AThose who have both seen the movie and read the book say that this is probably one of the closest adaptations yet of a Stephen King novel. Yet, there are some differences noted. Probably the biggest departure from the book was having Timothy Hutton play both Thad Beaumont and George Stark. In the book they were radically different physical types (one dark and thin, the other blond and muscular). Also, Stark's deterioration is much more severe in the book, as his appearance is described as being very grotesque, pretty much to the point of being inhuman. In addition, The character Rawlie DeLesseps in the novel undergoes a gender change and becomes Reggie Delesseps in the movie: the character explains much of Stark's origin in the movie while in the novel Thad merely speculates. Homer Gomache, an innocent bystander in the book, is restructured as the photographer in the movie, providing a more specific motive for Stark's animosity toward him. The movie presents the story in chronological order, while some of the events are told non-chronologically via flashbacks and reminisces in the novel. Unlike in the novel, Thad has no ironclad alibi for the first murder. Stark kills Rick Cowley in person rather than using explosives as in the novel. Thad undergoes an elaborate routine to evade his police escorts in the novel which is omitted in the movie. Thad visits Pritchard in person in the movie, while Pangborn speaks with the doctor in the novel. Stark murders Pritchard in the movie, a scene that doesn't appear in the novel. And Stark doesn't capture Sheriff Pangborn. Finally, there are a LOT more sparrows in the book.
