The Shining (1980)

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by Robert S

No - in the international version, Kubrick caught the error and trimmed the footage of Jack returning to his work.

fascinating!

so it sounds like an unintentional error - dang it! I thought the overlook was feeding paper!

[ssjmichael]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

fascinating!

so it sounds like an unintentional error - dang it! I thought the overlook was feeding paper!

I do wonder if that's true though. Surely if the EU version cut that part out the Kubrick theory sites all would make note of that, no?. The one's I've read haven't at least.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by ssjmichael

I do wonder if that's true though. Surely if the EU version cut that part out the Kubrick theory sites all would make note of that, no?. The one's I've read haven't at least.

we'll comisssion Kubrickfan to check it for us tonight!

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

we'll comisssion Kubrickfan to check it for us tonight!

I'm way ahead of you .

I just checked it, and the international version is indeed a few seconds shorter. In the American cut, you see Jack move the top of the typewriter to the left to resume writing, and then you see him type a few lines in the same shot. The International version shows him move the top, and just before he starts to type, it cuts immediately to Wendy and Danny playing in the snow. So since you can see the paper in the typewriter in both versions, I'd say the error is still there in both versions.

And about the differences between the American and International versions, I prefer the International cut, but that's only because that's the one I've seen the most. I've seen the American cut only once, and yeah, those skeletons are pretty tacky for a movie like this. Also, some scenes with Shelley Duvall feature some of the weaker acting she does in the movie, in my opinion, and those are removed as well in the International version (the scene with the doctor at the beginning, for instance). The American cut does feature a few more title cards and a few more fades, instead of simply cutting to the next scene. Whether you like the slightly disjointed feel the International cut has, is of course something one has to decide for himself. I do recommend everyone to see both versions.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by KubrickFan

I'm way ahead of you .

I just checked it, and the international version is indeed a few seconds shorter. In the American cut, you see Jack move the top of the typewriter to the left to resume writing, and then you see him type a few lines in the same shot. The International version shows him move the top, and just before he starts to type, it cuts immediately to Wendy and Danny playing in the snow. So since you can see the paper in the typewriter in both versions, I'd say the error is still there in both versions.

wow, that is surprising. you'd think if he was going to fix it, he'd fix it. oh well. dang you kubrick!!! he's laughing at us LOL

And about the differences between the American and International versions, I prefer the International cut, but that's only because that's the one I've seen the most. I've seen the American cut only once, and yeah, those skeletons are pretty tacky for a movie like this. Also, some scenes with Shelley Duvall feature some of the weaker acting she does in the movie, in my opinion, and those are removed as well in the International version (the scene with the doctor at the beginning, for instance). The American cut does feature a few more title cards and a few more fades, instead of simply cutting to the next scene. Whether you like the slightly disjointed feel the International cut has, is of course something one has to decide for himself. I do recommend everyone to see both versions.

I will have to watch it soon, since i love the film. Her acting was VERY weak in that doctor scene at times. For example, she offers her a cigarette in such an unconvincing manner that I cringed. it was 2 nights ago so its fresh in my mind

[Ill_Be_Back]

OK, before I get this which version should I buy US or UK? I have only ever seen the UK cut and have always been put off on getting the US version as it has extra scenes that are not needed well that's what I have been told. Anyway any suggestions would be great!! Thanks

[I KEEL YOU]

Originally Posted by Ill_Be_Back

OK, before I get this which version should I buy US or UK? I have only ever seen the UK cut and have always been put off on getting the US version as it has extra scenes that are not needed well that's what I have been told. Anyway any suggestions would be great!! Thanks

Those who have grown up with the U.S. cut will say get the U.S. cut and those who have grown up with the international cut will say get the international cut. For me, some of the scenes like the extended job interview and extended walk while they're being introduced to the hotel work very well in the U.S. cut, while others are ultra corny. I have both cuts and I can't really tell which of the two I put in my blu ray player more. Hard to say which one you should get. You should probably watch the U.S. cut and see if you like it or at the very least learn about the differences (spoiler alert):

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

[shogun123]

Originally Posted by PGW

I would.

I clearly remember reading that he wanted the film to be seen in 4 x 3. Lopping off the top and bottom of it to make it widescreen just so some people can fill their widescreen TVs is not acceptable to me.

I also wish they had looked a little harder and found the final scene. I remember seeing that in the theater when the film came out, and I thought it gives a needed upbeat coda to the film (Wendy and Danny survive) rather than the confusing and kind of trite close-up of Jack in the the photo.

Just my $0.02.

I guess you're not aware of the Baphomet significance.

[shogun123]

Originally Posted by Ill_Be_Back

OK, before I get this which version should I buy US or UK? I have only ever seen the UK cut and have always been put off on getting the US version as it has extra scenes that are not needed well that's what I have been told. Anyway any suggestions would be great!! Thanks

If you are a fan of the film then get both, I have the US cut but plan to purchase the Euro version. BTW everyone is raving about the PQ and while it is indeed excellent it is not perfect, there are a few scenes where there is flickering.

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by Ill_Be_Back

OK, before I get this which version should I buy US or UK? I have only ever seen the UK cut and have always been put off on getting the US version as it has extra scenes that are not needed well that's what I have been told. Anyway any suggestions would be great!! Thanks

What would you rather read--the novel by Stephen King or a Cliff's Notes version of it? Exactly. U.S. wins over the un-Kubrickian brevity of the UK cut.

[Ill_Be_Back]

Originally Posted by shogun123

If you are a fan of the film then get both, I have the US cut but plan to purchase the Euro version. BTW everyone is raving about the PQ and while it is indeed excellent it is not perfect, there are a few scenes where there is flickering.

I will get the US version for now as I am a little tight on money at the moment already waiting on 8 Blu rays coming!!

[#Darren]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

What would you rather read--the novel by Stephen King or a Cliff's Notes version of it? Exactly. U.S. wins over the un-Kubrickian brevity of the UK cut.

An un-Kubrickian cut made by Kubrick....

interesting.

[Ill_Be_Back]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

What would you rather read--the novel by Stephen King or a Cliff's Notes version of it? Exactly. U.S. wins over the un-Kubrickian brevity of the UK cut.

Though I have only ever seen the UK cut so there could be a difference of opinion here when I actually watch the US cut...

[I KEEL YOU]

To say that the U.S. cut is "more Kubrick" just because it has more scenes is stupid. If you knew about the history of the movie, you'd know that there was a very significant scene in a hospital after the movie's ending where Wendy is told that Jack's body could not be found and the movie ending with Ullman rolling a ball to Danny like the scene previously in the movie. But this scene was cut.

I guess then that if the international cut is "un-Kubrick", and the U.S. is "more Kubrick", then the cut including this scene would be the most Kubrick one of all so we're all robbed in the end.

Kubrick did everything for a reason and you best believe that there is a valid reason why he cut 24 minutes from the U.S. version.

[shogun123]

Taco Tuesday wrote:

- The twins are "twins" but have some slight differences between them. This harkens to Carl Jung's "duality of man" theory, which is a favorite for Kubrick

Don't forget the Baphomet pose in the b/w photo at the end: From Wiki:

Baphomet (/ˈbæfɵmɛt/; from medieval Latin Baphometh, baffometi, Occitan Bafometz) is an imagined pagan deity (i.e., a product of Christian folklore concerning pagans), revived in the 19th century as a figure of occultism and Satanism. Often mistaken for Satan, it represents the duality of male and female, as well as Heaven and Hell or night and day signified by the raising of one arm and the downward gesture of the other

[shogun123]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

To say that the U.S. cut is "more Kubrick" just because it has more scenes is stupid. If you knew about the history of the movie, you'd know that there was a very significant scene in a hospital after the movie's ending where Wendy is told that Jack's body could not be found and the movie ending with Ullman rolling a ball to Danny like the scene previously in the movie. But this scene was cut.

I guess then that if the international cut is "un-Kubrick", and the U.S. is "more Kubrick", then the cut including this scene would be the most Kubrick one of all so we're all robbed in the end.

Kubrick did everything for a reason and you best believe that there is a valid reason why he cut 24 minutes from the U.S. version.

I wouldn't bother arguing with Filmmaker, the only voice he is listening to is his own.

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by I KEEL YOU

To say that the U.S. cut is "more Kubrick" just because it has more scenes is stupid. If you knew about the history of the movie, you'd know that there was a very significant scene in a hospital after the movie's ending where Wendy is told that Jack's body could not be found and the movie ending with Ullman rolling a ball to Danny like the scene previously in the movie. But this scene was cut.

I guess then that if the international cut is "un-Kubrick", and the U.S. is "more Kubrick", then the cut including this scene would be the most Kubrick one of all so we're all robbed in the end.

Kubrick did everything for a reason and you best believe that there is a valid reason why he cut 24 minutes from the U.S. version.

I only mean to say that he second guessed himself, which some directors do to the detriment of their work (as with, arguably, Spielberg with THE TERMINAL, Lucas with the Special Editions of the STAR WARS trilogy, Coppola with APOCALYPSE NOW, Richard Kelly with DONNIE DARKO, etc.). The UK version plays like a too-rapid, Cliff's Notes version of its better U.S. edit and, when you place the two edits up against the flow of the rest of Kubrick's canon, the U.S. edit "fits" better.

[Geoff D]

Heh. I don't base my enjoyment of a film on how it "fits" within a director's "canon". I take it as it is, and the last time I watched the long version of The Shining it damn near sent me to sleep.

Put Barry Lyndon or 2001 or EWS on, and I'm enraptured from start to finish. But The Shining is not capable of sustaining its sense of menace and dread - which is the USP of the whole show - over the runtime of the long version, and Kubrick realised this. Hence the short version.

Of course, he left both versions in the wild, instead of declaring that one be better than the other, which only adds to the enigma of the man. I know which version I prefer, and that's good enough for me.

[GOMEZFAN69]

I can't imagine wanting to watch a shorter version of The Shining as I think it's perfect.

[Filmmaker]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

Heh. I don't base my enjoyment of a film on how it "fits" within a director's "canon". I take it as it is, and the last time I watched the long version of The Shining it damn near sent me to sleep.

Put Barry Lyndon or 2001 or EWS on, and I'm enraptured from start to finish. But The Shining is not capable of sustaining its sense of menace and dread - which is the USP of the whole show - over the runtime of the long version, and Kubrick realised this. Hence the short version.

Sure. Clearly the people who have consistently placed THE SHINING at, or near, the top of the Best Horror Films of All-Times lists over the last 30 years are all British voters.