The Shining three different running times on Blu-ray

[Cook]

Originally Posted by Filmmaker

Everytime someone says they prefer a truncated SHINING, I get an instant migraine.

To each their own. I guess you disagree with Kubrik then, because he liked the shorter cut and cut it himself. The shorter cut is better paced and lacks unecessary extraneous scenes, and creats a better sense of isolation, and nothing that was cut was needed. Longer isnt always better.

[Geoff D]

I prefer a truncated SHINING. Someone get that man some Advil.

[bigshot]

Most Kubrick movies could use a healthy bit of editing.

[Benh911f]

Originally Posted by Cook

To each their own. I guess you disagree with Kubrik then, because he liked the shorter cut and cut it himself. The shorter cut is better paced and lacks unecessary extraneous scenes, and creats a better sense of isolation, and nothing that was cut was needed. Longer isnt always better.

Admittedly I haven't seen the shorter cut, but how does the shorter version create more of a sense of isolation? I would think the longer version would do that, simply because it moves at a slower pace.

[Lyle_JP]

Originally Posted by Benh911f

Admittedly I haven't seen the shorter cut, but how does the shorter version create more of a sense of isolation? I would think the longer version would do that, simply because it moves at a slower pace.

Because there are less scenes of the world outside the Overlook Hotel, like the scene where Hallorann acquires a snow-cat from his buddy who runs the gas station.

[JimDiGriz]

Said it loads of times before but in the UK we only ever got to see the shorter version of The Shining for years. So the longer one is still a bit of a novelty for me even though Ive seen it at least three times now. So I will always prefer to watch the longer one and be a bit 'surprised' at the additional scenes. I still bought both versions though.

[TheHutt]

Originally Posted by FlyBry

Wow. I knew at one time there was a 2 hour version, but I didn't realize that version was still being released in some countries. I've been a fan of this movie since the late '80s, and I've only ever seen the 144 min. cut. It's weird that, in this day and age, so many people have never seen the 144 version and didn't even know it existed.

It still is like Kubrick wished: the US cut for the US and the Euro cut for Europe. Interestingly, the bonus materials on the discs do not contain any information that there actually are two different versions out there.

Also, it would be interesting to compare the audio commentaries which are present on the DVD/BluRay - the European version would have to be edited down in order to suit the shorter cut (ie some of the information must be missing).

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by TheHutt

Also, it would be interesting to compare the audio commentaries which are present on the DVD/BluRay - the European version would have to be edited down in order to suit the shorter cut (ie some of the information must be missing).

I'm sure that's what they did, the original Orion DVD of the theatrical cut of Dances With Wolves had the commentary from the 4hr laserdisc version edited down to 3hrs. The whole commentary is on the MGM DVD of the extended cut.

[jscoggins]

Originally Posted by Cook

To each their own. I guess you disagree with Kubrik then, because he liked the shorter cut and cut it himself. The shorter cut is better paced and lacks unecessary extraneous scenes, and creats a better sense of isolation, and nothing that was cut was needed. Longer isnt always better.

Originally Posted by bigshot

Most Kubrick movies could use a healthy bit of editing.

Indeed, the vast majority of movies should be shorter.

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by Cook

To each their own. I guess you disagree with Kubrik then, because he liked the shorter cut and cut it himself.

Earlier (I believe in this very thread), nobody was able to find a definitive quote by Kubrick anywhere as to which cut he preferred. You may just be saying he approved of it because he did it, which is certainly true, but there's no evidence the shorter version means he disapproved of the longer cut.

[bigshot]

Longer is not always better... except in your pants!

[tylergfoster]

Originally Posted by bigshot

Longer is not always better... except in your pants!

bigshot? more like RIMSHOT! HEYO

[phil4853]

Don't know why Warner didn't just release both cuts on one disc...it's not like rights would be an issue!

For me the skeleton's scene is worth going with the extended version alone.

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by phil4853

For me the skeleton's scene is worth going with the extended version alone.

Interesting, for me the deletion of that scene is a big reason I like the shorter version...

[Cook]

Originally Posted by tylergfoster

Earlier (I believe in this very thread), nobody was able to find a definitive quote by Kubrick anywhere as to which cut he preferred. You may just be saying he approved of it because he did it, which is certainly true, but there's no evidence the shorter version means he disapproved of the longer cut.

