Yes, the book was very like the movie ( which came later, of course, I think he may even have written the screenplay?). But there are small scenes here and there, like rape scenes which are hinted at in the book but not mentioned I think at all in the movie.
Like the person above wrote, the horror here is in knowing you're innocent, and even finding out after years the proof, only to have a corrupt warden destroy all the evidence to keep you inside for longer.
An excellent novella. The other 3 in the same book also were good, another was made into a movie, too.
2007-06-12 00:29:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by curious239 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
A lot of people are surprised Stephen King wrote that---he also wrote "Stand By Me/The Body". He's not a straight up gory slash horror writer. I find him to be quite intelligent, realistic, and often times, uplifting :)
Anyway, I have read Shawshank Redemption. And there a few a changes, (as always) but for the most part, it's one of the best screen adaptations I have ever seen. At quite a few parts, the movie goes word for word with the story, a rarity in film.
So nope, they didn't cut out any huge parts of the story (surprisingly) and there was no horror---unless you count prison as a horror ;)
Hope that helps :)
2007-06-12 07:25:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Calliope 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes and I loved it. It was a few years ago, but if I remember rightly it was a short story with a slightly different title to the film. I think it was called 'Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption.
Despite the fact that I liked the book I think this is one of the few examples of the film actually being better. Both Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman were excellent.
Still, it's certainly worth reading.
2007-06-12 12:17:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by shy_voo 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The Shawshank Redemption was actually a short story or novella by Stephen King and not released as a stand alone book (unless it's been put out recently as such).
Stephen King will eventually rank up there with Dickens and other classic writers. The quality of his writing and the depth of his work is unique and diverse and unfortunately he is not given the respect he deserves by literary critics. He has range and I always love it when I see people get that.!
2007-06-12 07:33:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jackie Oh! 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
King isn't ALL about horror. The movie is based on one of his short stories called "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption." It's in a book called Different Seasons, which also has the story called "The Body" that the movie "Stand by Me" was based on. As far as I can remember, Shawshank follows the original story fairly closely.
2007-06-12 07:25:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nasubi 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I enjoyed both films but give me a book anytime,especially Stephen King my fave..............i first read the short story Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption in Kings book Different Seasons which was published in 1983.
2007-06-12 07:30:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Tanya 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i dont think a fiilm can ever capture the full horror of a king novel, at least not the less obvious horrors. i think being incarcerated for a crime you didnt commit and spending 25 years digging away at a wall to escaope is pretty damn horrific myself. Have you read the long walk (under the name richard bachman) now that is horror at its best, yet no monsters vampires or haunted hotels.
2007-06-12 07:21:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by louie3 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have read the book and seen the film too and i agree with you,it was nothing like King.but i don't remember which came first;the book or the film.
2007-06-12 07:22:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by juejoe4 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I haven't read the books, but they sure were good movies
2007-06-12 07:24:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by txcatwoman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I havent but thanks for the idea, my next book.
2007-06-12 07:20:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