Jack! Nicolson did a fabulous job....I don't think any other could have played the part more perfectly!
The problem with the book, is that it represents King early in his career; he wasn't as clever as he would become later -- not that he was ever a great writer, but he did have an endless stream of ideas. The book expands on far too many needless details, holds no mystery, and the end of the book is ridiculously written -- mindless/cheesy action, bad dialogue, and characters acting completely out of character for the sake of saving Danny and destroying the hotel. The hedge-animals come alive, but there is no terror or danger involved -- what are the hedge animals really going to do? The real terror, as Kubrick understood, is the danger human beings (or ghosts of human beings) represent to one another; especially a father killing his family.
Loved the book, LOVED the movie. You went thinking you knew what was going to happen. When Hallorann got the axe everything you knew went out the window and it was Holy Sh!t! What's going to happen?!?! Brilliant move Stanley.
in the book, jack is not an 'everyman' so to speak. he is clearly someone with psychological problems, as you can see in his thoughts in the novel. but, yes, maybe casting JN was overkill, think how effective Christian Bale was in American Psycho
there is some weird sexual stuff in King's novels, often graphic, and not just suggested at. i recently read the terry brooks complete shanara chronicles and there was some disturbing sexual stuff in that for children's books
yeah, reminded me of the beginning of psycho when you think you know who the protagonist will be and then she has a shower...
I was at that impressionable age when Shining came out. those Twins still just freak me right the eff out Scatman Carruthers ? GTFO it’s a classic
the comment i was replying to was for the stephen king version of the film @Wildest cat from montana was saying he wasn't a fan of king's version!
I thought the film was erratic at best. Scatman was the only actor I enjoyed. Jack was okay at first, but over the top from the middle onward. Shelly Duvall was miscast. The kid was annoying throughout. Kubrick was limited by technology and could not pull off the topiary coming to life. But he omitted too many key factors in his film. Similar to Streisand with "Prince of Tides". The book scared the **** out of me at 19. I read it in one sitting. Stayed up all night. I re-read it later and enjoyed it even more. Probably my second favorite King book. The thing about the film vs movie that bothers me the most: the boiler. That represented the "heart" of the hotel, and added to the suspense, the beehive as well. Trouble with King's stories is as noted above, most of the interesting tale is in the minds of the Torrance's. King is quite good at writing the thoughts of his characters. Sometimes it's impossible to get that onto the movie screen. I love Kubricks work, but I think "The Shining" is not his best.
yeah, the homeostatic relationship between jack and the boiler was subtle but added to the tension. it brought the hotel 'to life' and made jack 'less tangible'. if you know what i mean?
Yes. Wasn't that the one where Stephen King was the producer or wrote the screenplay? I didn't like it because it still didn't follow the book. I also thought Steven Weber was miscast.
Funny, I thought Stephen Weber was great in that. I love the movie! The guy in the dog suit in the room with the guy who looks like George Martin is a favorite visual of mine. That scene creeps me out no matter how many times I’ve seen it. I also loved the book. I read Dr. Sleep, haven’t seen the movie yet.
Absolutely aweful. Steven Weber is a comedic actor. Also, it was made for TV, which sanitized it. Bad acting, terrible editing, bad screenplay, laughable dialogue, and not even remotely frightening.
Wait a minute...you telling me that you don't believe Kubrick used the film to place hidden messages that he faked the moon landing for NASA? As a child, this movie scared the **** out of me. When I watched it a couple decades later, it wasn't scary...it was disturbing. It didn't really seem to be about the supernatural...that stuff just helps propel the story forward. It's about a dysfunctional family dealing with alcoholism and child abuse. The way Danny completely shuts down after being abused is chilling.
I was extremely disappointed in Kubrick's film when I saw it on it's first run as I'd read the book first and found the deviations gratuitous. I've since come to realize it's a Kubrick film first and a Stephen King adaptation second. Seen in that light, it's faithful to Kubrick's vision as a director and one of his best.
I'm not really a fan of Stephen King's original novel so the changes Kubrick did doesn't really bother me. I will say that up until a few years ago I hadn't actually seen the whole thing before, but once I did I fell in love with it hook line and sinker. I think Jack is marvelous in it, a truly conflicted character who actually seems quite normal at first and doesn't really seem to fly off the rails until at least an hour into it. Wendy is a timid little mouse for the most part, Scatman Caruthers is perfectly cast, and of course Danny himself is just great. Add on the awesome visuals, the spooky music, and the slow descent into madness and it really is a fantastic movie. Shockingly enough when I saw Doctor Sleep for the first time last year I might have enjoyed it even more than the Shining. Danny as a grown-up is just plain fascinating, his relationship with Abra is very emotional, the red hats are some of the creepiest villains in any Stephen King movie, the visuals are even more off the charts, and the throwbacks to the Shining were extremely well done. The Shining and Doctor Sleep are both extraordinary movies basically.
