The Criterion Collection

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

I've mentioned this before but my friend and I saw it opening day and hated it! He was a huge Kubrick fan and was so enthusiastic about seeing it that he seemed genuinely embarrassed when we came out of the theater. I've grown to like it more over the years but it has one of the stupidest scenes that I can't get past.

I've always been of the opinion that a filmmaker's obligation is to make a good movie more than being faithful to the source material, but The Shining is an example where the changes Kubrick made from the novel weakened the story. Unlike A Clockwork Orange, where I think his changes were improvements on the novel, as were -- using a King-but-not-Kubrick example -- Carrie.

I'm not sure which scene you're referring to as "one of the stupidest", but the scene that drove me nuts was the scene of Jack encountering the lady in the bathtub. In the novel, the whole business of Room 217 was possibly the most frightening thing I've ever read in a book. In the movie, with the lady cackling, it came off as more silly than scary.

My feelings about The Shining (film) have tempered over the years. I don't hate it, exactly, but I just don't like it very much, either. It wouldn't even be in the top 10 of horror movies in my book. Probably quite a bit lower than that. I confess that I do have the recent UHD edition of it, but that's just because of my Kubrick obsessiveness.

And actually, it's not even my least favorite Kubrick film. Lolita takes that spot, for much the same reason I mentioned above. The changes made from the novel really dulled the wit of the original.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

I'm not sure I understand what is meant by a "Holy Trilogy" of films. That the meanings of the films are deep and profound? In that regard, I can see the similarity between 2001 and Stalker, but not with the other 2 Kubrick films mentioned. All very good or great films, to be sure, but I don't understand the connection that is trying to be made.

That's not how I interpreted the phrase. I could be wrong, but what I think he meant was a director having made three films (usually in a row) that represent the peak of his career.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Which scene?

Sorry to all for not replying sooner. I'm in a weird time zone. It's the

[Show spoiler]Scatman to the rescue sequence. The guy has this terrifying vision. Undertakes this trip across the country in rapidly deteriorating weather conditions. Finally, after several modes of transportation, gets to the hotel and after this Labours of Hercules effort and knowing something dreadful awaits....goes inside and basically yells "Hello!, Anybody Home?" So much for this Gift he and Danny have. The audience howled when it happened and it reminded me of something Mantan Moreland would do in a Charlie Chan film.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

Sorry to all for not replying sooner. I'm in a weird time zone. It's the

[Show spoiler]Scatman to the rescue sequence. The guy has this terrifying vision. Undertakes this trip across the country in rapidly deteriorating weather conditions. Finally, after several modes of transportation, gets to the hotel and after this Labours of Hercules effort and knowing something dreadful awaits....goes inside and basically yells "Hello!, Anybody Home?" So much for this Gift he and Danny have. The audience howled when it happened and it reminded me of something Mantan Moreland would do in a Charlie Chan film.

Yeah. That's another one. In the book, as he reached the hotel, he was

[Show spoiler]attacked by the hedge lion

which was the first overt instance of the hedge animals moving.

One of the biggest changes Kubrick made from the book was having the hedge maze instead of the topiary. His reason for that was because he didn't believe that SFX technology was up to the task of showing hedge animals in motion.

The problem was that in the novel, no one ever saw the hedge animals move. Even Danny didn't see them move, only that they had moved. It was much like the more recent instance of Doctor Who's Weeping Angels, which, again, no one actually sees moving. Seems to me that Kubrick could've done the whole topiary thing, and would've only had to change the Halloran ending if he didn't think he could convincingly show the animals in motion.

The hedge maze was, on paper, not a bad substitute, but in practice, it just wasn't as spooky as the changing hedge animals would've been.

[DVD Josh]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

Sorry to all for not replying sooner. I'm in a weird time zone. It's the

[Show spoiler]Scatman to the rescue sequence. The guy has this terrifying vision. Undertakes this trip across the country in rapidly deteriorating weather conditions. Finally, after several modes of transportation, gets to the hotel and after this Labours of Hercules effort and knowing something dreadful awaits....goes inside and basically yells "Hello!, Anybody Home?" So much for this Gift he and Danny have. The audience howled when it happened and it reminded me of something Mantan Moreland would do in a Charlie Chan film.

Reminds me of the midnight coterie of sinister intruders (go to 1:48).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfDI...youtu.be&t=108

[jw007]

I appreciate reading all this stuff on The Shining lately, because tomorrow night I have VIP tickets to see Dr. Sleep! I know its gotten mixed reviews, but I'm pretty excited. Any time I get a chance to go back to the Overlook Hotel is a good time.

[jw007]

I've been on a Jim Jarmusch binge lately. I watched Permanent Vacation and Stranger Than Paradise a few days ago. Then last night I dusted off my blu-ray of Down by Law. Now I'm committed to watching all of Jarmusch's films in chronological order on either blu-ray, dvd, or digital.

