The Shining (1980)

[thatguamguy]

Originally Posted by jackinbox

According to Kubrick's brother-in-law Jan Harlan, the director was adamant that the trims were never to be seen, and that he burned the negatives, which he had kept in his garage, shortly before his death.

Are we meant to infer that Kubrick knew he was dying, or just that the timing was a remarkable coincidence? I had always thought his death took everybody by surprise.

It also seems hard to believe to me that a director who is famous for tinkering with movies up until the release date, and in at least one if not two cases *past* the release date, would order all of the footage from "Eyes Wide Shut" destroyed while he was still alive and the film hadn't been released yet, especially since he supposedly anticipated a fight with the MPAA.

I can still believe that Vitali will one day be saying something like, "Oh, sure, we destroyed all the footage that was stored in the *garage*, but ..."

[Bronson13]

Even if most of his footage is destroyed wouldn't the deleted ending still one with Warner Bros. considering it was shown in theaters?

[crazybeats]

No doubt about it. I'm sure they were responsible for getting the prints made, would they have made all those prints and not kept one for themselves? And what are the prints made of? Don't they have to have the master copy in order for the 35mm prints to be made? There must be a lot of steps in that food chain before those prints were screened and I know about the stories of them cutting the ending, I think I read one story about people on bicycles transporting the prints back and forwards and travelling right away to make sure this ending was removed and it had to be at a precise point and then they went back on their bicycles with these trims and there was one story were the trims were sent straight back to Stanley Kubrick himself, Warner Bros didn't matter, it had to go straight to the man himself.....


I don't know how much of that I truly believe. What really baffles me and if it happened today I wouldn't understand it either. How can a film company pay someone millions of dollars to make a movie and that person hires all the staff, films the movie and then KEEPS the movie for themselves, which is what people are saying. Stanley had miles upon miles of negatives and prints and what he gave them back which is supposedly the final copy of the movie....that's what they get for their money. He even decided on the limited number of promo photos to be used. Do you think if that happened to me it would be the same? Do you think if I or anyone else got paid to make a movie the company would honestly say, all those photos you just keep them and send us the ones you want us to use and all that extra footage you shot and all those takes, just keep them yourself, just give us a 90 minute film at the end of it. No chance but this is the aura of Stanley Kubrick so the rules go out the window.

I find it hard to believe Warner Bros don't have anything. They had all that 2001 footage locked away in their vaults for all those years and it was said to be in pristine condition. At the very least, if all that stuff is true they should have the original version of the movie with the original ending in tact. As for anything else it's all up in the air. If the family does have everything else then I don't see the point in locking it away and not having it restored. There seems to be a lot of stuff about his movies that are never spoken about. Unfortunately for us, even in this digital age where many movies are shot digitally and by the same token so many are being restored to 2K and now 4K....these vaults if you want to call them that, are more active than they have ever been, whether it's physical cans of film or hard drives and computers, you would think someone that works there would know what was there. You would hope they would have everything catalogued by now or someone in the know who knows someone might ask questions and put it online for fans to read but it's very suspicious that this hasn't happened. Especially after all the multiple VHS and Laserdisc and DVD releases and Blu Ray releases and these subjects keep cropping up, you would think someone from there would just come out and say what is and what isn't there and put an end to it. They did that with 2001, we have the 18 minutes, it's in pristine quality but Stanley didn't want it to be seen so we respect his wishes. Why can't that be done with The Shining or Clockwork Orange? Or any of his other films?

[koberulz]

If WB got the final movie, why would they care about outtakes and other unused footage? Studios used to destroy entire actual films, and you think they were going to be picky about outtakes? With someone like Kubrick, who could have quite easily had that written into his contracts?

[crazybeats]

That is also true, he could have had it written into his contracts but outtakes certainly survived for films with directors a lot lesser known than Kubrick. Why did they keep those 18 minutes of 2001 then? Why wasn't that thrown in the trash to make room for something else? I know several black and white pictures showing deleted scenes from Clockwork Orange came straight from Malcolm McDowell. I have no doubt there is stuff relating to the Shining around.

Warner Bros released this movie in widescreen after his death.
They released the longer US cut in the UK after his death.


