Kubrick Vs. King | The Shining - Comparing Book to Movie
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 เม.ย. 2022
- In this video I provide a comprehensive comparison of Stephen King’s The Shining and Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.
We talk about what both did well and what both did not do well. Also discuss which ending was more impactful to the overall story.
SPOILERS!!!!!
DO NOT WATCH IF YOU ARE AVOIDING SPOILERS!!!
Enjoy! 🍻
My oversimplified take has always been: The best stuff from the book isn't in the movie, but the best stuff from the movie isn't in the book. I love them both! Also I think Doctor Sleep (the movie) is underrated for how well it brought together The Shining (book), The Shining (movie), and Doctor Sleep (book) into one cohesive film. If anyone is a fan of The Shining and hasn't read Doctor Sleep, and in turn watched that movie, you should! Jimmy I would love for you to do that as another video to follow-up on the sequels!!!
Bruh wtf thanks this was actually so helpful. Was thinking about reading and watching doctor sleep but didn’t wanna waste my time. But I think you’ve convinced me
The Dr sleep book was better than the shining book, in my opinion.
But the Dr sleep movie was absolutely dog water.
What I've heard for why Kubrick changed the number of the room (and it may not be true) is that the actual hotel owners in real life wanted him to use a number that wasn't actually a number for an actual room in the hotel so people who watched the movie wouldn't be frightened to stay in the room.
Interesting. Thanks for this. It makes sense if this were the case.
Yes, I have heard this reason as well. Ironically I think this room is the most requested room to stay in.
Ironically, Room 217 is the most requested room at Tmberline Lodge 😂.
The Stanley Hotel which is the hotel that the overlook is based off of and also used in the mini-series room 217 is one of the most requested rooms and popular rooms I have stayed in room 217 at the Stanley Hotel before also
I just read the novel last month for the first time. Really loved it. Kubrick's film as an adaptation is obviously not a great adaptation in terms of the story. But I do feel like Kubrick nailed the themes of isolation, psychosis and overall terror. Both film and novel are awesome. Love the content man.
I couldn’t agree with you more. Thanks! 🍻
I really liked how in the book Danny confronts his father calling him a false face. That how part broke my heart. The last remnants of his father fighting through to tell Danny that he loves him and to run.
I would like to see some more comparison videos between the books and movie or television adaptations. Keep up the good work!
One thing I liked about the book more is the fact that Jack had a mallet instead of the axe. The scene on the stairs where he beat Wendy with it was terrifying, it was good because a mallet was more painful over a quicker death from the axe.
The one thing I like a lot about the book is Jack’s love for Danny. I love the ending of the book so much more because even after the hotel has swallowed up Jack, he comes back for a couple seconds to tell Danny to run and that he loves him. To prove that Jack isn’t actually insane, but the hotel is feeding off him.
Jack's research is a really key difference. In the movie, Jack becomes uncreative as a result of the time in the hotel. In the book, the Overlook seems to seduce him by offering him a chance to do some creative work. Jack in the novel starts being unable to write the play.
Great video, congrats on the 10k subs!
Thanks Allan! 🍻
Great comparison. I really have nothing to add. I like that you really did justice to the movie too: movies are movies, they have their own constraints and all. Great video.
Really looking forward to a comparison between IT, the novel, and the latest IT movies.
Take care.
Thanks Gabriel! Great idea doing this with IT!
I'm happy to have both! Two titans of their respective medium at the top of their game, and we all just get to benefit.
Great video. Regarding the room change from 217 to 237, the hotel that Kubrick used for the exterior shots asked him not to use 217 because they were worried guests would not want to use room #217 after seeing the movie. So Kubrick used 237 because there is no Room #237 in that hotel. I've read this several times over the years so I'm assuming it's true :)
edit: i see someone answered this already. anyway great video :)
Great video, also love that shirt👍
Keen for more content like this would love to see some for the other Stephen king adaptions
Love this sort of video, would love to see more Stephen king - book v adaptation videos
Awesome as usual. King is one of my favorites and Kubrick is one of my favorites so I loved this!
Hi Jimmy 🙀 Thanx for another great video !!!! For me personally I LOVE THE BOOK but then I am 100% book nerd - LOVE MY BOOKS ALWAYS. I do enjoy the movie - I am a bit of a Jack fan and yes this was and will always be one of his best ever performances and I also just LOVE the spookiness in the movie. But if I have to chose it will have to be the book. Thank You for this - really enjoy ALL your videos 😈
Thanks Pauli! I agree with you. It’s tough for movies to top books in my opinion.
