The Shining 4K UHD (1980)

[Kyle15]

I'll never understand calling the footage "unnecessary" and "a drag."

It feels cut short without it and doesn't ruin the pace or its power at all. The shorter cut was a once-watch dealio for me.

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

I'll never understand calling the footage "unnecessary" and "a drag."

It feels cut short without it and doesn't ruin the pace or its power at all. The shorter cut was a once-watch dealio for me.

Just as the longer version was a one watch deal for me. I find it overly explanatory and I prefer the shorter cut, most likely because it is the cut that we have always been offered but I also find it a more mysterious story.

That said, I am happy the US fans and those who prefer the US version have it at last on the format it should be, but the shorter cut should have been given the same treatment and offered at the same time.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by The Fallen Deity

I don't prefer either cut over the other. They've both got their pro's and con's imo.

For me the perfect cut would be somewhere in-between.

With that being said though, I do lean more towards the European cut purely because the American Cut has so much unnecessary exposition that makes the film drag like crazy.

The stuff regarding Jack's alcoholism and the more in-depth stuff regarding Tony shouldn't have been cut out though.

Aye, something in-between would've been my ideal scenario, like SK trimming the fat rather than slicing out meaty chunks. Will be defaulting to the US cut in future though, and not just becuz 4K.

[TwoTecs]

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=1215

Looking at the differences documented here, I cannot understand why people think any of this should be cut. All the small extra scenes in the longer cut are essential texture for the film. They gives us a much better sense of the family's life in the hotel. They also capture Kubrick's essence as an artist. What he is capturing in these scenes serves a similar purpose to the detailing of life in space in 2001.

These small details is what makes the great films stand out from the mediocre ones. Stuff like Wendy opening a can is uniquely cinematic. Do people just want to be fed a plot with no connective tissue in between?

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by philthehip

Just as the longer version was a one watch deal for me. I find it overly explanatory and I prefer the shorter cut, most likely because it is the cut that we have always been offered but I also find it a more mysterious story.

That said, I am happy the US fans and those who prefer the US version have it at last on the format it should be, but the shorter cut should have been given the same treatment and offered at the same time.

I don't find it over-explanatory either.

They literally feed the aesthetic of the movie. I can't stand plot-dumps, over-explanations, etc. The Shining has none of those.

[Cherokee Jack]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The shorter cut is the European version. It lacks a lot of important character development and some of the film’s best scenes(“Danny’s not here, Mrs. Torrance”).

Everything important that's explicitly spelled out in the American cut, much of it very early on, is still there in the Euro cut only the reveals come later and are done more artfully. Wendy's conversation with the doctor for example is more exposition dump than character development. That scene and the parts of Hallorann's journey that were cut amount to almost 10 minutes of removed footage. Most of the rest of the reduced runtime is achieved with trims to the hotel tour, steadicam shots of the family moving around the empty hotel and people watching TV. The only 'character' that gets shortchanged in the Euro cut is arguably the hotel itself.

As for 'best scenes', that's a matter of opinion but I do miss a few moments in the Euro cut (Danny watching TV in the blizzard before going to get his fire engine and Jack taking his first drink for example). It's also pretty clear that Kubrick makes a mistake when he fails to properly introduce Hallorann in the Euro cut. My preference for the Euro cut's pacing outweighs any niggling concerns that Kubrick might have cut too much however.

Originally Posted by TwoTecs

These small details is what makes the great films stand out from the mediocre ones. Stuff like Wendy opening a can is uniquely cinematic. Do people just want to be fed a plot with no connective tissue in between?

The Shining's strongest points for me have always been its imagery, music and performances. The plot is incredibly simple (Kubrick chose to adapt King's book because he admired its structure, not its plot) and almost becomes an afterthought in the Euro cut. It certainly doesn't 'feed' plot to the audience in the way the American cut does at times.

