Implying that Kubrick isn't a genius in his own right.
Stephen King wrote a lot of stories. Not saying that a lot of them aren't good. But it feels, to me, like he's been throwing a lot of shit at the wall to see what sticks with a lot of years even releasing multiple books in a year. The man is a machine, with some good stories sometimes.
Kubrick's movies on the other hand have been classics for the most part. And yes, that includes the Shining.
The Kubricking extends beyond The Shining. A. I. is a horrible travesty of the original short story. The author begged him not to do that idiotic retelling of Pinocchio, but Kubrick didn't listen.
King did a good job of massacring his own boy when he tried to make a film adaptation of the book. To some extent I think that justifies Kubrick's creative changes.
Agree that the book itself is excellent - and much scarier than the Kubrick movie btw. It's just that some aspects of it that are the most chilling seem reliant on the medium of it being a novel.
Depends on how you define genius. If you expect high intellectual definitions, no. If you're talking a specific uncanny ability, yes. The dude has a way of getting to you.
The fact you reduced him to a 'pulp writer' is rather a tell, to which i say 'let them fuckin' trees fall'
Never read any author who gets human behavior more so than King. His characters are relatable, understandable. He's especially good with children. Kinda freaky how well I remember my childhood in his characters. Doesn't seem too hot with teens, skips over them to adults.
Pratchett is a very, very close second with his Discworld books. He writes about human behavior on a larger scale though, King's characters are more individual.
I will certainly agree with you that King has a knack of, well, not scaring me, but making me feel uncomfortable in a way that not too many authors do. My soul feels "fouled" after reading one of his books.
But feelings aside, he skimps on substance. Take "Mr Mercedes" for an example. Are we really supposed to accept a near-unified public blame and hatred placed on a car owner because she left keys in the ignition? It's a big part of the plot, and it's just plain silly.
As to the "Pulp" label, it is not denigrating in my mind at all, but just speaks to the common audience and lurid or sensational subject matter. I think Stephen King fits the bill. Along with Dashell Hammett, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, H.P. Lovecraft, H.G. Wells, and many more notable authors.
I honestly don't like Kubrick films. I tolerate 2001 A Space Odyssey, but that's about it. he might have been a genius when it came to his vision, but he was not a good director.
Adam Baldwin said on the set of full metal jacket, Kubrick was making them do take after take after take, and he finally asked Kubrick what he wanted, and his only direction was "act better". which is pretty fucking hypocritical since he's the director and he's not directing. and if you can't get a satisfactory performance out of Shelley Duvall without being an abusive fucking asshole, you're not a good director.