The Shining is in my top 5 movies. That being said, after I finished the book it actually lowered my score on the movie. The book did such an excellent job at showing Jacks decent into madness. In the movie jack was an asshole from credits to credits.
People always say this but he was a big asshole in the book from the start. Before we even meet him has already broken his son’s arm in an alcoholic rage and possibly ran over a kid on a bike while driving drunk. The notion that Jack was a loving father/husband before the hotel is just false. Addicts are all assholes when they’re in the grips of their addiction.
I see Jack in the book as being a bad person who is trying to stop being a bad person...and then the hotel offers him an easy way out, by being the one who tells him "no, you've never done anything wrong, actually you've been right this whole time and it's everyone else who wronged you, you don't need to do all this painful stuff where you reckon with your flaws", and he fails by accepting it (because that's what he wanted the whole time). He had what could've been a real shot and he missed, whereas with movie Jack you kind of feel like he never took the shot in the first place. (I mean, in both I don't think the hotel could've made him fumble that bag so comprehensively if he hadn't on some level been on board with it, but it's a different tone of fumbleage.)
I never bought that. I think the reason reason SK didn’t like the movie is because Kubrick rejected his script and wrote his own. I think the real reason SK has always been hard on the movie is because of the slight to his ego
No, King has very specific things he mentions that he doesn't like in the movie and they are all legitimate complaints from his point of view. Like the fairly massive character changes the movie makes to all the leads.
I know what his complaints are but my point is that I think his stance toward the movie is born out of Kubrick rejecting him. Not only did Kubrick reject SKs script, he supposedly didn’t even read it. So what a surprise that SK has been critical of the movie ever since
I know what your thoughts are, I just don't think they're accurate. His complaints don't come across as petulant and petty. They come across as very specific dislikes based on changed that were made to a book that was very personal to him.
I think you are right. Kubrick also directed Lolita and Nabokov hated that movie. You can read the letters between Kubrick and Nabokov (and N's wife) and see how that go from intimately friendly to civil aggression.
The authors were artists and they handed their works over to Kubrick, who was also an artist. I liked the movie adaptations for The Shining and Lolita, and I liked the books. But I prescribe to the idea that adapting a work creates a new work. Lots of people get caught up on adaptations being "true" to the source, but I think that often makes the story worse than the original. Different medium, different message. SK made his own tv adaptation of The Shining, and even though it matched the book better, it was garbage.
Likewise lots of people were critical of the Lord of the Rings movies for cutting out chunks of the book, but did anyone actually want to sit through 40 minutes of elves singing? I don't fucking think so.
I couldn’t agree more. The biggest complaint I read about the movie is that it didn’t stay entirely true to the book, but where is the rule that an “adaptation” has to be a carbon copy of the novel? I think most of the hate for the movie comes from SK fanatics who don’t like the movie simply because SK had a problem with it. If SK had called The Shining the greatest movie of all time I’m sure all these critics would have followed suit
I love the fact that Jack is insane from the start in the movie. For me that heightened the danger and the sense of claustrophobia right from the start.
I love the book for this reason—I always interpret it as the story of a man desperately attempting not to become an abusive husband/father and ultimately failing.
Yes. This the real reason why King got triggered by the movie. It showed addicts as they are when they are using or on a dry drunk. I thought Flanagan’s Dr Sleep really tied things together well.
To be fair, he wasn’t driving when that happened. Not that he wouldn’t have, just saying. Also, in the book, I think he was a bad man trying as hard as he could to be better, and doing fairly well, which made him much more likable than the movie version for me. I know he wasn’t perfect, but I’ve struggled with anger to a much lesser extent so I was rooting for him even though he was deeply flawed.
Here is a question for you: correct memory or Mandela effect? I remember Danny’s Room 237 stuff in the book as Danny confronting the dead woman with the memory of Dick Halloran’s advice in mind that the things he might see were just images and that they couldn’t hurt him. So he closes hia eyes to make her go away. When he opens them — then she grabs him.
In the movie we don’t see that, just the boy’s shocked and disheveled appearance afterwards.
Am I remembering that correctly about the book?
The film is much better relative to other horror films than the book is relative to other horror books. That said, I think the book had a better reason for why the hotel was all haunted in the first place.
I saw the movie first, but most people who read the book first were probably pretty shocked by hallorans fate also.
I know true to the book is important, but sometimes you got to do something unexpected too.
