Loading
The Dead Zone
Summary
Never before on audio! A #1 national bestseller about a man who wakes up from a five-year coma able to see people's futures and the terrible fate awaiting mankind in The Dead Zone-a "compulsive page-turner" (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution).
Johnny Smith awakens from a five-year coma after his car accident and discovers that he can see people's futures and pasts when he touches them. Many consider his talent a gift; Johnny feels cursed. His fiancé married another man during his coma and people clamor for him to solve their problems.
When Johnny has a disturbing vision after he shakes the hand of an ambitious and amoral politician, he must decide if he should take drastic action to change the future. The Dead Zone is a "faultlessly paced…continuously engrossing" (Los Angeles Times) novel of second sight.
Read on the Scribd mobile app
Download the free Scribd mobile app to read anytime, anywhere.
Reviews
I expected more from King.
Sometimes drawn out, and some of the characters were more evil than necessary, but I enjoyed it overall.
This was the very first Stephen King book I ever read (at age 12, btw), and I'm surprised I never re-read it until now. It's the one that got me hooked on King- - and I mean HOOKED. Yet, I never revisited this one....
I saw that it was recently released inn audio, with James Franco reading it. I was convinced: time tho luck this baby up again! So glad I did! It's even better than I had remembered, plus Franco brings such richness to the story with his reading of it! I highly recommend this book to you, even (especially?) if you're not a King fan.... it's different from his usual fare.
I saw that it was recently released inn audio, with James Franco reading it. I was convinced: time tho luck this baby up again! So glad I did! It's even better than I had remembered, plus Franco brings such richness to the story with his reading of it! I highly recommend this book to you, even (especially?) if you're not a King fan.... it's different from his usual fare.
I always love returning to Stephen King. This was one of his earlier novels and I had not heard too much about ti. Apparently there was a movie made out of it many years ago. I think this story has aged well. It is classic King with his ability to tell a story, foreshadow, and really get into the minds of his characters. This novel follows a person with supposed psychic abilities, and while fantastical, the story does seem plausible. I enjoyed the read.
There are probably some faults with this book, but I easily love it the best out of all of my Stephen King favourites so I had to rate it as "amazing".
I still remember the first (of many, many, many) time that I read it and how it got me so emotionally worked up that I wanted to shake characters and shout in their faces "just believe him! Why don't you believe him?"
Frustrating, emotional, gripping, and overall a book that left me better off than it found me.
I still remember the first (of many, many, many) time that I read it and how it got me so emotionally worked up that I wanted to shake characters and shout in their faces "just believe him! Why don't you believe him?"
Frustrating, emotional, gripping, and overall a book that left me better off than it found me.
Yeah...Stephen King is a good writer. Amazing, actually. I was disappointed by the ending of this book. Don't get me wrong. I had a better time reading this than trying to look for something to watch on TV. The ending just didn't sit right with me.
I like King's early novels, I feel they're the best in his catalog. That being said, I was quite disappointed with The Dead Zone. The storyline felt all over the place - nothing held my interest throughout the book.
This novel is not so much horror as it is, say, maybe suspense ... if you could even call it that.
I found The Dead Zone to be very slow, short of boring. And I can remember the feeling of wanting to abandon it midway through, but I dislike starting something and not finishing it, so I trekked on...
Maybe for some The Dead Zone would be a great and cozy read, but the writing, as far as I'm concerned, is "uncharacteristic" of King.
I found The Dead Zone to be very slow, short of boring. And I can remember the feeling of wanting to abandon it midway through, but I dislike starting something and not finishing it, so I trekked on...
Maybe for some The Dead Zone would be a great and cozy read, but the writing, as far as I'm concerned, is "uncharacteristic" of King.
A coma patient awakens after several years and finds that he can see future events just by touching people. He didn't ask for this gift and he doesn't want it! A later TV series was made from this book with all the characters created by Stephen King. The fist couple of seasons stayed close to the book but began to take on a life of their own in later seasons.
It has been ages since I read this book and that was when I only read my books translated in Dutch. I am glad I now have an English copy and planning to read it one day again.
Although a huge fan of King's work, I couldn't really get into this book and didn't feel i could connect with the main character. In the film version, Christopher Walken takes the lead and I have to admit that I enjoyed that more than the book on first reading it.
After watching a few episodes of the television show (and a glimpse of the movie with Christopher Walken and director David Cronenberg) I already knew much of what happened in this book story. So why read it? Because, adaptation issues aside, it's still a Stephen King book and he's not the kind of writer who delivers a bad book. Sure, they may not be all perfect, but there's always a lot of good qualities in them.
THE DEAD ZONE has very few, if any, things against it. It's well written, well developed and well plotted. The main story doesn't differ much from what happens in the movie, but it would be impossible to fit everything that happened in an almost 500 pages novel into a movie with less than two hours. Adapting a movie usually requires that the unessential aspects be trimmed and that's fine if you don't read the book prior to watching the movie. Or if you're kind the person who can separate one thing from the other, without making futile comparisons.
