All in all, I don’t regret reading the seven-hundred pages of Dreamcatcher.In an author's note to this novel, the first he's written since his near-fatal accident, King allows that he wrote the first draft of the book by hand.

A huge part of the plot revolves around mind-reading, which I always find a fascinating subject. Dreamcatcher is well written, engaging, and has a terrific nail-biter of an ending. Dreamcatcher pushes this boundary.Īlthough I didn’t always enjoy the direction of the story (US army themes are just not my cup of tea), I loved the journey these characters go through. Zombie brains, sure, but poo is a topic not discussed. This manifests itself in how in not a single apocalyptic story, anyone worries about toilet paper. A focus on bodily functions is childish, and not suited for adults. The way society works, we see books that deal with things like farts as immature. Giving them the nickname of shit-weasels. In this book, aliens bury themselves in the digestive system of humans – and they come out again too. I’ve always appreciated that King calls a cow a cow, and if a story involves pee/poo/vomit/blood/brain goo, he will tell you so. It doesn’t help that, though quite an interesting concept, the procreation of the aliens is just icky. The time of green men with big heads has passed, and the market of Dreamcatcher with it. No one is interested in aliens any more, at least not like this. The problem with this subject is that it seems so fake, so done, and so last century. Imagine a 90s Hollywood movie with aliens – Dreamcatcher is exactly that, in book form. The beings are not very friendly, and the US army makes an appearance. Dreamcatcher deals with an UFO that lands on American soil. It’s just not something you’d expect from the Stephen King stereotype – the archetypical horror writer. Something that doesn’t appeal to many people, is that Dreamcatcher is old-school science-fiction. It’s threat is more direct, the execution more ruthless and realistic. Yet Dreamcatcher doesn’t feel the same as It – it’s much more concrete where It seemed whimsical. On one hand we have this motif we’ve seen before – children who do something important in their childhood which ties together with some happening in their adulthood. This year’s trip is different – they see moving lights, get stuck in a terrible snow-storm, and meet someone who is… not entirely right.ĭreamcatcher is a strange book. They go on an annual hunting trip, but barely speak throughout the year. It’s not well loved, but as per my usual reaction with King’s books, I still found plenty of enjoyment in Dreamcatcher.įive boys from Derry grow up to be four guys. At seven-hundred pages, it can hardly be called little, but in the oeuvre of Stephen King it hardly registers as a small blip. Dreamcatcher is kind of an odd little ducky.

Dreamcatcher by stephen king