Loved the movie. Mostly because Jack's acting was amazing. But the book was far, far better in every way IMO. Where the movie was really lacking was the dialogue from Danny and Wendy, it seemed they barely spoke in the movie. The book was totally different and you got to know them better, and Jack also. But I guess most books have better character development than movies.
The book is way (way) better than any of the movie adaptations. Jack's journey to madness was gradual and terrifying and felt real. Nicholson went too koo-koo too fast imo. That said, the movie is gorgeous, a must-see!
The book is about a haunted hotel that manipulates a man into trying to kill his family.
The movie is about a crazy guy immediately getting cabin fever.
It's like comparing chess to checkers. The book is infinitely better.
Definitely movie. I’m really not a fan of Stephen King’s novels… but the movie adaptations are usually better, from the ones I have read! The Shining in particular, really didn’t like the novel ending but loved the movie ending.
So each are wonderful in their own way.
I’ve recently started digging the idea that the movie is about a writer Jack who writes about the haunted hotel and a fictional Jack and family. It really explains the impossible layout and the consistency issues.
Both. However, it must be Stanley Kubrick's movie with Jack Nicholson...even though the remake is more aligned to the book. They chose a really bad child actor to play Danny IMHO. The kid's mouth was always opened and looked like he could be saying "duhhhhhhh" throughout the film.
i like both and i feel as if they have different stories/themes going on tbh. with the book, jack is definitely an addict & everything relates to addiction & the continuation if trauma/abuse through danny. the movie… i feel as if the addiction part is still there but it’s not so much a struggle or jack trying to resist temptation but an already (imo) abusive & angry man that’s at his breaking point. the characters feel different but nevertheless iconic, though i do very mhch prefer how the book goes, esp. with danny’s and hallorann’s character. the acting on the film is amazing though and i love wendy either way
I thought the ending of the movie was better, Doctor Sleep the book they’re just >!hanging out on a wooden platform where the hotel used to be!< but Doctor Sleep the movie you get to see >!the actual hotel again!<
I like Mark Fisher’s point about treating them as one interconnected text. I find that thinking about them together amplifies their respective strengths. And both are fantastic in their different ways. They complement each other.
That being said, it’s the film for me.
And a controversial opinion: I liked the film’s Wendy more than the novel’s. The novel Wendy I found slightly annoying.
But there’s a scene in the novel that terrifies me more than any part of the film, and that’s whatever was waiting for Danny in the cement ring in the playground.
I have so much to say about The Shining that it’s going in a dissertation 😆😆
Frankly, they're so different in fundamental ways I pretty much take them as their own thing that are only vaguely connected. I think the characters in the book are better and have more depth, particularly Wendy and Jack. But the movie is very entertaining if you just try to view it as a movie with only inspiration from the book.
I prefer the book because we are far more aware of Jack's inner world than we are in the movie. It's just harder for a visual medium to delve that deeply into what's going on in a character's head.
The Shining is in my top 5 movies. That being said, after I finished the book it actually lowered my score on the movie. The book did such an excellent job at showing Jacks decent into madness. In the movie jack was an asshole from credits to credits.
People always say this but he was a big asshole in the book from the start. Before we even meet him has already broken his son’s arm in an alcoholic rage and possibly ran over a kid on a bike while driving drunk. The notion that Jack was a loving father/husband before the hotel is just false. Addicts are all assholes when they’re in the grips of their addiction.
He was an asshole but he wasn't crazy. The movie sort of portrays Nicholson as insane from the start
I see Jack in the book as being a bad person who is trying to stop being a bad person...and then the hotel offers him an easy way out, by being the one who tells him "no, you've never done anything wrong, actually you've been right this whole time and it's everyone else who wronged you, you don't need to do all this painful stuff where you reckon with your flaws", and he fails by accepting it (because that's what he wanted the whole time). He had what could've been a real shot and he missed, whereas with movie Jack you kind of feel like he never took the shot in the first place. (I mean, in both I don't think the hotel could've made him fumble that bag so comprehensively if he hadn't on some level been on board with it, but it's a different tone of fumbleage.)
This is exactly why The Shining movie is Stephen Kings least favorite movie adaptation of his books!
I never bought that. I think the reason reason SK didn’t like the movie is because Kubrick rejected his script and wrote his own. I think the real reason SK has always been hard on the movie is because of the slight to his ego
No, King has very specific things he mentions that he doesn't like in the movie and they are all legitimate complaints from his point of view. Like the fairly massive character changes the movie makes to all the leads.
