Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've never understood what people see in Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining. At least, not anyone who's read the book. ............
That's because most people have never read the book. They don't care if the movie is unlike the book. They don't care that Stephen King didn't like it. I'm one of them. I think the movie is brilliant. I've never read a Stephen King novel and never will.
That's because most people have never read the book. They don't care if the movie is unlike the book. They don't care that Stephen King didn't like it. I'm one of them. I think the movie is brilliant. I've never read a Stephen King novel and never will.
Well, thanks for that very plausible explanation!
And, btw, I don't think that movie adaptations should be in lockstep with the source, but when they veer TOO off-course either in character or plot, it's a turn-off. (Another example of that is What Dreams May Come. I loved the book but absolutely HATED the movie. And my husband STRONGLY disliked THE recent Hobbit movies. He's a Tolkien fan, and he didn't even bother watching the sequels.)
That's because most people have never read the book. They don't care if the movie is unlike the book. They don't care that Stephen King didn't like it. I'm one of them. I think the movie is brilliant. I've never read a Stephen King novel and never will.
That's too bad. I think you're missing out by never reading SK.
The novel was a story of horror, yes, but also a study of what happens to a man with robust personal demons when he is thrust into a situation that exploits his vulnerabilities. You could actually feel sympathy for Jack in the book, unlike Crazy Jack of the movie. Kubrick did the characters a disservice, by portraying them as one-dimensional and only the very worst dimension at that. The way Wendy was written for the movie, she was Jack's perception of her as whiny and clingy, which was the opposite of the actual character of Wendy as written by SK.
During the Hitchcock/Truffaut interviews, Hitch made his famous statement actors are cattle. They are pawns, pieces in the set, parts of the whole. Go in with kid gloves and you lose the initiative. A director has to direct.
I would rank It in my top 10 SK stories, short or novel length. Rereading It (haha) now and it's still a page turner.
During the Hitchcock/Truffaut interviews, Hitch made his famous statement actors are cattle. They are pawns, pieces in the set, parts of the whole. Go in with kid gloves and you lose the initiative. A director has to direct.
That's because Hitchcock hired actors, expecting them to act. He was there to direct the film, not give them acting lessons, and so he had no patience for actors wanting to be told what to do. That was their job, not his.
But that doesn't mean Hitch didn't have a very deep understanding and appreciation for human nature, motivations, passions, virtues, vices, etc. His movies are full of them. They have both a profound understanding of human psyche and heart.
Kubrick had none of that. He wasn't interested in people as anything other than set pieces. The only movie Kubrick ever made with any heart at all was Spartacus, a film he later loathed. Watching a Kubrick movie like watching a story made by a brilliant computer. Very smart. But no warmth in sight.
Hmm, The Killing, Paths of Glory, Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bombm 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut - I'm glad for those set pieces.
Hmm, The Killing, Paths of Glory, Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bombm 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut - I'm glad for those set pieces.
Staying on topic, let's look at THE SHINING.
Jack Torrance. He looks crazy in scene 1. He looks crazy in his last scene. In between, he types and rants crazily. Never sure why.
Wendy Torrance. Shrill and annoying in her first scene. Shrill and annoying in her last scene. In between, she's mostly shrill and annoying. Never sure why.
Danny Torrance. An emotionally disturbed little kid in his first scene. An emotionally disturbed little kid in his last scene. In between, he's an emotionally disturbed little kid. With parents like that, can you blame him?
But yes, the music and cinematography is great. There are some great scares. But the character arcs have all the height of a flat sheet of onion paper. The characters don't grow or develop. They just continue till the credits roll.
I rather enjoyed a few of the SK adaptations, even if they didn't follow the book. Often times it's difficult to squeeze so much into such a short movie. Some of the longer movies didn't quite pan out though, and actually were pretty uncomfortable to watch.
The ones I liked were:
Thinner
Cujo
The Shawshank Redemption
Sleepwalkers
Misery (my #1)
Apt Pupil
Stand by Me
Silver Bullet
Christine
Creepshow
Secret Window
The ones I wasn't so pleased with were:
Carrie
The Dead Zone
Maximum Overdrive
Firestarter
Salem's Lot (1&2)
Dolores Claiborne
Cell
Dreamcatcher
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
