A co-worker a long time ago begged me to read the book. She was a big mystery novel fan and was crazy about Stephen King. I said, "why bother" the movie was great, suspenful and Kathy Bates was Annie Wilkes as far as I was concern and besides, I didn't really like reading mystery novels. I found them boring and overly meticulous with the details. Then I saw the movie again on television and remembered how that co-worker said that after reading the book, you'll be dissapointed with the movie. So, I made the monumental effort to read this book. I couldn't put it down. And yes, the movie adaptation paled in comparisson. So much detail was left out from the book. And although Kathy Bates, was great in the movie, King's Annie Wilkes is a hell-of-a-lot scarier. And the way she died in the movie is sooo sanitized. How very dissappointing that the movie makers bowed out and chose a more cleaner, neater death for this "number one fan." King is very skillful in bringing out the fears and weaknesses of the main character Paul Sheldon. In the movie, James Caan portrayed a bravier character, but the book clearly shows that Paul Sheldon all but lost hope in seeing another day, except for who he is, a writer, and a writer must see the book to its fruitition, just like just readers must find out what happens at the end. I love this analogy and it makes the story more palpable, more real. I have to admit that the book is so much better than the movie. I have gained a lot of appreciation for Stephen King. I can see why he has so much appeal to the masses. He knows how to tell a story. You feel like a kid sitting around a campfire, while a skillful grown-up spins a really scary story. To that co-worker, yes you're right, the book is better.
