Submitted by Wandering_Texan80 t3_yfut5w in books
Grouchy-Weight-4950 t1_iu6ow76 wrote
I’m one of those with the unpopular opinion that... King was merely a prolific author, he wasn’t a particularly good one. The Stephen King drinking game exists for a reason.
Those who say he writes ‘horror’, I don’t think ever payed much attention to his writing. He does suspense. He also can never seem to write a good ending, on the rare occasion he actually has an ending at all.
Honestly, I think his books are the literary equivalent of mock busters. He throws in the same old tired tropes and characters again and again, not to scare you, but to mock those tropes, to make fun of them and even himself. It’s like he’s actually making fun of us for taking them, and him, seriously.
In that respect, he’s a genius author. Though his intention is lost, which in turn makes him a bad author. When it came to good suspense, I far preferred Dean Koontz.
beast916 t1_iu97llp wrote
People who say he can never seem to write a good ending clearly haven't read much King. He's certainly had some stinker endings, but to say he has almost never written a good one is just ridiculous.
Wandering_Texan80 OP t1_iu8oi8s wrote
I think he writes entertaining stories - one of my favorites is The Green Mile. Not all are great (and some are very meh), which is to be expected. It’s remarkable how much creativity he has in his head.
I prefer King to Koontz, but to each his own.
GirlNamedTex t1_iu93f2n wrote
I like his short stories and novellas (and some of the Bachman stories) better than the novels, in general, when it comes to his work. And they seem to translate to screen adaptations really well. 1922, Rita Hayworth..., The Green Mile etc., were all good to awesome.
And I also prefer him to Koontz by a long shot.
Edit to add: I really wish they would adapt The Long Walk to screen.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments