SimplyScripts Discussion Board
Blog Home - Produced Movie Script Library - TV Scripts - Unproduced Scripts - Contact - Site Map
ScriptSearch
Welcome, Guest.
It is March 29th, 2024, 5:44am
Please login or register.
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login
Please do read the guidelines that govern behavior on the discussion board. It will make for a much more pleasant experience for everyone. A word about SimplyScripts and Censorship


Produced Script Database (Updated!)
One Week Challenge - Who Wrote What and Writers' Choice.


Scripts studios are posting for award consideration

Short Script of the Day | Featured Script of the Month | Featured Short Scripts Available for Production
Submit Your Script

How do I get my film's link and banner here?
All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
Forum Login
Username: Create a new Account
Password:     Forgot Password

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board    Reviews    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  ›  The Shining Moderators: Nixon
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 6 Guests

 Pages: 1
Recommend Print
  Author    The Shining  (currently 901 views)
coldbug
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 3:36pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
35 degrees north latitude, 85 degrees west latitude
Posts
81
Posts Per Day
0.02
*******SPOILER WARNING*******  

My parents didn't let me watch this movie, and I finally had a chance to watch it at friend's house when I was 13 years old.  Too bad the country I came from has poor management in electricity.  The power went out after about 20 mins of the movie.  Then, I never tried to watch it again.
Guess what?  I watched the whole thing last night.  I was speechless.  If they play it on theaters today, I would happily pay $11.50 to see it again.
It had been more than 15 hours, and I am still thiking about the movie.  After Kubrick insrted the black and white ball room photo of Jack as a care taker at the end, I was totally confused.  I'd been thinking over and over again what actually was the movie about.  I still don't get it.  Confusions and questions run in my head at this moment.  So, I googled it.  There's one thread on a site that had been active since 2004, and people are still posting with different views and answers until today.  
I salute you Stanley for your amazing talent which can let your viewers hanging even after 31 years.  
I would like to bring the discussion to here since I see many wise writers and critics over here.  These are the questions I am facing now.  Please help.  Thanks all.

1.  Jack is in the photo at the end of movie as a care taker dated back in 1921.  So, is he being reincarnated?

2.  Who opened the door to let him out of a food storage room?  Was it Grady?  Did Kubrick really want to show the spirits or ghosts involving physically?  I don't think he was that cheap.  

3.  Does Jack really think he's seeing spirits?  Does he believe in it?  How about that Danny's sweater being torn, and being attacked by the crazy lady from room#237?  Jack told Wendy that Danny did it to himself.  So, he basically doesn't believe in it, or he was so attached to Overlook Hotel he tried to pursue his wife not to leave.

4.  Did Jack ever talked to the spirits?  Kubrick used angle shots to make things more complicated.
       One viewer explained about the bathroom scene with Jack and Grady.  "I never noticed that Jack was not talking to Grady.  He was talking to the mirror the entire scene.  I watched that scene again carefully, and noticed that Jack was not looking at Grady.  If you don't pay attention, it seems like he's talking to the spirit.  He wasn't, because his eyes were looking at the mirror.  There was a mirror behind Loyd(bartender) also"





A lie has traveled around the world while the truth is putting the shoes on.
Logged Offline
Private Message
ajr
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 3:38pm Report to Moderator
Old Timer



Posts
1482
Posts Per Day
0.28
Spoilers? If anyone hasn't seen The Shining by now they deserve to have it ruined...

(o:


Click HERE to read JOHN LENNON'S HEAVEN https://preview.tinyurl.com/John-Lennon-s-Heaven-110-pgs/
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 1 - 10
James McClung
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 4:07pm Report to Moderator
Of The Ancients



Location
Washington, D.C.
Posts
3293
Posts Per Day
0.49
Love The Shining. One of the best horror movies ever. Hating on Kubrick is trendy bullshit.

I think the stuff with the mirrors is all well and good but I do think there are real ghosts in The Shining. The entire family sees them, not just Jack. Whether or not Jack is actually talking to the ghosts just makes for interesting subtext. Either way, the supernatural aspect is severely downplayed to the point where the film's not even about the supernatural. The fact that it has those elements just makes the story way more dense and leaves more open to interpretation.


Logged
Private Message Reply: 2 - 10
coldbug
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 5:56pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
35 degrees north latitude, 85 degrees west latitude
Posts
81
Posts Per Day
0.02
5.  What's up with the bear mascot and a male guest scene?  


A lie has traveled around the world while the truth is putting the shoes on.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 3 - 10
Matt Chisholm
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 6:24pm Report to Moderator
New


You're darn tootin'

Location
Adelaide, Australia
Posts
259
Posts Per Day
0.05

Quoted from coldbug
5.  What's up with the bear mascot and a male guest scene?  


This is left over from the novel, where Jack attends a New Year's Eve party populated by hotel guests. There is a rich socialite man there (Harry Derwent I think his name was) who had a man servant named Roger with him dressed as a dog and on a leash. The implication King made was that the two were gay lovers who had a fight and Derwent only agreed to take him back if he attended the party dressed as an animal and performed tricks for the amusement of all the other rich snobs. This is something Kubrick does a lot in the movie, using small moments to hint at larger stories from the novel not included in the film, the scrapbook and the boiler-room being good examples.

This movie is pretty incredible. I love it to death, although having read the book several times I sometimes wonder what Kubrick's thinking was. The movie is kind of a joke compared to the novel, which is so emotionally complex and portrays Jack as a much more flawed, and therefore more frightening, antagonist/protagonist, whatever. Wendy's character is also severely compromised in this movie. Without the sub-plot involving her mother and all the tension between her, her husband and the little boy, she's not much more than a typical foghorn horror movie female.

