Originally Posted by THE VAMPIRE (Post 658371) I have wated so much to watch this movie and now when i did,I DONT FIND IT SCARY,why

Originally Posted by doctor satan (Post 658466) I'm not trying to be insulting but how old are you? I saw this film when i was about 12-13 & i had already seen DOTD, Zombi 2 & Cannibal Holocaust. at the time i was unimpressed by the measly bodycount, lack of gore etc. I then saw the film again 3-4 years later & realised what i had missed & appreciated the film a hell of a lot more. One of my favourite films & only just piped by Clockwork Orange as Kubricks best IMO.

Originally Posted by Doc Faustus (Post 658523) I didn't like Kubrick's Shining either. I felt he mangled the message and Jack was underdeveloped as a character. There are some scenes that are great (like the twins for example) but the Overlook was too sterile, Danny too small a part of the plot and Jack's descent into madness too quick. I share Stephen King's sentiments. If Kubrick wanted to adapt the book, he should have stuck closer to its themes instead of focusing on an artist going mad.

Originally Posted by Doc Faustus (Post 658523) I didn't like Kubrick's Shining either. I felt he mangled the message and Jack was underdeveloped as a character. There are some scenes that are great (like the twins for example) but the Overlook was too sterile, Danny too small a part of the plot and Jack's descent into madness too quick. I share Stephen King's sentiments. If Kubrick wanted to adapt the book, he should have stuck closer to its themes instead of focusing on an artist going mad.

Originally Posted by THE VAMPIRE (Post 658371) I have wated so much to watch this movie and now when i did,I DONT FIND IT SCARY,why

Originally Posted by The Vault of Horror (Post 658829) Kubrick made The Shining as a Kubrick movie. Most of his movies deal with the methodical dehumanization of their characters, as well as the steady collapse of a neat and supposedly perfect setup. Those were the themes he was interested in exploring, in his own style. I personally consider Kubrick to be a much more impressive artist than King, so I'm fine with him adapting it as he saw fit. For me, Kubrick's Shining is one of the most disturbing movies ever made.

Originally Posted by Fearonsarms (Post 941913) He was already insane in the movie before he got to The Overlook hence the lengthy writings on the typewriter that he must have started as soon as he got there-watch the new edition of the movie if it comes out on DVD with the restored deleted scenes

Originally Posted by Bob Gray (Post 942102) This is the one of the major issues that I have with the film. In King's book, the Overlook was the antagonist, it had a life of its own and it is what made Jack go crazy, it tried to possess Danny but couldn't so it went for Jack. In Kubrick's version, it seems as if Jack was crazy before he got to the Overlook and the seclusion is what put him over the top. The film takes away what the Overlook was, evil and crazy, it was a character all its own. Now don't get me wrong, I own a copy of the film, its great in its own right but I just have some big issues with it, I wish Kubrick would have realized the genius of making the Overlook the main antagonist.

Originally Posted by The_Knife (Post 942210) Kubrick's Shining is just that: Kubrick's Shining. It's a very separate entity to the King novel. As a piece of celluloid, the imagery, for me, is totally memorable. The whole thing has a hypnotic, dreamlike (or nightmarish) quality. I also remember that 2-part tv adaptation of the novel, penned for the screen by King himself. Even though that was significantly more faithful to the source material, I much prefer the Kubrick Shining as something that exists for the screen in the same way that, if you were to convert Kubrick's Shining directly into a novel, it'd be an utter mess.

Originally Posted by The_Knife (Post 942210) Kubrick's Shining is just that: Kubrick's Shining. It's a very separate entity to the King novel. As a piece of celluloid, the imagery, for me, is totally memorable. The whole thing has a hypnotic, dreamlike (or nightmarish) quality. I also remember that 2-part tv adaptation of the novel, penned for the screen by King himself. Even though that was significantly more faithful to the source material, I much prefer the Kubrick Shining as something that exists for the screen in the same way that, if you were to convert Kubrick's Shining directly into a novel, it'd be an utter mess.

Originally Posted by Bob Gray (Post 942485) I agree, that made-for-tv-movie wasn't nearly as good as Kubrick's version. It wasn't so much the story though, it was the terrible acting.

Originally Posted by Angra (Post 942979) Terrible acting? By whom? Thought the actors did really well in the remake. Not their fault Stephen King doesn't know how to make movies.

Originally Posted by Bob Gray (Post 942982) I'm sure Mr. King wrote a fine screenplay that was screwed up by bad acting.

Originally Posted by Angra (Post 942984) I believe it's the other way around. The mini series was "ruined" (honestly didn't think it was a bad watch. Just a bad horror movie) by people who only knew how to make scary scenes in book form. What we got instead was a lot of dialogue spread throughout 4+ hours, which is typical King.

***WORK IN PROGRESS***

Any true fan of horror that's worth their weight has undoubtedly seen Stanley Kubrick's stunning masterpiece The Shining, or have at least read the original novel by Stephen King. But how many of these fans have really taken a good, hard look at this film? It is apparent that the director, Kubrick, has packed, and I mean packed the entire movie with codes, secrets, symbolism, allegory and allusions, and many other things related to film psychology such as spatial awareness and set design, use of certain colors, etc. This thread's main purpose is to dive into the visual masterpiece that is Stanley Kubrick's The Shining, and the many many theories surrounding it.

For starters, let us understand the amount of analysis this film has undergone by listing the major theories and themes surrounding it and embedded within it.


1. Stanley's involvement in The Apollo Moon Landing Hoax
This is arguably the largest, most known, and most supported theory in regards to the film. At first skeptical, after some serious investigation the message becomes blatantly obvious at a plethora of points throughout the course of the movie. It is said that Kubrick, being "the most meticulous of film directors known to man", was not only a part of the Apollo 11 moon landing hoax, but he directed the whole thing to success under his genius.

2. The Holocaust
Another major and well-known theory, Kubrick appears to reference the Holocaust and Hitler's Nazi regimen several times in this film. We'll get to that later.

3. The genocide of Native Americans
A similar and less popular yet still supported theory is Kubrick addressing the genocide of the Native American peoples in America's early history. Both this theory and the Holocaust theory both tie in exceptionally well with the next.

4. History repeating itself
A common theme for many works of art and literature, it seems the past cannot escape itself. History is fated to repeat itself. This theory may be the least well supported, but retains solid evidence from the movie to back it up, so we will explore this as well.
5. Sexual abuse

6. Numbers Theories

Originally Posted by THE VAMPIRE (Post 658371) I have wated so much to watch this movie and now when i did,I DONT FIND IT SCARY,why

Originally Posted by colubrid660 (Post 659811) It's certainly a creepy movie. Watch it during the winter when no one is home sometime, and pay attention to the atmosphere and the environment. Nowadays, people make the mistake of thinking a movie has to be like 'Saw" or "Hostel" to be scary, that the torturing and gore has to start in the first 30 minutes or it's "boring". Ah such is life.....

Originally Posted by tfantasy (Post 976916) I think that when you're able to become a part of the movie and you can connect with the character(s), then you will most likely feel the scare factor that the movie is meant to produce.