Clearly, you're reading the wrong King; that very seldom happens in his work. In fact, the book I think of first that has an explosion has it happen about two thirds of the way in and arguably gets to the most important stuff after the explosion. In fact, I'm quite fond of King myself. For one, I think he's got a good knack for phrases. I think that he understands the inherent morality of the horror genre. I think he knows the history of whatever genre he happens to be writing in--not always horror--and respects it. Oh, there are some books we can do without--mostly what I call the "cocaine books," for reasons that are obvious to anyone who knows the man's history. However, most of his books actually spend a fair amount of time exploring what happens after the triumph over the villain. The Eyes of the Dragon, Bag of Bones, and The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon are good for that, and I think one of the greatest endings in the history of literature is the ending of The Shawshank Redemption. Phenomenal last lines.
Originally Posted by raptorthang
I can deal with stereotypes; everyone fits at least one in some way, even if it isn't the stereotype of their particular self-identified group. If the character is a cookie-cutter character, however, I'm done. If I can tell by reading the first dozen pages or so exactly what everyone is like and exactly what everyone will do, I'm done. If I spend the first dozen or so pages wanting to track down either character or author and kick them, I'm done. If I can't remember any character's name five minutes after setting down the book, I'm done.
If the vampires glitter . . . .
"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"
"You can't erase icing."
"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"