It wasnt my intention to imply he disliked the longer cut. I was just pointing out that he liked the shorter cut, and others liking it as well shouldnt be upsetting for others or considered in some way wrong. Calling the 119 minute cut "truncated" doesnt really ring true to me. Nothig vital was cut and the sense of isolation and pace was enhanced by the cuts. I think Kubrik did a good job tightening the film, and I wish he would have done this with his other films.

Originally Posted by Benh911f

Admittedly I haven't seen the shorter cut, but how does the shorter version create more of a sense of isolation? I would think the longer version would do that, simply because it moves at a slower pace.

Originally Posted by Lyle_JP

Because there are less scenes of the world outside the Overlook Hotel, like the scene where Hallorann acquires a snow-cat from his buddy who runs the gas station.

He cut out all the scenes of them watching television too. This further gives the impression that these three people are severely isolated and stranded. Jack has his book and increasing insanity. Danny has Tony and his toys and the horrors of the Overlook. And poor Wendy only has herself and her boy and the ever increasing issue of Jack's madness. The overlook might as well be an island in the middle of the ocean. At the beginning of the film they mention the Donner family that was stranded and froze to death. Once the television is removed from the movie it increases the comparison between the Donner's and the Torrences. They are stranded in the Overlook like the Donner party was stranded in the mountains.

[Aclea]

Kubrick's motive for cutting the film for the international market seems to have been primarily commercial: he didn't get a salary on his films at Warners but instead got some expenses and a percentage, with ownership of the film reverting to him after 15 years (on the condition that Warners retained distribution rights in perpetuity). It more or less broke even in the US, but with the video market barely developed at the time he was eager to maximise the revenue overseas, and a shorter running time was one way of doing that.

[JimDiGriz]

For me, more Kubrick = better.

And if they ever find those missing 2001 bits all the better.

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by Aclea

Kubrick's motive for cutting the film for the international market seems to have been primarily commercial: he didn't get a salary on his films at Warners but instead got some expenses and a percentage, with ownership of the film reverting to him after 15 years (on the condition that Warners retained distribution rights in perpetuity). It more or less broke even in the US, but with the video market barely developed at the time he was eager to maximise the revenue overseas, and a shorter running time was one way of doing that.

That's what I love about the enigma of Kubrick. On the one hand he's renowned as this legendary perfectionist, a man whose quest for art consumed his working life, and on the other he's a stone-cold pragmatist, cutting down the Shining just so he could pocket a bit of extra cheddar. Love it.

In any case, I love the shorter cut of the Shining. The US version ambles and meanders and takes too damned long to do anything, and when we do get the payoff it's just a bunch of dusty skellingtons! The UK cut maintains that almost hypnotic sense of tension and isolation throughout, keeping references to the outside world to a minimum.

Originally Posted by JimDiGriz

For me, more Kubrick = better.

And if they ever find those missing 2001 bits all the better.

Warners have been in possession of those missing bits for years. Whether they see the light of day is another question entirely.

I'm more interested in the movie getting a nice fat 8K scan from the 65mm negative than having more stuff cut into it.

[JimDiGriz]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

That's what I love about the enigma of Kubrick. On the one hand he's renowned as this legendary perfectionist, a man whose quest for art consumed his working life, and on the other he's a stone-cold pragmatist, cutting down the Shining just so he could pocket a bit of extra cheddar. Love it.

In any case, I love the shorter cut of the Shining. The US version ambles and meanders and takes too damned long to do anything, and when we do get the payoff it's just a bunch of dusty skellingtons! The UK cut maintains that almost hypnotic sense of tension and isolation throughout, keeping references to the outside world to a minimum.


Warners have been in possession of those missing bits for years. Whether they see the light of day is another question entirely.

I'm more interested in the movie getting a nice fat 8K scan from the 65mm negative than having more stuff cut into it.

Well Ive got both cuts on blu but I know which one Ill be watching when I watch it yet again soon - it wont be the shorter one!

Yeah Id love to see an even better 2001 transfer - Im sure it could look a bit better despite being such a revelation the first time I saw it on Blu-ray (the 2nd or 3rd Blu-ray I saw!).

What Id like even more though is a half-decent transfer of Eyes Wide Shut - the current one is just horrible.

[HeavyHitter]

Any different in PQ between the US and UK versions?