Clearly they can respect his wishes and also do as they please.


I really do think Christiane and Jan are the ones putting a hold on this stuff being released.

[bobbyh64]

Originally Posted by jackinbox

Vitali also defended the 1.78 transfer of Barry Lyndon and claimed that 1.66 was not the intended aspect ratio. Then a memo resurfaced from Kubrick himself which stated exactly the opposite.

If Leon Vitali said the sun were shining, I'd reach for the umbrella.

That’s pretty ridiculous that he defended the 1.78 ratio. I’m pretry sure no film was ever intended to be 1.78 before the creation of widescreen TVs. The only reason there are some movies released as 1.78 (I don’t know how many are released this way in theaters but it has to be a pretty low number) is because they’re just cropping it to make it fit 16:9 TVs.

I have both of the Kubrick DVD box sets. I remember some of the movies in the first box set were 1.33 and it said that was Kubrick’s intention and I thought that was odd. Then I read somewhere he only wanted them that way because he’d rather have his films opened up instead of cropped to fit 4:3 TVs. Are there even any 1.85 movies that were cropped to fit 4:3 TVs? I thought all 1.85 movies were just opened up.

I believe all the 1.85 movies in both box sets were opened up to 1.78 too. That kind of annoys me because even though there’s barely a difference between 1.85 and 1.78 I like watching movies in their original aspect ratio and I just don’t see the point in opening 1.85 to 1.78.

[English Patient]

I never quite understood why some filmmakers are so concerned with preventing outtakes from ever seeing the light of day. I can understand a filmmaker wanting his cut of a movie to not ever be manipulated or added to, but what's the harm in releasing deleted scenes, as long as they're not reintegrated into the movie? In a case like The Shining, it would really boost disc sales, reinvigorate interest in the movie, etc. I guess some artists don't like showing the public their mistakes or inferior bits, like it somehow tarnishes their reputation, but I think seeing the lost footage would actually make fans like the movie even more. I was a casual fan of Blade Runner - but I ended up being a much bigger fan after buying the 5-disc version with the tons of deleted scenes and alternate cuts, etc.

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by English Patient

I never quite understood why some filmmakers are so concerned with preventing outtakes from ever seeing the light of day. I can understand a filmmaker wanting his cut of a movie to not ever be manipulated or added to, but what's the harm in releasing deleted scenes, as long as they're not reintegrated into the movie? In a case like The Shining, it would really boost disc sales, reinvigorate interest in the movie, etc. I guess some artists don't like showing the public their mistakes or inferior bits, like it somehow tarnishes their reputation, but I think seeing the lost footage would actually make fans like the movie even more. I was a casual fan of Blade Runner - but I ended up being a much bigger fan after buying the 5-disc version with the tons of deleted scenes and alternate cuts, etc.

Especially with something like the Shining. The cut material feels like an urban myth. Seeing the deleted ending would make me literally piss my pants.

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

Especially with something like the Shining. The cut material feels like an urban myth. Seeing the deleted ending would make me literally piss my pants.

Exactly. All this talk about it over the years has made it seem much, much bigger than it probably was. But even if the scene was pretty lame or forgettable, I'd still easily spend fifty bucks on a new version just to see it out of curiosity. When I stumbled on that grainy photo on the internet from the long-lost Jack-finding-the-scrapbook scene, it was pretty much the highlight of my day.

Warners would be missing a great marketing opportunity by not including stuff like that in future editions.

[crazybeats]

I don't know if it will ever be scanned at 4K but if they do it could be a nice way of making it the definitive edition of The Shining by releasing the original ending and any deleted scenes and outtakes they have. It wouldn't hurt to ask Vivian to provide the 18 hours of footage she shot and try and get that released.

I do find it a bit disheartening that after all these years it's still rumours. The fact that Warner Bros have never said anything about this movie tells me there's probably quite a bit of material they have but it goes back to the standard reply of "respecting Stanley's wishes". No doubt if that footage ever surfaced it would make a lot of money. I just feel like as long as the family are there to publicly talk about Stanley's wishes then it wont happen. I don't know how it eventually got released in widescreen or how the US cut got released in the UK for the first time. I don't know was that a decision they made or did they consult the Kubrick family but surely the next step is all that footage.

