• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

King Vs Koontz

saliotthomas

saliotthomas

New Member
they both have good and bad point.both heavy-weight.both comercial

I find King more mysterious,enervingly sometime,book without end,cloudy..
but i think he is all together a better writer.

Koontz for his part as good ideas,efficent plots but sometime a very bad sens of humour,and his religious,moral undercover teaching unberable.
Like Phantom was very good,but the good guy bad.
 
i know that's a probleme i have(french and all)there in every forum a teacher like guy who find it his duty to reproche me.having read some of your post it doesn't affect me to much though! kiddo
 
King wins hands down. He's written a ton of books that just make the hair on the back of your neck stand up. Heck, I still check street drains for clowns and look around outside my car for frothing at the mouth mastiffs. :eek: Koontz did have Intensity, which was perhaps the best book of his in regards to scaring the living the daylights out of a person. My personal(non-scary) favorite of his, is Dark Rivers of the Heart. Just an opinion kiddos.:D
 
The only Dean Koontz book I enjoyed was Tick-Tock. I tried several of his other books and didn't like them all that much. In stark contrast, there are very few Stephen King novels I really dislike. Not to mention that King is much more prolific than Koontz, having written non-fiction and non-horror works that are just as readable and compelling as the material that he is best known for.

So yeah . . . I pick Stephen King.
 
Every Koontz book I've read (2 or 3 of them) has more or less bored me stiff. One-dimensional characters, predictable plots and preachy subtext. While my love for King has abated a little in recent years, I never had any for Koontz.
 
In my opinion, comparing King to Koontz is like comparing a peanut to a garbanzo bean. Sure they're both legumes, but I wouldn't put garbanzo beans on top of my ice cream. Though both writers are in the same genre, they are not (again, this is just my personal opinion) in the same class. King has written so many books that truly make your skin crawl and the depth of his characters and plots (though many endings are not as good as the trip to get to them) far outweigh anything that Koontz has even considered writing. I really enjoyed Koontz' Intensity, but I have not enjoyed any of his other works to date. I have only found one of King's books that I did not like so far.
 
knock out !

I agree with all of you,and as i said king is a far better writer-still in the horror types you should try Phantoms,it's really not bad
 
One thing I forgot to mention. The first King book I read was Christine - in which
Arnie dies at the end and Dennis and Leigh go separate ways
- and I thought that was a great if slightly bleak ending; turns out that's one of King's happier endings. Almost every one of his books ends in Misery... sorry, misery for everyone involved; even if they beat the monster, they have to live with the scars.

Every Koontz book I've read has had the righteous hero marry the single mother and live happily ever after.
 
saliotthomas said:
koontz is a great one for good moral and christianity
Click to expand...
Maybe this is why I've abhorred everything other than Intensity that I've read of his? I don't mind a subtle undertone (C.S. Lewis did this very well in my opinion), but I hate preachy books wearing masks of fiction and, more especially, horror.
 
I do really like some Koontz books - Phantoms is my favourite, Twilight Eyes, Mr Murder and the Moonlight Bay trilogy. But King has certainly been more prolific and consistent over the years. The Stand, IT, Needful Things, Desperation, The Dark Tower series, Salems Lot, The Shining, Pet Sematary etc etc. I enjoy both of their work.
 
I think they are very different and not really ripe for comparison. All of King's books are still in print, whereas loads of Koontz's have been forgotten about, some even under his own name. Too much of a muchness, no doubt, and nothing spectacular to recommend them.

Koontz is a complete hack. King is much better - and varied - at what he does and, at least, wants to write something beyond his means. I'd let King win this one, but I doubt he'd make it beyond the next round.
 
These are radically different writers. I have read both but for pure horror that can still make you laugh its SK all the way. His stories get tense, then tenser then BOOM, youre in the middle of an unimaginable situation , but his underlying sense of humorous reality is still there. SK is a class by himself. DK is fine and I have enjoyed some of his characters (Odd Thomas, for example).
 
I first like the presence of Elvis as a gost in odd thomas,but after the third you get tired of it.Sinatra his suppose to replace him in the next-god help us !!!
 
The only Koontz book I enjoyed is Watchers. I have struggled through so many of his others, only to give up on the majority of them. Now I don't even bother. :rolleyes: Not only is Stephen King a better writer, he is also a better storyteller. Koontz's books are full of sweet little moralistic preachings, that just make me roll my eyes, because they are so contrived. :rolleyes:
 
I liked King's earlier stuff.

I enjoy Koontz, some stuff better then others. He has a new Odd Thomas book coming out later this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top