Horror movie master John Carpenter is often outspoken about his views on his own films, but his thoughts about one of his ’80s cult classics are right on the money. Revolutionizing the slasher genre with 1978’s Halloween, Carpenter would kick off a career in horror that would see him set the gold standard for the 1980s, though he often jumped around to different genres. The Fog and The Thing proved he was a true master of his craft, and action comedies like Big Trouble in Little China were a showcase of his brilliant imagination.

Though Carpenter struggled to find consistent financial success throughout the bulk of his filmmaking career, the director/writer/composer is still recognized as one of the greatest minds in horror. Naturally, this has led to a revitalization of his entire catalog, with almost every one of his movies getting some sort of reᴀssessment through a modern lense. Prince of Darkness and In the Mouth of Madness have been rightly given their proper dues, but the filmmaker himself doesn’t always agree with fan sentiment concerning his own films. While they may sound harsh, Carpenter’s opinions about his own films are almost always correct.

John Carpenter Isn’t Entirely Convinced By Modern Reappraisals Of Christine

The Filmmaker Disagrees With Fans About His Stephen King Movie

One popular trend in horror today is to declare movies from the past as “hidden gems” or “cult classics”, and get them the attention that many fans feel they deserve. There are several notable examples in John Carpenter’s filmography, but none so popular as his 1983 adaptation of Stephen King’s Christine. The story of the haunted 1958 Plymouth Fury was a modest success upon release, but was not quite the box office smash that many other King adaptations would turn out to be.

When asked his thoughts concerning modern reappraisals of Christine, Carpenter bluntly said, “Oh come on, stop, that’s ridiculous.” Carpenter directed and did the score for the supernatural thriller, but he doesn’t view it as a cult-classic like many fans do. He didn’t completely disown the movie either, saying “It was fun. It’s not one of my favorites of mine, but that’s OK. It’s a good movie.” He clearly had fun making the movie, but he doesn’t hold it in the same regard as his more signature films.

John Carpenter Is Right About Christine

The Horror Master Knows What He’s Talking About

Not every film in a director’s filmography is going to be perfect, and I think John Carpenter was right when he countered modern reᴀssessments about Christine. When compared to Halloween or The Fog, Christine has less of the director’s fingerprints on the project. Besides The Thing (a remake), all of Carpenter’s films up to that point were original ideas from top to bottom. This allowed him to put his own touches on the story, and make the film unmistakably his. Christine doesn’t have that same feeling, due in large part to the fact that it’s a Stephen King adaptation.

Carpenter aptly pointed out that Christine is not one of his best. While it may deserve praise, it falls far short of Carpenter’s other films from the era, and it clearly has limits. The special effects are brilliant, and the score by Carpenter is quintessential ’80s, but the basic premise is a limiting factor that holds the film back. The novel is a slow-burning tale of possession, but the movie’s brisk 110-minute running time truncates things. Carpenter did the best he could with the material, but I think Christine was destined to be a second-rate horror movie.

Christine Is Still An Excellent Stephen King Movie, Even If It’s Not One Of John Carpenter’s Best

It’s Still One Of King’s Best Adaptations

Even if it isn’t one of John Carpenter’s best films, I still think that Christine deserves a place among the best Stephen King movies. First, the film manages to properly adapt the story without cutting too much or leaving too much in. While this seems like a simple task, King’s novels are often vexing for Hollywood screenwriters who get lost in their brilliant details. Christine is a surprisingly sprawling book with strong characters and a long arc that plays out across the novel, and the film pulls all the right elements.

The complete list of Stephen King novels adapted into movies in the 1980s includes:

It would be too simple to boil the story down to its “ghost car” essence, because it’s actually a tale about generational pain and the struggles of being an outcast. That is clearly understood in the movie itself, even if it doesn’t need several hours or hundreds of pages to get to the point. The King adaptations that succeed understand how to sift through the story to find the movie within, and Christine does so while also ratcheting up the tension to a higher gear for a more cinematic experience.