Stephen King

[TeenageRepublican]

I used to be a Stephen King fan until I discovered something about him that really pissed me off. In my opinion, he's ripping off of other movies and books.

Darkfall by Dean Koontz
Description:
Strange Days
Winter gripped the city. Terror gripped it too. They found four corpses in four days, each more hideous than the last.
Strange Nights
At first the cops thought they were dealing with a psychopath. But soon they heard eerie sounds in the ventilation system- and saw unearthly silver eyes in the snow-slashed night.
Final Hours
In a city paralyzed by a blizzard, something watches, something stalks...
Darkfall

Stephen King's Storm of the Century (Wrote screenplay)
Description:
A strange and powerful creature with the appearance of a man (Colm Feore) has come to the small town of Little Tall Island, Maine during the heaviest snow storm in the last 100 years. He brings with him the darkest secrets of all the townspeople and uses his knowledge to control and drive some of them to suicide and murder. But with every event, he leaves the clear message "Give me what I want and I'll go away." But first, he has to convince everyone that he has the power to destroy the village, if they don't comply. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0135659/plotsummary)

Darkfall was written before Storm of the Century. Storm of the Century has the exact same plotline. A city gets hit by a blizzard and an evil comes to them.

Darkfall's Villian:
Baba Lavelle: A Voodoo priest who practices black magic and uses it against the main character, who's a cop.

Stephen King's Storm of the Century's Villian:
Andre Linoge: A wizard (or something like that) that uses his power (evil) against the main character, who is a cop.

Darkfall was written before Storm of the Century.

Has Stephen King lost his touch? Have you noticed this going on? I think The Mist sure sounds a lot like The Fog!

[DesertFox]

Sorta hard to come up with new ideas every book. King's written how many now? ten thousand? a cool million? :question:

I quit readin' Stevie Boy when I seen a pitcher of him. He's uglier'n the south end of a north-pointing mule. Worse, he's a liberal.

[Lubbock]

I can proudly proclaim, I've never read a Stephen King novel.

I never saw an episode of Friends, either.

[DesertFox]

I read The Stand. It was excellent until about 2-3ds of the way thru when it was as if King didn't know where he wanted to take it so he just fiddled his way thru to the end.

Never read anything else by the bloke.

[Gonzo67]

I used to be a Stephen King fan until I discovered something about him that really pissed me off. In my opinion, he's ripping off of other movies and books.


Pretty strong statement to base on a single instance. And an instance, I might add, that is totally off the mark.

I read both King and Koontz. Their styles are slightly similar, but I prefer King. I haven't read the Koontz book you mention yet, but I have read Storm Of The Century. The "simple" outline you provide in regards to Steven Kings story is so "basic" that it can be applied to any number of stories.

And if you use that same "plot" line to describe Koontz's story (since you claim they are basically the same), I would say that you can accuse Dean Koontz of ripping off the writers for Creep Show (The Movie) for stealing the story about a small town gripped in a snow storm on Christmas when a psychopath (Evil) escapes the asylum and kills people.

There are movies far older and novels far older about Murder, Snow Storms, small towns and villages trapped in fear, etc. It's pretty much standard fare, and I doubt theres ANY writer of that genre that can not be accused of walking in those shadows once or twice. Are they ALL guilty of ripping each other off?


Storm of the Century has the exact same plotline. A city gets hit by a blizzard and an evil comes to them.


You fancy yourself a "Horror Writer", I would think you could distinguish between "plot" and "premise". You came no where near the "plot" of Storm Of The Century.


Darkfall's Villian:
Baba Lavelle: A Voodoo priest who practices black magic and uses it against the main character, who's a cop.

Stephen King's Storm of the Century's Villain:
Andre Linoge: A wizard (or something like that) that uses his power (evil) against the main character, who is a cop.


Story: End Of Days - Author, I don't know

Villain: Satan A demonic figure, familiar to most everyone. Uses his power against an Ex-Cop turned Church sponsored investigator.


Story: The Fallen

Villain: Executed Serial Killer who's evil spirit possesses people in his quest to kill the cop who put him away.

The point is, there are millions of stories about an evil antagonist targeting a cop. So how did you come to the conclusion that King ripped off Dean Koontz? And if that's true, who did Koontz rip off when writing his story? After all, I can safely state that Koontz did NOT invent the idea of a satanic bad guy looking to kill a cop.

Your mistake is in your telling of the Plot of King's novel. In his novel, the villain wants a single child. If the villagers give one of their children to him, none of the murders or the suicides would ever happen. Does the Villain in Koontz's story offer the citizens of the city such a "deal"?

