The Shining, From Sane to INsane

[Nickdoran412]

OMBAYJAYJAY, so, how do you think about how Jack Torrence in The Shining went from sane to INsane?

[Fearonsarms]

He was already insane in the movie before he got to The Overlook hence the lengthy writings on the typewriter that he must have started as soon as he got there-watch the new edition of the movie if it comes out on DVD with the restored deleted scenes

[jaimin26783]

That's the beauty of Jack Nicholson. He developed insane character not only in The Shining. He does this kind of role in many movies.

[MichaelMyers]

Clearly the spirits of the house made him one of "them."

[Bob Gray]

Originally Posted by Fearonsarms

He was already insane in the movie before he got to The Overlook hence the lengthy writings on the typewriter that he must have started as soon as he got there-watch the new edition of the movie if it comes out on DVD with the restored deleted scenes

This is the one of the major issues that I have with the film. In King's book, the Overlook was the antagonist, it had a life of its own and it is what made Jack go crazy, it tried to possess Danny but couldn't so it went for Jack. In Kubrick's version, it seems as if Jack was crazy before he got to the Overlook and the seclusion is what put him over the top. The film takes away what the Overlook was, evil and crazy, it was a character all its own. Now don't get me wrong, I own a copy of the film, its great in its own right but I just have some big issues with it, I wish Kubrick would have realized the genius of making the Overlook the main antagonist.

[Fearonsarms]

Originally Posted by Bob Gray

This is the one of the major issues that I have with the film. In King's book, the Overlook was the antagonist, it had a life of its own and it is what made Jack go crazy, it tried to possess Danny but couldn't so it went for Jack. In Kubrick's version, it seems as if Jack was crazy before he got to the Overlook and the seclusion is what put him over the top. The film takes away what the Overlook was, evil and crazy, it was a character all its own. Now don't get me wrong, I own a copy of the film, its great in its own right but I just have some big issues with it, I wish Kubrick would have realized the genius of making the Overlook the main antagonist.

I completely understand your points and why you would be unhappy with the movie. But I love BOTH the movie and the book but for different reasons. I love Kubrick's vision of the film focusing on Jack's Insanity though still included the spirits of the Overlook and some breathtaking cinematography, performance from Jack Nicholson plus a sense of unease and dread that permeated through the entire film. I love how the book focuses instead on the Overlook, its history, the spirits and some of King's most creative writing. I just see them both as seperate entities.

[The_Knife]

Kubrick's Shining is just that: Kubrick's Shining. It's a very separate entity to the King novel. As a piece of celluloid, the imagery, for me, is totally memorable. The whole thing has a hypnotic, dreamlike (or nightmarish) quality. I also remember that 2-part tv adaptation of the novel, penned for the screen by King himself. Even though that was significantly more faithful to the source material, I much prefer the Kubrick Shining as something that exists for the screen in the same way that, if you were to convert Kubrick's Shining directly into a novel, it'd be an utter mess.

[Fearonsarms]

Originally Posted by The_Knife

Kubrick's Shining is just that: Kubrick's Shining. It's a very separate entity to the King novel. As a piece of celluloid, the imagery, for me, is totally memorable. The whole thing has a hypnotic, dreamlike (or nightmarish) quality. I also remember that 2-part tv adaptation of the novel, penned for the screen by King himself. Even though that was significantly more faithful to the source material, I much prefer the Kubrick Shining as something that exists for the screen in the same way that, if you were to convert Kubrick's Shining directly into a novel, it'd be an utter mess.

Couldn't have put it better myself 100% agreed :)

[Bob Gray]

Originally Posted by The_Knife

Kubrick's Shining is just that: Kubrick's Shining. It's a very separate entity to the King novel. As a piece of celluloid, the imagery, for me, is totally memorable. The whole thing has a hypnotic, dreamlike (or nightmarish) quality. I also remember that 2-part tv adaptation of the novel, penned for the screen by King himself. Even though that was significantly more faithful to the source material, I much prefer the Kubrick Shining as something that exists for the screen in the same way that, if you were to convert Kubrick's Shining directly into a novel, it'd be an utter mess.

I agree, that made-for-tv-movie wasn't nearly as good as Kubrick's version. It wasn't so much the story though, it was the terrible acting.

[Angra]

Originally Posted by Bob Gray

I agree, that made-for-tv-movie wasn't nearly as good as Kubrick's version. It wasn't so much the story though, it was the terrible acting.

Terrible acting? By whom?

Thought the actors did really well in the remake. Not their fault Stephen King doesn't know how to make movies.