Which was better?

[Rmhill10]

Do you think the movie was better or the story? :eyebrow:

[Mr. Palmer]

Definitely the short.

To be honest, I'm not a fan of the film.

[bopropadop]

Do you think the movie was better or the story? :eyebrow:


The written story for me. I almost always prefer the book. The Mist and The Shining (TV version) are about the best adaptations that I've seen. I still enjoyed 1408 (the movie) but I'd rather read it or listen to Sai King reading it on the audio version.

[King Jacob]

I like the film. If only because it scared my father so bad that he spilled popcorn all over himself when he jumped.

But Sai King is untouchable when it comes to the written word. I'll take his books over the movies any day...even though I like some of the movies a lot.

[Jake Featherston]

The story was excellent, but I thought the movie was garbage.

[Sitarhero]

Hmmm not to be rude or anything but I am wondering if the majority of people here vote written story out of pure loyalty to our S.King. To be honest, even though it wasn't the greatist adaption (saying that it didn't follow the story) I do think the additions and changes they made were much better then the oringinal tale... Hmmmm

[michal]

The book was better by a mile in my view. The film was... Well, boring to be frank and while I understand how hard it is to pull off an interesting movie when you basically have only one character (and an evil presence :biggrin2:), Hitchcock managed similar tricks with what I felt was a better success.
The story was great through, and I like the written hero much more than I did the Hollywood-designed one.

[Jake Featherston]

Hmmm not to be rude or anything but I am wondering if the majority of people here vote written story out of pure loyalty to our S.King.

I don't have any misplaced loyalty to some man I've never met; my "loyalty," as it were, only extends to the quality of his writing. 1408 just happens to be an extremely good story, and the movie is one of the worst things I have ever seen. My wife felt the same way (about the story and the movie; 1408 was the very first thing she'd ever read by Stephen King, by the way). The movie is simply atrocious, which was hardly surprising; the only way a movie adaptation of 1408 could have been any good is if it were a short (5-20 minute) film - the idea of making a 90+ minute cinematic version of this story was always a fool's errand.

[jamconsulting]

Do you think the movie was better or the story? :eyebrow:
I think the book version is better than the movie 90% of the time. If the book is written after the movie the movie wins. In the case of Harry Potter I liked the books best. A Dark Tower movie would be really scary; but you would need to read the books to understand what was going on. What say you?

[Srbo]

I absolutely hate the movie, and I admit that I didn`t even read the story yet.
The movie is so bad, IMO, that I avoid the story exactly because of the movie.

[dav]

I think with most of Stephen kings' work the book is always better because he allows you to use your imagination.

[Jake Featherston]

The movie is so bad, IMO, that I avoid the story exactly because of the movie.

You shouldn't do that; the story is not only about 20 times better than the movie (easily), its basically nothing like the story. Only the opening scenes with Samuel L. Jackson, before he checks into the room, remind me even vaguely of the story.

[Sarlinov]

I absolutely hate the movie, and I admit that I didn`t even read the story yet.
The movie is so bad, IMO, that I avoid the story exactly because of the movie.

well the movie sucks (cusack seems to think he's still making high fidelity and everyone else is trying desperately to copy the insultingly bad silent hill movie) but the story is excellent: don't avoid a good story just because of a ****** movie

[Perse Jr.]

I absolutely hate the movie, and I admit that I didn`t even read the story yet.
The movie is so bad, IMO, that I avoid the story exactly because of the movie.

Hey Srbo...the story is SO MUCH BETTER than the movie. You will not be disappointed! I loved the story and really disliked the movie. There are similarities (the room, the lone reporter, etc.), but the story is so unbelievably different that it was truly disappointing to have anticipated a great movie only to turn out disliking it (for many reasons).

Note: My comments have no bearing on my loyalty to John Cusack. I adore him and most of his films.

[Matthew.Degnan]

the story.

[Desidiosusprime]

Okay I gotta put in my two cents on this one. I think what alot of readers forget is that a movie is meant to entertain. It's not meant mirror a book to the letter. That said my opion is that both the book and the movie are good. I watched 1408 with an open mind knowing they would make changes and add details that were never in the orignal work. Seems to me that most of the people who hated the film were being a bit snobbish when it comes to a movie based on a short story. But that's just my opinion. I welcome yours.

