|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
1.36.25.19
This video may change your mind.As film buffs you know that Kubrick was OCD when it came to every single shot in his films and no detail was overlooked or too small.
You will also know that Stephen King didn't like the film because it left parts out.
Well, this video has an entirely different take on the film and it's called the Wendy Theory where in fact there was no Shining in the Shining and that Jack was a good guy and in fact, it was Wendy who was batcrap crazy and was suffering from schizophrenia and Munchausen's syndrome.
Unfortunately, the narration is a robot voice style so if you can try to get past that and give it 10 minutes you can begin to see a very strong case for this theory. And that changes the entire film, the perspectives, and hell it changes the entire focus of the film's central character.
It's now a film about a mental disorder and not about supernatural abilities and ghosts in a hotel. There is a solid case to be made that it was Wendy suffering severe mental illness possibly brought on by isolation. Regardless, the analysis is a fun one.
Edits: 05/12/21Follow Ups:
Clint Eastwood's Blood Work also changed things, including who the "Bad Guy" was, in that story.
Unacceptable.
Over the years, THE SHINING, which, I admit, left me a bit underwhelmed when I first saw it, has grown mightily in its depth and scope since.This seems to happen with many of Kubrick's film, with 2001 being the most notable example. But I also remember being a bit disappointed with FULL METAL JACKET, which turned out to be something other than the jungle combat fantasmagoria I went to the theater seeking. Today, I consider it one of the finest films of the late 20th century.
Woody Allen admitted that he was unmoved by his first viewing of 2001, and found that after a second viewing, and a third viewing, he came to see it for the great artistic achievement it is.
He later declared (paraphrasing) that in 2001 "the vision of the artist so far exceeded the audience's ability to comprehend it" that it was vastly misunderstood.
I feel the same way about THE SHINING. It was viewed widely, at first, as a poorly executed version of King's ghost story. What is actually is, is a harrowing study of domestic violence and marital dysfunction which requires neither ghosts nor supernatural doings to convey its terrors. In fact, the ghosts can be viewed as almost superfluous.
It is epic in its portrayal of the heartlessness and self-indulgence of evil, and how alarmingly common are its causes.
BTW, there are many EXCELLENT Kubrick documentaries on Youtube, including the Cinema Tyler series, and REMEMBERING STANLY KUBRICK, among others.
Edits: 05/15/21
his greatest contribution to the horror genre was Lolita
be well,
I am a fan of Kubrick AND I didn't like "The Shining"
Did the video's new analysis change your view when looked at in a completely different light?
If the Wendy Theory holds then this is no longer a film about a fantastical hotel or a man who gets cabin fever and tries to kill his family.
In fact, in this light - it is perhaps about a woman who read "The Shining" by Stephen King and the novel is in her schizophrenic mind when she heads to a hotel.
No "Shining" and No ghosts - just a woman going mad. I would not put it past Kubrick to make you think you watched a movie you never really saw.
That Roger Ebert quote that Tin put up pretty much nails it, IMO.
We don't know who's version to believe.
" 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."
Indeed,
"Did Jack's violent pursuit of his wife and child exist entirely in Wendy's imagination, or Danny's, or theirs?" Roger Ebert
Anyway - it ranks as one of the great horror films regardless of how one views it but I suppose I think it is a stronger film from the Wendy Theory take for being her madness than simply a film about a haunted hotel with supernatural and evil powers.
A lot of support for her hallucinating most of what is going on makes sense.
I only like three of his movies: Paths of Glory, Dr. S and Barry Lyndon.
Ryan O'Neal was miscast.... The cinematography is nothing short of beautiful...
be in danger of being upstaged by props.
I think his ho-hum attitude is completely in place, I think.
And that music...
insisted that a top 10 box office star be given the role which at the time meant that Redford or O'Neal were the only choices. Redford being Kubrick's first choice turned it down to do The Great Waldo Pepper which left O'Neal.... Harris IMO is a MUCH better actor than either of the other two and probably would have been amazing! Marisa Berenson is one of the MOST beautiful women EVER period!
Sidney Pollack as Ziegler in EYES WIDE SHUT.
Harvey Keitel was supposed have the role, but had a falling out with Kubrick during the shoot. He was removed from the film, even though almost all of his scenes had been shot, and replaced by Pollack.
The official story was that Keitel had a scheduling conflict.
I still imagine how much better he would have been in the role, as a sneaky, weasel-ly duplicitous Ziegler, with a suspiciously urbane and mannered exterior.
Instead, we got an avuncular Pollack, totally unconvincing as a sexual animal, who spent way too much time playing with a billiard ball.
I am so darn glad he turned it down.
I think Ryan was such a success, that Kubrick later decided to try that trick again - to take a lousy actor and make him shine in his hands. But EWS killed that "universal success recipe" idea. It simply gave us dreck actors, dreck directing and dreck movie.
light comedy and some drama pieces. Redford has been successful as a director, especially with films like Ordinary People which I think is one the best films of the last 50 years....
It's a masterpiece of the horror/ghost genre--- and Kubrick is the most unique of directors in that he not only took on the challenge of different genres, he often made THE example of them. Historical drama. War film. Heist film. Sci-fi. Marital drama.
Like many works of art, often his films aren't easily explained: they are mysterious. The fun of "The Shining" is that it is open to many explanations (like 2001 or Clockwork O).
"The one observer who seems trustworthy at all times is Dick Hallorann, but his usefulness ends soon after his midwinter return to the hotel. That leaves us with a closed-room mystery: 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." Roger Ebert
The Shining
Full Metal Jacket
2001 A Space Odyssey
A Clockwork Orange
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (a Kubrick film directed by Spielberg)In the The Shining Jack just had a bad case of cabin fever. :-0
Edits: 05/13/21 05/13/21
a
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
On an even subtler level so did Barry Lyndon.
