Go Back   Forums @ The Digital Fix > Entertainment Discussion Forums > Film Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 25-03-2005, 18:16   #1
Guest 46475
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 26
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The Shining - which version to get?

Having never seen Kubrick's foray into the horror genre, I'm wondering which DVD is preferable for a newcomer? I know the R1’s cut is longer but the R2 is Kubrick's preferred version (and easier to procure from my standpoint since I live in the UK). So for someone who hasn't seen The Shining, which is a better starting point, the longer or the shorter version?

No spoliers!

Thanks.
Guest 46475 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 18:22   #2
Guest 28750
What the BBFC Ban, I Buy
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: What was the U.K
Posts: 2,335
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Got both and i'd say i prefer the Shorter, the longer slows down the film but does extend a few of the key scenes, actually its a hard one to judge. Get them both or whatever is cheaper.
Sorry i'm totally no help ignore me.
Guest 28750 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 18:26   #3
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
See this thread
__________________
So many films, so little time...
My Film Journal Blog
Emily Collingwood: I can't see him. All I can see is the flags...
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 18:26   #4
GarethH
Idle
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Posts: 5,964
Thanks: 9
Thanked 17 Times in 11 Posts
I prefer the shorter version myself, it just feels more concise. The long version does drag slightly, but the movie is fantastic either way.
__________________
Camera Body: 5D Mark III and 5D Mark II | Lenses: Canon 35L, Canon 135L, Canon 70-200L II, Canon 300 f4L, Sigma 85 f1.4, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, Tamron Di II 90 Macro
500px
GarethH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 18:53   #5
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Another vote for the shorter version. I've got both and only watched the longer cut once and never bothered again. I think the shorter version is more intense and exudes far more of an atmosphere of dread. The longer version blunts this for me.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 18:54   #6
ourmatetone
PSN/XBL/Steam: tone217
 
ourmatetone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chelmsford
Posts: 15,398
Thanks: 208
Thanked 153 Times in 99 Posts
Shorter, most definately. It was Kubrick's preferred version too apparently
ourmatetone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 19:09   #7
drush9999
Trusted User
 
drush9999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England - The Land of Do-As-You-Please?
Posts: 2,196
Thanks: 48
Thanked 36 Times in 31 Posts
I felt ripped when I got the shorter version on VHS years ago, had been watching the longer version from an ITV recording for years. Both versions are Kubrick friendly so it doesn't really matter.

I think the longer version has more tension and creepiness IMHO
drush9999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 21:49   #8
Guest 45586
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 912
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'd say there is no question that the longer version is far creepier - and this is not a conventional horror movie, like Carrie, that depends on shocks and surprises. It has a strange, haunting, meditative, cumulatively evil quality which suits the more leisurely running time. I think Kubrick only cut the film because he was dismayed by the indifferent box-office performance in the States - just as he did with 2001 which lost 20 minutes within a fortnight. First sequence to be cut was the hospital-set epilogue which is missing from all extant versions. Kubrick also cut the film - I think - because he really craved a mega-hit in the era of those early smashes from Lucas and Spielberg. Another reason to buy the R1 disc is the docu by Stanley's daughter which affords unique glimpses of the great man in the flesh. Perhaps one day we can see her docu on Full Metal Jacket which was shot and then buried by daddy.
Guest 45586 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-03-2005, 23:09   #9
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
The R2 disc has Vivian Kubrick's documentary as well (the R1 is identical to the R2 in this regard): as above I'd say buy both, considering it'd only set you back about a tenner...
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 00:17   #10
Guest 2449
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 111
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The longer version is more explicit and less effective. The shorter version depicts events from Jack's alientated POV and is more unsettling - gets my vote. Film-making lesson: 'How to Make a Spooky Movie in Stark Lighting, thereby avoiding Dimly Lit Cliches and Cats jumping out of Cupboards'.
Guest 2449 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 12:45   #11
DanWilde1966
I no longer post here.
 
DanWilde1966's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,006
Thanks: 28
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
The only problem with the shorter version, is that it's the work of a man who took too much notice of the critics in 1980, and effectively appeased them. The critics (typically, for a new Kubrick film), were extremely negative, so Kubrick cut the film by well-over twenty minutes. Kubrick may well have come to nominate the shorter version as his preferred cut, but it was not his original vision - auteurists take note!
DanWilde1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 13:46   #12
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
In line with the above statement, at least both versions of The Shining are available - I'd kill to see Kubrick's original cut of 2001 before he listened to nags nagging that it was too long.
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 14:38   #13
DanWilde1966
I no longer post here.
 