[scarywriter]

I didn't find the movie as bad as some others on this board seem to believe. The written story was a lot better however. There were some major changes and plot problems that made the movie fall flat for me, not just as an SK fan but as a general movie-goer. As for how bad it was, please, take a look at some of the other crapfest horror flicks coming out these days and it was practically a masterpiece.

[ponygirl01]

Well, i have to say that i have not read the story yet. But i did see the movie, and i LOVED it. Kept me on the edge of my seat. So, here is my excitement... when i do read the story (and i will), will do it at night, with only a book light, maybe on Halloween when i am home alone. :eek2:

[Cognac]

the story. but to be having this discussion shows how good a movie it is.

[wheeler92]

I saw the film, but haven't read the book.
In my opinion, I would say the book is better because of much more detail.

[yog-sothoth]

The short...but I love John

[Sawney Beane]

The movie wasn´t very good,but frankly the short storie wasn´t great either,to me it was just a filler.

[qu33n0f3mpir3]

this movie was good but weird, i have to see where i can find the book.

[constantreader1313]

To be honest I saw the movie first, which I hate doing, and thought it was pretty good but kind of slow. Then when I read the short a few days ago I couldn't get John Cusack and Samuel L Jackson out of my head. After concentrating for awhile and being able to put my own faces to the characters I got into the short more than I did the movie. So it's the short for me...

[Churchill502]

i actually thought the movie was very good. Way better than most of Stephen Kings movies. Alot of the times the movies come off very cheap and have horrible actors. This movie had me intrigued from the very beginning.

[sai slone]

I thought the short story was better. I just wish the powers that be would respect Mr.King alot moor by putting as much time,effort and tallent into the movies as he puts into the stories.

[dejolane]

The movie of course.

[Terri]

The book, absolutely.

[Jake Featherston]

The book, absolutely.

Yeah, by a factor of like 50 to 1. The short story was one of the best short stories King has written, in my opinion, while the movie was one of the worst things I've seen in years.

[BruinLZ]

The film was...less than satisfactory to say the least. However, for pure entertainment value...it was alright...I didn't really expect to look at it from the point of view that it would live up to the Author's work...that is almost always the case. It should be noted though that it put some money in Mr. King's pocket and that is alright by me...

[sandiego39]

the short was alot better

[jules17330]

I liked them both. I think John Cusack is a very strong actor and pulled this character off extremely well. The story was good too. It's a tie, imho.

[Manxkitti]

I like the story better. I also have this one on audio cd. Love it.

[bryantburnette]

The story is better, but I like the movie okay. My problem with it is that it wasn't actually scary. On the other hand, Cusack and Jackson were good, and it was a good-looking movie. Lotsa worse things in the world than that.

[dwalters]

This was one of those stories where I heard they were making a movie adaptation and I just cringed at the thought. A lot of what makes this story as scary as it is is the manner in which it was written - "This is six! Six!" - and a lot of the psychological oddities that the main character experiences would be almost impossible to translate into a movie. I still watched it, but it was maybe a C at best, whereas the story was an A+ in my book.

[mrg666]

Definitely the short.

To be honest, I'm not a fan of the film.

Every time for me the book is better, the movies take away your imagination and they can only transfer so much of the story over

[DaveN]

I really liked the short story alot. I think trying to do a film interpretation of it was a really bold and tough thing to accomplish. Like someone stated before its hard to create that kind of suspense needed when there are few characters. Not that Cusack didnt do a good job, it's just the movie wasnt that good.
I dont think the movie was horrible, it was a good attempt, kinda poor outcome.
but yeah...short story definitely.

[Mookie]

I liked the movie. I went in expecting to be a bit disappointed like I was with The Mist. So it turned out to be better than I had anticipated. There are several movies done of King's stories, where the movie does not measure up. That may be the case here too, since I haven't read the short story of 1408 yet. I am reading that book now. I prefer books over movies and TV in general anyway, so my vote would likely be for the story every time. Books get into your head better than movies do. (At least for me)

[Mookie]

I finished the short story of 1408 and as usual I liked the story more. I just love books, and reading in general. So, I guess for me that's a given.