Dr. Sleep pretty much negates that theory
but apply it to the Wendy in Peter Pan and it's a revelation
in fact, wasn't it stolen from that concept?
sure sounds familiar
regards,
The Kubrick film doesn't follow the King novel. It's Kubrick's vision.
Doctor Sleep is Stephen King's follow-up of his version of the book and that lousy made-for TV version of The Shining.
. . . which King claimed he liked better than he did Kubrick's version. ;-)
That's true because it followed his novel more closely so of course he liked it better - King also wrote the teleplay to the miniseries.I don't think it matters at all what King likes better. Kubrick's film is entirely Kubrick's film and is basically an entirely different take on the book.
And critics and audiences preferred the Kubrick film. Sometimes the movie is better than the book.
My main gripe with the Kubrick movie was that Jack went nuts too early and it was a little overacted - BUT if the Wendy Theory version holds then that changes things because she is essentially imagining Jack's behavior and would have been doing this well before they ever went to the hotel so he didn't go nuts early - she simply views him like that all along. That actually strengthens his performance because he is "off" during that drive up to the hotel with her and Danny.
To me, it makes this movie a helluva lot better and the performances a helluva lot better subscribing to the Wendy Theory including Duvall's performance.
Of course, Ebert's view that there is no reliable protagonist also is valid since if Wendy is nuts then she is not reliable and Jack certainly isn't as he is seeing ghosts - and Danny has an imaginary friend and strange powers (or not - could be imaginary too).
I like that it's fairly open-ended. But Wendy watching a blank TV imagining there is a program and what she tells the shrink early in the movie is almost or is word for word what Jack tells the ghostly bartender would come from the same person's mind. He didn't comment on this in the video but if you go back you can hear her telling the shrink the same thing Jack tells the bartender.
Edits: 05/13/21
[sarcasm] What a sexist, misogynist theory! It's no wonder there are no women on this site! [/sarcasm] ;-)
I just watched the video myself and I just told Ms. CfL about it - she wants to watch it tonight, so we'll see what her reaction is. She's naturally skeptical, so I doubt she'll buy into it. The Shining is already one of our favorite movies anyway, so she's got a lot of interest in it, no matter what.
I think there is a definite case to be made here that there are two realities going on - One version of events with a set of furnishings and a second one. It sure would explain a lot and makes the film better IMO. I already liked the film but did have some problems with the relationships and Jack being a jerk right from the get go. The Wendy Theory puts things into perspective. I will try and rewatch the film when I get some time and view it from Wendy's perspective.
. . . was that it was bunk. She agreed with the poster who held that all the continuity errors of the (chair/rug/kool-aid, etc.) placements were not intended to be noticed by the viewer per se (even though a lot of fanatics DO notice them!), but rather to generate a vague sense of unease. IOW, you're not noticing the inconsistencies consciously, but rather producing within yourself a general unsettling discomfort from them.
That's her take - so what? I mean it's a valid take but so is the take in the video.There is aI would make the case that there is a consistency to these shifting patterns - the furniture is one certain way when she is in a psychotic episode and another way when not. In other words, the furniture is not "random." Random would indicate your wife's take. But because the furniture is consistent when in reality and consistent during a psychotic break then it holds to his Wendy Theory quite well.
Edits: 05/13/21
But to me, there are a number of elements in it that require special pleading, such as Jack's "facial expression" as he begins re-typing. That's not proof of anything. Or the paper being already in the typewriter - when I first saw that, I assumed that Kubrick didn't want to waste screen time showing Jack putting the paper back in. There are all sorts of alternative explanations for the Wendy Theory's "evidence".
Mine too!
It certainly makes a fairly compelling explanation of a Kubrick film that has always puzzled me.
I always thought a ghost story was out of character for Kubrick. Reinterpreting the King ghost story as one of mental illness seems more of a fit.
Thanks for posting.
It sure explains a lot of the issues in the film.
I especially like the light switches - not there in her reality - there in reality - when she is imagining things there is Kool-Aid - not there in reality. Ditto the lamps and fireplace carpet. There and not there depending on whether it is imaginary or not. The non-plugged-in TV - she is watching a blank screen.
Her calling him Delbert Grady because she doesn't know his first name which is Charles Grady.
It also helps explains Jack's character and facial expressions in certain scenes and why you never really see affection by Danny towards his mother. He comes in with the bruised neck and glares at Wendy - she pulls him in for the hug but Danny is doesn't hug her - he seems terrified of her.
I enjoyed The Shining because I enjoy the horror genre but I agree this makes more sense for Kubrick than just a "guy goes nuts and tries to kill his family" story.
I was always uneasy with that film.
Kubrick has been my favorite director ever since a couple of high school friends and I borrowed ID's showing legal age so we could get in to see Clockwork when it came out. That film changed my life.
Shining, although I did enjoy it when it came out (and since), always seemed like a lesser work of his, and maybe his weakest (except for Eyes). I've never been able to figure out what possessed Kubrick to make a goofy ghost story out of a goofy Steven King ghost story in the first place. The Wendy Theory answers that. The movie was NEVER about ghosts!
I will watch it again with this new lens. I have to say - it would seem to make the entire film a helluva lot better. It also explains Jack's performance and some of the "why does he go off the rails so fast?" - well maybe he never did. Listen to her dialog talking to the shrink and see how it matched when he is talking to the ghost in the bar.
I came back to this movie because I rather enjoyed Doctor Sleep.
I like Paths of Glory.
"Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. "
― W.C. Fields
....any way you want to. I don't watch fantasy and horror, but only ones that are based on some believable science fiction storyline.
I wish that those amateur Psychiatrists would stick to movies only.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: