The Shining (1980)

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

Does anyone know if ANY of the DVD or Blu releases include the Epilogue that was attached to the film for it's initial run?
Per Wikipedia:
"After its premiere and a week into the general run (with a running time of 146 minutes), Kubrick cut a scene at the end that took place in a hospital. The scene shows Wendy in a bed talking with Mr. Ullman who explains that Jack's body could not be found; he then gives Danny a yellow tennis ball, presumably the same one that lured Danny into Room 237. This scene was subsequently physically cut out of prints by projectionists and sent back to the studio by order of Warner Bros., the film's distributor. This cut the film's running time to 144 minutes."

I need to see this, and am disappointed that has yet to find it's way onto an American release.

Why are you disappointed? I believe someone found an old premiere print and screened the film with this epilogue recently, but otherwise it hadn't been seen since 1980 and was removed by Kubrick. As with any piece of deleted footage from a Kubrick movie, you should set your expectations to "never going to see it". And if by some divine miracle it winds up on a future home video release, you can be all the more excited.

[SleazyForWeasley]

Disappointed because, while the movie is already haunting enough, it certainly leaves things even more open-ended. If Jack was never found was it because he was never there, or was his energy and body absorbed back into the Overlook? It's yet another "what really happened at the Overlook?" moment. There's always been the mystery of perception (whose eye-witness account is this?) throughout the film. It seems that Halloran is really the only objective person. I think this would be a scene worth seeing, rather than only reading about.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

Does anyone know if ANY of the DVD or Blu releases include the Epilogue that was attached to the film for it's initial run?
Per Wikipedia:
"After its premiere and a week into the general run (with a running time of 146 minutes), Kubrick cut

[Show spoiler]a scene at the end that took place in a hospital. The scene shows Wendy in a bed talking with Mr. Ullman who explains that Jack's body could not be found; he then gives Danny a yellow tennis ball, presumably the same one that lured Danny into Room 237.

I need to see this, and am disappointed that has yet to find it's way onto an American release.

You're ruining the ending of the movie for others who've haven't seen it. Use Spoiler Tags.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by slimdude

You're ruining the ending of the movie for others who've haven't seen it. Use Spoiler Tags.

Because quoting and bolding the spoiler really helps that effort

[Wizard-of-Wars]

You know Stephen King HAS wrote a sequel to Rhe Shining! It will be available next September. Takes place as Danny is a middle aged man and uses is powers against a supernatural group. He also has a companion...a cat!

This is NO joke!

[benricci]

Originally Posted by Wizard-of-Wars

You know Stephen King HAS wrote a sequel to The Shining!

The word you're looking for is "written."

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Rizor

I believe someone found an old premiere print and screened the film with this epilogue recently, but otherwise it hadn't been seen since 1980 and was removed by Kubrick.

It was announced last fall that a theater in New York would be screening a print with the epilogue, but two weeks after the announcement, someone put the brakes on it (Kubrick's estate? Warners?).

[Lemmy Lugosi]

Originally Posted by Wizard-of-Wars

You know Stephen King HAS wrote a sequel to Rhe Shining! It will be available next September. Takes place as Danny is a middle aged man and uses is powers against a supernatural group. He also has a companion...a cat!

This is NO joke!

The joke will be on the pages, and it will be played on everyone who buys a copy.

We don't need a sequel [cough-cashgrab-cough] to The Shining.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

Because quoting and bolding the spoiler really helps that effort

Well, It didn't matter anyway because, it's already been revealed.

[tonylopez]

Sorry someone might ruin the movie for you with the spoiler but don't let that ever discourage you from seeing one of the best horror films ever. It is amazing. But in the other guys defense, 32 years later makes me think it might be okay to talk openly about the movie. I being a Kubrick fan would love to see any deleted scenes from any of his films however his estate will always abide by his wishes to not let them be seen.

[benricci]

Originally Posted by tonylopez

Sorry someone might ruin the movie for you with the spoiler but don't let that ever discourage you from seeing one of the best horror films ever. It is amazing. But in the other guys defense, 32 years later makes me think it might be okay to talk openly about the movie. I being a Kubrick fan would love to see any deleted scenes from any of his films however his estate will always abide by his wishes to not let them be seen.

Seriously. The movie is over 30 years old and the director's been dead for nearly 15 years. I think we can do without spoiler tags at this point.

[Ill_Be_Back]

Originally Posted by benricci

Seriously. The movie is over 30 years old and the director's been dead for nearly 15 years. I think we can do without spoiler tags at this point.

I don't see your point....

[Rizor]

Originally Posted by dissention

It was announced last fall that a theater in New York would be screening a print with the epilogue, but two weeks after the announcement, someone put the brakes on it (Kubrick's estate? Warners?).