Hey! I’m new here. I’m bench watching your videos. I love to hear your thoughts on the S.K books. I wish you could do Tik Toks or TH-cam Shorts of book recommendations, maybe it would be easier to post more frequently. I would love to hear more book recommendations from you. Keep up with the good work.
My favorite King novel! I actually read the book before I watched the movie. I was a bit surprised by the differences. I do think the movie nailed the bartender scenes though. As always, love your content man! Keep ‘em comin
Thanks Blake! 🍻
I liked the book, a lot. Last time I checked, it's in my top-10 King novels and I plan to read it again someday. That said, the Kubrick film is still a more engaging piece of pure art. 40+ years after its release and it continues to demand from its viewers a level of attention and insight that is uncommon among popular films. Just last year I discovered "The Wendy Theory" and it added yet another layer to the film's complexity. (Seriously, look up this theory. A compelling explanation of why Jack is crazy from the start and why he may not be the main character.)
I don't necessarily begrudge King for his opinion of what Kubrick did with the source material, but it's because of this bias (and how nasty and personal King has gotten about Kubrick) that makes him an unreliable witness on the subject. Though one thing I did like more about the book is King's version of Danny, specifically his imaginary friend "Tony" and who exactly that being was, which King gratefully expanded on in the screenplay for the 1997 TV miniseries. Still my favorite ending, but it just wouldn't have worked with the Kubrick film.
Great topic, Mango.
Thanks! I am definitely going to look up that “Wendy theory”.
I am little late to finding your video. The movie had one little nod to Jack doing research. If you look closely when Jack is at the table typing, you can see the scrapbook open next to his typewriter. I just noticed this the other night when my wife and I watched the movie after I reread the book. Enjoying your content
04:27
I agree, he seems crazy the entire time because it’s Jack Nicholson and he’s just like that. I don’t really think that’s a bad thing though he certainly showed some depth of decline in his portrayal. His subtle remarks and acting during the ghost scenes were great. Definitely a flat villain in the film though.
Great analysis, couldn't agree more. Did you know they made a TV mini-series for The Shining? I haven't seen it in years so I'm not sure how well it's aged, however, I remember it being more faithful to the novel. They attempted the animal topiary scene, I think the low budget cgi didn't do it true justice but I like that they went for it. The maze was cool, but for me that scene in the book was the scariest part of the novel. Anywho, loved to know what you thought of that adaption too. Take care!
Thanks! I’ll see if I can check that out!
Love what you did with this video!
I like how you point out a lot of close details to make your comparisons between the book and the movie. I especially like how you take a stance and vote for one over the other at the end, but also keep it light and open it up to a friendly discussion of other opinions. Awesome stuff!
If anyone is looking for similar videos comparing books to their movie adaptations, consider checking out this channel I'm commenting from right now. My brother and I recently started a series called Adaptation Station where we each rate books and their movie adaptations. The twist is that one of us reads the book first, then watches the movie. The other watches the movie first, then reads the book. We have a spoiler-filled discussion of the comparisons (which you can skip over if you're just looking for the ratings). Finally, we give you our recommendations for which order gives you the best experience.
We have two episodes out now and more on the way. We even plan on doing a Stephen King episode in the near future. (So stay tuned!)
Anyways, that's the end of my ad.
Thanks for making a cool video, Jimmy!
-Dillon
I love the novel and the movie, planning to re-read the novel soon as it had been years since I last read it and it's one of my favourites!
It's my understanding that the change in the room number from 217 to 237 was due to the hotel in which they filmed a lot of the interior shots being concerned that people would see the film and specifically request not to be put in room 217. So it was changed to 237 since there was no room with that number in the actual hotel. It wasn't intended as a slap in the face of Stephen King by Stanley Kubrick.
....because the way Stanley Kubrick went about doing THAT was the brief shot of a red Volkswagen Beetle completely smashed up on the side of the road as Dick is passing it on his way to the Overlook. Since the red Beetle was the Torrence's car in the novel,this was Kubrick's way of sending the message that this film was telling HIS story,and he would rework and/or discard whatever he felt was necessary.
I'm PRETTY sure that both of these stories are accurate,but I recommend that you take it with a grain of salt anyway. You know how pop culture myths can be started and then perpetuated through the years.
