The Shining (1980)

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

That‘s 2.5 minutes of him saying nothing about the plot, just about how great it’s going to be. Nothing about Indians, nothing how it relates to the Kubrick film, nothing really. It’s just going to be great !

Everything I have read about the plot for the prequel was that it’s based on Before the Play. And now the project appears to be dead as nothing has been heard for several years.

They talked about how it’s a daunting task making a prequel to Kubricks movie and even mentioned Scatman Crothers so if that isn’t confirmation I don’t know what is.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

They talked about how it’s a daunting task making a prequel to Kubricks movie and even mentioned Scatman Crothers so if that isn’t confirmation I don’t know what is.

He says that’s exactly what it’s not going to be. It’s all just hot air and hype with absolutely no substance. Look at what the headline says.

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

He says that’s exactly what it’s not going to be. It’s all just hot air and hype with absolutely no substance. Look at what the headline says.

It’s was gonna be it’s own film but still connected to Kubricks movie.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

It’s was gonna be it’s own film but still connected to Kubricks movie.

http://www.slashfilm.com/the-shining...es-vanderbilt/

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

http://www.slashfilm.com/the-shining...es-vanderbilt/

They got that from the IMDB page. There is no confirmation that it’s about that. IMDB is not a reliable source for anything. I just feel if it wasn’t connected to Kubricks movie James Vanderbilt would have said so in that interview but the interviewer kept throwing nods at Kubricks film and he said nothing.

[myway]

I read Dr. Sleep and I really don't see any reason why it couldn't be adapted as a sequel to the Kubrick film; in fact, I find it hard to believe that WB (which owns the rights to the Kubrick film) would option the film rights to a sequel of one of their most popular/classic/influential/you name it movies and then produce a movie which is not connected to it.

The Halloran stuff IIRC is mostly flashbacks; and even if not, they can make them flashbacks in the film. Regardless, he's out of the book almost entirely after the opening.

Beyond that, it's not like Dr. Sleep actually takes place in the Overlook. Whether or not you enjoyed the book (I did), there's really nothing that precludes it from being adapted as sequel to the Kubrick film.

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by myway

I read Dr. Sleep and I really don't see any reason why it couldn't be adapted as a sequel to the Kubrick film; in fact, I find it hard to believe that WB (which owns the rights to the Kubrick film) would option the film rights to a sequel of one of their most popular/classic/influential/you name it movies and then produce a movie which is not connected to it.

The Halloran stuff IIRC is mostly flashbacks; and even if not, they can make them flashbacks in the film. Regardless, he's out of the book almost entirely after the opening.

Beyond that, it's not like Dr. Sleep actually takes place in the Overlook. Whether or not you enjoyed the book (I did), there's really nothing that precludes it from being adapted as sequel to the Kubrick film

That would so disrespectful to Kubricks movie. That would just be a big f-you to him. And a f-you to King also. King didn’t write that to be a sequel to Kubricks movie. He hates Kubricks movie.

[Morsoth]

So, we are going to get both a "prequel" and a Dr. Sleep movie?! That's great! Very excited for both of them!

I never saw the Shining TV miniseries, was it any good?

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by Morsoth

So, we are going to get both a "prequel" and a Dr. Sleep movie?! That's great! Very excited for both of them!

I never saw the Shining TV miniseries, was it any good?

God no.

It literally feels like a lifetime movie.

[mar3o]

Here's all you need to see about the mini-seires:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4V7NllEE4k

It's garbage.

[Richard--W]

Originally Posted by Morsoth

So, we are going to get both a "prequel" and a Dr. Sleep movie?! That's great! Very excited for both of them!

I never saw the Shining TV miniseries, was it any good?

It was worse than an Ed Wood movie if that's possible.
It doesn't even convince you that you're watching a movie.

... meanwhile, Kubrick's film seems to improve with each passing year. I didn't think much of it at first. The novel was getting in my way, I think. It was the worst haunted house novel I'd read. Just bad verbose writing. Technically the film dazzles like a Kubrick film always does but the storytelling needed time to grow on me. Kubrick wrangled that novel. The film blows me away now.