I still love this movie a whole hell of a lot though. I doubt anyone else will be able to make a movie the way Kubrick did. We've got plenty of talented filmmakers around right now, but none quite like the Master.


I can't live the buttoned-down life like you. I want it all. The dizzying highs, the terrifying lows, the creamy middles. Sure, I may offend some of the blue bloods with my cocky stride and musky odors. Oh, I'll never be the darling of the so-called "city fathers," who cluck their tongues, stroke their beards and talk about what's to be done with this Homer Simpson?
Logged
Private Message Reply: 4 - 10
mcornetto
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 6:42pm Report to Moderator
Guest User



While the Shining is a masterfully made movie, I think it's an absoulute shame what Kubrik did to one of Stephen Kings best novels.   He turned what was a fantastic ghost story into a domestic tragedy that was nothing like the book at all.   And while I appreciate the filmmaking that went into it, and while it made you jump in a few places, I can't really say it was all that effective as a horror story.    
Logged
e-mail Reply: 5 - 10
coldbug
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 7:25pm Report to Moderator
New



Location
35 degrees north latitude, 85 degrees west latitude
Posts
81
Posts Per Day
0.02
Matt..thanks..now i can understand that scene.  I can't believe Kubrick put this one in.  He could easily left it out.  I think his intension of putting this scene is to make people raise questions like I did, and to let the viewers find the answers from one another.

James...you are hitting one of my doubts from last night.  Maybe, Kubrick also wanted to show the difference between the two worlds is not a big deal.  It's just a matter of how we believe and interpret those twos.  

mcornetto...i understand.  It's so hard to see an excellent novel on a screen just as the way a reader wants to see, especially to direct this kind of mind blowing challange novel.  I don't honestly know which part was harder for Kubrick.  Transforming the great King's book into a script, or directing that script.  I just found out that he made a Steadicam on a special mount to follow Danny's tricycle to create an extended tracking shot.  



A lie has traveled around the world while the truth is putting the shoes on.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 6 - 10
DarrenJamesSeeley
Posted: March 31st, 2011, 9:26pm Report to Moderator
January Project Group



Location
Michigan.USA
Posts
1522
Posts Per Day
0.31

Quoted from mcornetto
While the Shining is a masterfully made movie, I think it's an absoulute shame what Kubrik did to one of Stephen Kings best novels.   He turned what was a fantastic ghost story into a domestic tragedy that was nothing like the book at all.   And while I appreciate the filmmaking that went into it, and while it made you jump in a few places, I can't really say it was all that effective as a horror story.    


It's an odd thing with me. See, there's a lot of stuff in Kubrick's film which I (and others) truly enjoy. One of the best things was the mild hint at the supernatural, aside from the psychic bit of The Shining. The real horror, it is suggested, is the meltdown of Jack Torrence, through stress and being under influence, going mad. That's also why the supernatural works- there are things that cannot (and should not) be explained.

Why is it an oddity for me- well, I also loved the '97 miniseries which King adapted from his own novel, directed by Mick Garris, in which Jack Torrence is clearly more influenced by the supernatural events and /or characters in the Overlook. I actually like it better than the Kubrick film to some small degree- but only because it is more faithful to the book and had better payoffs to the characters. It is the Kubrick version that has the most iconic shots- blood rivers in the hallway, the steadicam use,  and the hedge maze. None of that can be forgotten- but the miniseries was more satisfying in character and story, in my view.


"I know you want to work for Mo Fuzz. And Mo Fuzz wants you to. But first, I'm going to need to you do something for me... on spec." - Mo Fuzz, Tapeheads, 1988
my scripts on ss : http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?m-1095531482/s-45/#num48
The Art!http://www.simplyscripts.net/cgi-bin/Blah/Blah.pl?b-knowyou/m-1190561532/s-105/#num106
Logged Offline
Site Private Message AIM YIM Reply: 7 - 10
Electric Dreamer
Posted: April 1st, 2011, 2:00am Report to Moderator
Old Timer


Taking a long vacation from the holidays.

Location
Los Angeles
Posts
2740
Posts Per Day
0.55
I'm firmly seated in the Cornetto section on this film.
However, this video essay gives insight into Kubrick's power as a film maker.

E.D.



LATEST NEWS

CineVita Films
is producing a short based on my new feature!

A list of my scripts can be found here.
Logged
Private Message Reply: 8 - 10
Dreamscale
Posted: April 1st, 2011, 10:46am Report to Moderator
Guest User



I've never been a big fan of the film.  I thought it was a huge letdown from the novel, which is SO MUCH BETTER!

IMO, the film is overblown and underwhelms in every category.

Now, don't get me wrong, I didn't hate it in any way either, and have seen it many times.  I just expected so much more, but we'll probably never get a classic King novel turned into a truly great film.
Logged
e-mail Reply: 9 - 10
coldbug
Posted: April 1st, 2011, 10:57am Report to Moderator
New



Location
35 degrees north latitude, 85 degrees west latitude
Posts
81
Posts Per Day
0.02
I guess the black and white photo at the end was not in the book.  It was another trick of Kubrick.


A lie has traveled around the world while the truth is putting the shoes on.
Logged Offline
Private Message Reply: 10 - 10
 Pages: 1
Recommend Print

Locked Board Board Index    Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  [ previous | next ] Switch to:
Was Portal Recent Posts Home Help Calendar Search Register Login

Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post polls
You may not post attachments
HTML is on
Blah Code is on
Smilies are on


Powered by E-Blah Platinum 9.71B © 2001-2006