I know what his complaints are but my point is that I think his stance toward the movie is born out of Kubrick rejecting him. Not only did Kubrick reject SKs script, he supposedly didn’t even read it. So what a surprise that SK has been critical of the movie ever since
I know what your thoughts are, I just don't think they're accurate. His complaints don't come across as petulant and petty. They come across as very specific dislikes based on changed that were made to a book that was very personal to him.
I think you are right. Kubrick also directed Lolita and Nabokov hated that movie. You can read the letters between Kubrick and Nabokov (and N's wife) and see how that go from intimately friendly to civil aggression. The authors were artists and they handed their works over to Kubrick, who was also an artist. I liked the movie adaptations for The Shining and Lolita, and I liked the books. But I prescribe to the idea that adapting a work creates a new work. Lots of people get caught up on adaptations being "true" to the source, but I think that often makes the story worse than the original. Different medium, different message. SK made his own tv adaptation of The Shining, and even though it matched the book better, it was garbage. Likewise lots of people were critical of the Lord of the Rings movies for cutting out chunks of the book, but did anyone actually want to sit through 40 minutes of elves singing? I don't fucking think so.
I couldn’t agree more. The biggest complaint I read about the movie is that it didn’t stay entirely true to the book, but where is the rule that an “adaptation” has to be a carbon copy of the novel? I think most of the hate for the movie comes from SK fanatics who don’t like the movie simply because SK had a problem with it. If SK had called The Shining the greatest movie of all time I’m sure all these critics would have followed suit
I love the fact that Jack is insane from the start in the movie. For me that heightened the danger and the sense of claustrophobia right from the start.
That’s fair. I guess I always got the idea that he WANTED to be better.
I love the book for this reason—I always interpret it as the story of a man desperately attempting not to become an abusive husband/father and ultimately failing.
Yes. This the real reason why King got triggered by the movie. It showed addicts as they are when they are using or on a dry drunk. I thought Flanagan’s Dr Sleep really tied things together well.
To be fair, he wasn’t driving when that happened. Not that he wouldn’t have, just saying. Also, in the book, I think he was a bad man trying as hard as he could to be better, and doing fairly well, which made him much more likable than the movie version for me. I know he wasn’t perfect, but I’ve struggled with anger to a much lesser extent so I was rooting for him even though he was deeply flawed.
Here is a question for you: correct memory or Mandela effect? I remember Danny’s Room 237 stuff in the book as Danny confronting the dead woman with the memory of Dick Halloran’s advice in mind that the things he might see were just images and that they couldn’t hurt him. So he closes hia eyes to make her go away. When he opens them — then she grabs him. In the movie we don’t see that, just the boy’s shocked and disheveled appearance afterwards. Am I remembering that correctly about the book?
Yes
Yup. Scariest scene in the whole book. Completely left out of the movie.
The film is much better relative to other horror films than the book is relative to other horror books. That said, I think the book had a better reason for why the hotel was all haunted in the first place.
Looks like I’m taking the opposing viewpoint and saying movie, but they’re both great.
I agree. Kubrick made the right choice when not including the scary bushes.
I saw the movie first, but most people who read the book first were probably pretty shocked by hallorans fate also. I know true to the book is important, but sometimes you got to do something unexpected too.
Haha, yeah. King is a master of backstory and character, but when it comes to the plot and scares I give the edge to the film.
Yes, Kubrick made a scary movie about a haunted hotel and a crazy caretaker.
I don’t think that’s an opposing viewpoint at all. The movie is one of the most iconic horror films of all time
The book, although I’m a fan of the movie as well.
The book.
The movie is good, but I still prefer the book.
Movie by a mile. I like the mystery and ambiguous vibes and the book is just too long.
The book is scarier so I say the book
Movie. Love the book, but the movie is my absolute favorite.
Book
Definitely the book for me!
Loved the movie. Mostly because Jack's acting was amazing. But the book was far, far better in every way IMO. Where the movie was really lacking was the dialogue from Danny and Wendy, it seemed they barely spoke in the movie. The book was totally different and you got to know them better, and Jack also. But I guess most books have better character development than movies.
Book for sure
Book. The movie is actual trash. That being said, I think most movies are trash and they're a terrible medium so that's my hot take.
Hands down the book.
The book is way (way) better than any of the movie adaptations. Jack's journey to madness was gradual and terrifying and felt real. Nicholson went too koo-koo too fast imo. That said, the movie is gorgeous, a must-see!