Everything that isn't in the movies or in the TV series is not essential to the story. True. Stephen King could easily have told the same story without those small secondary story lines. But it's those story lines, those unnecessary peaks at the characters that make like Stephen King so much. He could have written THE DEAD ZONE without them, but it would not have been the same book. Nor as good.
THE DEAD ZONE has very few, if any, things against it. It's well written, well developed and well plotted. The main story doesn't differ much from what happens in the movie, but it would be impossible to fit everything that happened in an almost 500 pages novel into a movie with less than two hours. Adapting a movie usually requires that the unessential aspects be trimmed and that's fine if you don't read the book prior to watching the movie. Or if you're kind the person who can separate one thing from the other, without making futile comparisons.
Everything that isn't in the movies or in the TV series is not essential to the story. True. Stephen King could easily have told the same story without those small secondary story lines. But it's those story lines, those unnecessary peaks at the characters that make like Stephen King so much. He could have written THE DEAD ZONE without them, but it would not have been the same book. Nor as good.
A quick, easy read. I enjoyed how King considered the moral and societal implications of clairvoyance rather than just taking for granted that it would be accepted and appreciated. Tidily ended.
King's foray into the thriller genre isn't as successful as his earlier titles. It's talky and dense, but with the sharp characterizations king is known for.
King just started hitting his stridewith tthis story about a man given the gift of insight and prenostacation. He sees a future candidate for the U.S. presidency who will start WWIII and take out humanity.
Funny thing? The face on the cover of my copy (published in 1980) looks eerily like Anthony Michael Hall who would portray Johnny in the TV series (which I also like) MANY MANY years later. Hmmmm....
I will probably attract the attention of the CIA or the Secret Service if I intimate that it would be beneficial for all humankind if John Smith, the protagonist of Stephen King's The Dead Zone, had occasion to shake the hand of our current president. So I'm not going to suggest that. I will, however, suggest that this is a tightly-crafted novel that exemplifies some of King's best work. And that the 1970's Vietnam/Nixon impeachment/Watergate backdrop makes for a setting that resonates in today's political climate.
This was my first Stephen King book and although he isn't one of my favourtie authors I still think he is good. I liked the book. There were some quite creepy moments but like most of his books it wasn't exactly action packed...more like...subtle action...oh I dunno...heehee
As with many of King's works, I find his books that deal with real people to be far scarier and more entertaining than the books that involve supernatural (and many times silly) monsters and beings. Gerald's Game, Dolores Claiborne, The Shining, Misery are terrifying without being ridiculous.
The first half of the book is rather slow to get going, focusing mainly on Johnny's relationship with his parents and Sarah, a woman he loved just before the crash. I really like the Wheel of Fortune scene at the fair though, and how it becomes a recurring symbol. This heat up when he tracks down Frank Dodd, but the investigation is over rather abruptly. Nevertheless, King does a fine job plotting here, with Frank Dodd and the restaurant fire premonition leading Johnny to the inevitable conclusion that he must assassinate Greg Stillson for the great good of the world. Johnny is tormented by his psychic gift and the way it distances him from other people, haunted by his mother's words that God has a mission for him to do.
For some reason, my recollection of reading this book before was very vague. Therefore, I went into the rereading process without knowing what to expect at all. Boy, was I surprised. After finishing it, I think that The Dead Zone is one of King's best novels.The character development is superb and I think that Johnny Smith is possibly one of King's best developed characters. We also spend considerable time with his family members and the principle villains and these characters are all strongly developed and quirky in their own ways.The story, while not action packed, takes the reader completely into the world of Johnny Smith, a regular guy with a bit of psychic ability and some incredibly bad luck. A big part of the storyline revolves around the political climate of the 70's but it is written in such a way that it stays interesting throughout. I honestly did not experience any moments of boredom with the story.As I'm finding with several King books that I've re-read lately, The Dead Zone is not really a horror novel at all. There's a little bit of gore and graphic violence and of course King's choice of language is a bit colorful at times, but really this is a good suspense story with a bit of politics and psychic powers thrown in for good measure.All in all a GREAT novel. I highly recommend it.
Interesting concept...seeing the future after waking up from a coma. I wonder if it has something to do with the time while you were a vegetable and your brain not functioning, that when you come out of it you mind is doing double time to make up for all the time lost. Think of all the possibilities!
Not being either a Stephen King or a Horror fan I haven't read many of his books. However having started watching the series (I love the satelite sometimes - it's on SciFi) I had this intense urge to find out how the series compared with the book. There are definite links, those links made by a fan when he's using a book as a starting block and running from there. I would suspect that the differences should start to make themselves more evident in the next couple of episodes. The first episode was very derivative - even down to the murderer and other events. (Deirdre trying hard not to do spoilers on either)It is an interesting read, even if the stress on John Smith is unremitting.
This is one of Stephen King's better books.If you were transmitted back in time to 1910, would you kill Adolf Hitler? That's the premise this book works off of. Fascinating novel.
I imagine I must have identified with the main character, as this book really got to me (it's had remarkably little effect on people I've recommended it to, mind). It's a reasonably simple plot: a man wakes from a long-term coma to find he has mental powers, but Stephen King's masterful writing ability puts it way above the average tale. I believed every minute of it, and was literally shaking at the conclusion.
