^ I still don't understand why they had to change the title of the book for American audiences. :confused:

Anyway I just read this...

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l4...6r71o1_400.jpg

I thought it was going to be some pissy chick lit but it was actually really, really good. It's up there with some of my favourite books of all time, and it will take a lot to knock it off. It really affected me in a kinda profound way for some reason.

The movie was terrible, though.

That ending was sum bull****. Seriously I was so mad after reading it!!! Ugh I liked the movie though.

It was a huge shock, and I was pissed too at the ending... but I'm not really a fan of happily ever after lovey-dovey stuff anyway.

Because publishers here think the American public are idiots. I believe it's not just the title they changed but also certain words (i.e. replacing "torch" with "flashlight"). It's pretty silly.

Just finished The Running Man by Stephen King. It was alright. Like a book you'd read for filler while waiting for something else, which is what I'm did (waiting for my local library to get The Plague delivered). I feel as though the potential of a plot like this was wasted with King.

I think that's pretty indicative of Stephen King as a whole.

Blasphemy!!


Ok, not that bad, but really? As a whole?

I like Stephen King, but am I alone in thinking he's not very good at writing endings? It's especially true with his horror stories. I feel like they frequently have final acts that aren't up to the level of the rest of the book.

You might have a point there. I thought the endings to "Under the Dome" and "The Mist" could have use a little tweaking. In fact, the ending to the film "The Mist" was tons better than the book.

I would never say that Stephen King books were generally good "filler" material though.

A few of his books can stand on their own, but as a whole I think his writing is the very kind that's designed to be read once while you're in between books and then dropped off at a used bookstore. Go to any used bookstore in your city and count how many Stephen King books infest the shelves of the horror section, hell one of the ones where I live has actually set aside their own shelf that's just dedicated to his material. If they weren't, then why would people be so intent on getting rid of them?

I don't hate his works, in fact The Long Walk was one of the first books that really got me into psychological horror and his books can at least be relied upon to provide entertainment, but it's a fleeting kind for me. The Myst, The Long Walk, Desperation, and Misery have all managed to stay with me after reading them, but a lot of his other novels haven't. It would be foolish to say he has not had a major impact on the horror genre, he has, its just not a genre defying one that H.P. Lovecraft had