This film's top. The book's not.

Rating: Null/10 (15 February 1999)

Why do so many Stephen King fans go on about what a travesty this film is? King wrote a novel, not a screenplay - and if Kubrick wants to use it as the basis for a film, why should he have to keep it all? If you prefer the book then fair enough, but as far as I'm concerned, Kubrick creates top end, visually stunning cinema in comparison to which King writes pulp fiction. I mean, just go back, forget the plot and check out those visuals one more time and you'll maybe see what I mean.