In King's novel, it's also a partial "history" story, as it's supposed to be the same thing that happened to the lost English Colony of Roanoke Island in Virginia. Does Koontz's novel claim to be a "continuation" of the events at Roanoke?

In King's novel, once the villagers choose a child and gives him to the villain, he's true to his word and leaves them in peace. Does the villain in Koontz's story prove to be not only evil, but "honorable" at the same time, keeping his promises?

Is Koontz's novel built around children who are held in an "unmovable coma" making it impossible for the people to leave? After all, in King's novel, it was not the STORM keeping the people from taking their children and leaving, it was the magic of the villain preventing it.

I'm willing to bet that if you read both of the novels you mentioned (read the novels, forget the movies) you'll find that while the PREMISE may seem slightly similar, the actual PLOTS are quite different.


Has Stephen King lost his touch?


In my opinion, no. As a matter of fact, I believe he gets more versatile with age. If you want to check that theory for yourself, I suggest his collection of "short stories" that I just finished reading: "Everything's Eventual". The collection features the original Short Story of 1408 (the way it was WRITTEN - Not what it was "made into" by Hollywood") which is quite good. And the Story that lends it's name to the book, "Everything's Eventual" is quite good, as it's somehow a small "departure" from kings 'typical" stuff, while still maintaining his own familiar style. The story, "The Road Virus Heads North" is classic King, and it's a good read, quite "suspenseful" for a short story.

Also, if you want to read a very good, though quite long, novel by King, I recommend "Insomnia". Great story line, and he does an exceptional job is his narrative so you can really visualize it while you read it. It's a great novel.


I think The Mist sure sounds a lot like The Fog!


That's because you have obviously never read the story "The Mist". If you wish to, look for a copy of "Skeleton Crew". Another book collection of Stephen King short stories. I have seen previews for the movie made from this story, and the movie looks like it might be ok in it's own right, but I guarantee you, it will not be better than the story as it was originally written.

If you've read the "The Fog", you would know it's about a Pirate Curse on a small town that betrayed pirates and killed a leper colony. The fog came in as "cover" for the spirits of the pirates who return to reclaim what was stolen from them, and to avenge the murders by killing the descendants of the original settlers.

In King's story, "The Mist" finally covers the entire country (and as far as the main characters in the story know at the end, the entire world), bringing mutated creatures. In the story, the "creatures" are never actually seen, except in small, passing glances, but it's suggested that some of the creatures residing in the mist are "pre-historic" in nature.

"The Fog" was a "ghost story" about revenge, while "The Mist" is a "monster story". The premises of the 2 stories are quite different, as is the plot of both.

[Rhino]

Storm of the Century has the exact same plotline. A city gets hit by a blizzard and an evil comes to them.You think that's the exact same plotline??? So basically, every horror story since the beginning of time that happens to occur in the winter, is a copy??? Oh yeah, there was a cop. I guess it's just too coincidental that a cop might be involved when people are getting killed. Methinks thou dost stretch too much.

[TeenageRepublican]

Pretty strong statement to base on a single instance. And an instance, I might add, that is totally off the mark.

I've actually noticed a change in a lot of his work. I'm STILL a King fan. I just read Lisey's Story (I thought it was okay).



I read both King and Koontz. Their styles are slightly similar, but I prefer King. I haven't read the Koontz book you mention yet, but I have read Storm Of The Century. The "simple" outline you provide in regards to Steven Kings story is so "basic" that it can be applied to any number of stories.

Darkfall is awesome. A great read and it keeps you on the edge of your seat. Another book of his is coming out tomorrow.


And if you use that same "plot" line to describe Koontz's story (since you claim they are basically the same), I would say that you can accuse Dean Koontz of ripping off the writers for Creep Show (The Movie) for stealing the story about a small town gripped in a snow storm on Christmas when a psychopath (Evil) escapes the asylum and kills people.

Never seen it, so I can't comment it (yet). Actually it sounds good.

You fancy yourself a "Horror Writer", I would think you could distinguish between "plot" and "premise". You came no where near the "plot" of Storm Of The Century.

I got it off of IMDB.



Your mistake is in your telling of the Plot of King's novel. In his novel, the villain wants a single child. If the villagers give one of their children to him, none of the murders or the suicides would ever happen. Does the Villain in Koontz's story offer the citizens of the city such a "deal"?


Yes. He offers just to let him do what he wants (kill people that did something to him) and let him leave.



