Sunday, March 9, 2014

Movie Review: Stephen King's "The Shining"




For a long time, I had wanted to see this version of "The Shining". As a devoted fan of Stephen King, it had been on my bucket list for some time. Yet, somehow, I had never managed to see it, until last week.

Now, here's the thing: there are two different movie versions of The Shining out now, and there is also the novel by Stephen King. The miniseries version, which is the focus of this review, is supposed to be truer to the spirit of the novel, which King feels the Kubric version deviated from.

I did read the novel, although it was many years ago by now. So, my memory is not so fresh with the novel, although I used to remember the differences between the novel and the earlier film adaptation. What I do remember of the novel, though, allowed me to see that the miniseries version does, indeed, seem to be more true to the novel than Stanley Kubrick's version.

Yet, they are all a bit different in their own ways, so perhaps a little clarity is in order. In each version, the novel and the two film adaptations, there is The Overlook Hotel, and Jack Torrance has just been hired as the caretaker for the long, cold, winter months while the hotel is closed. In each version, he will be staying with his family, his wife Wendy, and his son, Danny. In each version, Danny has a very unique ability to "see" things and communicate with others who have this ability, and Danny meets the cook, Dick Hallorann, who also has this ability, which he calls the shining (from which the novel and the movies get the name). In each version, Hallorann warns Danny not to read too much into the images, that they are like pictures in a book, and cannot do him harm. In each version, Danny has a kind of protector, Tony, who appears to others like an imaginary friend. In each version, strange, inexplicable things start happening in the hotel, and Danny is the first to experience them, although Jack also experiences some very weird things and, in time, these weird things happen more and more often. In each version, Jack grows more disturbed, and the situation gets so bad, that Danny, using his shining abilities, reaches out to Dick, who flies in from Miami, and braves a horrendous winterstorm, to provide assistance. In each version, Wendy also grows increasingly worried, and begins to want to leave the hotel, which Jack has fallen in love with, and Jack sabotages any chance of their escaping. In each version, Jack finally snaps, and sets out to harm Wendy and especially Danny, and even Dick.

Those are the similarities with each version, the novel and the two film adaptations. But there are differences, as well.

So, what exactly are they? And what prompted Stephen King to take such exception to Stanley Kubrick's version, that he finally made a very different version?

Like most people, I was familiar with the Stanley Kubrick movie, and loved it, truth be told. But I also knew that Stephen King himself hated it. He took exception to Shelley Duvall, who he refers to as a "scream machine" in the movie and, frankly, he has a point about that.

The main thing that he did not like about that movie was that Jack Torrance, the caretaker of the Overlook Hotel. King claims that right from the very beginning of the movie, during the interview, you could just tell that the man is insane, and that this detracts from the notion that the hotel is the source of evil in this story.

Again, he has a point. And in the newer version, the Stephen King version, which stars Steven Weber (from the comedy series "Wings" in the role of Jack Torrance, he goes quite a way to remedying that. Jack Torrance is a likable, if flawed, character, trying to make a break from the mistakes of his past, and looking at the Overlook as a second chance - perhaps his last chance. But he is a family man, and loves his wife Wendy (played by Rebecca De Mornay) and son Danny (played by Courtland Mead). Steven Weber makes Jack an everyday kind of guy in this movie, while Jack Nickolson portrays a far creepier, more believable insane guy in the Kubrick film.

In the miniseries (King) version, it is also much clearer that the hotel itself is the problem. That there is some kind of inexplicable spirit or power or something that lives within the hotel, and the little boy's incredibly strong ability to "shine" gives it greater power and increased life. It remains relatively powerless at first, until Danny finally enters Room 217. The haunted room that Dick Holleran, the cook, warns Danny never, ever to go in. In the Kubrick version, that room opens on it's own, under mysterious reasons. Was Jack doing something in there, or perhaps even Wendy, and they simply forgot to close it afterward? or, was it the hotel itself that somehow managed to open the door, urging Danny to come in and explore? In King's version, it is Danny himself that opens the door, wanting to conquer his own fears, although in an obviously ill-advised manner.

Finally, in the novel and in the miniseries version, the hotel blows up at the end, because Jack has forgotten to relieve the old and decrepit boiler, which is highly unstable. Danny uses this against Jack when cornered, and Jack races down to try and save the hotel. But it is already too late, and the hotel ultimately blows up. In Kubrick's version, the hotel does not blow up at all.

So, yes, there are definitely noticeable differences between the novel and miniseries, and the Kubrick version film, which is probably the most famous adaptation that people are familiar with. Yet,somehow, it is kind of hard to separate two movies that are very similar in some ways, yet very different in others.

You would not necessarily think that was the case, but it is. Really, it is not all that different than reading the book, then seeing the movie (or vice versa) and comparing.

The thing is, I read the book, and saw the original movie. Now, I've seen the remake, too.

If you want to watch a scary movie, just to get freaked out, I still think that Kubrick's version is more likely to appeal to a wider audience. I know Stephen King is not a fan (he hates it, actually), but I just had to watch it again after seeing the King version (which was a miniseries from 1997 that I actually missed at the time). And it struck me that this film, in terms of just pure thrills and chills, works remarkably well. You do get the sense that there is something wrong with the hotel itself, although it is admittedly not as pronounced as in the book, or the King version. But Kubrick's version is very good, and Jack Nicholson immortalized the role, particularly with the trademark words that he utters after breaking down the door with his axe. Who could ever forget "Heeere's Johnny!"? There is a reason why the movie has achieved such distinction among fans of horror, after all.

For fans of Stephen King, however, this miniseries is very different than Kubrick's film, and is truer, although not quite identical, with the novel. It is not quite as scary and creepy as Stanley Kubrick's movie, yet it is more involved, obviously much longer and, in the end, definitely worth seeing for any King fans!

No comments:

Post a Comment