Kingdom Hospital

I really looked forward to it when I heard that King was planning to do this show'(my favourite author), I watched the danish mini series when it aired in Danish television in 1994, back then I was thrilled with the show, it was simply brilliant. I wasn't disappointed with this version, it's basically the same story, but with changed characters, I don't think there's a lack of humour but it's just different. There is only one thing I can complain about and that is Bruce Davison/Dr. Stegman is doing a fine job but he gets nowhere near Ernst-Hugo Järegård/Helmer. In "Riget" the funniest thing was the Swedish Dr. Helmer, who hated danes, treating everyone like they had no brain, Dr. Stegman is quite unpleasant but not as enjoyably nasty as Helmer was. R.I.P.

First of all, as a former college English teacher, let me comment on the disturbing lack of good grammar, spelling, punctuation, ability to construct thoughts into logical sentences, etc., that I found in many of the comments posted for this program. It is frightening. Even more frightening than "Kingdom Hospital" has turned out to be. I began watching the program, because it was by Stephen King. The first double episode was interesting, but went no where. I decided to watch it again to see what was going to develop. Again nothing. However, I have noticed a pattern in recent episodes: Each begins with the insertion of new characters and the hour is spent explaining how they fit in. In last week's episode, April 22, I finally found something worthwhile: the dog eating the heart that was to be transplanted into the obnoxious lawyer (a redundancy, I admit) and the anteater doing his form of surgery: "Out with the old; in with the new." I found it hysterically funny. I do have a personality fault, in that once I start to read a book, I can't put it down, no matter how bad it is. I have to keep reading, hoping that it improves, that it provides some kind of insight. I have wasted a lot of time reading bad books. I hope that isn't the case with this mini-series. I trust King will give us some kind of pay-off before we are done with the 15 hours. There are so many ways the subplots, the character developments, the various themes can develop that I admit, I'm hooked, and will keep watching.

I enjoyed Kingdom hospital very much but i felt at times it was a bit slow and a few episodes were made up of unnecessary events, that weren't crucial to the plot, although some were enjoyable. The first episode was fantastic at the start but then dragged on for an extra 20 minutes too long and the first 4 episodes had a good atmosphere. Then the series got a bit boring although mostly enjoyable to watch. I loved the episode 'Butter fingers' and the last two episodes were excellent bar the unsatisfying ending. At times the show was quite scary and certainly creepy but there's nothing that will haunt you forever here. The effects were quite good especially on the creepy anteater that roams the old kingdom. I recommend it if you like the Craig r Baxley and Stephen King combination and if you enjoyed this or want to watch a enjoyable series by the pair but not one as long then i recommend 'Rose red', 'Storm of the century' and 'the shining (1997)'.Once again there is some cool atmospheric music from Gary Chang although lots of the music is just the same piece playing throughout the series. I found it entertaining because or the plot and the mystery once you watch one show you want to see the next! All in all kingdom hospital is good, when you've got the time for it.

"Riget" is one of the most unique films you could ever hope to see. Flawed though it is, it never loses your attention, and you never cease wanting to see more of it, even after hours. "Stephen King's Kingdom Hospital" has the opposite effect. Having sat through three episodes now, I'm on the verge of wondering just why I'm wasting my time. The premiere episode was okay - the second somewhat less than that, and the third out and out awful. I finally figured it out. Whenever they stick to remaking "Riget," the thing works. Whenever they veer from that path, it completely fails. I always thought "Riget" was basically a comedy, with some moments of true horror, and lots of suspense. "SKKH" has none of this. Nothing's funny. Nothing's scary. Nothing's even suspenseful, because they don't give you enough plot for you to even follow. What's annoying is that all they had to do is REMAKE the original for the whole thing to work - but nooooo... they had to go and "improve" it with talking anteaters, singing nurses, and oh-so-cute references (I'm told) to various other Stephen King novels, as if maybe THAT will keep us interested. The sad thing is that "Riget" was never finished - the first series leaves you with an incredible cliffhanger, and the end of "Riget II" tops THAT - cutting off just as everything finally seems to be coming to a climax. If SKKH had followed the original, we could at last have looked forward to seeing the thing resolved (even if it is in English, with a completely different set of actors). Now... who cares? It's already so far from the original that it can't possibly even be following the same storyline as the original. What a missed opportunity - what a shame. Sigh. Well, at least we have the originals (and I urge all of you who might like the U.S. version to try and hunt up the original and see how it MIGHT have been).

Riget is indeed an excellent body of work. But the humor is based on Danish culture and might be lost on other viewers. If you are a Stephen King fan, then you'll probably enjoy his interpretation of that story. If you don't like Stephen King, then why watch his movies? Consider "Psycho" starring Ann Heche - a remake down to the very last word and camera angle of Hitchcock's "Psycho." What's the point? Or consider James Whale's original Frankenstein - an absolute horror masterpiece. Does that mean I shouldn't enjoy "Young Frankenstein" because it mocks the original? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. It brings this story to people who wouldn't otherwise watch it. Some people don't like dubbed movies - they ruin the atmosphere and subtitled movies invariably cause me to miss visual cues. I agree, Riget "Rules", absolutely. But this version has some interesting qualities and I enjoyed watching it. It's better on DVD without all the cuts on cable/dish.