I think the rambling style's alright if done properly, but King lets it
sprawl far, far too much, and only because he knows he can get away
with it.
I agree his short stories are usually put together better but only
because
the format doesn't allow for a 10,000 word incidental tangent on a
particular character who's going to die anyway.
The Stand is, deservedly a seminal vision of post-apocalypse fiction,
even
if it is a bit dated by today's standards. But King had to add 100,000
words
to the original and come out with an expanded edition, I haven't read
the
original version but people tell me it was a lot more focused, and I
can
believe them.
As far as the movies, I would only blame King for the one he's directed
(Maximum Overdrive, I think was the only one, and I think they took
away his
director's hat after that), the problem with King movies is so much of
his
stories take place on a psychological and mental level that they don't
trranslate properly. The same problem happens with movies based on H.P.
Lovecraft- people forget that the two are completely different mediums
and
rarely transfer well from one to the other, and the style of the writer
is
critical as to whether this can be pulled off. I think it's sometimes
succeeded, though. The Shining was fine, as was IT and the Stand
miniseries.