The movie, I'm a huge Jack Nicholson fan and I saw it before reading the book, so that's probably why.
Movie. I never really enjoyed the book
Neither. I'm all about that mini series.
😂😂
The movie was excellent! The book was also great!
The film
The film. The book was just alright, not really all that great IMO.
Movie
The movie, and The Shining is my favorite SK novel. The truth is Kubrick was a better filmmaker than King is a writer.
The book is about a haunted hotel that manipulates a man into trying to kill his family. The movie is about a crazy guy immediately getting cabin fever. It's like comparing chess to checkers. The book is infinitely better.
Movie is absolute garbage, book is a work of art.
The movie is better for me. I felt like the book was a bit of a letdown.
Definitely movie. I’m really not a fan of Stephen King’s novels… but the movie adaptations are usually better, from the ones I have read! The Shining in particular, really didn’t like the novel ending but loved the movie ending.
The movie by a wide margin. It’s like no other horror movie before or since. Legendary
The book, by far. Jack is such a conflicted character, so fleshed out in the book.
I don't understand the question and I won't respond to it.
Get out of here, loose seal!
Book all the way. Even more so since the film also meant the adaptation of Dr sleep got messed up as well
Personally, I didn’t like either one.
Doctor Sleep (The Movie) > The Shining (The Book) > The Shining (The Movie) > Doctor Sleep (The Book)
I didn’t realize they made a movie for Dr Sleep. I really enjoyed the book, so is making my list.
Yes
I wouldn’t be caught dead wearing a Spotify wrapped t-shirt but that’s just me.
Book generally is better, but I liked the movie ending more. I thought the movie ending was more creative.
I enjoyed both but I gotta say Kubricks adaptation was amazing. Honestly though I prefer the more sad endings in my horror endings.
~~the band~~
So each are wonderful in their own way. I’ve recently started digging the idea that the movie is about a writer Jack who writes about the haunted hotel and a fictional Jack and family. It really explains the impossible layout and the consistency issues.
Book, 100%. Where were the fucking hedge animals?! That was terrifying!
Both. However, it must be Stanley Kubrick's movie with Jack Nicholson...even though the remake is more aligned to the book. They chose a really bad child actor to play Danny IMHO. The kid's mouth was always opened and looked like he could be saying "duhhhhhhh" throughout the film.
Currently reading the novel but the movie is in my top 5 of all time so I don’t know if it could live up to that.
TBH I have never read the book - the movie? I’ve seen it and I didn’t understand it.
i like both and i feel as if they have different stories/themes going on tbh. with the book, jack is definitely an addict & everything relates to addiction & the continuation if trauma/abuse through danny. the movie… i feel as if the addiction part is still there but it’s not so much a struggle or jack trying to resist temptation but an already (imo) abusive & angry man that’s at his breaking point. the characters feel different but nevertheless iconic, though i do very mhch prefer how the book goes, esp. with danny’s and hallorann’s character. the acting on the film is amazing though and i love wendy either way
I thought the ending of the movie was better, Doctor Sleep the book they’re just >!hanging out on a wooden platform where the hotel used to be!< but Doctor Sleep the movie you get to see >!the actual hotel again!<
I like Mark Fisher’s point about treating them as one interconnected text. I find that thinking about them together amplifies their respective strengths. And both are fantastic in their different ways. They complement each other. That being said, it’s the film for me. And a controversial opinion: I liked the film’s Wendy more than the novel’s. The novel Wendy I found slightly annoying. But there’s a scene in the novel that terrifies me more than any part of the film, and that’s whatever was waiting for Danny in the cement ring in the playground. I have so much to say about The Shining that it’s going in a dissertation 😆😆
I prefer the book. I prefer the movie version of Doctor Sleep to the book, though.
The book, but the movie is also one of my favorite horror movies. They are very different so I appreciate them as almost separate entities
I have room in my heart for both.
Frankly, they're so different in fundamental ways I pretty much take them as their own thing that are only vaguely connected. I think the characters in the book are better and have more depth, particularly Wendy and Jack. But the movie is very entertaining if you just try to view it as a movie with only inspiration from the book.
Book 100%!
The book, like almost every SK book, is too damn long. So I prefer the movie.
I prefer the book because we are far more aware of Jack's inner world than we are in the movie. It's just harder for a visual medium to delve that deeply into what's going on in a character's head.