Hi Jimmy, what Dean Koontz novels would you recommend? Thanks
Harvey. I really liked Dragon Tears and Night Chills.
@@jimmymango Thank you!
I really like your videos and you have helped me get back into reading! Great idea having a movie adaptation video (hopefully series)! Great way to switch up the typical book review format. Keep "em comin man!
Thanks Vince! 🍻
Thank you for the video! It was great. I read The Shining the first time in 2019 because I really wanted to read Dr Sleep. Maybe because the Shining of Kubrick was about the first horror movie I ever had seen I think I ended up liking that movie better. Actually I liked Dr Sleep better then both of them.
Great comparison, thanks for not just dumping on the movie.
Kubrick’s version was Striking with its Iconic Imagery and sense of Dread
Loved it
The book fleshes Jack out a lot
For me personally I like the movie more
Kubrick creates a visual tapestry that still resonates today
Enjoy your channel very much. I enjoyed your analysis of the book vs. the movie. FYI: Microfilm readers are still used in libraries
across the United States. Microfiche (pronounced microfish) are the flat sheets of film that make up a roll of microfilm. The room
change from 217 to 237 was requested by the Timberline Lodge in Oregon, which is the hotel pictured in the movie. The Stanley
Hotel located in Estes Park, CO was the inspiration for the "Overlook Hotel" in the movie. Stephen and Tabitha King stayed at the Stanley Hotel one night in room 217 in September 1974. They were told by the management that this room was haunted. (Apparently both the Timberline Lodge in OR and the Stanley Hotel in CO have been considered "haunted" for many, many decades.)
The Timberline Lodge doesn't have a room 237, but the Stephen King's "book" fans know to ask for the "real deal", room 217. The
Stanley Hotel has both, room 217 and room 237, so you can take your pick. Spend one night in one, and the next night in the other.
Thank you for this! Very informative!
I found this video really interesting, and I was thinking about much of the same as well. I didn't watch and read the Shinning back to back, so your point of view was war more educated than mine, and you saw many more details. Also was nice to look from someone else's point of view on the matter. And because you enjoy moves as well as books, I think you should consider making this a series, like "book vs move" or something. There are so many great books made into great movies that are so different from each other, like The Exorcist, Jaws, Rosemary's Baby and so much more(not to mention all the moves based on Stephen King's books)... My point is - I would like to see more of those, but you're the one who can tell if this video did well for you or not. And I guess those are not easy to make, because you will need to read and watch everything again, to make an educated comparison. But maybe when you do re-read some of those adapted books, you can watch the move too:)
It was posted over an year ago, so I doubt you will see this comment, but I've only recently discovered your channel, so I had to try:) Keep it up!
I’ve seen the comment and thank you. I agree that I should do more of these comparisons. Thanks for the suggestion!
From what I’ve heard and seen from various documentary’s on the movie, one of the reasons I’ve heard why Kubrick changed the room number was because of the real hotel that inspired the story( The Stanley Hotel), which really has a room 217.
The word was that the managers of the hotel contacted Kubrick and requested that he change the number because they were worried guests wouldn’t want to rent the room because they would think it was really haunted. The hotel doesn’t have 237 rooms, so he changed it to that random number. 🤷♂️🤷♂️
But that’s just one explanation. Another one leads into a grand conspiracy theory which involves Stanley Kubrick faking the Moon Landing with NASA, while he was filming 2001: a Space Odyssey. Apparently, the amount of space between the Earth and The Moon are exactly 237,000 miles apart, and Kubrick put the number 237 in The Shining as a subtle confession to faking the moon landing. 🤷♂️🤷♂️ Yeah… that’s what people really think of this🤣
Wow! You’re the second person to mention the first reason. The moon landing one is pretty out there…but who am I to judge. Anything is possible I guess.
@@jimmymango Yeah there’s a whole boatload of theories about what the movie “really means” , and the messages it has hidden throughout. There are some real doozies out there. 🤔
@@theroamer2355 hey boss, that moon landing conspiracy was probably gotten from a documentary called room 237. If you havent seen it, its got a lot of theories about the movie
I've heard it was the hotel they filmed in, not the Stanley, wanted the room number changed for the reason you stated. Funny enough, 217 is Stanley's most requested room. It gets booked like months in advance
For me the book is far better than the movie. I love how strong Wendy is in the book. Also how we see that the hotel is that makes Jack goes crazy.
Is a new video upload up soon?
Soon…next week for sure!
Love your vids...Microfishe is pronouncd "Micro-fish" and is long dead as we know....I remember this at Uni in my day. :)
Just finished rereading the book (I think it's my fourth time) and it was my favorite King novel for years. But I noticed things much more after having a kid. And I'm surprised no comments mentioned it. I think King wrote Danny far too smart as a five year old and inconsistently smart, sometimes within pages of each other (like he couldn't possibly comprehend why a woman wanted to get into a guy's pants, but then says he doesn't want to listen in on Mommy and Daddy's naked time where they do things in their pants...).
King, and you, mentioned, that the "shine" gave him insight far beyond his years, but I don't think reading minds would give deep insight into comprehending death, and ghosts, and Overlook's subliminal intentions. He even said that he knew that the hotel was using his Daddy far early in the book, but when Wendy said the hotel was using Jack at the end, Danny was shocked into tears. And I can't tell if the inconsistencies was poor writing on King's part, or brilliant writing of a child with conflicting internal levels of comprehension. I do assume the latter btw, but I just wish he would have been portrayed as seven or eight.
My son is now six and I hate to seem like I'm bragging, but the kid is brilliant: puzzles, video games, and incredibly artistic and socially adept. And he goes to a high-expectation school and is getting straight A's. However, Danny would make him seem like a dunce in comparison. I mean, seriously, "go ahead and kill me if you are going to because you are a false face"). That's a line that mature protagonists give at the end of action movie to the bad guy to fane bravery as a delay tactic right before they grab the gun on the floor two feet away, and it's ridiculous when adults in books and movies do it, but a five year old? Nah. Not buying it.
So, if you read this far, I LOVED how the movie actually made Danny a child. But I did want to over-expand upon why.
Still love the book and movie!
I would love you to do a review of the mini-series. 🙂
I liked the book a lot better as well. That being said, I agree that both Nicholson and Duvall gave great performances.
I'm kind of hoping that there is a remake done sometime in the near future, that follows the book a bit better. Resurrected wasps, George Hatfield, better relationship between Jack and Wendy, George Hatfield etc.
I must admit I’m a little biased in regards to this subject. I’ve never really enjoyed any of Kubrick’s movies. He seems to keep everything mono toned and flat.when you compare full metal jacket to platoon or Apocalypse now is the best example I can give. It seems he always has problems with source material and uses it more as an outline. I read the shining 40 years ago and couldn’t wait for the movie to be made. Big disappointment. I know king is hard to adapt at least for some and certainly miss matched with Kubrick. Good video I agree with most of what you said. The only thing I would give Kubrick is I like the hedge maze more than the animal topiary. Thank you for your opinions I watched a bunch of your videos and got some good reads out of them
I also read the Shining before the movie came out and thought it was a huge disappointment, for the same reasons you mentioned. The film is just another slasher flick, the book is a masterpiece of a psychological thriller.
Jimmy, cool shirt! I love your videos! The most honest and non pretentious booktuber! I think Kubrick changed Dick's story to portrait some killing in the movie, and to show that Jack completely lost it. From that point on you knew he would kill his wife and son for real.
Thanks for the compliment! That’s an interesting reasoning behind it. I guess outside of Dick there really wasn’t any opportunity to put in a kill.
They're both great. I understand why Kubrick made the changes he did to make the film the best he could. I think some elements wouldn't have translated to screen with the limited technology of 1980, i.e. the hedge animals.
I think if he would have made a direct translation from the novel, it would have affected the pacing. It's perfectly paced as is, but digging into the basement would have slowed it down in the middle.
The omission of Jack's backstory does seem to me that it watered down his character and just made him a bogeyman.
In The movie jack used an axe and in the book it was a mallet ? And I agree that the axe looks more scary on a crazy dude. Love ur vids man, big stephen king fan here
please make a video like thia on "It" book vs two movies.
Glad to have found this channel. I'm a totally blind Stephen King nut, and I've read nearly everything via the mostly-fantastic audio books. King has been lucky enough to get some amazing narrators on his books, and though he will deny it, he's not so bad himself. Great video, and keep 'em coming!
Thanks Brandon! 🍻
There is also a little known three part mini series with Rebecca de mornay. Apparently king prefared this over Kubrick's. I haven't seen it myself so cannot comment. I'm going for book too though far superior.
The 1997 miniseries has received _a lot_ of negative criticism (though it was well received at the time). It's very different from Kubrick's film. It was shot in the actual Stanley Hotel which was a source of King's inspiration. In my opinion it's an excellent faithful interpretation of King's story. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shining_(miniseries)
I'm a fan of the book. As you mentioned, the decline of Jack Torrence was a slower burn and a bigger build of suspense. It was the hotel that was playing on his weaknesses and causing him to lose his mind. In the movie, that wasn't clear, and as a result, the supernatural elements didn't make sense.
The movie was basically a slasher flick, whereas the book was a tense psychological thriller.
It can’t be anymore sideways than it actually is. The Shining book is a generic ghost story. It takes elements of horror we’ve seen done death already.
The film actually knows psychological terror but because Kubrick actually knows how to direct metaphors for the human mind. Take the hedge maze as example. It’s a symbolism for the entirety of the film. It’s symbolism for The Overlook, an never answered mystery. It’s symbolism for Jack, never having any rest or being fully consumed by the Overlook, unable to escape.
It’s actually scary because the more and more you get twisted and turned inside a maze, overwhelming thoughts of if you’re going to escape or not overtake your mind.
Or take the blood elevator. That scene is terrifying because no one knows what the hell happened in their, it’s terrifying to think about.
Also, Jack was being influenced by his own insanity due too cabin fever. Wendy sees ghost just like Jack and Danny because she has the shining like them.
It’s not that hard too understand, we’re you even paying attention?
@PrinceAliTheGreatest Was the snark necessary? Can you have a different interpretation without being rude? The story was about a lot more than "cabin fever", and there is zero indication that either Jack or Wendy had "The Shine".
Spot on ! I agree with everything you said. The novel is absolutely perfect, except for the hedge animals. They are the only weak link in the book.
The '97 television remake was 4 hours 43 minutes, and many people sat through the entire thing... It was very accurate to the book, if I recall correctly.
It has been compared unfavorably with Kubrick's version, but I have no idea why. I don't understand the worship of Kubrick at all.
Read the novel and then watched the movie for the first time this week. The lack of character development really disappointed me BUT, the final 30-45 minutes of the movie was incredible. If I just mentally insert all of the novel's development into the first half of the movie, the final act is perfection. Jack Nicholson knocked it out of the park
We could say, Jack was drinking "boos"
...
😅
LOL
Could you do a beginner’s guide to Stephen King? I want to get into his books but I know that some of them are in the same universe and such and I don’t know where to start.
If you want a conspiracy take on why Kubrick changed the number of the room, it was due to his involvement in filming the original Apollo moon landing! 237 is the number of miles to the moon! There’s actually a fantastic documentary about all the things Kubrick did with that movie and why the changes were made, my favorite being the color of the beetle being red in the novel and yellow in the movie and the scene with dick driving up in the snowstorm you see a crushed up red beetle, which many people take as Kubrick giving the middle finger to kings work ! Love your vids !
The reason they changes the room number from 217 to 237 was due to a request from the actual hotel. They changed it to 237 which doesn't actually exist in the real hotel because they were worried that people wouldn't want to stay in the real room 217 in the future
I personally prefer the movie, but I love both. The movie is my favourite movie of all time, and it is what I first saw that got me into books and movies, and I never would have read King if I hadn't seen this movie, so I may have a bit of bias towards it.
I think it's great as an adaptation, I know people might disagree, but some people are really hot on the topic, a lot of people hate the changes for the movie, but I think all changes were warranted. There's no way that 1980s CGI could pull off a living fire hose, living hedge animals, etc. And the change made for the hedge animals into a hedge maze was great as it served as a great final set piece. I understand why people don't like Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance, but again, the book is obviously going to go into more depth with the character, can't knock points off for that. I believe that Jack isn't a very good person, he has good in him, but he isn't a straight up good guy. I felt that the hotel went for Jack in particular because the hotel knew he had that darkness in him.
Also your comment on him being insane the whole time, it's Jack Nicholson. Even in the book, he is cold on the outside, but we view him as being warm and nice because we spend so much time inside his head and what he would like to be able to express. Also, when Jack is writing in the movie, he has the scrapbook next to him, it is something I didn't realise on the first viewing and I think a lot of people miss that little touch.
Agreed on Wendy, people say she was completely different but I thought she was great in both.
I also prefer how much more isolated the film is, in the book there's a lot of connections to the outside world and it released all tension but the movie kept me feeling trapped and claustrophobic the whole time.
Anyway I'll stop, because I could go on forever, but I am glad to see a King fan try be objective on this manner! So many fans just shit all over the movie, seemingly just because King himself didn't care for it, but I'm glad to hear you justify your thoughts.
Thanks for this! You made some great points. I had no idea the scrapbook was even in the movie even if In only a subtle way.
@@jimmymango Cheers! Keep these kinds of videos going! I really enjoy them, also I'm currently following your Dark Tower guide as well. Reading Eyes of the Dragon now, then I might veer off course to read Under The Dome next, but then I'll be onto The Talisman.
They changed the room number from 217 to 237 because 237 isn’t an actual room number at the hotel where the movie was filmed. They didn’t want to deter people from staying in that room after the movie came out
Kubrick understood story telling better than King, hands down. Even aside from the difference in mediums.
Kubrick’s Jack is more terrifying. A Jack who is a good guy and becomes evil is pretty nonsensical. A Jack who’s already abusive and is right on the edge of snapping creates tension from the very first scene. His family has already been isolated emotionally, and now they’re further isolated within this hotel, and the hotel only needs to nudge Jack to fulfill his obligation (as the hotel’s evil reincarnate). Much scarier than a happy family, and all-of-a-sudden dad’s evil because the ghosts did ghost magic.
This is one of the better pro-Kubrick takes I’ve heard. Thank you.
@@jimmymango Don’t get me wrong. I like Stephen King’s story telling ability. But I think Kubrick’s adaptation might be a bit overlooked in some ways, but namely _why_ it’s terrifying. He created less of a horror movie adaptation, and more of a psychological rollercoaster that hits the viewer in the kisser by making a massive building feel claustrophobic. Jack’s attitude, and Wendy’s (and Danny’s), disposition therein heighten the mood of the hotel in my mind.
I know a lot of people say that her character was pointless, but I think the nature of her character is the only thing that makes Jack scary.
Can you make one about Christine? Book vs Movie
Both the book and the film are great. It's okay to like both. It's also okay for a film to depart from the source material. It doesn't matter what Stephen King thinks or whether he liked it or not. The only thing I don't like about the film is the casting of Jack Nicholson. That doesn't mean I don't like it. The film works as a whole. But Kubrick should've went with Robert De Niro, whom he was considering in the first place. Or Al Pacino.
I think the room number in the movie is a reference to “Doctor Strangelove”.
For some reason your SK all novels ranked was recommended, I can appreciate that. Do you Koontz tho? I know people prefer one over the other, I think they both are tops. As to the Shining, Novel>Kubrick>Made for T.V.
I’m making my way through Koontz slowly. I enjoy him but not as much as King.
Definitely check out King's miniseries version from 1997. Obviously different actors and performances but much closer to the book as an adaptation.
Kubrick originally wanted to use the hedge animal topiary from the book but couldn't figure out how to do it. The maze is a really good compromise. He also planned on more stuff with the scrapbook and history of the hotel but eventually trimmed it out. The topiary is in the miniseries and done very except for some extremely terrible CGI at one point. Cringe-inducing.
You Aldo need to read the sequel Doctor Sleep and then watch the 3 hour director's cut of the film.
Out of all the books I’ve read by King (Carrie, Salems Lot, The Stand, IT, The Gunslinger and this book) The Shining is definitely my favorite. There’s something about this book and the very deep story it tells really stands out in king’s Bibliography.
I full agree! There is a certain depth to this novel. Thanks for the comment! 🍻
@@jimmymango Your welcome! You know I just finished The Stand: extended cut. It was really good, and it got me wanting to start The Dark Tower series, mostly because i want to see what happens next with Mr. Randall Flagg. I’ve read the Gunslinger before, but only halfway. Are they a good read?
Yeah love the DT series. Especially 2-4! I’ve read that entire series twice and am planning a third read through.
I love the movie as an adaptation but overall the book is better. I also really like the TV mini series
My issue with the mini series was the set. I know it was filmed at Stanley for legitimacy but King didn't base the Overlook directly on Stanley. Stanley doesn't have the huge rooms and high ceilings and for me the set really suffers in comparison. I don't dislike the TV version but it's not one I go back to.
You look very stylish now, Jimmy. 😻
12:59 I think the word you're looking for is _microfiche_ (pronounced like "microfeesh"). 😉
Lol…thank you! I was hoping someone posted about this!
