I’ve never read The Shining, but I have seen the mini-series that more faithfully adapted the original story. So, I understand the basic conflict between Kubrick and King. While the antagonistic forces are more clearly supernatural rather than psychological in King’s version, King’s also comes across as the stronger character piece. This was one of the movies in which Nicholson didn’t so much “act” as “stood in front of a camera being Jack Nicholson.” While Steven Weber on the other hand portrayed a much more conflicted character.
I also preferred Melvin Van Peebles in
the mini-series over Scatman Crothers in the movie. I’m going to
limit my comments on that to simply saying that I preferred it.
Talking about why could potentially take me into a discussion of race
that I don’t want to touch with a ten foot pole.
This certainly doesn’t mean that I
dislike the Kubrick film. To me though, it’s an art film. It puts
the actors through Hell in the form of bizarre visuals with no
explanation given (or at least no definitive explanation). It’s
creepy and disorienting, but still has enough plot to prevent us from
being jaded.
I've actually encountered people who
haven’t seen this movie and don’t even know what it’s about.
So to clarify: a recovering alcoholic named Jack Torrence
(Nicholson), his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall), and his psychic son
Danny (Danny Lloyd) move into a hotel that closes down for the
winter. Jack has been hired to maintain the hotel during the off
season, and wants to use this as a chance to write a novel while far
away from the temptation of alcohol.
Unfortunately, as it turns out, the
hotel is haunted by many past guests who want to drive Jack insane
and get him to kill his family. Whether there was something special
about Jack or if the ghosts simply target anyone vulnerable is a
matter of much dispute in analyzing this film. I’m honestly
uncertain which way I fall on this matter, as there’s clear
evidence for both sides. In fact, most of the evidence could be
interpreted either way… assuming you even accept that anything in
the film is literally true at all.
One surprising thing I find on this
list of movies; quite a few of them don’t feature any actual
killing until near the end of the film. A major factor in creating
horror is giving the audience some idea of who these people are and
why we should care that they’re dying. That certainly seems to be
the case in this film, in which I believe there are only two onscreen
deaths; Jack himself, and Dick Hollarann (Scatman Crothers); a
psychic cook who returns to the hotel in response to a supernatural
distress signal sent by Danny. Both of these deaths, as well as
Danny and Wendy’s near-brushes with death, are far more impactful
than Jason Vorhees tearing through an army of anonymous High School
students, precisely because the film spends so much time building up
to them. These are human lives to be valued by the viewer, and we
learn why.
If there’s a true weakness in the
film, it’s Shelley Duvall. This came out two years after Alien,
and we have an entirely stereotypical damsel in distress. When
confronting a clearly insane Jack, she can’t even hold a baseball
bat effectively. Even when Jack directly threatens her life, her
attempts to defend herself look like she’s trying to shoo away an
annoying house cat. She whimpers, screams, and cries throughout her
role. I’m sorry, but she doesn’t come across as sympathetic, she
comes across as pathetic. The idea that she successfully overpowered
Jack Nicholson at one point was probably the single most unbelievable
thing in this movie. I understand that Kubrick cut a fair amount of
Duvall’s lines because he was unsatisfied with her performance, and
I don’t blame him one bit.
I recommend the film. I recommend
watching it in close proximity, if not back-to-back, with the
mini-series (yep, came back to that again), as they represent such
vastly different vision of the same basic story that I can’t
imagine anyone not being fascinated by the contrast. Even on its own
though, the movie is good.
No comments:
Post a Comment