Record Ratings, Hiddleston’s Best Role in Years: The New King Adaptation Wins Even Over Horror Skeptics
Mike Flanagan has done it again.
This time — no ghosts, no gore, no screams in the dark. Instead: a kitchen dance, flooded cities, a schoolteacher watching an old musical, and Tom Hiddleston being thanked on billboards and TV screens. The Life of Chuck is not just another Stephen King adaptation. It’s an event. And judging by early reviews, it’s the best King adaptation in the past eight years.
On Rotten Tomatoes, the film currently holds an 87% freshness rating, the highest for a King movie since Gerald's Game (91%) and 1922 (92%) in 2017. It leaves behind Doctor Sleep, It, and the endless Pet Sematary remakes. This is a rare beast: a King adaptation without horror, but with something even scarier — the awareness that life slips away, and that death isn’t the end, but a form of memory.
King’s Most Personal Work
The film is based on a novella from the 2020 collection If It Bleeds, and tells the story of Charles Krantz, an ordinary man whose life unfolds in three acts — from death to childhood, in reverse. First, we witness the end: the world dying with Chuck — through catastrophes, earthquakes, and apathy. Then we move backwards: to his adult years, where he dances on a rooftop, and finally to his childhood, in a house with a mysterious attic.
It sounds strange because it is. But that’s the point: The Life of Chuck isn’t a film that explains. It’s a film that feels. Critics are already comparing it to Stand by Me, It's a Wonderful Life, and the films of Rob Reiner. This is King not scaring, but comforting. And in 2025, based on first reactions, this is exactly the kind of film many people need.
From Horror to a Chorus of Voices
For Flanagan, it’s a step to the side. He’s long been associated with meticulously crafted horror: The Haunting of Hill House, Midnight Mass, Doctor Sleep. But here, we get a meditation on life and its cost — filmed with tenderness and almost philosophical calm. Reviews note: yes, it’s sentimental at times. Yes, there are moments that tug at the heartstrings. But it does so sincerely, not manipulatively.
Tom Hiddleston (as Chuck) doesn’t seem to be playing a person so much as an idea. He is a reflection of how we might be remembered. His smile, his dance, his silence — all serve the image of a good man you can’t forget.
But the real revelation is Benjamin Pajak, who plays young Chuck. His scenes with his grandfather, played by Mark Hamill, are pure gold — especially the monologue about math and loneliness. And Mia Sara makes a surprising return to the screen — with charm and grace.
Flanagan Knows How to Listen
In an age where even the most heartfelt films strive to be 'clever' or 'ironic,' The Life of Chuck arrives as a rare example of empathetic cinema. This isn’t a film that explains why a person matters. It’s a film that makes you feel it in your bones.
Critics are calling it "the most Capra-esque King film" — in the spirit of It’s a Wonderful Life. It doesn’t offer answers about what comes after death. It simply reminds us how much can happen before it. And how important it is to live while we can.
Conclusion
All signs point to The Life of Chuck being, without exaggeration, the best King adaptation in the past eight years — and one of the most unusual ever made. It’s not about monsters, but about us. Not about evil, but memory. It’s a film that doesn’t require explanation — only attention, and the willingness to receive it.
For some, it may seem strange. For others — boring. But for anyone who has ever been afraid of the thought that it all ends, The Life of Chuck may just be the film that brings comfort. Or at least tries.