In King's novel, it's also a partial "history" story, as it's supposed to be the same thing that happened to the lost English Colony of Roanoke Island in Virginia. Does Koontz's novel claim to be a "continuation" of the events at Roanoke?

Nope.


In King's novel, once the villagers choose a child and gives him to the villain, he's true to his word and leaves them in peace. Does the villain in Koontz's story prove to be not only evil, but "honorable" at the same time, keeping his promises?

Yes. On the phone with the cop, he says he's trustworthy and he just wants to murder these certain people.


Is Koontz's novel built around children who are held in an "unmovable coma" making it impossible for the people to leave? After all, in King's novel, it was not the STORM keeping the people from taking their children and leaving, it was the magic of the villain preventing it.

No, but he does go after the children.


I'm willing to bet that if you read both of the novels you mentioned (read the novels, forget the movies) you'll find that while the PREMISE may seem slightly similar, the actual PLOTS are quite different.

I thought that Storm of the Century was a Screenplay.

In my opinion, no. As a matter of fact, I believe he gets more versatile with age. If you want to check that theory for yourself, I suggest his collection of "short stories" that I just finished reading: "Everything's Eventual". The collection features the original Short Story of 1408 (the way it was WRITTEN - Not what it was "made into" by Hollywood") which is quite good. And the Story that lends it's name to the book, "Everything's Eventual" is quite good, as it's somehow a small "departure" from kings 'typical" stuff, while still maintaining his own familiar style. The story, "The Road Virus Heads North" is classic King, and it's a good read, quite "suspenseful" for a short story.

I recommend Misery, The Shining, Christine, and It. Loved them all.


That's because you have obviously never read the story "The Mist". If you wish to, look for a copy of "Skeleton Crew". Another book collection of Stephen King short stories. I have seen previews for the movie made from this story, and the movie looks like it might be ok in it's own right, but I guarantee you, it will not be better than the story as it was originally written.

They just released The Mist by itself. I will try to get it, it's kinda crazy here now (Black Friday, but in Colorado it lasts for three days. It's insane).


If you've read the "The Fog", you would know it's about a Pirate Curse on a small town that betrayed pirates and killed a leper colony. The fog came in as "cover" for the spirits of the pirates who return to reclaim what was stolen from them, and to avenge the murders by killing the descendants of the original settlers.

There's a book? Who's it by?


In King's story, "The Mist" finally covers the entire country (and as far as the main characters in the story know at the end, the entire world), bringing mutated creatures. In the story, the "creatures" are never actually seen, except in small, passing glances, but it's suggested that some of the creatures residing in the mist are "pre-historic" in nature.

"The Fog" was a "ghost story" about revenge, while "The Mist" is a "monster story". The premises of the 2 stories are quite different, as is the plot of both.


Alright my bad. I have these random bad headaches that I keep having. I'm going to see a doctor. But I read Darkfall and saw Storm of the Century around the same time. I just kind of said to myself "that's weird" and started obsessing over it. I think too much when I'm alone and that thinking isn't good when it has a headache. I decided to share my "discovery". I now made myself look like an idiot. Not the first time on this board...
Anyway, I was disappointed by Storm of the Century. I'm trying to figure out how a guy can look at a pile of blocks and somehow spell a demon's name out of nowhere. It wasn't as bad as The Ring. But I was expecting to watch a scary movie, it wasn't scary to me.
Christine and Carrie on the other hand...:thumb:

[TeenageRepublican]

I can proudly proclaim, I've never read a Stephen King novel.

I never saw an episode of Friends, either.

Stephen King is a good writer. 85% of his stuff is good, 15% might as well burn in the fire place. Every writer has his flops, even the great Lovecraft.

[TeenageRepublican]

Sorta hard to come up with new ideas every book. King's written how many now? ten thousand? a cool million? :question:

I quit readin' Stevie Boy when I seen a pitcher of him. He's uglier'n the south end of a north-pointing mule. Worse, he's a liberal.

Most horror writers are liberals, I'm like Robert Neville in I Am Legend and all the liberal horror writers are the vampires.

P.S. I think Stephen King wrote 60 novels and 200 short stories. It might've changed.

[EveningStar]

King is the smoother writer. Koontz is the better plotter.

King has the better style but you will find fewer plot holes with Koontz.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Stephen King's writing has gotten steadily worse as the years have gone by, and in my personal opinion is due to his slippery ride down the slide of liberalism. I think his accident really took a lot out of him too. I stopped reading King several years ago. Koontz, however, has gotten steadily better. I do my best to get the new books as soon as they come out (he just doesn't write fast enough for me, :smirky:). The sad part about it, though, they make better movies out of King's work than Koontz's, even though Koontz's work has the better stories!

