Question about The Shining...[SPOILERS INSIDE] - Page 2

John Hodson · 10-01-2005, 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeyserSoze

I have the R2 version, is it worth picking up the US version for extended scenes ?

Well, they don't add a great deal to the film IMHO; apparently Kubrick favoured the better paced European cut and I wouldn't argue with him. Even knowing that, I did buy the R1 version on the basis that you can't have too much of either Mr Kubrick or Mr Nicholson (well, with the latter, sometimes...)

As for Despin's King / Kubrick story, even if it's apocryphal, I rather hope that it's true...I was a big King fan right about the time I read the first edition of Salem's Lot, now I can't stand him and his narrative (hawk, spit, look...) tics.

anephric · 10-01-2005, 17:36

Erm... doesn't King contradict that 'apocryphal' story in the quote I quoted?

I prefer the longer cut of The Shining, btw: it fleshes out both Danny and Jack's characters a tad...

John Hodson · 10-01-2005, 17:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by anephric

Erm... doesn't King contradict that 'apocryphal' story in the quote I quoted?

Why so prickly? I did say, I'd like it to be true (I don't particularly care whether it is or it isn't, neither anecdote increases or decreases my lack of admiration for the self styled horror meister. Kubrick on the other hand...)

anephric · 10-01-2005, 18:01

Me prickly? Never, unless prodded

Seriously, I didn't mean to come across tart, it's just that he does contradict that story...

Guest 33484 · 10-01-2005, 18:31

I own the extended DVD cut on R1 - I figure that extra Kubrick is not a bad thing.

Guest 33312 · 10-01-2005, 18:44

The Extended American cut was on sky cinema last night. Anyone with sky/cable might want to keep their eyes out in case of another showing...

John Hodson · 10-01-2005, 19:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by anephric

Me prickly? Never, unless prodded

Or pecked

Quote:

Originally Posted by anephric

...it's just that he does contradict that story...

Maybe he's a mass of contradictions, a big fat liar (or a tart...) King's a shameless self-publicist who has contradicted himself time and again both in word and deed.

And, you have to admit, that story was soooo Kubrick...

anephric · 10-01-2005, 23:37

Yessss, but if I believed everything of that ilk the bitchy brickbats of Mr. Raphael start to hold more allure and... well... I've already convinced myself they're the pejorative rhetoric of a wounded intellectual.

And I quite like Mr. King. Well, up until about 1985 I quite like Mr. King.

John Hodson · 10-01-2005, 23:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by anephric

And I quite like Mr. King. Well, up until about 1985 I quite like Mr. King.

Sounds like a decent cut-off date here too.

Guest 29 · 11-01-2005, 18:09

I think the last King novel I really enjoyed was "It" which would make the 1985/86 cut off point valid for me too.

Guest 8645 · 14-01-2005, 00:36

King has always liked 'The Shining' as a film, In fact in 'Danse Macabre' he lists the horror movies that everyone should see and sure enough, the Shining is in there. However, King thought it was a poor adaptation of his work and I'm inclined to agree. The downfall of Jack is just far more tragic in King's original work and far more believeable. As has been mentioned many many times though, Nicholson is seemingly insane from the start and typically of Kubrick, it was more a style over substance piece anyway.

DanWilde1966 · 14-01-2005, 08:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrossePointeJack

...typically of Kubrick, it was more a style over substance piece anyway.

This is true. What is the purpose of the blood coming out of the elevator, other than to create a striking visual image? (As Pauline Kael noted in her New Yorker piece - no one in the film actually uses the elevator...) And, of course, Jack Torrance fits neatly into the pantheon of Kubrick lunatics: Dr Strangelove, Sgt Hartman, Mr Alexander, the bellhop in Eyes Wide Shut, and so forth.

The-Colonel · 17-01-2005, 15:16

I aint seen the extended cut. Although the region 2 is good enough for me. Documentary and print quality are very good imo.

Guest 19096 · 17-01-2005, 15:24

I've seen both versions and in this case I prefer the shorter cut. The extended scenes don't really add that much in terms of story and really slow the film down. There also is a cutaway to some cobweb covered skeletons towards the end, which is more William Castle than Kubrick and doesn't fit with the style of the film.

Guest 3125 · 17-01-2005, 15:38

I totally argee with Reno. I have the extended cut and although I didn't really know what extra scenes I was expecting, i certainly hadn't figured on it to include cutting away to some half-assed ghost train props covered with fake spiderwebs! Totally wiped out all the wonderful tension and weirdness which had been building up - because I was left laughing in disbelief!

the thing with no name · 18-01-2005, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary Couzens

So that's you and me...I wonder who the other eight are?

I'm one, if that helps (sorry to drag off topic

)