Someone please explain the movie, "The Shining" to me.

best of luck, OP.

It’s just weird and scary. It’s Stephen King. Leave it at that. REDRUM

The scene with the guy in the animal costume left an impression on me when I saw The Shining as a child, I knew it was sexual and gay without knowing exactly what was going on. It was jarring and also enticing.

I read the book later in my teens. They were characters from the past if I remember correctly. There was a party at the hotel and the costume guy was drunk and blowing a married guy he was in lust with. It wasn't of consequence to the story.

I saw this movie as a kid and the guy in the animal costume scared me the most for some reason.

The animal costumes are freaky!

So, did the hotel drive Jack crazy, or was he already crazy?

Here's the teaser trailer OP. It should tell you all you need to know.

Ths movie’s horror is derived from Kubrick’s ingeniously inserted subtext. Danny is a victim of child molestation by Jack.

R1, some of those theories are unbelievably stupid.

I thought the picture at the end just meant that Jack's spirit was now trapped in the hotel with all of the others.

the article is titled “The Craziest...” r8.

r7 and r9 are spot on.

What about that scene when he has a drink at the bar, with the devil?

It's not supposed to make sense. They even mess with the layout of the hotel so that what is shown is sometimes physically impossible.

Why do people think that Danny was being molested? Are they just reading too much into the subtext?

With Kubrick, you can never read too much into the subtext.

The fact that it's Jack in that picture means that the superintendant is just always reincarnated. When Jack was frozen to death his spirit passed into someone else.

I wonder why I didn't play the wife? I would have been nominated of course.

Danny is a victim of sexual abuse by Jack. Tony is his means of escape. Danny is also autistic. He knows that living in the Overlook, the whole dysfunctional lot of them cooped up and isolated, is going to be a nightmare.

Room 237 is where Jack likely abused Danny (hence his torn sweater and bruises), but Danny made up the "old lady" story to cover up for him.

Halloran clearly saw that Danny was troubled and did not want to be living at the Overlook at all.

The guy in the bear suit is giving head to the old man on the bed. This is foreshadowed by the teddy bear we see in bed with Danny towards the beginning of the movie, when he has a seizure in his bathroom and blacks out.

...oh, and then we have the references to the sham that is the Federal Reserve (the photo at the end shows many prominent US figures who were powerful at the time of its implementation), the laughably faked moon landing, and the mistreatment of First Nations on US soil.

It's just a fucking creepy movie all around, and every single viewing shows you a little bit more. And sometimes , horror movies just want to show you horror with no deeper meaning.

[quote]...oh, and then we have the references to the sham that is the Federal Reserve (the photo at the end shows many prominent US figures who were powerful at the time of its implementation), the laughably faked moon landing, and the mistreatment of First Nations on US soil.

Why is it that anyone who uses the term "First Nations" invariably turns out to be an idiot?

R5 did you get a chance to read the book? It's a good one. S King did not like Kubricks take of his novel. Jack was an Alcoholic, and was battling demons. The hotel exploited his weakness, it fed off his insecurity. While driving to the hotel for his job, at the Overlook, he has an intuition he should turn back. He didnt. An undertone of the book is people with esp. This is one of Kings best works. I love to read it in October, when winter is just around the corner.

At the front desk and all the way down the hall, it was very hairy legs. And buttocks.

One of the worst movies I ever sat through. Ponderous beyond belief. Hated, hated , hated it.

there is a King endorsed mini-series with Rebecca De Mornay and Steven Weber which is supposed to be what King really wanted.

Kubrick probably barely knew himself what he was really saying. I've heard some of his desire to have long shoots was because he owned all the equipment and made a lot of money renting it to his own films.

I haven't seen The Shining or read the book, but two years ago I won a Stephen King novel pack and Doctor Sleep was one of them. A fantastic, enthralling read that featured a grown up Danny. I recommend it as a stand alone read or to glean more insight into The Shining.

R18, because violent, hate-filled, racialist US citizens who call themselves "American" when there are dozens of countries who are technically "American" don't give a shit about terminology, and actually begin threads with topics such as "Are Italians white?"

I didn't like the movie either, then I read Roger Ebert's review which questions who is the reliable observer in all this. That made it a little more interesting.

[quote]Why do people think that Danny was being molested? Are they just reading too much into the subtext?

It's pretty explicitly right there in the text if you look closely enough, as others have pointed out. (I'm talking about the cinematic text, not the novel. I think the book and the movie really have to be viewed separately, as Kubrick took such large liberties.)