[TwoTecs]

Originally Posted by Cherokee Jack

Everything important that's explicitly spelled out in the American cut, much of it very early on, is still there in the Euro cut only the reveals come later and are done more artfully. Wendy's conversation with the doctor for example is more exposition dump than character development. That scene and the parts of Hallorann's journey that were cut amount to almost 10 minutes of removed footage. Most of the rest of the reduced runtime is achieved with trims to the hotel tour, steadicam shots of the family moving around the empty hotel and people watching TV. The only 'character' that gets shortchanged in the Euro cut is arguably the hotel itself.

The Steadicam shots is exactly what I am talking about though. They are signature Kubrick and they give us a sense of what it is like to be in the hotel.

The doctor conversation is character development for Wendy. It is good background for the couple's relationship. There is nothing inherently wrong with exposition in spite of what Screenwriting 101 manuals would have you believe.

Originally Posted by Cherokee Jack

As for 'best scenes', that's a matter of opinion but I do miss a few moments in the Euro cut (Danny watching TV in the blizzard before going to get his fire engine and Jack taking his first drink for example). It's also pretty clear that Kubrick makes a mistake when he fails to properly introduce Hallorann in the Euro cut. My preference for the Euro cut's pacing outweighs any niggling concerns that Kubrick might have cut too much however.


The Shining's strongest points for me have always been its imagery, music and performances. The plot is incredibly simple (Kubrick chose to adapt King's book because he admired its structure, not its plot) and almost becomes an afterthought in the Euro cut. It certainly doesn't 'feed' plot to the audience in the way the American cut does at times.

The American version is the more luxuriously paced version though. Your argument is self-contradictory. The American version is the one that doesn't rush from one plot point to another but instead has plenty of space in the middle for texture.

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by TwoTecs

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=1215

Looking at the differences documented here, I cannot understand why people think any of this should be cut. All the small extra scenes in the longer cut are essential texture for the film. They gives us a much better sense of the family's life in the hotel. They also capture Kubrick's essence as an artist. What he is capturing in these scenes serves a similar purpose to the detailing of life in space in 2001.

These small details is what makes the great films stand out from the mediocre ones. Stuff like Wendy opening a can is uniquely cinematic. Do people just want to be fed a plot with no connective tissue in between?

The only thing I can't understand is why so many of you can't understand that as individuals we all have different views and opinions. I prefer the shorter cut, whether somebody feels that way or not, I do.

Originally Posted by Kyle15

I don't find it over-explanatory either.

They literally feed the aesthetic of the movie. I can't stand plot-dumps, over-explanations, etc. The Shining has none of those.

And yet regardless of your entirely subjective opinion I and many others feel the US version is over explained and too long and we prefer the shorter cut. It is almost as if we also have entirely subjective opinions. It seems to hurt many of you that we prefer the cut we have known for nearly 40 years, a cut that was performed by Stanley Kubrick I might add.

[rroeder]

I've never seen the shorter UK cut, would they have to restore that cut just like the longer one or just delete scenes from the longer restored cut? I agree it should of been there but if they had to completely restore it like the longer cut then I can see why they didn't.

Think I'm watching my copy for the 2nd time tonight, first real snowstorm of the season

[TwoTecs]

Originally Posted by philthehip

The only thing I can't understand is why so many of you can't understand that as individuals we all have different views and opinions. I prefer the shorter cut, whether somebody feels that way or not, I do.



And yet regardless of your entirely subjective opinion I and many others feel the US version is over explained and too long and we prefer the shorter cut. It is almost as if we also have entirely subjective opinions. It seems to hurt many of you that we prefer the cut we have known for nearly 40 years, a cut that was performed by Stanley Kubrick I might add.

Well I am interested in discussing the differences and the opinions. We are on a film/home video discussion forum, aren't we? If you don't want to do so, fine but no need to get pissy.

I am not hurt but your preference but I am questioning it since this is a discussion., If your argument is just "it is subjective:", you clearly have nothing to say. Of course it is subjective but that does not mean the subjective opinions cannot be evaluated.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

I don't find it over-explanatory either.

They literally feed the aesthetic of the movie. I can't stand plot-dumps, over-explanations, etc. The Shining has none of those.

