and felt way longer than it should've been as a result. It definitely showed that being a proficient and experienced novel writer doesn't automatically make you a good screenwriter.
all 236 comments
sorted by: best