In-depth Exploration into the Making of The Shining

Discussion in 'The Shining' started by Garriga, May 31, 2014.

  1. Garriga

    Garriga Well-Known Member

    This Video Might Be the Most In-Depth Exploration Into the Making of Kubrick's 'The Shining' « No Film School



    This is an interesting article by Justin Marrow from No Film School. I haven't watched the documentaries yet. But I have seen the film several times.

    Why are most people critical of Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining? To me, it is a beautiful film with contemplative scenes that show Torrance's insanity slowly progressing. Setting details are a focal point and the audience sees the story.

    I want to explore this style of storytelling.
     
  2. blunthead

    blunthead Well-Known Member

    IMHO, complaints about Kubrick's interpretation and outright changes to the original are generally founded soundly. I like the movie, though, due to Kubrick's signature, his auteurism. He's one of my top few favorite directors, and The Shining remains a favorite of mine for this reason, among others. But, imho, Kubrick misinterpreted or misjudged artistically what the story is or should've been, to create his own story which is a lesser one. Some great directors have a really bad habit of thinking that they're also good at writing and even acting (please see James Cameron and M. Night Shyamalan) when they're not particularly. But their ego blocks their ability to see their lack of talent.
     
  3. GNTLGNT

    GNTLGNT Idiot in Situ and Unholy Devourer of Cookies

    ...better stated than I could have Frank, and much more politely-seeing as how I feel about it...
     
  4. blunthead

    blunthead Well-Known Member

    Yes, I resisted writing "Kubrick sucks". Oops...
     
    Sundrop, kingricefan, Neesy and 5 others like this.
  5. Dana Jean

    Dana Jean Beta Tester/Moderator Moderator

    I like the Kubrick version (minus a couple actors who should've been hacked up on the side of the road.) I also liked Stephen's miniseries version very much, as it was truer to the book obviously. I felt Steven Weber did an exceptional job as Jack. I thought he was brilliant. But I also thought Nicholson's Jack was brilliant too. They both had their shining moments. What pun?
     
  6. GNTLGNT

    GNTLGNT Idiot in Situ and Unholy Devourer of Cookies

    ...in all fairness, Kubrick made a great movie, my pissiness comes from the lack of faithfulness to the novel and the "please kill her NOW" ahem "acting of Olive Oyl...I thought the mini-series was a vast improvement, and yes-Nicholson's performance was one for the ages...
     
  7. mustangclaire

    mustangclaire There's petrol runnin' through my veins.

    Good to see you Garriga, I hope you are well and happy. I enjoyed the film.
     
    Neesy, Garriga, GNTLGNT and 2 others like this.
  8. guido tkp

    guido tkp Well-Known Member

    kubrick as often as not draws the characters in his films as exactly that: broad, all encompassing characters that, instantaneously, define the whole of both the person and what kubrick wants them to mean within his version of the tale...in a sense, a stereotype meant to convey a thought

    shelley duvalls character is, in its own way, not that far different than many who appear in all kinds of kubrick films...look at any kubrick film and you will see a plethora of harshly drawn characterizations meant as much to represent identifiable thoughts and emotions as much as identifiable people.

    in that sense even kubricks jack torrance, also a widely drawn figure, is as perfect a representation within the context of what that director usually sets out to do as is peter sellers in dr stranglelove...

    as a kubrick fan...i knew i would never see 'stephen kings the shining' with stanley on board...from the moment it was announced i knew it would be more an interpretation than a true 'adaption'...
     

Share This Page

AGM Preorder