[Shadowtron]

I liked the movie more. I did enjoy the short, but I think the film is one of the best adapatations of a King story and, in all honesty, one of the best haunted house/psychological terror films made in the last few years. John's performance was riveting, the additional character development made him sympathetic, and the scares were genuinely unnerving. King's story, while entertaining, did not have the same inpact with me.

[Richard King]

I think that the movie and the short story can be looked at as two very different versions. The short story was truly excellent, which worked so well as King created a great sense of foreboding at the beginning of the story when they are in Olin's office. In fact i think the story only spends about 10 pages or so in the actual room.
I also prefer the idea in the in the short story that you can never really escape the room, it plants its seed in you so to speak, which will eventually grow into something rather nasty, which i personally found really creepy!
Having said that considering the length of the story i think the filmmakers did an admirable job at adapting and expanding upon the story. As Shadowtron said; John Cusack was brilliant and the added backstory helped create sympathy for the character, however this was obviously not the intention of king in his short story. So overall i would say i very much enjoyed both, but for different reasons. Sorry, i kinda rambled on a bit there!

[HayleyDiva]

Hi there,

I think the book 1408 was better than the movie. I remember I read the book a long time before the movie came out, but the movie wasn't exactly how I imagined the book. I remember being a lot more scared reading the book.

The only time I can ever remember any movie being better than the book just happens to be another Stephen King that I read - Cujo. It was unfortunately the first book of his that I read. It almost turned me off of him completely. I was only about eight or nine and it was really difficult for me to read. Mostly because it kept going back to that damned cereal story. I didn't get it. I don't remember if that side story was in the movie or not, but if it was, it was a lot less distracting.

I've read literally every novel King has written including & before From a Buick 8. The last book of his that I read was On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft. It was the only book of his I ever put down without finishing & that was 10 years ago. Now it's the only book that I've ever finished and then immediately turned back to the front cover & started reading again. I think that's why I stopped reading his stuff. It was too addictive.

Thankfully I stuck with Cujo and it turned out a pretty good book & an even better movie. I think the next one I read was Christine. After that I was hooked.

Now I'm going to have to try and catch up on the past 10 years. Thank God for audiobooks, though I might get hardcovers to add to my collection.
:blush:

[Richard King]

I know what you mean when you talk about the addiction level of his books, it seems that all i want to do in my spare time is read another King book. Cujo is one i've been meaning to read for years, so must get round to that at some point. Have you read the dark tower series? I reckon they have to be some of his best if not best work.

Good luck with the catching up, i have got quite a lot of it to do myself!

[HayleyDiva]

I don't have any misplaced loyalty to some man I've never met; my "loyalty," as it were, only extends to the quality of his writing. 1408 just happens to be an extremely good story, and the movie is one of the worst things I have ever seen. My wife felt the same way (about the story and the movie; 1408 was the very first thing she'd ever read by Stephen King, by the way). The movie is simply atrocious, which was hardly surprising; the only way a movie adaptation of 1408 could have been any good is if it were a short (5-20 minute) film - the idea of making a 90+ minute cinematic version of this story was always a fool's errand.

I totally disagree. I liked the book better but it was still a good movie. It was actually a pretty amazing movie. It was legends above most of the cookie-cutter crap that comes out of Hollywood. I loved it.

[HayleyDiva]

I actually still haven't read the Dark Tower series. There were three of them and I was just a bit too young to believe I could take it on.

One of my dad's girlfriends had a huge collection of King books. I think all of them, including Dark Tower. She's his wife now & probably still has that collection. I don't want a dime from them when they croak but I wouldn't mind getting my hands on that collection.

Now I'm going to have to start my catching up with that one. I forgot that I had skipped it.

I left home shortly after her arrival and started buying his books myself. I've lost a lot of stuff over the years (& gained even more), but those books are still in my closet in a box (they would be on a shelf, but I don't have the space). I haven't counted them, but the whole box is full. I can imagine there's probably about forty in there.
:blush:

[HayleyDiva]

I just did the math & I've read forty-two of his books. I had no idea that the Dark Tower Series has seven books now. He must enjoy writing those. Those will be my start. I think I might have read The Gunslinger, it sounds familiar, but I didn't count it because I wasn't sure. I don't have my own copies of Carrie, Christine & a couple of others. Right now I'm trying to put down On Writing and get dressed.

