I'm afraid that I will have to respectfully disagree with my friend here on this one . I enjoyed the novel so much more than the film and thought it was far superior. While the film is a different take on the story, why did Kubrick bother doing an adaptation if he was going to completely change key points? I know that you can't necessarily copy a book from page to screen exactly, but for me, I thought the struggle existing within Jack Torrance was much more believable in the book, and I thought the ending in the book was more interesting. Who knows, maybe I just have a problem with the gentleman in Rawr's avvie over there, but that's another story.
Stand By Me was an excellent adaptation of King's short story, The Body, but I guess I like the movie better because it just expounded on the short story. I think that's the only case of a book I've read that has a better film adaptation.