In some ways it's more like anti-plot which is why it feels like it's unnecessary to some folks, though the stuff with the doctor after Danny's episode should never have been cut.

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by philthehip

And yet regardless of your entirely subjective opinion I and many others feel the US version is over explained and too long and we prefer the shorter cut. It is almost as if we also have entirely subjective opinions. It seems to hurt many of you that we prefer the cut we have known for nearly 40 years,

And yet regardless of your entirely subjective opinion, I and many others feel the shorter cut loses mood and is over too fast and we prefer the longer cut. It is almost as if we also have entirely subjective opinions. It seems to hurt so many of you etc etc etc blah blah blah, see where I'm going with this? lol

a cut that was performed by Stanley Kubrick I might add.

I know you wanna appeal to authority because opinions hurt u and you want to flaunt yours as fact with a little passive-aggressive wall of text and the above, but this is not true. Kubrick approved both cuts. You prefer what you prefer. We know this stuff is subjective. An angry text wall about opinions being opinions says a whole lot about nothing.

[DR Herbert West]

Originally Posted by rroeder

I've never seen the shorter UK cut, would they have to restore that cut just like the longer one or just delete scenes from the longer restored cut?

They'd just have to delete scenes from the longer cut.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

They'd just have to delete scenes from the longer cut.

You mean work.

[Bobbyjoe766]

People (fan editors) are probably working on it right now.

Not the ideal solution (both versions should have been included in 4K). It won't be open matte though.

[philthehip]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

[I]I know you wanna appeal to authority because opinions hurt u and you want to flaunt yours as fact

Given the flavour of this thread about the US vs shorter cut, that is hilarious. This thread has been a tirade of angry US 'versioners' declaring their version the best and only version. The points have been stated for the shorter cut only for us to be shouted down and if you think this thread and any of the replies supporting the shorter cut have been about our superior opinion then you sir have not been paying attention. This thread is filled with self righteous speeches and picture postcard responses by those who have declared the shorter cut to be piss and only now you find a voice. Well, well done and good day to you.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

And yet regardless of your entirely subjective opinion, I and many others feel the shorter cut loses mood and is over too fast and we prefer the longer cut. It is almost as if we also have entirely subjective opinions. It seems to hurt so many of you etc etc etc blah blah blah, see where I'm going with this? lol



I know you wanna appeal to authority because opinions hurt u and you want to flaunt yours as fact with a little passive-aggressive wall of text and the above, but this is not true. Kubrick approved both cuts. You prefer what you prefer. We know this stuff is subjective. An angry text wall about opinions being opinions says a whole lot about nothing.

I'm a fan of the US cut over the International. But would I absolutely love having the International that's been released before? Yes!! It doesn't hurt anyone but you apparently. You scream immaturity on these forums. You'll be on my ignore list soon enough too!

[Marv Inc.]

Is there a video a glitch when the blood gets off the elevator the first time? Maybe it was just my copy.

[sfmarine]

Originally Posted by Marv Inc.

Is there a video a glitch when the blood gets off the elevator the first time? Maybe it was just my copy.

What sort of glitch did you encounter?

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by philthehip

Given the flavour of this thread about the US vs shorter cut, that is hilarious. This thread has been a tirade of angry US 'versioners' declaring their version the best and only version. The points have been stated for the shorter cut only for us to be shouted down and if you think this thread and any of the replies supporting the shorter cut have been about our superior opinion then you sir have not been paying attention. This thread is filled with self righteous speeches and picture postcard responses by those who have declared the shorter cut to be piss and only now you find a voice. Well, well done and good day to you.

I didnt even know there was a different cut. Stanley doesnt generally do directors cuts or alternate cuts. You get what you get and thats the movie he intended you to see! Right? Its the version Ive always watched and while its not a short film I cant imagine what could really be cut out that would make the movie any better. I guess whatever version people like is the one they should watch!

Finally watching this tonight with the bro on the OLED. Cant wait....