The Criterion Collection

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jayembee

The biggie was the old woman in the bathtub. The scene as it played out in the book, was one of the hands-down scariest moments in horror fiction. The scene as it played out in the movie came off looking silly.

The second was Kubrick's changing the topiary into a hedge maze. The given reason was that he didn't believe that the state of visual effects was up to showing hedge animals moving. What he seemed to fail to understand is that, with one exception (the hedge lion attacking Halloran toward the end; which simply could've been left out, as it ended up being anyway), the animals were never actually seen moving; Danny only noticed that they had moved. This could've been easily accomplished.

As it was, the hedge maze offered nothing in the way of suspense. If Kubrick had done anything to suggest that the maze was changing as Danny was running through it, and as such that Danny might be trapped in it (and possibly caught by Jack) it might've worked OK. But as it was, pfft.

thanks for the info, Jay. I consider myself a pretty big Kubrick fan and was unaware of this. hedge animals could have been pretty badass!

I don't mind the scene with the old lady too much. I think Kubrick establishes a sense of dread (what's in that room?!? ) well enough that it makes it sufficiently creepy

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Yah he HATED kubricks adaptation, Kubrick made it his own and Kubrick knew what he was doing, notice how he changed the car colour and in the intro you see the car (same colour as one in book) hit by a lorry in the snow? Thats Kubricks big 'Screw you, this is my story now'.

I love it and I'm glad Kubrick made the changes, the bush scene in book would have looked terrible >.< the maze worked so much better and was consistent throughout the entire film, the entire hotel was alive and was in a way a maze.

Beside Kubrick didn't make the shining, he made took an idea and a theme and made his own film. He made it so much better.

ALso to the guy above, you do see Danny lost in an ever changing maze. The tricycle scene, he goes in a3 loops and each time it changes and the set changes, he goes through corridors that don't exist. Notice how there is a window in the office at start, that window should NOT exist.

Kubrick showed who the hotel was alive and moving so well, even by make continuity errors on purpose and forces us to see them without us questioning it.

I've seen the movie several times and I never noticed that the scenery was changing when Danny rides the tricycle through the hotel. I only became aware of it after seeing the documentary Room 237. I can't remember, but does he only make left turns? If he doesn't, I can't see how it is possible to even keep track of where he is unless you do like those loons in the doc did and make a map of the place.

I do agree with you, though, regarding your opinion of the hedge maze working fine.

[StLouisRibs]

So Criterion uploaded a video highlighting the usage of Eyes in Hitchcock's films - which I think a bit odd given tthat they don't have the rights to most of his American stuff that appears in the video.

It's probably just that they got a temporary license or even no license but it seems interesting to me to see Vertigo and the like in a video with the Criterion stamp on it though it'll likely never happen again.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by StLouisRibs

So Criterion uploaded a video highlighting the usage of Eyes in Hitchcock's films - which I think a bit odd given tthat they don't have the rights to most of his American stuff that appears in the video.

It's probably just that they got a temporary license or even no license but it seems interesting to me to see Vertigo and the like in a video with the Criterion stamp on it though it'll likely never happen again.

Funny timing here, because a local friend of mine on Facebook just brought to my attention that The Birds, Dial M for Murder, Vertigo, Rear Window, and Psycho are all playing at a movie tavern north of Atlanta during late September and throughout October.

I've already seen The Birds on the big screen, but I should get my wallet ready for the others. Especially Vertigo.

[StLouisRibs]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Funny timing here, because a local friend of mine on Facebook just brought to my attention that The Birds, Dial M for Murder, Vertigo, Rear Window, and Psycho are all playing at a movie tavern north of Atlanta during late September and throughout October.

I've already seen The Birds on the big screen, but I should get my wallet ready for the others. Especially Vertigo.

I dunno if its a new set of prints or the like, as the Angelika's Pop-up in DC is also doing a series of Hitchcock stuff next month (for some reason, only tickets for Psycho are up for pre-order, though plugging in film titles into the URLs brings up most of the expected classics like Vertigo and Strangers on a Train as forthcoming). I've actually not seen most of the American films he's done so will be trying to make it to a few of them.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Polaroid

Yah he HATED kubricks adaptation

No, I didn't hate it; I (obviously) had some problems with it, and thought Kubrick could've done a lot better job with it, but I do think it has its virtues as well.

Hell, it's not even my least favorite Kubrick film. I have more problems with his adaptation of Lolita (largely due to Peter Sellers's portrayal of Quilty). Although even here, one of Kubrick's alterations from Nabakov's novel was pure genius.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by StLouisRibs

So Criterion uploaded a video highlighting the usage of Eyes in Hitchcock's films - which I think a bit odd given tthat they don't have the rights to most of his American stuff that appears in the video.

It's probably just that they got a temporary license or even no license but it seems interesting to me to see Vertigo and the like in a video with the Criterion stamp on it though it'll likely never happen again.

wow, that is a super cheesy video!

The Wrong Man would be an interesting title for CC to obtain rights to. Nobody else seems to be in a hurry to release it.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

wow, that is a super cheesy video!

Yeah, it's like Alfred Hitchcock meets A Night at the Roxbury.

I recently revisited the first two Psycho sequels, by way of the Scream Factory Blu-rays. It goes without saying that Psycho II and Psycho III are nowhere near the same league as Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho, but they're still surprisingly fun and intense both on their own terms and as homages to the original film. I had not seen either of them in over 25 years, so I was pleased to find that they've both aged well.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

The Wrong Man would be an interesting title for CC to obtain rights to. Nobody else seems to be in a hurry to release it.

Unfortunately, it's owned by Warner.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Yeah, it's like Alfred Hitchcock meets A Night at the Roxbury.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Unfortunately, it's owned by Warner.

I knew you'd know.

so that means, 'not gonna ever happen'?

CC have never had a Warner film?

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by jayembee

The second was Kubrick's changing the topiary into a hedge maze. The given reason was that he didn't believe that the state of visual effects was up to showing hedge animals moving. What he seemed to fail to understand is that, with one exception (the hedge lion attacking Halloran toward the end; which simply could've been left out, as it ended up being anyway), the animals were never actually seen moving; Danny only noticed that they had moved. This could've been easily accomplished.

It's been 30 years since I read the book (& probably 25 since I last saw the movie) , but the Topiary was a huge let-down for me. In my memory, there were lots of changes...the whole Talking Mr. Finger "Redrum" was a cinematic invention if I recall, some of the changes weren't bad, but The Shining remains one of those "the book was soo much better" titles IMHO. Seems like there was a television adaptation that was a little better (miniseries?). I can't imagine editing The Stand down to a 150 minute theatrical, probably end up being like the Potter adaptations (from one set piece to the next and the hell with character development/motivation).

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I knew you'd know.

so that means, 'not gonna ever happen'?

CC have never had a Warner film?

Warner has a history of not wanting to license their films out to anyone else.

Criterion has had a Warner-owned title: Badlands. That was a case of Malick twisting their corporate arm. Oliver Stone did the same thing so Twilight Time could license Heaven & Earth. Unless Hitch comes back from the dead (and I wouldn't put it past him to do that) I don't see Criterion getting a license for The Wrong Man.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

My one and only complaint about Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining takes place when

[Show spoiler]Wendy sees the play written entirely as, "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy." The camera shows Jack walking up behind her. Personally, I would have shown Wendy reading the sheets of paper only to turn around and see Jack standing right behind her. This has nothing to do with the source material, but Kubrick wasted the opportunity for a solid honest-to-goodness jump scare.

Stephen King's book is primarily about alcoholism and parental responsibility. It's an easily relatable novel, because much of the story is told from Jack's third person point of view as he dwells on his past alcohol-induced mistakes and he ponders his inadequacies as a father. In Kubrick's movie, all of these things come into play, but Jack Nicholson has to externalize the emotions and thoughts, since cinema cannot put us into someone's mind in the same way that third-person narration in literature can. I believe that Kubrick and Jack Nicholson both do an amazing job conveying the thematic gist of the novel to the screen. The supernatural element of the hotel is downplayed, but I think that this works for the best in terms of Kubrick's angle of approach for telling Jack Torrance's story. I also believe that Kubrick does a fantastic job of depicting Wendy and Danny as individuals who are both traumatized by abuse. In the Stephen King novel, Wendy is an attractive blonde. In the movie, though, Kubrick wanted to depict Wendy as the type of woman who would stay with an abusive husband. Shelley Duvall is superb for the part.

Kubrick's decision to use a hedge maze instead of hedge animals is an awesome out-of-the-park home run. The hedge maze works so incredibly well in cinematic terms.

Kubrick's use of brightness and light to intensify the scares is ingenious, because it's unlike most horror films out there.

The Shining is my personal favorite Stanley Kubrick movie for so many reasons.

The silliest scene was

[Show spoiler]Scatman, sensing Danny's danger, travels across the country going through heaven and hell to get there, and then comes through the door shouting "Hello, anybody here?" It was something right out of a Monogram Charlie Chan with Mantan Moreland.

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

wow, that is a super cheesy video!

Reminds me of those auto-tune vids.

Not a good thing.

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by jayembee

No, I didn't hate it;

He was talking about Stephen King hating it, which he rightly did.

[movieben1138]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Warner has a history of not wanting to license their films out to anyone else.

Criterion has had a Warner-owned title: Badlands. That was a case of Malick twisting their corporate arm. Oliver Stone did the same thing so Twilight Time could license Heaven & Earth. Unless Hitch comes back from the dead (and I wouldn't put it past him to do that) I don't see Criterion getting a license for The Wrong Man.

So did John Ford rise from the dead and influence the release of Stagecoach? Or was that a special exception? I know the DVD I had of it was in the Warner Bros. Ford/Wayne box set.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by TJS_Blu

Reminds me of those auto-tune vids.

Not a good thing.

ha ha!! had never seen this... kinda 'so bad it's good' though. probably not for more than 1 or 2 listens tops.

at 1:29 - the "doin' lines of coke" lyric is pretty funny!

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

thanks for the info, Jay. I consider myself a pretty big Kubrick fan and was unaware of this. hedge animals could have been pretty badass!

I don't mind the scene with the old lady too much. I think Kubrick establishes a sense of dread (what's in that room?!? ) well enough that it makes it sufficiently creepy



I've seen the movie several times and I never noticed that the scenery was changing when Danny rides the tricycle through the hotel. I only became aware of it after seeing the documentary Room 237. I can't remember, but does he only make left turns? If he doesn't, I can't see how it is possible to even keep track of where he is unless you do like those loons in the doc did and make a map of the place.

I do agree with you, though, regarding your opinion of the hedge maze working fine.

He does 3 different routes, room 237 does great insight into it - apparently each route reflects a characters experience thats happening - but he passes rooms that should not exist in the layout of the hotel, and even goes down non existent corridors etc, or goes from one side of hotel to the other in 1 turn.

It shard to explain but its very cleverly done - parts of room 237 are wasted and a bit far fetched but there are some great theories in it.

[Polaroid]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

The silliest scene was

[Show spoiler]Scatman, sensing Danny's danger, travels across the country going through heaven and hell to get there, and then comes through the door shouting "Hello, anybody here?" It was something right out of a Monogram Charlie Chan with Mantan Moreland.

The film is full of silly moments to enforce the scary scenes -

[Show spoiler]remember the scene when wendy has knife and opens the room to see cheesey looking skeletons and cobwebs, it did that to make us laugh and relax and bit - then the next scene appears for scary/dakr and dangerous - Kubrick plays with the audience a lot in this film to mess and play with emotions. Another example is how he uses colours and changes their meaning to cause unease.

There is SO much to talk about within The Shining.

[Polaroid]

Sorry for spam but I'm a HUGE kubrick fan!

Heres a superb little compilation and a celebration of Kubricks style:

http://vimeo.com/48425421

Shame about the music used though!