TR, don't take the criticism so hard, you aren't the only one to have similar thoughts about King and his literary work. BTW, I thought Storm of the Century stunk.

[TeenageRepublican]

TR, don't take the criticism so hard, you aren't the only one to have similar thoughts about King and his literary work. BTW, I thought Storm of the Century stunk.

It was good for the first 2 hours, then either the director used the script to smoke pot or Stephen King just said "whatever" and typed a crappy last 2 hours.

[TeenageRepublican]

Dean Koontz's new novel "The Darkest Evening of the Year" comes out tuesday! I'm going to get my copy ASAP.
Description:
THE DARKEST EVENING OF THE YEAR


The Book

<OBJECT type=application/x-shockwave-flash height=197 width=262 data=/flash/flvplayer.swf?file=/video/Darkest-Evening-suspense.flv&autostart=false&image=/images/suspense.jpg wmode="transparent"></OBJECT>

Amy Redwing has dedicated her life to the southern California organization she founded to rescue abandoned and endangered golden retrievers. Among dog lovers, she's a legend for the risks she'll take to save an animal from abuse. Among her friends, Amy's heedless devotion is often cause for concern. To widower Brian McCarthy, whose commitment she can't allow herself to return, Amy's behavior is far more puzzling and hides a shattering secret.
No one is surprised when Amy risks her life to save Nickie, nor when she takes the female golden into her home. The bond between Amy and Nickie is immediate and uncanny. Even her two other goldens, Fred and Ethel, recognize Nickie as special, a natural alpha. But the instant joy Nickie brings is shadowed by a series of eerie incidents. An ominous stranger. A mysterious home invasion. And the unmistakable sense that someone is watching Amy's every move and that, whoever it is, he's not alone.
Someone has come back to turn Amy into the desperate, hunted creature she's always been there to save. But now there's no one to save Amy and those she loves. From its breathtaking opening scene to its shocking climax, The Darkest Evening of the Year is Dean Koontz at his finest, a transcendent thriller certain to have readers turning pages until dawn.
http://www.deankoontz.com/books/darkest-evening/book.php

[gnome]

For all that I enjoy Stephen King, he seems to have a problem writing good endings to long stories. Half the time you wind up just kinda going... "uh? That's it?"

I wound up preferring his short stories. Most of them are scarier than his epics.

"The Boogie Man" in "Night Shift" is probably the scariest story I have ever read.

[Rhino]

I loved Salem's Lot. I knew a guy who caught a cold from sleeping under his bed while reading it. :lol:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I'll not put another dime, nay another penny in King's pocket:

Stephen King says: Let’s waterboard Jenna! (http://whitehouser.com/news/stephen-king-suggests-we-waterboard-jenna-bush/)
"So I said something to the Nightline guy about waterboarding, and if the Bush administration didn’t think it was torture, they ought to do some personal investigation. Someone in the Bush family should actually be waterboarded so they could report on it to George. I said, I didn’t think he would do it, but I suggested Jenna be waterboarded and then she could talk about whether or not she thought it was torture." ~ Stephen King

[TeenageRepublican]

I'm still getting the movies. The movies are good, depending on which one you get.

[Eagle1]

the mist was a short story written a long time ago, dont know if it was before the fog though

the movie was terrible, the ending was much worse then the story. having an evil christian character wasn't so bad, a little fred phelpsy but it was clear she was a nut and not mainstream

kings new stuff is not anywhere near as good as the old, save dreamcatcher, that was a great book, movie was just ok

[TeenageRepublican]

the mist was a short story written a long time ago, dont know if it was before the fog though

the movie was terrible, the ending was much worse then the story. having an evil christian character wasn't so bad, a little fred phelpsy but it was clear she was a nut and not mainstream

kings new stuff is not anywhere near as good as the old, save dreamcatcher, that was a great book, movie was just ok

The movie was bad?

[CONSERVATIVE HERO]

I never saw an episode of Friends, either.
I used to work with this old, crotchy, guy once who cracked me up when he'd talk about Friends. He hated the show (I can't blame him) down to its name. I'd ask him why, and he'd always answer, "they're not my f*ckin friends." :biggrin:

Personally, I think a more fitting title would have been Sluts.

[Rhino]

I have the entire Friends series on DVD. I don't watch TV or movies, or read books, based on the political opinions of the actors or writers. I watch, or read, for entertainment. I think Friends was the second best TV series ever made.