Stephen King Lost Two Letters
Where, oh where, do I begin?
I started reading Stephen King's SHIT back in middle school. I was a dumb kid who thoroughly enjoyed the TV mini-series and wanted to read the book so checked it out from the library. However, being a dumb kid in middle school, I didn't have time to read the book due to juggling homework every night and a desire to play my new Nintendo GameCube. There's only so much time in a day.
However, to my twelve-year-old self: playing Sonic Adventure 2 was the superior choice. Good job.
Why does Stephen King keep talking about how sexy an eleven-year-old girl is? This isn't something he talks about once or twice. He constantly talks about how sexy an eleven-year-old girl is in a book where her male friends run a train on her.
Run Train: To call your friends to preform various unforgivable acts of a sexual nature on one female in rapid succession.
Remember how early on in my book reviews how I said people have a problem with the Gor books? Weirdos consider the Gor books to be vile and disgusting filth. However, this book, this book is okay.
Stephen King can claim he did all the coke in the world and I will still not excuse him for creating this despicable abomination to roam the Earth. Do you know why this book has over 1000 pages? It's because Stephen King rambles on about nonsensical BS from his childhood for four or five pages at a time. "
Ben Hanscom went and sat on the swing. Remember the swings from the 1950s, weren't they grand? They were made of the cheapest metal to make them extremely aerodynamic but if you were a fat fuck like Ben Hanscom, the metal was likely to give way and you'd fall on your ass. That's exactly what happened here. The amazing girth of Ben Hanscom's fat fucking ass caused the metal to give way and he was soon on the ground. Then Eddie Bowers came over. Eddie was smoking a cigarette, do you remember how kids in the 1950s would smoke? Our parents didn't give a fuck! Not like the parents today. No wonder the kids today are a bunch of pussy pukes.
Yeah, cool story, grandpa.
Maybe I'm being too cynical to this book, because It has MHI syndrome. That means I couldn't be bothered to finish it. I got 400 pages into this 1,000+ page tome and went "why am I torturing myself?" I then looked up the cliff notes to get the gist of the book. Thinking back on it, MHI was also 1,000+ pages. Note to authors: if you need 1,000+ pages to tell your story, you should probably hire an editor.
It's funny that I mention MHI because this book has a lot of the same problems that I had with that book: the author keeps praising his self-insert (Bill is such a bad ass that he could fuck Beverly and everyone would be cool with it, especially that cuck Ben), he rambles on about his autistic interest (Correia did it with his guns and Beaver Man with his old ass shows), and the constant political rants.
I have a question for people who regularly read Stephen King, do you read anything else? I'm not trying to bully you or anything, but do you genuinely read anything other than works published by this hack? Liarmouth was bad, but that was bad in a failed screenplay didn't translate to book way.
Seriously, read this and tell me that he's a grand storyteller.
I'm hoping that Stephen King being a good writer is just a meme that I'm not aware of, because holy shit, this is awful!
None of the kids in this book talk or even act like children. King also really likes talking about the boners of young boys and adores saying the N-word more than your average Kiwi Farms user. Hell, the whole reason I even started reading SHIT, is because I wanted to put together a Demise of Film segment. Fuck it, this is Demise of Film now.
Demise of Film: IT
Both movies are better because the boys don't run train on Beverly.
Isn't it ironic how my longest Demise of Film post is on a really long and terrible book?
I'm going to be honest, I'm not a fan of the newer films. They stray from the source material and focus more on jump-scares than anything else. The dialogue is also somehow worse than the source material's. I was not a fan of the constant swearing and everyone wandering around town to collect their totems was pretty dumb.
The 1990s series may hold a special place in my heart. I remember the box cover staring at me every time I wandered down the horror aisle. The clown with the monster hands was so intriguing to me as a kid. Then one day it was on TV and I watched It. I fell in love with part 1 but found part 2 to be lacking.
I really like how the 90s movie didn't just focus on movie monsters though, something the book relied heavily upon. I couldn't shake the feeling that Stephen King knows nothing of horror outside 1950s monster movies. This goes without saying: Tim Curry is a freaking beast.
I watched a documentary called Pennywise about the making of the 90s mini-series and was just fascinated by how the young actors would hang out with their older counterparts to come up with ticks and mannerisms. It really gave me a nostalgia for a time when people making movies seemed to care.
The recent version was obviously made only for monetary purposes and the two part aspect feels like a really half-baked idea. The "scares" were also hilariously bad to the point I couldn't stop laughing whenever they were on screen.
If I had to suggest which one of the three SHIT experiences to have, I'd recommend the 90s movie. It really distilled the book down to its basics and dropped a lot of the sillier, weird, and just plain perverted aspects that are essential to the Stephen King formula.
Leave a Reply.