This movie is so effective at conjuring a feeling of immense dread. It's a disorienting work of genius IMO. I don't know if I'd say I *enjoy* watching it, however, as it's so deeply unsettling.

[quote] Was Tony an actual entity or just the name Danny gave to his ESP?

Tony was Danny's imaginary friend, and his ESP manifested through the persona of his imaginary friend.

[quote] What's the deal with room 237? Was the old woman's spirit confined to that room?

It's explained in the novel. A wealthy woman who was dumped by her much younger gigolo killed herself in that room--it becomes the repository for much of the hotel's anguish and evil

[quote] What was up with Danny's ESP? Was he only able to see things that happened in the past, or was he also able to see ghosts?

Danny could see things that happened in the past. he could also see the hotel's ghostly evil manifest itself in the form of the Grady sisters' ghosts.

[quote]Jack was the reincarnation of the caretaker, Grady? Am I right? If so, how did they manage to meet up in the bathroom scene? Was Jack talking to a former version of himself? What about the picture, at the very end that shows Jack? How did he look like himself, (current version) if he was Grady in a past life?

Jack could not have been the reincarnation of Grady--he was alive when Grady was alive and killed his family. Grady also tells him they are different: Jack is the caretaker, and Grady is the bartender.

[quote] What on earth was with the people in animal costumes?

They are the ghosts of people who had decadent sex parties at the Overlook and dressed up in kinky animal costumes.

ROOM 237 is terrific! There are a couple of DVDs with other outrageous theories as well, including the whole thing about Kubrick faking the moon landing.

True or not, they are FUN to watch.

R28, the first time I saw Room 237 I was intrigued. I watched it again a few years later and felt like an idiot for having believed any of it earlier. Sure, some of its ideas might have some truth to them but many seem just too outlandish. I suspect that people are desperately trying to fill holes in a somewhat flawed film The Shining is, OR trying to explain what it is that's so unsettling about the film. I remember when I saw the film the first time and it felt like something major was missing. I didn't feel satisfied. The film was most definitely creepy but it was also annoying in many ways. I've since learned to love it but the film remains a mystery in many ways.

[quote]It's pretty explicitly right there in the text if you look closely enough, as others have pointed out. (I'm talking about the cinematic text, not the novel. I think the book and the movie really have to be viewed separately, as Kubrick took such large liberties.)

R26, it's there if you pretend it's there. We have people claiming it's in the book as well and that King is a pedophile. I read the novel before seeing the film and I never saw any kind of sexual abuse going on in either. Some people seem to be obsessed about pedophilia and keep seeing it everywhere. But, again, sure it's possible King might've deliberately hinted at something. After all he writes horror and enjoys making people uncomfortable.

"Honey, I'm home!"

Only a third of the way through the novel, and Jack doesn’t sexually abuse Danny! He breaks his arm in a drunken rage, but there’s no sexual abuse (yet, at least).

Sorry to say I don’t find the book scary at all. In fact - and I know this is sacrilege - I’ve never read anything by Steven King that I find the least bit scary. The film scared the crap out of me, though.

My kids LOVE the movie and don’t seem to be scared of it anymore. (My teenage daughter is the one who bought the novel.)

R31 There's no sexual abuse in the novel, the subtext was added for the film.

The book was much better. The whole business of the shining and Hallorann's character is much more evident in the book. When Hallorann picks up on that Danny is in trouble and Hallorann's frantic trip back from Florida are much more present in the book & show that the shining exists in many people to varying levels.

I didn't much like the movie at all, mainly because Nicholson way, way overacts.

I suspect that is what most people like about it. - Nicholson.

I just find him annoying.

Scariest thing about the novel was the drug experimentation part towards the beginning; Wendy is high high high but notices that a fellow test subject has clawed his own eyes out. That has always stayed with me. Just an awful scenario, and so well-written. I know King did lots of acid in his youth (and was a brutal alcoholic / drug addict for a number of years...he has since said that he sees a lot of his old self in Jack) but this was just fucked. Very surprised that not many people talk about this.

I liked the hedge creatures.

R34, aren't you talking about Firestarter and the government drug test that goes wrong?

Yeah, that's not in the novel of "The Shining," r34. I just read it last year.

Here's the scene from the film, R34.

The animal topiary was the scariest part of the book for me. Danny could only sense them moving out of the corner of his eye.

Was very disappointed that the movie changed it to a cliched maze.

