Useful information
Prime News delivers timely, accurate news and insights on global events, politics, business, and technology
Since it is one of the most popular novelists in the history of American literature, it is not surprising that the novels and short stories of Stephen King have adapted for cinema and television innumerable times since the publication of their first book, “Carrie”, in 1974. Obviously, we are all well aware of the many great films that have been easy to make their workers are so altered So easy that you have to be easier to be those that are so easy to be those that are so easy to be the ones that are so easy to be those that are so easy to be those that are so easy to be the ones that are so easy to be the ones that are so easy for adaptations. Meh-to-Good those that exist.
Yes, there was a great interpretation of “Hearts of Atlantis” starring Anthony Hopkins and a young Anton Yelchin, and, no, you didn’t imagine “The Night Flier” or “Mercy.” Television adaptations are particularly easy to forget because, well, most of them are completely and aggressively forgettable. A “Rose Red” miniseries really happened, and “Esperation” actually became a television movie. With a few exceptions, television has not done well for King. Even when King himself has been involved (for example, in the CBS All Access version of “The Stand”), the results have tended to be disappointing at best.
Therefore, you cannot blame the author for trying to shake things by adapting another person’s work for a change, what King did in 2004 with the “Kingdom Hospital.” Based on the horror miniseries “The Kingdom”, which Lars Von Trier created for Danish television in 1994 (and generated sequelae series in 1997 and 2022), originally intended to be a miniseries itself. But King saw potential in the material for an ongoing series, and ABC was probably also interested when the premiere of the program gave the network the highest grades for a dramatic debut that season.
If you are struggling to remember what happened in the series like me, you probably don’t remember why that second season never came to fruition. The answer will not surprise you.
Kingdom Hospital was not suitable for a king, much less the king of horror
Although king He told New York Times In 2004 that “Kingdom Hospital” was “what I like most of all the things I have done”, apparently the spectators did not agree. The series classifications fell from a cliff after the premiere, and lacked the critical support required to make ABC think that a second season could be worth it.
My memory of the series is that it was a long time in configuration and delivery. It is a pity because the medical procedure is a popular genre on American television and, therefore, full of potential if it comes from a strange perspective. Establishing a series in a populated hospital with a staff that belongs to a secret society seemed like a winning idea (after all, Von Trier worked wonderfully with him), but the program simply could not put your hooks in you. Even with a dynamite cast that had Bruce Davison, Ed Begley Jr. (a veteran of the hospital presentation given his work in “St. Osewhere”), and Diane Ladd, the series remained disappointedly tasteless.
King had a plan for a second season, and his staunch fans pressed on behalf of the series, but without critical support (the program has an average below the average Metacritic 47 score), there was simply not the possibility that ABC supported what also turned out to be a rather expensive show. Taking into account that each episode was directed by Craig R. Baxley, the underestimated action filmmaker responsible for “Action Jackson” (one of the 101 best action movies in the film) and “Stone Cold”, nobody wanted this series to work more than me. I was simply not in the cards. And now you can forget “Kingdom Hospital” that once again existed.