I guess that pretty much confirms it'll never see the light of day.

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

Disappointed because, while the movie is already haunting enough, it certainly leaves things even more open-ended. If Jack was never found was it because he was never there, or was his energy and body absorbed back into the Overlook? It's yet another "what really happened at the Overlook?" moment. There's always been the mystery of perception (whose eye-witness account is this?) throughout the film. It seems that Halloran is really the only objective person. I think this would be a scene worth seeing, rather than only reading about.

While I'd love to see it myself, when dealing with a Kubrick film, we're never gonna get any deleted material. As it stands, The Shining is a bonafide classic and has taken its place in film legend. The scene was deleted after the premiere for a reason and it no longer belongs in the movie. Even if it was included as a standalone deleted scene, it wouldn't change how anyone looks at the already ambiguous ending.

[SleazyForWeasley]

Does a 35+ year old book with a 30+ year old movie really need a spoiler alert? I didn't think so, but I'll be more careful. But, hey, here's an idea: How about a little patience for someone who has posted ten MAX posts in the forum when they don't know every single rule by heart instead of berating them in the forum and accusing them or ruining the ending of a 35+ year old book / 30+ year old movie for those who are unfortunate enough to have never seen it before? Really makes people want to take part in the discussion.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by SleazyForWeasley

Does a 35+ year old book with a 30+ year old movie really need a spoiler alert?

I never got the age argument. Have you read every 30+ year old book, or seen every movie older than 30 years? No, you haven't. Would you like me to reveal spoilers for all the ones you haven't seen or read? I doubt it. It makes liltle sense to factor age into it

[Ill_Be_Back]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I never got the age argument. Have you read every 30+ year old book, or seen every movie older than 30 years? No, you haven't. Would you like me to reveal spoilers for all the ones you haven't seen or read? I doubt it. It makes liltle sense to factor age into it

Yeah, it doesn't matter about age a spoiler is a spoiler....

[benricci]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

I never got the age argument. Have you read every 30+ year old book, or seen every movie older than 30 years? No, you haven't. Would you like me to reveal spoilers for all the ones you haven't seen or read? I doubt it. It makes liltle sense to factor age into it

At a certain point, though, things just seep into popular culture and no longer run the risk of really being "spoiled." To put spoiler tags around plot points for The Shining is kind of silly, given how old it is and how much of its plot and imagery is common knowledge. Not to mention most people contributing to the thread have either seen it multiple times or at least know what it's about.

No one's randomly stumbling into a Shining blu-ray thread thinking, "Hmm, wonder what this is all about. Hope no one ruins anything for me!"

If there's a new movie out in theaters with some twist ending, then yeah, throw a spoiler tag on it. But I saw a thread recently where someone put spoiler tags on plot points to The Wizard of Oz, for crying out loud. I mean, give me a break already.

I also don't see how a brief description of a cut scene in any way ruins the movie for someone who's already seen it. That argument makes no sense.

[TripleHBK]

Why would you be in a discussion forum for a movie that's this old if you haven't seen it? What could a person possibly contribute to the discussion if they haven't seen the movie. I agree that spoiler tags are warranted for new releases up to 6 months or so from Home Video Release date, but come on... The Shining is over 30 years old, if you haven't seen it by now AND you decide to come into a topic devoted to the movie that's your fault.

Oh and While I'm at it...

[Show spoiler]Vader is Luke's Father

[SleazyForWeasley]

Well, I probably wouldn't be posting in a forum on a movie I'd never seen before. I'd have little to nothing of worth to interject. After reading this entire thread it seems I am alone in that view. My point was that perhaps a little more tolerance for new(ish) people would make more people want to take part. Instead of someone who obviously spends a lot of time on the forum berating someone who is somewhat new here in the forum, would a friendly reminder not to use spoilers have been so difficult? Probably not. I've already apologized and it won't happen again. Or will it. What movie can I "ruin" next? Mwaahahahahaha.

[eiknarf]

Originally Posted by Ill_Be_Back

Yeah, it doesn't matter about age a spoiler is a spoiler....

*A little tidbit on spoilers:

if you're the type who clicks on a movie or PQ review and expects to be warned about spoilers, it's time for you to reflect on life and the decisions you've made.

It's fact that any review or discussion worth a damn will contain spoilers.

I will give one hundred dollars to anyone that can explain what "spoiled" means!

Did someone give away the ending? "OMG! The world is going to end!"

If spoiling a movie mattered, then you wouldn't own movies you've seen before.

Everyone has to remember that you watch a movie for the experience and story telling, not about having some personal revelation about the plot the first time you see the movie.

You all know how every superhero movie ends, yet billions of people still watch and enjoy them. (Wait a minutes! You mean to tell me the superhero wins?)