When they first get to the hotel, Jack tells Wendy that he felt at home right away, like he'd been at the hotel before, and that he knew what was around every corner. Why did he have such a strong connection to the place?

In the interview scene, the manager tells jack that Grady was the caretaker and he murdered his family in the winter of 1970, so yes, Jack couldn't be the reincarnation of Grady, but Grady definitely was the caretaker.

I just watched the film again for the first time in years the other day and didn't pick up upon any sexual abuse of Danny.

I think r34 is referencing Firestarter. LOL.

I just remember the audience cheering when Wendy, after witnessing Danny giving Jack a handjob on the ferry (talk about symbolism!), pushes Jack into the well. They were hungry for blood!

There is no sexual abuse in the novel, but the novel strongly suggests that Jack is gay and that his assault of the student whom he was attracted to was the result of his downfall.

Kubrick must have been a nightmare to work with. Principal photography took a year.

[quote]we have the references to the sham that is the Federal Reserve (the photo at the end shows many prominent US figures who were powerful at the time of its implementation)

Name one.

R29, just because you don't understand it doesn't mean there's nothing there to understand.

And Room 237 doesn't present those theories as legitimate. It simply presents them and it's up to viewers to use their own critical thinking skills to decide if the theory is sound, if it's a product of the life circumstances of the person being interviewed, etc. You should have never ever gone into Room 237 thinking you were supposed to believe all of it.

Kubrick’s obsession with the Federal Reserve, the gold standard and the Illuminati is pretty well documented

Kubrick just put his own demons on top of Stephen King's demons (which King put in the source material). Of course King must have felt slighted that Kubrick dared to take away the spotlight of King's demons (aka source material) and give the movie a new angle about child molestation.

Scary how urgently one of our pedo posters wants us to see jack molesting Danny.

Rob Ager is a conspiracy theorist, r47. His theories on movies start out with standard analysis and go off the deep end, standard practice for online conspiracy theories.

And I'm still waiting for you to name the prominent Federal Reserve figures in that party photo.

I don't buy the "Jack molested Danny" theory (though there is explicit physical assault in the book), but I grew up devouring everything King wrote, and he does indeed seem to have a weird preoccupation with weird sex stuff, abuse/assault, and kids.

Carrie: a girl's telekinetic powers explode after she has her period

The Stand (uncut version) has a character named "The Kid" raping Trashcan Man with the barrell of a gun. It is an adult, but he calls himself "The Kid." Odd.

Firestarter: again with a little girl who has superhuman abilities (and as in cases of arson, starting fires is easily tied to sexual energy) ; the book also has a flashback scene where one of the doctors is forced to cross-dress and is sexually assaulted by his fraternity brothers.

Cujo has a weird out-of-nowhere scene where the mom's ex breaks into their house and jerks off onto her bed.

IT: in the beginning of a book, there is an explicit scene where a little boy is giving his friend a handjob (the boy is then promptly killed by Pennywise). And then there is the truly creepy kiddy gang bang where all the friends take turns fucking the little girl so they can bond (from what I remember, the characters are all of 11/12 years old).

Tommyknockers explicitly describes a man who was raping both of his sons.

Dolores Claiborne explicitly deals with child sex abuse, and its companion book Gerald's Game is all about S&M.

Those are all right off the top of my head; I am sure there is more. And in all of that, King rarely describes any normal sex between long term couples.

I don't want to read to much into anything, but there is definitely something off about him.

"I don't want to read to much into anything, but there is definitely something off about him. "

Ya think???

Grrr. Too not to.

I deserve an "Oh, dear" for that. But it was honestly a typo.

It's just a silly ghost story. Nothing to analyze.

Kubrick, whose own career had driven him a bit mad, grafted his own personal biography onto Stephen King's novel "The Shining." Anything that doesn't make sense -- and veers too much from the novel -- is Kubrick confessing some weird shit, including the possibility that he "fathered" a lie -- a fake filmed moon landing that put him into the upper echelon of society, where kinky weird shit happened. EYES WIDE SHUT is his coded confession part 2.

Eyes Wide Shut is about showbiz Jews exploiting women.

Let's not forget 2001: A Space Odyssey. If anyone can explain the last fifteen minutes of THAT, I'll be grateful.

King's short story "The Library Policeman" contains a graphic description of a little boy being raped.

In "The Talisman" a man holds a cigarette lighter to a boy's testicles.

In "It" the leper offers Eddie a blowjob.