Started By
Message

Just read and watched The Shining for the first time

Posted on 5/23/25 at 8:56 pm
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
104494 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 8:56 pm
The book was incredible. The character development was unreal. I truly felt like I knew Jack, Wendy, and Danny by the end. I also felt the fear from Danny of his Dad because it felt possible. Jack was a normal man that lost it. He wasn’t a true “psycho”, but a man that was sent to crazy ways by unnatural forces. I loved it. Til the very end Jack fought his demons. He literally told Danny to run away from him so he could be safe. The father was always there

The movie was utter shite. It wasnt scary or fearful at all. There was zero depth and it was just bland. How the hell did that movie became a “classic” in horror films? Jack looked crazy, assholish, and murder tending from the first scene he was in. There was no building at all
This post was edited on 5/23/25 at 8:59 pm
Posted by Brosef Stalin
Member since Dec 2011
40815 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:00 pm to
You must have watched the tv movie with Steven Weber.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
104494 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:04 pm to
No, but I heard the tv version was much better than the movie

Jack Nicholson quite literally looked full psycho from the jump. I mean the cannibalism discussion on the way up the mountain right away made him look like a mad man
Posted by MSTiger33
Member since Oct 2007
21018 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:23 pm to
We did compare and contrast of the book and movie in high school. My English teacher did all kids of crazy stuff like that
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452011 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:28 pm to
quote:

but I heard the tv version was much better than the movie


From whom?
Posted by Jay Are
Baton Rouge
Member since Nov 2014
5517 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:31 pm to
quote:

How the hell did that movie became a “classic” in horror films?


Considered outside the context of being an adaptation of a decent King novel (with a hilariously dogshite final few hundred pages), if a compelling film. I agree the film is no masterpiece, but Kubrick's visual depiction of the hauntings is far more surreal, creepy, and overall effective than King's descriptions of same, at least for me.

And Nicholson's unhinged nature is part of the appeal. His Jack is so clearly fricked up when he arrives that we can believe he almost wanted what was coming.

I disliked the movie the first few times I saw it. I came around to respecting but not loving it. The approach is so visually detailed, though, and the performances so big, that using "bland" to describe the film is going to make people question whether you actually watched it.
Posted by littlebird92
Louisiana
Member since May 2018
270 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 9:57 pm to
I saw the movie before I read the book which probably skews my opinion, but I LOVE the movie. It's one of my all time favorites. You kind of have to look at them as their own separate entities. The book is fantastic too. Although *spoiler* I hated the hedge animals. I think the maze was better.
Posted by Ham Solo
Member since Apr 2015
8059 posts
Posted on 5/23/25 at 11:22 pm to
Both the book and the movie are incredible even though they're two different things. Both are masterpieces for completely different reasons.

The interesting thing is that, the book sequel Dr. Sleep by Stephen King follows his book version of The Shining, but movie sequel follows Kubrick's version. King actually gave permission for this even though he hated Kubrick's version.

It's really comparing apples and oranges. King was just telling a ghost story, Kubrick was using a ghost story to subliminally message us with his views of the world.
This post was edited on 5/23/25 at 11:28 pm
Posted by pevetohead
lurking behind sonic
Member since Apr 2017
3432 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 12:01 am to
Because Stanley Kubrick was not interested in a story about a man’s relationship with his wife & son.

He took the main interesting thing from the book - the Overlook Hotel being a manifestation of evil - and made a movie about it.

A guy that gradually goes nuts? There’s a million movies that do that. Go watch those instead. This is about a bad guy going nuts.

The main character of the movie is the Overlook Hotel.
Posted by pevetohead
lurking behind sonic
Member since Apr 2017
3432 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 12:03 am to
quote:

No, but I heard the tv version was much better than the movie


You’re either a troll or totally retarded
Posted by Brosef Stalin
Member since Dec 2011
40815 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 12:15 am to
quote:

King was just telling a ghost story, Kubrick was using a ghost story to subliminally message us with his views of the world.

King's story was more alcoholism and the dissolution of the family. Kubrick's story was more about ghosts. King's biggest complaint was that Kubrick didn't focus on the family element enough.
Posted by Gusoline
Jacksonville, NC
Member since Dec 2013
10004 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 2:28 am to
Dr sleep is pretty good. I didn't like the shining at all as a movie.
Posted by stonedbegonias
Member since Jan 2010
12010 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 6:44 am to
Incredible movie
Posted by Saintsisit
Member since Jan 2013
4630 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 7:22 am to
quote:

Dr sleep is pretty good. 


It is really good.

Side note: I'd definitely let Rebecca Ferguson suck the life out of me any day.

Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
104494 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 7:38 am to
quote:

You’re either a troll or totally retarded
Umm, it’s from this very site where I read that…..
Posted by ipodking
#StopTalkingAboutWomensSports
Member since Jun 2008
57542 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 7:38 am to
quote:

The interesting thing is that, the book sequel Dr. Sleep by Stephen King follows his book version of The Shining, but movie sequel follows Kubrick's version. King actually gave permission for this even though he hated Kubrick's version.


Only the great Mike Flanagan could seemlessly tie the book a film together and make Dr Sleep
This post was edited on 5/24/25 at 12:17 pm
Posted by dickkellog
little rock
Member since Dec 2024
652 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 8:10 am to
king never liked the movie, kubrick didn't care because he was stanley fricking kubrick and had creative control of the script.

to see that movie in the theater in 1980 was incredible. the tension was palpable. i've never had a movie experience anything close.

king remade his version of his book in the TV version with stephen weber, and it made me appreciate kubrick's genius.
Posted by dawgdayafternoon
Jacksonville, GA
Member since Jul 2011
22991 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 8:32 am to
quote:

No, but I heard the tv version was much better than the movie

If you thought the Kubrick movie was bland and utter shite, the TV version may make you rethink that statement.
Posted by Pikes Peak Tiger
Colorado Springs
Member since Jun 2023
6710 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 8:34 am to
quote:

You must have watched the tv movie with Steven Weber


That one was more true to the book than Kubrick’s version

But Kubrick’s movie was somehow better than the book and the TV adaption
This post was edited on 5/24/25 at 8:36 am
Posted by RoyalAir
Detroit
Member since Dec 2012
6838 posts
Posted on 5/24/25 at 8:36 am to
quote:

Rebecca Ferguson


I lowkey fell in love with her in The Greatest Showman.

Regarding the Shining, I have not read the book.

But the movie is one of those that you can watch it a dozen times and pick up different themes, elements, and subtexts. It's legit art.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram