Stanley Kubrick Fan Club

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Kubrick's The Shining: "it's like a big, beautiful Cadillac with no engine inside it." -Stephen King

[Soubhagya]

Of course, he would say that. So, much was changed from the story. Most importantly, the lead character was partly based on him. Jack Torrance is supposed to be a sympathetic character. And he supposedly based the lead character on his own struggles with alcoholism.

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/lifes...shining/story/


But in the film:



He comes across as scary almost from the beginning and is hardly a sympathetic character. That would surely anger him.

But its an opinion. Not only is it 'shiny at the exterior' (pardon the pun) and beautiful to see, it really works as a horror movie. Making such an analogy wrong. Such a Cadillac wouldn't run for all its beauty. But 'The Shining' does.

From the great Roger Ebert: "In a snowbound hotel, three people descend into versions of madness or psychic terror, and we cannot depend on any of them for an objective view of what happens. It is this elusive open-endedness that makes Kubrick's film so strangely disturbing."

[Kirby101]

A fascinating article from Vanity Fair about the making of 2001.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...50-years-later

[Billy Batson]

Kubrick's The Shining: "it's like a big, beautiful Cadillac with no engine inside it." -Stephen King

King is just butthurt that Kubrick's take eclipsed his own. He has no problem praising the shitty adaptations of his work.

[Astroman]

'The Shining' is simply amazing! I absolutely admire the film and its artistry. Its almost as if he has taken us right into Overlook Hotel and made us loose ourselves in its desolate interiors with only the the Torrances as our 'living' companions. Technically in terms of cinematography, editing, score, etc. its top notch. One readily available example is the hallway tracking shot.




I did not like it so much in my first watch. Ghosts who are too realistic. Jump scares and scary ghosts are sparse. I thought it was just an okay movie. But watching it again i could see what Kubrick was really trying to do. And i fell in love with the film instantly. Its my favorite horror film for now.

Just like its reception. It received lukewarm reviews on release. Stephen King denounced the film. (Quite rightly too as Kubrick took so much liberties). It actually got razzie nominations too. But its stature has only grown with time.

Yeah, I would agree with anyone who says it's a poor adaptation (it's more along the lines of what some film theorists would call an 'appropriation') but it's a masterful film and some of the stylistic and cinematographic techniques are absolutely brilliant... the long shot you posted not being least among them.

I especially love the subtle switch of the arrangement of toys on the carpet in one of the scenes with Danny. Some people say it was an unintentional accident while others that it was planned, but whatever the truth, it was a very effective and almost subliminal reinforcement of the shifting of the reality of the scene.

[Osiris-Rex]

Cool. I haven't watched it yet. Personally, it would be hard to top 'Apocalypse Now'. That film was pure excellence. Yet 'Full Metal Jacket' is considered among all time great war films. Hope i will enjoy it when i see it as i am planning to watch it soon.

I actually got to operate one of those PBRs like in Apocalypse Now when I was in the Navy, so it was fun to see one on screen. But in a way Apocalypse Now was more of a horror movie that took place
during a war than a war movie. Full Metal Jacket was more of a straight up war movie.

[Judge Dredd]

Odd place to post for me. As i give the example of how being faithful to the source material does not always bring good results by citing 'Shining'. Oddly enough i haven't read the book or watched the tv movie yet. So, i can't really discuss about this.

Book is well worth a read great book its a slow spiral into insanity and has a very claustrophobic feel, for the movie that creepy old lady from the bathtub has been stuck in my mind since I was like 10. It is a weird one as watching it as a stand alone and just judging it by whats on screen the actors, story, and filming style are spectacular and I get why it is so praised. As far as a horror movie goes it is hard to beat and I get why it is top on many list. Usually when you get bad adaptions they are bad films, but here you get a bad adaption as a great film. One of the most interesting things about the film to me is how it was received at first vs how it changed over the years. I am not as familiar with his other works as some are here and was wondering if that consistent with his other films or were they praised upon release?

[Osiris-Rex]

Book is well worth a read great book its a slow spiral into insanity and has a very claustrophobic feel, for the movie that creepy old lady from the bathtub has been stuck in my mind since I was like 10. It is a weird one as watching it as a stand alone and just judging it by whats on screen the actors, story, and filming style are spectacular and I get why it is so praised. As far as a horror movie goes it is hard to beat and I get why it is top on many list. Usually when you get bad adaptions they are bad films, but here you get a bad adaption as a great film. One of the most interesting things about the film to me is how it was received at first vs how it changed over the years. I am not as familiar with his other works as some are here and was wondering if that consistent with his other films or were they praised upon release?

A Clockwork Orange got a lot of negative criticism when it was released. Mostly for the sex and violence.

[Soubhagya]

A fascinating article from Vanity Fair about the making of 2001.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood...50-years-later

Thanks for sharing! Its a fascinating read. Its the 50th year of this landmark film. Good that we have some acknowledgment.

[Soubhagya]

Yeah, I would agree with anyone who says it's a poor adaptation (it's more along the lines of what some film theorists would call an 'appropriation') but it's a masterful film and some of the stylistic and cinematographic techniques are absolutely brilliant... the long shot you posted not being least among them.

I especially love the subtle switch of the arrangement of toys on the carpet in one of the scenes with Danny. Some people say it was an unintentional accident while others that it was planned, but whatever the truth, it was a very effective and almost subliminal reinforcement of the shifting of the reality of the scene.

I had not noticed that so far. Now that's the beauty of Kubrick's films in general. There's so much detail to soak in. Will keep an eye for that the next time (my third viewing).

I haven't read the book yet. But i have heard that its a really good book. I will read it someday real soon.

[Soubhagya]

I actually got to operate one of those PBRs like in Apocalypse Now when I was in the Navy, so it was fun to see one on screen. But in a way Apocalypse Now was more of a horror movie that took place
during a war than a war movie. Full Metal Jacket was more of a straight up war movie.

Yes Apocalypse Now can be said like that. The movie focuses more on the darkness in people's hearts brought about by war. It is generally classified as a war movie. So, while i would call it a war film i can see your point.

[Soubhagya]

Book is well worth a read great book its a slow spiral into insanity and has a very claustrophobic feel, for the movie that creepy old lady from the bathtub has been stuck in my mind since I was like 10. It is a weird one as watching it as a stand alone and just judging it by whats on screen the actors, story, and filming style are spectacular and I get why it is so praised. As far as a horror movie goes it is hard to beat and I get why it is top on many list. Usually when you get bad adaptions they are bad films, but here you get a bad adaption as a great film. One of the most interesting things about the film to me is how it was received at first vs how it changed over the years. I am not as familiar with his other works as some are here and was wondering if that consistent with his other films or were they praised upon release?

A number of Kubrick's films were well received. Others were mixed, which grew in stature with time. I took a look at Wikipedia entries. Copying that for some films.

2001:
"Upon release, 2001 polarized critical opinion, receiving both ecstatic praise and vehement derision."

Its presently considered as one of the best sci-fi films ever. Rotten Tomatoes 94% and Metacritic 86.

Lolita:
"Lolita premiered on June 13, 1962 in New York City. It performed fairly well, with little advertising relying mostly on word-of-mouth; many critics seemed uninterested or dismissive of the film while others gave it glowing reviews. However, the film was very controversial, due to the hebephilia-related content. The film has been re-appraised by critics over time, and currently has a score of 95% on Rotten Tomatoes."

Spartacus:
"The movie received mixed reviews when first released; Bosley Crowther called it a "spotty, uneven drama." Over time, however, its reputation has grown in stature."

It presently has 96% in Rotten Tomatoes, 87 in Metacritic.

A Clockwork Orange:
"Despite general praise from critics, the film had notable detractors."

Presently, Rotten Tomatoes 91%. And 78 in Metacritic.

Barry Lyndon:
"The film "was not the commercial success Warner Bros. had been hoping for" within the United States,[5] although it fared better in Europe. This mixed reaction saw the film (in the words of one retrospective review) "greeted, on its release, with dutiful admiration – but not love. Critics... rail[ed] against the perceived coldness of Kubrick's style, the film's self-conscious artistry and slow pace. Audiences, on the whole, rather agreed..."[5]

In recent years, the film has gained a more positive reaction. As of October 2014 it holds a 97% "Certified Fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 52 reviews..."



Of course The Shining received mixed reception. And Clockwork Orange was surely controversial.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

King is just butthurt that Kubrick's take eclipsed his own. He has no problem praising the shitty adaptations of his work.

King praised Misery, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile, Hearts in Atlantis, and Carrie too. They weren't "shitty" adaptations." Personally, I wouldn't put Kubrick's the Shining on the same list as Paths of Glory, Spartacus, Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and A Clockwork Orange. Full Metal Jacket is one my favorite films though. Don't know if it's considered a classic.

[BeastieRunner]

Dr. Strangelove is my favorite of his with A Clockwork Orange coming in at #2.

[JBatmanFan05]

I haven't read the book [The Shining] yet. But i have heard that its a really good book. I will read it someday real soon.

You really should. If even only just to bounce it off of Kubrick's film to see the differences, see what everyone argues about. In King's book, everything is clearer as far as what is going on and the hotel's motivations. Book Jack is much more interesting and multi-dimensional and ends up being possibly King's best character in all of his books, he's neither the hero or the villain really.

I read on wikipedia that the film maybe makes the viewer wonder whether the hotel's goal is Jack or Danny (or both), but the book is very clear. The hotel has a very straightforward simple enough evil plan in the book.

Kubrick's film and King's book are both greats, both must sees/reads for fans of the general story that is The Shining. The Shining (TV Mini-Series 1997) is also worth a see to see something closer to King's vision (but too sanitized IMHO) and SEE THE ACTUAL HOTEL that inspired the book.