Is Stephen King Still King of Horror?

Anyone who keeps an eye on the New York Times Best-Seller list knows that Stephen King is still overlord of the genre. But, that's in print. What about in film? On celluloid, King's stories have a history of being lost in translation. Be it stretching or condensing the material, there's almost always something that happens in the conversion that figures into how well the story makes the switch from book to screen (be it the big or small one).

"The Stand" mini-series is probably his most successful leap, and it represents one of the closest successes to his name. The USA network show "The Dead Zone" starring Anthony Michael Hall has enjoyed much popularity since it premiered in 2002. The TV series was spun from King's 1983 book-to-movie "The Dead Zone" starring Christopher Walken, which was one of the earliest successful films made from his work. And, some say that "Salem's Lot" starring Rob Lowe (who played Nick in "The Stand") was better than the original. Depending on which segment of King readers you ask, you may also hear that "Stephen King's The Shining" TV mini-series starring Steven Weber was much better and truer to what King fans expect than the 1980 Stanley Kubrick film version of "The Shining" that left King himself wanting for more creative control over the transition of his writings to the screen.

Some will say that Kubrick's "The Shining" is one of the most definitive horror films ever made, and they generally attribute that glory to the late, great Kubrick. Still, King needed to bring his vision of the novel to an audience, and he did it through television. Which version is better is entirely dependent upon your loyalties and preferences when it comes to King and his element. Whatever you think of the made-for-television reincarnation of "The Shining," it seems to represent a trend in the last decade of King returning to his old horror with remade or revisited classics such as "Carrie" and "Firestarter" as they surface on the small screen.

The reason for this change of venue from cinemas to our living rooms may be related to the box office figures for King's latest movies to open on a big screen. The numbers are less than encouraging when you consider how synonomous the name King has become with his most prolific genre. In 2002, "Dreamcatcher" took in $75 million worldwide, leaving a small profit margin since it cost approximately $68 million to make. In 2004, "Secret Window" took in $92 million worldwide, which was not bad given the production cost of approximately $40 million. It's a respectable profit (probably made on Johnny Depp's name as well as King's), but it's not what one would expect when knowing the connotations of the name King.

The irony is that King's most notable work to make it to theaters falls outside the field for which he is so famous. "The Green Mile" (Tom Hanks, Michael Clarke Duncan) and "The Shawshank Redemption" (Tim Robbins, Morgan Freeman) are not only Oscar-nominated films but the former was box office gold. "The Green Mile" closed at a worldwide gross of $286 million. "Shawshank" found most of its acclaim and appreciation after its short life in theaters. "Stand By Me" is a classic, and it couldn't be further from real horror. King seems to do drama best, at least as universal appeal goes. In the dark and shadowy world of horror, the fans seem hopelessly divided.

Now, King's latest endeavor from page to screen has been announced. "Cell" is a creepy twist on technology and the way it can turn a person into the walking dead. With many horror fans groaning about stale King movies, this news was received with disillusionment and ambivalence. But, there's new blood in Hollywood horror. Eli Roth is directing, and his films "Cabin Fever" and "Hostel" have garnered some cult attention, making him something of a fresh commodity in horror movies. This is bringing some of the most jaded fans a little bit of hope.

No matter what happens with "Cell," it's impossible to imagine the world of horror films without the infusion of good and bad films that King has lent to it. We will always remember names like "Carrie," "Cujo," "Pet Cemetery," "It," "Christine," "Firestarter," "Children of the Corn," "The Dead Zone," and of course "The Shining" regardless which version you prefer. The list goes on and on, and there's no denying the saturation of King in horror and its influences. The best-selling novelist even wrote an episode for "The X-Files," which is in and of itself a testament to how people will always associate him with horror, no matter how he does it or by what means. I hope he never retires, for better or worse. Horror without Stephen King? Love him or hate him, he's practically its poster boy. Thoughts? Comments? Feedback? Join the discussion on Stephen Kings Cell