1976, Brian de Palma réalise Carrie, le premier roman de Stephen King. Depuis, plus de 50 réalisateurs ont adapté les livres du maître de l'horreur, dans plus de 80 films et séries.1976, Brian de Palma réalise Carrie, le premier roman de Stephen King. Depuis, plus de 50 réalisateurs ont adapté les livres du maître de l'horreur, dans plus de 80 films et séries.1976, Brian de Palma réalise Carrie, le premier roman de Stephen King. Depuis, plus de 50 réalisateurs ont adapté les livres du maître de l'horreur, dans plus de 80 films et séries.
Histoire
Commentaire à la une
This is a documentary that I saw on Shudder. The concept intrigued me. What is interesting is that Stephen King, like others, is my favorite author. He was my introduction into adult horror literature. I own all his older works and am someone that eventually picks up his newer titles as well. Seeking out the adaptations of his works was something else I did when expanding my horror knowledge from what we already owned. This was a documentary that I watched at work, treating it like a podcast, watching when something truly caught my attention and listened to the rest.
What is a shame here is that they couldn't get King himself to be a part of it. What I do like though is that the people who are interviewed are filmmakers who have adapted his works. There is charm there, because as a fan of King, it is fun to see that the likes of Frank Darabont, Tom Holland, Mike Flanagan, Mick Garris and Greg Nicotero are the same. It makes me feel like I'm part of a club. It is truly amazing to hear how many books/short stories/screenplays that King has and then even crazier the number that have also been adapted.
I do have issues here and it falls in line with others that I saw review this on Letterboxd. It focuses quite a bit on the fact that King hates Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining. We also have all these people who are interviewed here who are on the side of King. This is an argument and a stance that has grown tiresome. I did find it more interesting hearing Flanagan say how he swayed King to his vision for Doctor Sleep, blending Kubrick with the source for both books.
Another issue I have is that this focuses on work more than others. Keeping it more balanced would be preferred. I get that not every production would be as interesting. Hearing Darabont talk about The Shawshank Redemption is something that I enjoyed, but that seems more for a special feature for that film. Including stories or more information for other adaptations would be something I'm more intrigued by.
This is still impressive to see all the people that were involved. I thought this was well-made, including the editing of footage to help visually show what people were talking about. What they did here was fine, but I do think that a bit different approach would make this work better personally. Still worth a watch for King fans, whether it is his writing or his films.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
What is a shame here is that they couldn't get King himself to be a part of it. What I do like though is that the people who are interviewed are filmmakers who have adapted his works. There is charm there, because as a fan of King, it is fun to see that the likes of Frank Darabont, Tom Holland, Mike Flanagan, Mick Garris and Greg Nicotero are the same. It makes me feel like I'm part of a club. It is truly amazing to hear how many books/short stories/screenplays that King has and then even crazier the number that have also been adapted.
I do have issues here and it falls in line with others that I saw review this on Letterboxd. It focuses quite a bit on the fact that King hates Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining. We also have all these people who are interviewed here who are on the side of King. This is an argument and a stance that has grown tiresome. I did find it more interesting hearing Flanagan say how he swayed King to his vision for Doctor Sleep, blending Kubrick with the source for both books.
Another issue I have is that this focuses on work more than others. Keeping it more balanced would be preferred. I get that not every production would be as interesting. Hearing Darabont talk about The Shawshank Redemption is something that I enjoyed, but that seems more for a special feature for that film. Including stories or more information for other adaptations would be something I'm more intrigued by.
This is still impressive to see all the people that were involved. I thought this was well-made, including the editing of footage to help visually show what people were talking about. What they did here was fine, but I do think that a bit different approach would make this work better personally. Still worth a watch for King fans, whether it is his writing or his films.
My Rating: 7 out of 10.
- Reviews_of_the_Dead
- 28 nov. 2024
- Permalien
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is King on Screen?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Stephen King on Screen
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 5 188 $US
- Durée1 heure 45 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.00 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was King on Screen (2022) officially released in India in English?
Répondre