[Richard King]

Wow, that is quite a bit! I think considering you have read so many of his books you would get a lot of enjoyment from the dark tower series, as they contain characters and locations from quite a few of his books.

[HayleyDiva]

I love how he does that. Saves his characters. Now I'm trying to think of some of my favourites...

You made me get a little wet just thinking about it. I hope it's okay to admit that. I think it had something to do with hearing that he's coming to Toronto. I'm still not sure if it's true but it sounds really too good to be true. I can't freakin believe that yours truly is going to own a mother-freakin signed copy of a Stephen King!!! Ugh, I need another shower. I'm totally wetting my pants.. well my robe, no, I'm still not dressed. I just hope I can act normal while he's signing the book. I'm going to be so embarrassed if I start humping his leg and security has to get involved.

Haha, he's like the Pamela Anderson of dudes. Well, if you're turned on my creativity and brains, that is.

Yay! I just got a call! Now I really have to get dressed. I don't know if I should post this, it's really silly. I don't mean to offend anyone. Maybe this is a darling I should have killed.

[Twilight2388]

The Audio Version creeps me out more than anything!

[Adrian]

The book was way better.

[Antony butterworth]

Hello fans of the king

The book is brilliant

and the film is awsome

[Girl87]

I liked the story and the movie. Both was good.

[ADT]

I would have to say all King's book are better than the movies. There is so much more detail, emtions, and just weirdness in the books.....If you want to see a movie of King's I would suggest not reading the book first. Will be disappointed every time. Mr King takes you by the hand and leads you to places in yourself you never knew was there. I do not believe anyone can reproduce Mr King's imagination.

[DelvianBlue]

The short story was definitely better. Movies are almost never as good as the book.

[hapijoyo]

The movie was okay but didn't give as much info about the nasty history of the room or describe how desperately the writer tried to fight the poison of the room like SK's words did. Reminds me of how disappointed I was with The Shining in film after reading the book.

[Sherrie43]

Definitely the story...always!!

[Lina]

I have finally read the story, and then I started to think which one I liked more: the movie or the story. And I can say only that I like them both. But, of course, there is nothing better than a good book! Reading is always better that any movie, and 1408 is a real great story.

[peaceluvnsploosh]

I think i liked the movie better.... idk i just like how they adapted it from the story although the story was great too i like the movie

[Farah]

If you view the movie as a completly different entity as the story, then it was good, but they are not the same, the adaptation was waaaaaaaaaaaay off, about the only thing they had in common was a horrible hotel room that was trying to kill the smarta** writer, I did like the movie, but as with most Stephen King movies, I have to put the book out of my mind or I go bonkers. Esp. with The Mist...what was up with that ending????

[MissTallica]

This shouldn't even be questioned... the short story of course...
Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie, it didn't suck, like so many other adaptations from SK stories/novels. But still, nothing compares to the reading experience of SK's short stories.

[johnmarinville]

The movie is good, this story is better. And for me, the biggest difference between the two lies in the setup: the conversation in Mr. Olin's office before Mike Enslin gets to the room. I love Sam Jackson, so it's nothing against him. It's that Olin, as written by SK, diverges from what Enslin expects from a hotel manager who is only trying to keep him away to add to the mystique. Olin is diffident out in the lobby, but oddly confident within the confines of his own office, and there, he has several insights which can only be described as unnerving to our friend Mikey.

Sam Jackson is a bad ass hotel manager, because he's a bad ass everything. His character in the movie plays into what you would expect form a manager who is only trying to play up the ghost story to add to hotel's rep.

Too, I am biased in favor of the story's version of that scene because SK featured it in On Writing, using that scene to illustrate a portion of his editing process.

But the movie is good. There are several elements on SK story descriptions that are nicely brough to light in the movie through the cinemtography, the tilted camera angles, the yellow-to-orange lighting, etc. And the Carpenter's song at the beginning of his stay is a very SK-esque touch.

