Podcast Summary: The Book Review – "Stephen King Isn't Always Scary" (with Sean Fennessey)
Host: Gilbert Cruz (New York Times Book Review)
Guest: Sean Fennessey (co-host of The Big Picture podcast)
Date: October 17, 2025
Main Theme:
This episode explores the enduring appeal and adaptability of Stephen King’s work for film—especially focusing on his non-horror stories and the diverse ways King’s writing has resonated in cinema beyond just the scares.
Episode Overview
Gilbert Cruz welcomes film commentator and fellow Stephen King enthusiast Sean Fennessey to examine why King's stories, especially the less traditionally "scary" ones, have captivated both Hollywood and audiences for decades. They trace King’s legacy, discuss key film adaptations, unpack the screen potential in his writing style, and analyze what makes King’s stories work across genres and eras.
Key Discussion Points and Insights
1. Why is Stephen King’s Work So Frequently Adapted?
[02:50]
- King’s stories are described as “the most unkillable IP short of Greek myths at this point” (Sean Fennessey).
- The emotional comfort, cinematic prose, and adaptable nature of King’s work make it perfect for films.
- “He writes in a very cinematic style...makes you feel like you are intimately connected to the characters and the story. And it's just so darn adaptable. And also, the man's written 10,000 books.” (C – Sean, 03:30)
[03:53]
- King’s early experiences and influences—classic horror, sci-fi, and cinema—laid a foundation for his storytelling techniques.
- He was naturally suited to film adaptation because “even early on, there was the idea that he was writing as someone who grew up watching movies himself.” (B – Gilbert, 04:03)
2. The Cinematic Mind of King: Influence and Context
[04:40]
- King’s blend of pop sci-fi and intense horror is attributed to influences like Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson, and films like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.
- “If you think about those two things smashed together, of course that guy’s gonna make stuff that feels like a movie.” (C – Sean, 05:00)
[07:03]
- King emerged during a cultural moment rich with horror in publishing and cinema; his early success was propelled by both paperback and movie hits, like Carrie.
3. A Brief History of King Film Adaptations
- Early Era: Esteemed directors—Brian De Palma, Stanley Kubrick, Tobe Hooper, John Carpenter—adapted King, merging “transgressive and commercial” appeal. (C – Sean, 08:20)
- 80s Boom and Bust: The volume of adaptations led to mixed quality: “He was known for overwhelming the market and a lot of the stuff was bad.” (B – Gilbert, 09:01)
- Films like Children of the Corn and Firestarter are cited as lesser works, illustrating the challenges of overexposure.
4. Stand By Me (1986): The Game Changer
[09:39]
- Seen as King’s definitive “non-horror” adaptation, reshaping his reputation.
- “It meant that he wasn’t strictly defined by the box of horror convention.” (C – Sean, 09:39)
- Stand By Me is praised for its authentic depiction of childhood: “I just love to hear kids curse in movies. And there's so much profanity that's true. I cannot wait to show my child this movie.” (B – Gilbert, 13:00)
[13:47]
- The film’s legacy includes inspiring Castle Rock Entertainment (named after King’s fictional town).
- “Castle Rock Entertainment is named after the town in this book, which is named after a location in Lord of the Flies, which is Stephen King’s favorite book.” (B – 13:47)
5. King’s Genre Versatility: Thrillers, Sci-fi, and Beyond
[15:25]
- Gilbert notes: “He is a cross-genre [storyteller]. We think of him as horror, but he does non-horror stuff. He does thrillers, detective stories, westerns, fantasies, and he does sci-fi.”
The Running Man (1987):
- An early “game show dystopia” with social commentary, now considered a precursor to films like The Hunger Games.
- “It’s a game show movie about survival. It feels very much like his Paddy Chayefsky movie about people who are plunged into this active 24-hour livestream game show.” (C – Sean, 16:56)
[19:22]
- The upcoming Edgar Wright adaptation is discussed, with the expectation that it will reflect the spirit of King’s original novel more faithfully than the Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle.
6. King’s Use of Pseudonym Richard Bachman
[21:20]
- Bachman books (& their adaptations): Thinner, Rage (unfilmed), The Long Walk, Road Work, and The Running Man.
- The alias allowed King to publish more work and test his broader appeal. “The main reason [for Bachman] was he was producing so much work...his publisher was like, you can't keep putting more books out under the name Stephen King.” (B – 22:06)
7. Shawshank Redemption (1994): The Sentimental King
[25:08]
- Shawshank Redemption—adapted from Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption—is arguably the most beloved King adaptation, despite not being a hit on theatrical release.
