I’m no bibliophile, but I’ve read a lot of books and recently while discussing the “book was better” trope of horror movies, we talked about how it is pretty common knowledge that Stephen King hated Stanley Kubrick’s take on his story of “The Shining”. Not because it was better, but because Kubrick fundamentally changed the story.
I was asked if I’d ever heard about Stephen King being upset over other screen-versions of his books, and I admitted that I don’t know. I’ve read a lot of Stephen King, but not everything. It’s rare that the movie duplicates the flow of the book, and in some cases there are elements of a book that just do not translate to film and have to be either forced via creative effects and bad CGI or eliminated altogether.
1990’s It miniseries was infamous for its unintentionally hilarious spider monster at the time of release, which made for a fairly disheartening final boss after all the solid scares that Pennywise’s Tim Curry clown form offered earlier in the show.
Screenrant
I did mention one huge problem I’ve had over the years with a Stephen King adaptation that I’ve never heard about King having issues with. That’s the omission of Norma Crandall from both Pet Sematary movies.
Here be spoilers for anyone who’s never seen the Pet Sematary movies or read the book
A lot of the narrative of Pet Sematary centers on the relationship between Louis and Jud.
While Louis’ wife Rachel plays a pretty significant role (and has her own terrifying side-story), Jud’s wife, Norma, barely has any lines. The character seems hollow without much backstory apart from being a kindly old southern woman that bakes and doesn’t abide foul language.
Looka this!’ And they all stop and look. And goddamn if she ain’t—”
Norma Crandall does not abide foul language
“Jud,” Norma said warningly.
“Sorry, dear; I get carried away yarning, you know that.”
“I guess you do,” she said.
But, I’ve long maintained that eliminating Norma’s character from the films was a horrible decision. In the book – Louis saves Norma’s life on Halloween night after she has a heart attack while handing out treats to Ellie and some friends. Louis happened to be there and moved quickly to assist. When Louis called the hospital to check on her the following day, Norma’s doctor told him, “I wouldn’t even call it a minor myocardial infarction… No scarring. She owes you a hell of a lot, Dr. Creed.“
Jud was so grateful to Louis that when, a month later, the Creed’s cat was run down in the country road, Jud told him the secret of the Micmac burying ground. The place beyond the Pet Sematary.
I think Jud knew the evil he was potentially unleashing by introducing Louis to that power, but he also felt that he owed Louis payment in kind. Jud’s decision to take Louis to the Micmac burying ground to bury Church seems less opportunistic and more like a sincere (although misguided) gift Jud is offering Louis to pay him back.
Without Norma, Jud’s decision to take Louis to the Micmac burying ground could be seen as a conscious decision to expose Louis and his family to the evil that lays buried there. Almost like Jud was in on the “joke” and Church’s death was just the excuse he needed to “infect” the Creed’s.
Without Norma, Jud comes off as an old man biding his time till he has an excuse to perpetuate the evil of the burying ground.
So, there you have it. I’m not normally one of those people that dissect books and I acknowledge that the book is nearly always superior to the film adaptation, but the omission of Norma Crandall in the Pet Sematary adaptations, to me, is tantamount to the fundamental changes Kubrick made to “The Shining”. It may be a hot-take, but it’s mine.