[Richard--W]

Has anyone read this analysis of the film, in the BFI book series:

[Bronson13]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

It was worse than an Ed Wood movie if that's possible.
It doesn't even convince you that you're watching a movie.

... meanwhile, Kubrick's film seems to improve with each passing year. I didn't think much of it at first. The novel was getting in my way, I think. It was the worst haunted house novel I'd read. Just bad verbose writing. Technically the film dazzles like a Kubrick film always does but the storytelling needed time to grow on me. Kubrick wrangled that novel. The film blows me away now.

And people want them to connect Kings mediocre Dr. Sleep to Kubricks movie and tarnish its legacy...

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Richard--W

Has anyone read this analysis of the film, in the BFI book series:

Yeah, I bought it a few years ago - it was pretty decent, had some interesting ideas about folklore and fairy tales and how they show up in the movie. There were also some interesting passages about the music and the composers, as well as some insights into the acting, the production, the photograph of Jack at the end, the nature of Mr. Grady, and other things.

It's far from a 'making-of' book - it's just a short, kind of free-form intellectual analysis of the movie, like a grad student's thesis.

[Richard--W]

An analysis, yes.
It compliments The Stanley Kubrick Archives.

Originally Posted by Bronson13

And people want them to connect Kings mediocre Dr. Sleep to Kubricks movie and tarnish its legacy...

No we don't want that.
You're being very restrained if not overly kind calling Dr. Sleep "mediocre."

[myway]

How will the legacy of the Shining be tarnished by a Dr. Sleep adaptation?

The Kubrick film is almost 40 years old and has clearly engrained itself in modern culture. If people don't like Dr. Sleep then so be it but I think people will get the fact that Dr. Sleep is not a Stanley Kubrick production.

[English Patient]

Originally Posted by Bronson13

And people want them to connect Kings mediocre Dr. Sleep to Kubricks movie and tarnish its legacy...

Even if they wanted to turn The Shining into some sort of franchise, with sequels and prequels and spin-offs, I don't think it would tarnish Kubrick's film. 2010 didn't hurt 2001 and the forgettable Scarlett TV mini-series didn't harm Gone With the Wind. If anything, I think sequels would probably make people appreciate Kubrick's movie all the more simply because it would tower over the others in terms of quality. And it would probably compel some new people to seek out Kubrick's movie out of curiosity. (Don't get me wrong, though - I'm not crazy about sequels and generally avoid most of them. But if they bring more fans to the original movie, they might serve a purpose.)

[Richard--W]

I like this storyboard panel, by Kubrick, from the book The Stanley Kubrick Archives:

[happydood]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

"Dr. Sleep" is one of the worst books King has written in recent years, and a big reason is because he is still so pissed about the movie "The Shining" that he seems to be writing the novel out of spite so that he can emphasize all of the ways that Kubrick "got it wrong". There are several scenes where he stops the story just to remind the reader of something that Kubrick changed, or to emphasize how Jack really *was* a good guy not just a monster like some people think.

Huh. I'd argue that many if not most of his books fulfill some pulp genre criteria while not being necessarily being great literature. And don't take that the wrong way, I love them just as much. But this one was maybe the first in a long while that had a central conceit that not only paid off, but was the entire point- and I'm not talking about the horror elements but rather what Danny is in the beginning and what he ends up becoming. Regardless of his motivations, it was a solid novel if not a solid horror sequel.

[dallywhitty]

I really liked Doctor Sleep. It falters towards the end with a certain plot twist I didn't care for, but I commend King for letting the book do its own thing and not simply rehash The Shining.

Originally Posted by mar3o

Here's all you need to see about the mini-seires:

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4V7NllEE4k

It's garbage.

I'd gladly watch the mini-series on a never-ending loop over watching one of Nostalgia Critic's videos again.