Fan submitted reviews of Shining, The (TV Program):|
Posted By: Darryl - September 13th, 2012 2:12:47 pm EDT
loved this when the mini series came out. have been to estes park and the stanley hotel several times. love kings work.
Posted By: Anonymous - July 2nd, 2012 7:08:54 pm EDT
King was disappointed in kubrick's adaption,because it was actually far FAR superior as a horror story.It's just envy,no more,no less.King's book and the mini-series plays out like a family in a halloween haunted house,it's a corny fantasy.Kubrick made wendy and danny more believable,considering who jack torrance was.Wendy WOULD be in the real world,someone like duvall.Someone who's naive to put up with this jerk.Danny lloyd acts how a kid i think WOULD act,being that he's psychic,abusive father,stuck in an isolated place.In fact,all of kubrick's creations do far more to my imagination,than anything in king's book.Great horror doesn't explain everything,it doesn't end the story with a feeling of hope.This is what kubrick gets,while king and his fans remain clueless.
Posted By: Joe - June 9th, 2012 1:55:47 pm EDT
Was enjoyable. Found at Walmart for a song and was pleasantly surprised.
Posted By: BrettC - March 24th, 2012 2:38:19 pm EDT
i liked both versions of the shining, i dont care what everyone else thinks, they are different, who cares?
Posted By: Skankinator - November 8th, 2011 12:50:19 pm EST
Anything that Hollywood did to King's books to make movies did not do any justice to King's talent he put into his books. There was not a good King movie until King got involved in the filming so Hollywood could not screw up any more of his works. Since I have seen King's remakes of The Shining and Carrie I cannot watch the older versions because they are total crap and quickly skipped over the actual story line. I have enjoyed every King movie since he took over the making of the movies. If King had left it up to Hollywood to do all his movies there would not be so many fans. If you have not seen the remakes of The Shining and Carrie, make a point of it because Hollywood did horribly trash his stories..
Posted By: Dave67000 - October 29th, 2011 3:15:54 am EDT
I wish he had done more with the bush animals. There was only one short scene where Wendy is screaming from the window as the animals stalk Danny. In the book Danny has a drawn out confrontation with the lions as he desperately attempts to get around them and back to the hotel.
Posted By: SK Is Awsome - June 12th, 2011 11:06:26 pm EDT
i liked this the kubrick version sucked people who hate this movie are lovers of kubricks version and lovers of this film are the haters of kubricks version or lovers of the book
Posted By: C-Trewth - February 16th, 2011 9:52:43 am EST
I thought it was alright. i heard the movie is terrifying. idk ill check it out
Posted By: S.K.Rules - January 6th, 2011 5:13:53 pm EST
Forgot to say ain't as good as Kubricks version though. but nice to see a more faithful adap.
Posted By: MrsPennywise96 - September 2nd, 2010 7:21:35 pm EDT
This is absolutely wonderful, though the ending and the CGI sucked. The book is the only work of art: The Shining (1979): 9/10, a work of art and not scary. The Shining (1980): 5/10, terrible and not scary. The Shining (1997): 9/10, wonderful and not scary. My English teacher loves Mr. King's work; and he feels that it is his scariest - I told him I feel It is his scariest... though we argue, I am still in love with him (my English teacher)... Courtland Mead's acting mixed with Danny Lloyd's looks would have made the perfect Danny; but the only person who would ever have been able to pull off Danny Torrance was Haley Joel Osment... I loved Steven Weber - so creepy towards the end ("What a clever little boy it is, or thinks it is...") Rebecca DeMornay was exactly how I pictured Wendy... actually almost all of the actors were how I pictured their character (Elliot Gould as Stuart Ullman, for example.). I love it.
Posted By: S.K.Rules - August 22nd, 2010 4:55:52 pm EDT
Glad they made one that was closer to the novel, the 80's film was good (good not scary) but I wanted a more truer adap. And this is it.
Posted By: Clarice - May 25th, 2010 10:12:04 am EDT
Almost everything about the mini-series version of "The Shining" - the script, the production, the acting - was near perfect. The only flaw was the casting of Courtland Mead in the part of Danny. So wrong for the part to begin with - and not a very strong actor at this point in his career
Posted By: Lindsay - May 1st, 2010 12:00:34 am EDT
I really enjoyed this version! There is no doubt that Kubrick's version was scary and amazing, but this version let the viewer see the true horror at the Overlook and let them see the true Jack. It was great to see a version that was truer to the book.
Posted By: Shadow Of The Tower - March 8th, 2010 1:06:28 pm EST
So glad this came out. So much truer to the book. Though I still relish in Jack Nicholson's performance
Posted By: Jordy - August 17th, 2009 1:40:45 pm EDT
I think this version is the best cause this one is really based in the book, Jack uses the croquet mallet and they put the lawn animals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rebecca De Mornay and Steven Weber, are the real actors for Jack and Wendy Torrance.
Posted By: Steve - October 23rd, 2008 4:33:55 pm EDT
Thank god this movie came out and actually told the story, the old version with good old Jack Nickolson was scary as hell, but lacked any real substance in terms of storytelling through a movie. I'm soooo glad they put the lawn animals in there! Still though, I can't see anybody replacing Jack Nickolson as Jack Torrence (too iconing), however he was replaced (in my opinion) as the Joker in the Dark Knight. :D
Posted By: Frankdop - August 28th, 2008 4:12:08 am EDT
absolutely great, better than kubricks