Workshed
Posts: 2471
Joined: 11/11/2005 From: somewhere near barstow on the edge of the desert
|
I've read the book and I've given it 5 stars. Kubrick took the concept and made it his own. The book made it clear that the there were DEFINITELY ghosts in the hotel and they possessed and manipulated Jack Torrence, however the beauty of what Kubrick did with the film was that he made it more psychological and ambiguous. Spielberg says that the movie is about an underlying resentment and hatred of a man and his wife and child, and I think this is a brilliant interpretation and especially with the juxtaposition of casting of Nicholson, the notorious hellraiser and womaniser, who still doesn't like the idea of settling down (legend!). Kubrick definitely succeeded in creating a masterpiece of modern horror and despite the changes he made with character and narrative, he didn't intend to do a direct adaptation. The exhausted and frustrated performances he draws out of the actors and the steadycam shots and the forboding sense of isolation were revolutionary at the time and havn't been bettered in a horror movie since IMO. The book was very good and although I can appreciate that the only real similarities are the basic story, character names and sense of fear and dread, it should be viewed as a different beast altogether, however, if you want a direct adaptation, watch the piss-poor Stephen King's The Shining TV movie. Then you'll really appreciate what Kubrick did.
< Message edited by Workshed -- 11/1/2008 12:13:43 PM >
|