I once did this with Stanley Kubrick's films with his box sets I have starting with Lolita until Eyes Wide Shut, but now I'm trying this for the first time with Jarmusch (and he doesn't even have a box set).

It will be a challenge to see them all since I have to either rent or buy The Limits of Control which I do not own (the blu-ray comes out next month!). I also do not have Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai on blu-ray either, nor Broken Flowers or The Dead Don't Die. Every other film he's made I own on either blu-ray or dvd though.

Maybe after my Jarmusch binge, I should get into my Aki Kaurismäki film library (both were very influenced by one another early on in their careers).

[Gacivory]

Originally Posted by jw007

I've been on a Jim Jarmusch binge lately. I watched Permanent Vacation and Stranger Than Paradise a few days ago. Then last night I dusted off my blu-ray of Down by Law. Now I'm committed to watching all of Jarmusch's films in chronological order on either blu-ray, dvd, or digital.

I once did this with Stanley Kubrick's films with his box sets I have starting with Lolita until Eyes Wide Shut, but now I'm trying this for the first time with Jarmusch (and he doesn't even have a box set).

It will be a challenge to see them all since I have to either rent or buy The Limits of Control which I do not own (the blu-ray comes out next month!). I also do not have Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai on blu-ray either, nor Broken Flowers or The Dead Don't Die. Every other film he's made I own on either blu-ray or dvd though.

Maybe after my Jarmusch binge, I should get into my Aki Kaurismäki film library (both were very influenced by one another early on in their careers).

Yeah, I highly recommend Aki Kaurismaki! I love him!

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by jayembee

The hedge maze was, on paper, not a bad substitute, but in practice, it just wasn't as spooky as the changing hedge animals would've been.

I don't know about that. For some people seeing a character getting lost is a more relatable and thereby effective fear than seeing one being accosted by a walking bush.

[BaronVH]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I don't know about that. For some people seeing a character getting lost is a more relatable and thereby effective fear than seeing one being accosted by a walking bush.

It would have been truly frightening if it were the bush from the Three Amigos.

[JasonMichael]

Originally Posted by jw007

I've been on a Jim Jarmusch binge lately. I watched Permanent Vacation and Stranger Than Paradise a few days ago. Then last night I dusted off my blu-ray of Down by Law. Now I'm committed to watching all of Jarmusch's films in chronological order on either blu-ray, dvd, or digital.

I once did this with Stanley Kubrick's films with his box sets I have starting with Lolita until Eyes Wide Shut, but now I'm trying this for the first time with Jarmusch (and he doesn't even have a box set).

It will be a challenge to see them all since I have to either rent or buy The Limits of Control which I do not own (the blu-ray comes out next month!). I also do not have Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai on blu-ray either, nor Broken Flowers or The Dead Don't Die. Every other film he's made I own on either blu-ray or dvd though.

Maybe after my Jarmusch binge, I should get into my Aki Kaurismäki film library (both were very influenced by one another early on in their careers).

You should also return to your Kubrick marathon starting with his early films. Killer's Kiss and the Killing are well worth your time.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by jw007

I've been on a Jim Jarmusch binge lately. I watched Permanent Vacation and Stranger Than Paradise a few days ago. Then last night I dusted off my blu-ray of Down by Law. Now I'm committed to watching all of Jarmusch's films in chronological order on either blu-ray, dvd, or digital.

I once did this with Stanley Kubrick's films with his box sets I have starting with Lolita until Eyes Wide Shut, but now I'm trying this for the first time with Jarmusch (and he doesn't even have a box set).

It will be a challenge to see them all since I have to either rent or buy The Limits of Control which I do not own (the blu-ray comes out next month!). I also do not have Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai on blu-ray either, nor Broken Flowers or The Dead Don't Die. Every other film he's made I own on either blu-ray or dvd though.

Maybe after my Jarmusch binge, I should get into my Aki Kaurismäki film library (both were very influenced by one another early on in their careers).

What do you think of Night On Earth?

I’ve considered blind buying it, but i already own three JJ Criterions.

...is NOE worth it?

[Arawn]

Originally Posted by ravenus

For some people seeing a character getting lost is a more relatable and thereby effective fear than seeing one being accosted by a walking bush.

How about a walker bush?

Is our children learning?

[MifuneFan]

Maybe it's ignorance, but I'm damn glad that my fondness for The Shining film isn't hindered by having read the book first. This really applies to most book to movie adaptations. Many people simply can't accept any major (or even minor) changes that happen during such format transitions. There's been instances where I've read the book before a film, and very rarely do they line up at a high percentage, even when the director is attempting to be faithful. Some times it sucks to not see your own "vision" up on the screen, but at the same time, I realize that a lot of things in books don't always translate well to screen, especially in a limited run time.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I don't know about that. For some people seeing a character getting lost is a more relatable and thereby effective fear than seeing one being accosted by a walking bush.

I'm pretty sure that isn't what he said.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by JasonMichael

You should also return to your Kubrick marathon starting with his early films. Killer's Kiss and the Killing are well worth your time.