I liked the book so much better! Although I really enjoyed the movie for what it is
Kubrick supposedly chose 237 at the request of the hotel they used for the exterior shots. They didn't want 217 to become infamous there and they didn't have a 237
I love both but I'm team Kubrick on this one - I prefer the idea of it being up to interpretation whether or not the Overlook is haunted. King let's us know it's haunted for definite. Just a personal preference
they're both better than the TV adaptation.
Honestly I think that the debate stems from the fact both the book and the movie are pieces from two very different artists going for very different versions of the same story. There's parts of this video I disagree with and parts I do agree with, I think the biggest part I disagree with is the judgement that the backstory which is lacking in the film for Jack makes his character less engaging. The more spiritual nature of the horror in the Kubrick film I think fits the ambiguity of Jack and also a sequence explaining the background in a flashback or even a conversation would make the film's pace a lot worse. I agree with the judgement about Shelly Duvall and think her performance is incredibly underrated, I also think the judgement about Danny is accurate, but in all different ways the more interpretive version of Kubrick's movie is just a completely different work to King's more chunky narrative based book.
I'm pretty sure there is a part of the movie where Wendy is at what seems to be a boiler
Kubrick hired an author to write the book of the film “2001 A Space Odyssey” and purposely had that author misinformation about it and had him write scenes that got cut .... Kubrick wanted to make sure you couldn’t go to the book for answers. With The Shining, it’s the same deal. He took a book as inspiration and did his own thing with it. You can’t get secrets of the movie from the book... and that’s purposeful. You can’t read the shining and know what to expect from the film.
Movie for me
As a huge fan of the Kubrick film,I've always loved the movie and I never thought it could get better until I read the book. I agree completely when it comes to Halloran. I absolutely loved the ending in the book so much more.
He changed the room number because people would be afraid to stay in that room in real life, they made it a number that didn't exist.
The movie Wendy was terrible, she was just there to scream and be a weak helpless woman, I don't think she got a scratch on her, book Wendy took a beating and held her own against Jack.
And I think the book got across that at the end, it wasn't even Jack chasing Danny, it was the hotel.
Did you like the other version with steven weber as jack?
i always thought they changed the room number because 237 sounds cooler
They changed the room number because the hotel they used for a lot of shots actually had a room 217 and didn't want people afraid to sleep there.
he changed the number because the hotel they shot at told him to they didnt have a room 237 and they didnt want people to be afraid to stay in 217
Thanks Gus! 🍻
Room 217 is changed in the movie because the hotel had a room 217 and didn’t want to scare people away from the hotel. It wasn’t an artistic choice, the hotel that it’s set in required it
I wonder how your analysis would have been, had you compared the book to the miniseries. The miniseries is a more faithful adaptation than Kubrick’s, but I’m sure you’ve already thought of that.
I know it's a heavily debated subject, so let me end the debate by giving the correct answer to all the burning questions:
1. Is Stephen King's book The Shining a good book? CORRECT ANSWER: The Shining is one of his better books. Not the best, but among the better ones.
2. Did Stanley Kubrick make a good adaptation of Stephen King's book? CORRECT ANSWER: No. He was apparently told the gist of the story by a child with A.D.D. and then wrote the screenplay after taking mushrooms.
3. Is Stanley Kubrick's film scary? CORRECT ANSWER: No. It should be on Mystery Science Theater.
4. Is Stanley Kubrick's film good? CORRECT ANSWER: No. It's pretentious and boring melodrama.
Too bad that King do not make movies. I wonder if his movies would be as good as Kubricks. At least his storys are.
The book will always be better than the movie, but books don't always translate well into movies, point for point. This is especially true with King's work, as this was proven when The Shining was adapted into a mini-series in the mid 90's, that followed the book under King's supervision. The mini-series was weaker than Kubrick's movie, and it just shows that sometimes, liberties are needed to enhance an on-screen interpretation. It would be nice if you did a comparison of the Movie vs mini-series, and I am sure you would probably agree (I would imagine most would too).
Just finished the book, then the movie over the weekend! I’m also Team Book, but I did love aspects of both. However, I was shocked Kubrick didn’t incorporate Jack’s discovering the documents and more so I was disappointed the movie didn’t use “the phone call” scene where Jack really begins to tip into madness by outing the topic of his novel, disrespecting Al Shockley (the man who got Jack the job and has stake in the Overlook Hotel) in the process. And man, Kubrick did Dick Hallarann dirty. He was the undeniable hero of the story and to kill him off right as he walks into the hotel was a huge disappointment.
