Steven King had over 50 of his novels, short stories or novels adapted to the screen, making it one of the most popular authors. The author's gentle and direct prose attracts directors because it is filled with relative characters and is rooted in a strong sense of place (often rural Maine). After calming you down in the rhythm of the story, the king will smear you in the face with some of the most famous stomach densities or existential fear. King's books often explore the insidious evil under a small city of America, the emotional fragility of childhood, and are unfolded as epic epics with huge mythology.

But not every adaptation of Steven King's film is successful or worth watching. For every "ransom of Joshank", there is a "cell"; For every "misery", there are "trucks". The failure of such films to capture the essence of the original material will bothers many authors. In Interview with VultureSteven King References "Rosemary's Baby Author", Ira Levin, who was "very upset that (director Roman Polanski) follows the book very carefully, next to the type of shirts that Johnon Cassetsks' character." King does not occupy the same approach, so we ended up with such an uneven mixture in the quality of adaptations.

Most authors treat their books as sacred creations - like their own babies - because years have spent writing them and pouring all their creativity and heart into them. But Steven King has never been too precious for his work, allowing the directors to run wild with their own interpretations. He said Rolling stone In 2014, "Movies have never been a big deal. The movies are the movies. They just do them. If they are good, it's scary. If they're not, they're not." This makes us wonder: What allows King to be so practical with his stories?

King explains in an interview with Vrejadec that his easy attitude towards the film adaptations of his work comes from writer "Mildr Pierce" Jamesimes M. Cain, who responded to the rapporteur's statement that his novels were destroyed by the films. Cain said, while pointing to the bookshelf, "No, no, everyone is there." In other words, King considers the film and the book as two separate entities. King's feeling for filmmakers who visualize his work has always been: "If it's a success, it will help me do what I want to do, and that is to write books." Whether it ends as a classic like "Kerry" or A. Trainwreck as "Dreamcatcher", King sees his books as "untouchable". He can accept this point of view of Lais Fair because, "a) I do well financially so I can afford to risk and b) I have been fertile enough to not feel anxious."

There is one exception to his perspective on cold. The novelist is known to hate Stanley Kubrick's "glitter". Ironically, this is what and /film and many critics consider Steven King's best adaptation of all time. King did not like that Jackack Nicholson came out as Machiavellian from the beginning, and that Wendy was portrayed as a trembling jellyfish. He also opposed the cold, separated and cynical treatment of Kubrick's "glitter" because it was a very personal story about him as a recovering alcoholic. He could turn his fears that the anger and violent impulses of his drinking could turn him into a monster that harms his family. Steven King ended with mini production To say a version that was closer to its original intentions.