Yes, I actually will start with those films (and maybe even Fear and Desire, an even earlier movie) before I get to Lolita. And hell, just for sh#ts and giggles, I'll throw in Spartacus (even though Kubrick didn't write the script for that one, he did do a good job directing it).

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

What do you think of Night On Earth?

I’ve considered blind buying it, but i already own three JJ Criterions.

...is NOE worth it?

I just watched Night on Earth last night (I should have watched Mystery Train because it came before it, but I just wasn't in the mood), and I have to say, its a thoroughly entertaining movie. My favorite of the 5 locations was New York City. Absolutely hilarious scene! The movie sort of evolves as it progresses, starting out with small talk and superficial dialogue in the first Los Angeles location, but by the time it gets to the very end in Helsinki, it takes on deeply emotional themes and tragic stories shared between total strangers in a taxi cab. It's a very different type of movie and if you're a fan of Jim Jarmusch, this will be a no brainer to watch, own, and love tenderly.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Maybe it's ignorance, but I'm damn glad that my fondness for The Shining film isn't hindered by having read the book first. This really applies to most book to movie adaptations. Many people simply can't accept any major (or even minor) changes that happen during such format transitions. There's been instances where I've read the book before a film, and very rarely do they line up at a high percentage, even when the director is attempting to be faithful. Some times it sucks to not see your own "vision" up on the screen, but at the same time, I realize that a lot of things in books don't always translate well to screen, especially in a limited run time.

I've always stayed clear of reading a book before watching the film. My expectations are always going to be higher than usual as its hard for me to have zero expectations with highly anticipated film adaptations. So now I believe I'd rather watch the film first and then read the book, because the book will always be better no matter what. The movie can sort of be a teaser to the book, as it only requires 2 hours of one's time (in most instances). Anyway, I agree with your opinion.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by jw007

I've always stayed clear of reading a book before watching the film. My expectations are always going to be higher than usual as its hard for me to have zero expectations with highly anticipated film adaptations. So now I believe I'd rather watch the film first and then read the book, because the book will always be better no matter what. The movie can sort of be a teaser to the book, as it only requires 2 hours of one's time (in most instances). Anyway, I agree with your opinion.

I have no problem reading a book in close proximity to its movie adaptation(s). Sometimes reading the book can give you a bit of insight into certain aspects of a movie that aren't made clear. For example, I was as confused as hell when I first saw Inherent Vice but after reading the novel, the movie made a hell of a lot more sense. If I had read the book first, I think I would have enjoyed the film a lot more. I find it interesting to see how a filmmaker visualizes something and how it compared to what I saw in my own mind's eye when reading the book.

People just have to remember that they are different forms of media with their own advantages. A book can get really in-depth into small details thus can provide a more informative experience, however, film can do a better job of making something feel more immersive or real because it's so sensory based. I've had a lot more emotional connections to movies than I have to books.

I don't share the belief that the book is always better. There have been some great movies made from mediocre or terrible books, and vice versa. Most of the time I find them to be equal in quality when taking the respective limitations of either form of media into consideration.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

I have no problem reading a book in close proximity to its movie adaptation(s). Sometimes reading the book can give you a bit of insight into certain aspects of a movie that aren't made clear. For example, I was as confused as hell when I first saw Inherent Vice but after reading the novel, the movie made a hell of a lot more sense. If I had read the book first, I think I would have enjoyed the film a lot more. I find it interesting to see how a filmmaker visualizes something and how it compared to what I saw in my own mind's eye when reading the book.

People just have to remember that they are different forms of media with their own advantages. A book can get really in-depth into small details thus can provide a more informative experience, however, film can do a better job of making something feel more immersive or real because it's so sensory based. I've had a lot more emotional connections to movies than I have to books.

I don't share the belief that the book is always better. There have been some great movies made from mediocre or terrible books, and vice versa. Most of the time I find them to be equal in quality when taking the respective limitations of either form of media into consideration.

That's a very reasonable thing you say regarding books not always being better. I sometimes have draconian viewpoints and make blanket statements when it comes to art/cinema/literature as you can see. Indeed I have seen some great films that not only expanded upon but brought out the best aspects of a certain piece of literature. I like the whole auteur aspect of a filmmaker making his/her own work of art, much like what Martin Scorsese said in a recent op-ed on the NY Times regarding his distaste for Marvel movies. A lot of people disagreed with him, but those that agreed are people I see eye to eye with. I'm fully aware of the last few decades of film pop culture and trends in cinema and how it is becoming less and less common for fully realized works of cinematic art that aren't compromised because of financial decisions from the higher ups in the industry. I think this whole discussion on the soul of cinema is very intriguing, and says a lot about the current society we live in. Anyway, I welcome more independently realized and visionary films from new directors such as Ari Aster and Robert Eggers and hopefully some great film adaptations from some great literature. Hey, when's a new visionary director going to finally adapt the Foundation series by Isaac Asimov?! That would be amazing!