But I agree with you on everything you loved about the movie (exceptttt Shelly Duvall’s performance. I do feel people were too critical of her over the years, but Wendy had more nerve in the book than what was portrayed in the movie.
Just because it is an opinion doesn't mean you're wrong.
Good sidexside look.
Utube comment section, "Pshhh...This guy. I bet he doesn't even own a Stephen King book."
I am a Stephen King loyalist. I agree the book and movie are very different… I have a hard time getting past how Kubrick treated the actors. It was obsessive and I think abusive.
To me, I thought Jack toting that roque mallet in the book was far more sinister than the axe from the movie. An axe is such a cliche murder weapon. Kubrick's Shining is a great horror movie in a vacuum, but obviously not a great adaptation. He not only took too many liberties with the novel, but he fundamentally changed major themes from it as well (some of which are understandable, but still).
On a side note: I thought it was really impressive how the director of Doctor Sleep was able to incorporate canon from King's Shining and Kubrick's Shining into his movie. That was really well done
Dude book all the way.
I agree…but I was trying to be as unbiased as possible for the sake of the video.
@@jimmymango Smart.
Like the movie better.
I clicked on this video when recommended because of the title. I noticed afterwards that you are a King novel based channel. Since you have presumably read most if not all his works, I am wondering if you noticed his tendency towards gays: Not all his bad guys are gays, but all his gays or bisexuals are bad guys or victims. He has not a single character who is gay and just gay and not a stereotype or other problem.
His homophobia is very obvious to me... I am curious if you ever noticed it.
My first Stephen King novel I read was The Shining. I love the way it pulls you in. People do have to realize the movie and the book are their own stories. The movie was a masterpiece and the book was a masterpiece. I both love the movie and love the book. But they are almost completely different.
I didnt like Wendy wasnt blonde in movie😆
Great video. My own opinion is that the movie is far superior to the novel. When I read The Shining I really didn’t like it and it is ranked as one of the worst King reads for me. I recognise that it gets good once they are at The Overlook but it was the near 100 pages of unnecessary overwriting beforehand to get to The Overlook that ruined the novel for me. I won’t knock anyone who loves the novel though, but it just simply wasn’t for me.
The Dr sleep movie was cheeks, shitty ones.
The book was absolutely amazing.
There's no comparison. The movie makes King's book look self-absorbed and silly.
In the book, Jack (before he went bad) and Wendy Torrance WERE Stephen and Tabitha King.
In Kubrick's film, Jack and Wendy Torrance WERE- wait for it-
Stephen and Tabitha King.
And now you know the real reason King hated the film.
Brilliant!
I'm old..44 and love Kubrick for the fact he's insane. Whether or not he "abused" Shelley Duvall is not the issue. Just take note the amount of coke going up her nose while playing a hysterical terrified woman may have contributed to her "abuse." I say this as I've seen the video and am I former friend of coke so I know the high isn't that calm while chillin in the living room.
A lot of Stephen King movies don't translate to screen real well. Case in point, The Stand, phenomenal book but horrible Paramount production. The 90s series was good just as it was with "It" and "Salem's Lot" but I couldn't make it past episode 2 of Paramount's The Stand. Part 1 of It was awful, Part 2 was great.
Movies are made for mass audiences and they are visual. They have to be blunt so there is nothing left to interpretation so even the stupid can understand. I like horror movies that have a story, a puzzle to figure out but those are now Indie movies because the stupid people don't go to the movies to see them. They need visual problems, Jack goes crazy, Danny sees ghosts, Wendy screams and runs..all the time. Kubrick did an awesome job. To show the visual physical manifestation of Jack's alcoholism gradually from a wee shot to a fifth for breakfast by going from a bartender to a gala that's a hell of a director.
I love the book. I love the movie. I saw the movie when I was 9 and I didn't rewatch until I was 25 because of the bathtub scene. To say which is better is comparing apples and ostriches.
Salem's Lot, the miniseries scared a lot of us kids in the '80s. I'll never forget the terror of seeing Danny Glick at the window no matter how it's remade.
i think the movie was better than the book
Absolutely. It has so many more layers to it
The book is better, the movie is just very nihilistic and cold.
@@virgogaming6488 they're two very different, yet similar, stories. King's waa strictly horror while Kunrick's was psychological
I like the movie better too.
In my opinion its the only case where the movie is better than the book.
Kubrick did it better
I don't believe you read the book
Well it’s a good thing I don’t give a shit what you believe
Touche