King is my favorite author, hands down, but I don't understand why so many people seem to look down at Koontz. If we're really being honest, Koontz would be much more well regarded if it weren't for the fact that he's so frequently directly compared to King, and Stephen King is a one-of-a-kind, once in a lifetime literary master. Absent the comparison to King, the bulk of Koontz's work holds up quite well. It's entertaining writing with relatable characters that are easy for become invested in. Hell, some of his ideas were not only terrifyingly imaginative, they were also oddly accurate predictions of the future. Demon Seed is uniquely chilling in that it was almost comically over the top with its seemingly ridiculous technology that has since very much become a reality.
I would also argue that Koontz has had a few film adaptations that ended up better than the King adaptations of their time. Phantoms, Watchers, Servants of Twilight, Whispers, Intensity, and Mr. Murder were all pretty great.
Koontz has a great track record. He simply suffers from living in the shadow of a modern day colossus like King. Absent the comparison, I feel Koontz would be much more favorably viewed.
I’ve read a couple of Dean’s books and I don’t regret it, but also didn’t find them that good.
Outside a couple of disappointments, everything I’ve read from King has ranged from really good (Salems lot, tommyknockers, etc) to outstanding (the dark tower series, the tailsman).
One of my neighbors named their daughter "Stormy" after Odd Thomas's >!dead!< girlfriend. When I asked him if he and his wife were big fans of the books, he said that they'd never read the books before. But they'd seen the movie.
He told me this several years ago and it still annoys me to this day.