DanWilde1966's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,006
Thanks: 28
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
The deeply annoying thing about "the critics" (without wishing to generalise), was that the same people who slated the original cuts of 2001 and The Shining, later extolled their virtues as masterpieces without the barest hint of apology for their earlier misunderstandings and misguidedness. In ten years time, we will be listening to "them" laud Eyes Wide Shut as a classic, as if that had always been their assessment...
DanWilde1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 14:57   #14
John Hodson
Out to lunch...
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bolton, Lancashire
Posts: 12,507
Thanks: 9
Thanked 55 Times in 4 Posts
I've always liked EWS, though I approached it prepared to be disappointed. The films don't change, we do, our characters, our perceptions; who knows, in 10 years time I might think it a pile of old poo? But at least we'll have enough distance behind us to judge its worth as a genuine classic. I've a funny feeling it will stand the test of time.

Apologies for going OT...

Last edited by John Hodson; 26-03-2005 at 15:08.
John Hodson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 15:09   #15
Richie
Trusted User
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 23,671
Thanks: 238
Thanked 159 Times in 82 Posts
"The movie never changes, it can't change. But every time you see it, it seems different because you're different."
Richie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 15:10   #16
anephric
Kidney Thief
 
anephric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Derby, UK
Posts: 22,698
Thanks: 33
Thanked 120 Times in 76 Posts
Just to wax cynical, I very much liked EWS on a first viewing but have liked it less and less on subsequent occasions... what I initially took to be deeply mordant satire (with deliberately plastic erotic representations) now comes across as an earnestly ill-informed fumble at dissecting modern sexual mores.

Last edited by anephric; 26-03-2005 at 15:50.
anephric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-03-2005, 15:43   #17
DanWilde1966
I no longer post here.
 
DanWilde1966's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,006
Thanks: 28
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by anephric
Just to wax cynical, I very much liked EWS on a first viewing but have like it less and less on subsequent occasions... what I initially took to be deeply mordant satire (with deliberately plastic erotic representations) now comes across as an earnestly ill-informed fumble at dissecting modern sexual mores.
If EWS is at attempt at eroticism, it is utterly feeble. What I love about it is the defiantly sloowww pace, the sheer craft, and Cruise's performance. One can pick holes in most Kubrick films (am I the only person who considers Full Metal Jacket his worst film - an utter miscalculation?), but most of them have qualities that transcend what most other practitioners of film have able to achieve.
DanWilde1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-03-2005, 23:25   #18
Guest 993
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 16,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanWilde1966
The only problem with the shorter version, is that it's the work of a man who took too much notice of the critics in 1980, and effectively appeased them. The critics (typically, for a new Kubrick film), were extremely negative, so Kubrick cut the film by well-over twenty minutes. Kubrick may well have come to nominate the shorter version as his preferred cut, but it was not his original vision - auteurists take note!
Exactly. If there's one criticism of Kubrick, it's this. 2001, Clockwork Orange, The Shining, Eyes Wide Shut, all suffered due to taking too much notice of critics and newspapers (though in the case of Clockwork Orange it did supposedly involve death threats). Thankfully (except for 2001) the original versions are available in one region or another (and that Clockwork Orange got released in the UK eventually). Lucas take note

Personally though, the longer version is the one for me. There are a whole load of classic scenes with Scatman Crothers for starters.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie
"The movie never changes, it can't change"
Except if your name is George Lucas
Guest 993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-2005, 07:30   #19
Guest 3532
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Stratford Upon Avon, England
Posts: 845
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drush9999
I felt ripped when I got the shorter version on VHS years ago, had been watching the longer version from an ITV recording for years. Both versions are Kubrick friendly so it doesn't really matter.

I think the longer version has more tension and creepiness IMHO
If I wasn't sure that I've always posted under the name Dr Derek Doctors then I'd swear this post was by me as I have the exact same sentiments. Grew up with the lovely ITV cut with all the brilliant scene-setting and slow build-up of dread. Bought the VHS and was horrified to see how much of it was missing.
Guest 3532 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-03-2005, 08:54   #20
dangermouse
Trusted User
 
dangermouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,165
Thanks: 1
Thanked 19 Times in 11 Posts
Warner Brothers announced in their Home Theatre Forums webchat that there will new special editions of the Kubrick movies in 2006, so it will be interesting to see what happens (im hoping from audio commentaries from cast/film historians)
dangermouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
Anne Jackson, Barry Dennen, Barry Nelson, Danny Lloyd, Diane Johnson, Jack Nicholson, Jan Harlan, Joe Turkel, Lisa Burns, Louise Burns, Martin Richards, Norman Gay, Philip Stone, Rachel Elkind, Scatman Crothers, Shelley Duvall, Stanley Kubrick, Stephen King, The Shining, Tony Burton, Vivian Kubrick, Wendy Carlos

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 17:51.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.qq
Copyright ©2000 - 2021 Network N Ltd.