I rather have a good movie, thank you very much.
For example, lets look at THE DEAD ZONE novel of his. You have an opening with the hero as a kid getting his psychic powers, and eventual villain revealed to be a rotten ambitious son of a bitch. King goes on and on with the in-depth backstory of all these characters, relevant or not.
As David Cronenberg's terrific movie showed, you don't need all that bullshit.
"The Dead Zone" was a wonderful novel, Ronnie. Those backstories made you care about John and Sarah, and made you loathe Stillson. They were essential to advancing the plot. While I agree that sometimes King's novels are way too long and the backstories aren't really essential, "The Dead Zone" isn't one of them.
And you said it yourself, you're a bigger film fan than book fan, which is fine. But it leaves you with a clear bias against the written word
.