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by English Patient

I never quite understood why some filmmakers are so concerned with preventing outtakes from ever seeing the light of day. I can understand a filmmaker wanting his cut of a movie to not ever be manipulated or added to, but what's the harm in releasing deleted scenes, as long as they're not reintegrated into the movie? In a case like The Shining, it would really boost disc sales, reinvigorate interest in the movie, etc. I guess some artists don't like showing the public their mistakes or inferior bits, like it somehow tarnishes their reputation, but I think seeing the lost footage would actually make fans like the movie even more. I was a casual fan of Blade Runner - but I ended up being a much bigger fan after buying the 5-disc version with the tons of deleted scenes and alternate cuts, etc.

If anything, it shows how good they are. It shows that they know how to edit, and that they have restraint.

[Doctor Jack]

Originally Posted by English Patient

I never quite understood why some filmmakers are so concerned with preventing outtakes from ever seeing the light of day. I can understand a filmmaker wanting his cut of a movie to not ever be manipulated or added to, but what's the harm in releasing deleted scenes, as long as they're not reintegrated into the movie? In a case like The Shining, it would really boost disc sales, reinvigorate interest in the movie, etc. I guess some artists don't like showing the public their mistakes or inferior bits, like it somehow tarnishes their reputation, but I think seeing the lost footage would actually make fans like the movie even more. I was a casual fan of Blade Runner - but I ended up being a much bigger fan after buying the 5-disc version with the tons of deleted scenes and alternate cuts, etc.

Would reinvigorate interest? Let me assure you that 99% of the people who watch this movie watch it for the movie and couldn’t care less about deleted footage. Kubrick didn’t want it released. Warner is adhering to his wishes. Them going against his wishes and releasing the footage will not generate many sales.

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by eiknarf

If anything, it shows how good they are. It shows that they know how to edit, and that they have restraint.

Exactly. I had a newfound respect for William Friedkin after seeing The Exorcist's deleted scenes and then listening to his reasons why they were cut - it showed he really put a lot of thought into how the movie was constructed and how much he trusted the audience to 'get' the message without having everything spelled out.

I find it odd that Kubrick and/or his estate were ok with releasing Vivian Kubrick's behind-the-scenes documentary but not ok with showing any of the deleted footage from the movie. The documentary actually has the potential of spoiling or dimming the mystique about the film by showing how it was made, how the actors behaved and were treated on set, the chaotic last-minute rewriting of scenes, the arguing, etc.

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Doctor Jack

Would reinvigorate interest? Let me assure you that 99% of the people who watch this movie watch it for the movie and couldn’t care less about deleted footage. Kubrick didn’t want it released. Warner is adhering to his wishes. Them going against his wishes and releasing the footage will not generate many sales.

So you've polled every single fan of The Shining out there and asked them specifically what would motivate them to re-buy the movie on home video?

You don't know that it wouldn't generate many sales. In fact, there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that it would - like re-releases of movies with newfound footage. One of the reasons re-releases like the Star Wars special editions and The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen saw the light of day is because people were curious about the additional footage and there was obviously a market for it. I don't think The Shining would be much different. I've read many, many posts on this website from people not willing to re-buy a favorite movie because it was the same old transfer or there wasn't anything new in the special features. If they included deleted scenes, I'm sure it would get people to double-dip again. Would it be a huge amount of sales? No one can know. But look at how much the deleted ending has been talked about on this thread. Obviously people are curious about it, and they'd probably buy the film again if the footage was there.

[Bobbyjoe766]

Speaking for myself, I have immense interest in ‘lost footage’ from films - especially the classics.

Deleted scenes are my favourite kind of supplement. I wouldn’t hesitate buying (again) The Shining, 2001: A Space Odyssey or A Clockwork Orange, if they included never-before-seen deleted material.

Seeing a fresh new perspective on an old classic, through unseen footage, can be exhilarating and only adds to my appreciation for these films.