- “You have to be a dead eyed alien to not have a reaction to this movie. At least it's beautifully made.” (C – Sean, 27:47)
[29:15]
- Discussion of Shawshank’s position as possibly the “quintessential King movie” due to its broad, crowd-pleasing appeal.
“This is a movie with absolute exaltation at its conclusion. It is literally we won. And I think that’s part of the reason why it is so powerful for people.”
—Sean Fennessey [30:26]
8. Other Notable Non-Horror Adaptations
Dolores Claiborne (1995)
[33:24]
- A psychological thriller with no supernatural elements, rooted in trauma and “originating incident.”
- “There's a lot of originating incident that informs the psychology of the characters...even though there's nothing supernatural...it does feel very tightly rooted in a lot of his other work.” (C – Sean, 34:25)
- Noted for its strong performances (Kathy Bates) and effective changes from the source material (script by Tony Gilroy).
The Green Mile (1999)
[37:31]
- Serial novel, then film by Frank Darabont. A commercial hit, but now less culturally resonant.
- “I don't really feel like this movie has a huge legacy. I could be wrong. There could be someone...screaming, ‘no, the Green Mile is my favorite film of all time.’ How dare you?...But I don't think this movie has a terribly deep legacy at this point.” (C – Sean, 40:33)
- Noted for its sentimentality and episodic structure.
9. Recent King Adaptations (2020s)
Life of Chuck (2025, dir. Mike Flanagan)
[42:59]; [44:49]
- Adapted from the 2020 story; “doesn’t feel like any movie I’ve ever seen.”
- Highly faithful, deeply sentimental: “[Mike Flanagan] just brought it straight to the screen.” (B – 44:49)
- “I couldn't really figure out what it was the entire way through...I do think there's a lot of things about it that don't work, but that doesn't mean it's unsuccessful for me.” (C – Sean, 45:30)
The Long Walk (2025, dir. Francis Lawrence)
- Adaptation of King’s earliest novel (under Bachman), with strong performances but a divisive ending.
- “Liked it quite a bit until I didn't...” (C – Sean, 48:06)
- The film’s premise—100 boys must walk until only one survives—serves as an allegory open to wide contemporary interpretation.
- “It is an unusually dark, bleak movie for the movies in 25.” (C – Sean, 50:15)
Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments
-
On King’s adaptability:
“The longevity is extraordinary...it’s because there is a sense of emotional comfort in what you’re getting from a Stephen King story.”
—Sean Fennessey [02:50] -
On King’s pop-cultural influence:
“Stand By Me...changed the game for King and what we expect from his films.”
—Gilbert Cruz [13:29] -
On sentimentality in King’s work:
“He would call himself a sentimentalist. I think he has actually said that.”
—Gilbert Cruz [30:22] -
On King as a craftsman of ideas:
“He just consistently conceives of cool concepts. And that's not...just not easy. He just has one of those minds that it feels like it's a conveyor belt and it never turns off.”
—Sean Fennessey [53:08]
Timestamps for Important Segments
- [02:50] – Why King’s stories keep getting adapted
- [04:40] – King’s cinematic mind and influences
- [09:39] – Stand By Me and King’s non-horror film legacy
- [15:25] – Cross-genre storytelling and The Running Man
- [21:20] – The Richard Bachman era and King’s publishing experiment
- [25:08] – The genesis and impact of The Shawshank Redemption
- [33:24] – Dolores Claiborne and trauma storytelling
- [37:31] – The serial publication and adaptation of The Green Mile
- [42:59] – New and recent King adaptations (Life of Chuck, The Long Walk)
- [51:53] – What makes a King story work for film?
- [53:08] – The unique “conveyor belt” of King’s big ideas
Conclusion: What Makes a Great King Adaptation?
- Great King stories balance “good situations surrounded by great characters.” (B – Gilbert, 51:53)
- King’s prose is “propulsive...an all-time page-turner,” making his work naturally suited to screen adaptation. (C – Sean, 51:53)
- “He just consistently conceives of cool concepts...that’s not easy.” – Sean Fennessey [53:08]
- King’s adaptability isn’t just about genre, but his instinct for emotional stakes, memorable hooks, and craft.
Final Thoughts
This episode expertly traverses Stephen King’s literary universe beyond horror. Cruz and Fennessey highlight the humanism, sentimentality, and enduring relevance of King’s work—demonstrating how his characters, situations, and cinematic mind continue to find new life on screen.
For listeners and readers alike, the legacy of Stephen King isn’t just about scares, but about the breadth of stories, ideas, and voices he brings to modern storytelling.