In the movie, I miss the story's emphasis on the disjointed tape recording and the instectile voice on the phone, but as good as some elements of the story were, I don't think they would have translated to the screen well, so except for the Olin scene, I think the story changes in the movie would very well done.

[CrazyAbe]

I Think the story is good

but i think the movie is better:biggrin2:

[Cowboy]

Rarely does a book capture the imagination like a well written book.

[Christiane17]

The story is better than the movie. I didn't watch it all, cause I thought it was lame. But it's only my opinion. Someone has to make up his own mind.:smile2:

[Snaggletooth]

Did both, and got the result I expected: the story was superior. SK's works don't usually translate that well to the big screen (Green Mile & Shawshank are notable exceptions, perhaps because Darabont is a real SK fan) and even Kubrick's Shining (which SK hated, I understand) was a letdown, and I enjoyed all the rest of Kubrick's films. Stand By Me came close, but some parts were left out of the film and that usually spoils it for me. Of course, I always see the film after reading the book, so the film can't really compete with my reading experience. I probably won't go see another one of these adaptations...even The Mist was a disappointment. Ah, expectations doth make fools of us all.

[Ozymandas]

I've never found any movie to be superior to the book on which it was based. The best any movie can hope for is to be, to me, "as good".

I did not expect much from this movie, given how short the story was, but I think they did a great job. None of the added material seemed like "filler" and I think it all fit well with the original work. The direction, acting and effects were all on-spot.

This movie, in my humble opinion, was as good as the book.

[andreasmith762]

Frankly, that's like asking someone to compare they're best Halloween night as a child to they're best Halloween night (that they can recall) as an adult (and by adult I mean drunken 19 year old).

I liked the story and I liked how it transfered as a movie.
Both scared teh CRAP out of me...I had nightmares after both and it was the best performance of John Cussack in all his hairy armed goodness since HIgh Fidelity.

[KyleEstey]

I think the book version is better than the movie 90% of the time. If the book is written after the movie the movie wins. In the case of Harry Potter I liked the books best. A Dark Tower movie would be really scary; but you would need to read the books to understand what was going on. What say you?

What do you mean by 'scary' for a Dark Tower movie? I would hate to see one, as the movies always have a way of destroying the characters image. As Sai King said, "Oh, Roland Deschain looks like Billy Bob Thornton"

I do agree with the reading of the books first if they made a movie. Like the dollar baby of Paranoid: a chant, nobody would understand it if they haven't read the story-thing( And I'm not sayinhg everyone has read it, just saying that those who have probably understand it more)

[Doc Wilson]

kings novels are too big, his short stories are just right for making movies. This one hit the spot, its on par with shawshank, and thats saying something.

[xville]

I dug them both.

[Sexysade]

The Film was pretty cool, but the book wins hands down
x x x

[cfin5256]

For me it would have to be the story simply because if given a choice between reading and watching, I'd much rather read. That being said, I guess I'm one of the few here that enjoyed the movie. I was looking to be entertained and it delivered.

[frisbee]

I did like the movie - particularly because the actors were so good. However, my imagination is always scarier than a movie. I'd have to come down on the side of the book on this one...

[karend3]

Per usual the story was better

[SharonC]

I enjoyed the movie a lot. I thought John Cusack was great as Mike. If anyone saw it on dvd, I'd be curious to know which ending you enjoyed more? An alternate ending was included in the special features.

[m@ria]

I liked the movie,haven't read the book yet.
Most of the times I like the books better than the movie though.

[Nisi]

I saw the movie and I liked it very much, and it was great in the cinema. And I wanted to read the story but I just don't know where I can find it :sad:!!!

Can someone help me?

[cfin5256]

I saw the movie and I liked it very much, and it was great in the cinema. And I wanted to read the story but I just don't know where I can find it :sad:!!!

Can someone help me?

It's in the book Everything's Eventual. Great book, great stories, great times... :smile2:

[wall of fog]

I liked the movie because it introduced me to 1408. I'm enjoying the short story collection right now and just finished the story.
I like the story for the themes maintained throughout it.
I also like the movie's use of the water, post office and return to the room from you can never really escape the room which was a nice use of plot while not using all the interior dialogue in the character's head, which ended up sounding like a case file.
It is interesting that it sounded like a case file.