Kubrick by a mile.

Kubrick's version.

I just got done watching the tv version. Why it might not be as scary as Kubricks version and doesn't have a good of an ending, I liked the story more and there were a lot more details in this version that I liked.

Reading the book after seeing the Kubrick version helped me understand somethings, but there was no point in watching the King miniseries after reading the book.

Based strictly as a movie and me not ever reading the book, I prefer the Kubrick version.

One thing about the TV version is that I felt bad that Jack dies. This made the movie more of a tradegy. In Kubrick's version Jack was "evil" and I didn't care if he died at all.

That is the whole point that Kubrick missed when he made his film! Imagine how much better the film would have been if Jack was normal and not demented from scene one.

I don't think Kubrick missed the point. Just take a look at how he plays with conventions, setting most of the horror in the oppressively lit and garish interiors of the overlook. So, when he finally does go to a night-time setting (chase through the hedge maze) it's like revealing an even darker side to the sunlit horror. Jack, in the beginning, may be a sociopath, but he's in relative control of his vices. Then look at him chasing Danny in the maze. He's the quintessential ogre, even with an inhuman limp, wielding an axe, and a crazier look on his face.

It's less of a transformation than it is an unleashing, a failure of Jack's system of restraint when confronted with his family, alone in a hotel for a winter. And we all know Kubrick's films are, if anything, about the breakdown of systems.

I think it's obvious I'm a big fan of Kubrick's movie. I saw the film well before reading the book. But before seeing the film I was well acquainted with the works of Stephen King. My reaction to the novel itself: liked it until it started wrapping up, then I was disappointed in the conclusion. It just felt way too similar to other King works that I missed the challenges the movie offered.

As for the TV series, I couldn't watch 5 minutes of it.

My reaction to the book was the total opposite. While reading the book, I enjoyed how King gave us a continuous dose of what the ending would entail - Danny being chased down the hall by a maleviolent being (suggested as the book goes along that it may be the boy's father), and then the reality of it at the end where Danny falls through the hole in himself while staring at the clock-globe (DECEMBER 2 / MURDER), then finding himself running down the hall on the 3rd floor with his father trailing after him...

I was totally riveted to my chair at this point. Then, when Danny is cornered and his father turns the corner with the bloody mallet in his hand, Danny has a flash of what his father forgot. But before Danny tells the Hotel, Jack Torrance emerges for the last time in an effort to overwhelm the evil possessing him...

I had shivers of emotion flowing through me at that moment. The sadness, the loss, and the pity of it all came through in King's writing.

Looks like there is a new version of The Shining coming out:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/i17pORf_iE4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think Kubrick's version is far better, but I actually think Dead Pool is the best Stephen King inspired film.

The Dead Zone or The Green Mile are the best movies made from his books.

I love the book, it's top-shelf Stephen King horror. I am not a huge fan of either movie, despite believing Kubrick was likely the most gifted filmmaker to ever live. Kubrick took the book and went his own way with the material. I don't think it particularly works as a horror movie though there are some interesting things in it.

King's television adaptation isn't terrible but obviously isn't a masterpiece.

I think it is interesting that Kubrick did two versions of The Shining. A longer version for the US, and a shorter for Europe because he thought European audience would "get it" and don't need extra scenes to point out the obvious.

His reason for making a second version for foreign markets is unclear and still debated to this day. There is certainly no evidence to back up your statement regarding European markets "getting it". Also, it was a foreign version for ALL foreign markets, not just Europe.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/...cut-fight.html

The Kubrick film and the thread should be closed and end of discussion and there should be no debate.

Kubrick's version for sure. King's version was a chore to sit through, I wouldn't want to do it very often.

Lets see, we have a theatrical release directed by the greatest director of all time and with a lead actor who was at the top of his game and the introduction of a child actor who did an outstanding job. And then we have a shitty TV movie with nobodies and has-beens directed by someone far inferior that tried to be faithful to the book but little else.

Kubrick created a movie that left the audience with questions and we continue to talk abut the movie 36 years after its release. The longest conversation i think i ever had with someone about the TV version went something like this.

Friend: "Hey you see that TV version of the Shining?"
Me: "Yes i am sorry to say i did. Utter shite."
Friend: "Agreed."


Stephen King might be a good writer, but he has little idea when it comes to making a good movie. Just look at Maximum Overdrive.

I picked the book. One of the few books to actually scare me.

If I never read the book, I would pick Kubrick.

To me they are simply different beasts. I love the book, so I hate Kubrick's abomination. I can appreciate it's a well crafted film with some amazing performances... it's just a shitty Shining movie.

The TV version is far more faithful and superior in that regard, but it's low budget with an average cast and on network television. Had this been on a cable channel where the gloves could have been taken off, it might have been something.

So yeah... the book and nothing else.