[stephengizmo]

The shining in UHD Dolby vision to pop those colours embossed in a limited edition steelbook with both cuts and a third disc of new extras

I just had a wet dream soz

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Bobbyjoe766

Speaking for myself, I have immense interest in ‘lost footage’ from films - especially the classics.

Deleted scenes are my favourite kind of supplement. I wouldn’t hesitate buying (again) The Shining, 2001: A Space Odyssey or A Clockwork Orange, if they included never-before-seen deleted material.

Seeing a fresh new perspective on an old classic, through unseen footage, can be exhilarating and only adds to my appreciation for these films.

Very nicely put. It's especially meaningful because movies like 2001 and The Shining are such familiar, towering classics that seeing lost/deleted footage would be akin to finding a lost scene from Hamlet.

Even if no future edition included deleted footage, a brand new transfer would probably be an even better incentive to re-buy the movie.

[iamnoone]

Originally Posted by Bobbyjoe766

Speaking for myself, I have immense interest in ‘lost footage’ from films - especially the classics.

Deleted scenes are my favourite kind of supplement. I wouldn’t hesitate buying (again) The Shining, 2001: A Space Odyssey or A Clockwork Orange, if they included never-before-seen deleted material.

Seeing a fresh new perspective on an old classic, through unseen footage, can be exhilarating and only adds to my appreciation for these films.

And in the case of 2001 and THE SHINING, some of that footage isn't "never-before-seen". Both films premiered with extra footage, 18 minutes in 2001, and the ending for THE SHINING, both edited out after playing in theaters.

I would absolutely die to see and own the 18 minutes from 2001, even if just included as an extra. And I'd also pay a LOT for that privelege. Same goes for the legendary chopped off ending to "THE SHINING". I was around when THE SHINING opened and saw it opening day, but it wasn't released nationally all on the same day back then, and only a few major cities got the unedited cut before it went wide, and my small town wasn't one of those major cities. And I've been P-O'd about never getting to see that chopped off ending for close to 40 years now.

In both cases, this footage was in the original theatrical release. To me, that makes the cut footage even more historical.

I'm not as concerned with general outtakes and other unused clips. They would be great to be preserved and seen, but just give us the original incarnations of these classics as they originally premiered, even if that deleted footage isn't reintegrated where it once was.

Kubrick is still huge. Don't underestimate his fanbase. A new release of "2001" (which we should be getting this year) touting that it's including the "18 minutes excised from the film 50 years ago and not seen since" as an extra would be HUGE. The 50th Anniversary edition will still sell big regardless, but including that footage would propel sales into the stratosphere past Jupiter.

[bobbyh64]

Since 2001 was selected to be in the National Film Registry, does that mean they might have the original version? My understanding is they want to preserve the absolute original versions of films.

[Bobbyjoe766]

Originally Posted by iamnoone

And in the case of 2001 and THE SHINING, some of that footage isn't "never-before-seen". Both films premiered with extra footage, 18 minutes in 2001, and the ending for THE SHINING, both edited out after playing in theaters.

I would absolutely die to see and own the 18 minutes from 2001, even if just included as an extra. And I'd also pay a LOT for that privelege. Same goes for the legendary chopped off ending to "THE SHINING". I was around when THE SHINING opened and saw it opening day, but it wasn't released nationally all on the same day back then, and only a few major cities got the unedited cut before it went wide, and my small town wasn't one of those major cities. And I've been P-O'd about never getting to see that chopped off ending for close to 40 years now.

In both cases, this footage was in the original theatrical release. To me, that makes the cut footage even more historical.

I'm not as concerned with general outtakes and other unused clips. They would be great to be preserved and seen, but just give us the original incarnations of these classics as they originally premiered, even if that deleted footage isn't reintegrated where it once was.

Kubrick is still huge. Don't underestimate his fanbase. A new release of "2001" (which we should be getting this year) touting that it's including the "18 minutes excised from the film 50 years ago and not seen since" as an extra would be HUGE. The 50th Anniversary edition will still sell big regardless, but including that footage would propel sales into the stratosphere past Jupiter.

Agreed. The 50th anniversary of 2001: A Space Odyssey would be the most perfect time to release the missing footage.