For Goodreads: 2.5 stars.
I think I dislike this book a little more every time I read it. The Dead Zone is, for the most part, boring setups that lead to lackluster climaxes, if they can be called climaxes at all. Maybe "payoffs" would be a better word... But I think what I dislike the most about this book is all the political mumbo jumbo. I simply don't give a shit about politics, and this book is full of it. If Johnny Smith isn't thinking about how shitty he has it, he's ruminating on the political climate. This is purely subjective, of course, because if you dig your stories dredged in government, battered in legislature, and fried in policy then this book is definitely for you.
Honestly, The Dead Zone never had a chance. Not this time around at least. Especially coming off my reread of King's exceptional third outing, The Shining. (In case you're wondering, I skipped The Stand because I just reread it last year.) I suppose The Dead Zone is a perfect example of that old saying: They can't all be winners. King came out the gate with five fantastic novels. He was bound to lay a stinker on the world eventually.
I do enjoy the first 140 or so pages of this book, but everything's downhill from there. King had some terrific characters, but it seems as if he didn't really know what do with them once they were established. It's funny, because the book feels more like a collection of interconnected short stories than it does a novel.
Notes on the film and television adaptations: I love Christopher Walken. He's one of my favorite actors. But I've never been able to finish the film adaptation of this book. It bores me to sleep every time. Shit's better than L-tryptophan, son! And the TV series with that dude from Weird Science? All I saw of that were the commercials. I suppose this story just doesn't pique my interest. I do believe this is the final time I'm reading this one. Maybe...
Notable names:
Jerusalem's Lot (Obvious)
Gendron (used throughout the King-verse)
Richard Dees (the despicable main character of King's short story "The Night Flier")
Inside View (a gossip rag like The Enquirer that shows up quite bit inside the King-verse. The aforementioned Richard Dees is a headhunter for said magazine.)
Carrie (mentioned as a book instead of a person)
And, of course, Castle Rock (No-brainer)
In summation: One of my bottom five when it comes to King's books, right down there with Wizard and Glass and the absolutely terrible From a Buick 8. I'm definitely not looking forward to my reread of the latter.
On to Firestarter, which I don't remember at all. I read this one in my teens and haven't read it since. I'm looking forward to it because I don't remember hating it and I dig the movie adaptation very much.
I think I dislike this book a little more every time I read it. The Dead Zone is, for the most part, boring setups that lead to lackluster climaxes, if they can be called climaxes at all. Maybe "payoffs" would be a better word... But I think what I dislike the most about this book is all the political mumbo jumbo. I simply don't give a shit about politics, and this book is full of it. If Johnny Smith isn't thinking about how shitty he has it, he's ruminating on the political climate. This is purely subjective, of course, because if you dig your stories dredged in government, battered in legislature, and fried in policy then this book is definitely for you.
Honestly, The Dead Zone never had a chance. Not this time around at least. Especially coming off my reread of King's exceptional third outing, The Shining. (In case you're wondering, I skipped The Stand because I just reread it last year.) I suppose The Dead Zone is a perfect example of that old saying: They can't all be winners. King came out the gate with five fantastic novels. He was bound to lay a stinker on the world eventually.
I do enjoy the first 140 or so pages of this book, but everything's downhill from there. King had some terrific characters, but it seems as if he didn't really know what do with them once they were established. It's funny, because the book feels more like a collection of interconnected short stories than it does a novel.
Notes on the film and television adaptations: I love Christopher Walken. He's one of my favorite actors. But I've never been able to finish the film adaptation of this book. It bores me to sleep every time. Shit's better than L-tryptophan, son! And the TV series with that dude from Weird Science? All I saw of that were the commercials. I suppose this story just doesn't pique my interest. I do believe this is the final time I'm reading this one. Maybe...
Notable names:
Jerusalem's Lot (Obvious)
Gendron (used throughout the King-verse)
Richard Dees (the despicable main character of King's short story "The Night Flier")
Inside View (a gossip rag like The Enquirer that shows up quite bit inside the King-verse. The aforementioned Richard Dees is a headhunter for said magazine.)
Carrie (mentioned as a book instead of a person)
And, of course, Castle Rock (No-brainer)
In summation: One of my bottom five when it comes to King's books, right down there with Wizard and Glass and the absolutely terrible From a Buick 8. I'm definitely not looking forward to my reread of the latter.
On to Firestarter, which I don't remember at all. I read this one in my teens and haven't read it since. I'm looking forward to it because I don't remember hating it and I dig the movie adaptation very much.
I saw the movie and disliked it, so I was sure the book would be as much of a bore as the movie. I was wrong!Stephen King has a way with words that cannot be duplicated or adapted to the big screen. He knows how to weave a story and word it perfectly.As weird as he is, he's amazing. He has a way of stirring up all of my emotions and, in my opinion, that is what makes an artist great.
There is a lot of heartache and misery in this book. But pretty decent.
This was my favourite King book for a long time until I decided to re-read it and couldn't get into it again. Loved in my 20's but one of those great memories that it is perhaps better not to go back to
One of King's best. Creepy, compelling and even tragic.