Pharonic Fantasy Theatre: Why I Don't Like Hotels, Exhibit A:

Stanley Kubrick is possibly the greatest American movie director who ever lived. After mentioning him in my last post I got to thinking that it was about time I got around to reviewing one of his movies on this site. And with all the cold weather and winter bleakness I thought how relevant The Shining is and – what, you thought I was going to review 2001? Just ‘cause I reviewed its sequel for my year-end rant last time? Well, think again – I’m that unpredictable, HA HA HA HA!! All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy! So just sit back, put on some hot cocoa and put down the bat, dear, because I’m about to review the cuddliest and heartwarming movie that Kubrick ever did (wait, isn’t “Heartwarming Kubrick Movie” an oxymoron?). Join me as I review

Theatrical Film, 1980

Director: Stanley Kubrick

Story

Just about the entire movie-watching public knows this, so I’ll be brief (and not worry about spoilers). A writer, his wife and their son go up to the mountains in Colorado to take care of a hotel for the winter. Unfortunately, the dad’s a barely repressed alcoholic, the mom’s a complete milquetoast and the son has this tiny problem with seeing hideous visions of violence and evil at the place they’re staying at for an entire season (he’s psychic, see). On top of that they’ve all become snow-bound after a blizzard and the dad is slowly losing it under the influence (maybe – see Analysis) of the evil hotel. Oh, and he’s played by Jack Nicholson. You can see where this is going, right?

Review

I know I gave Stanley Kubrick a glowing introduction at the beginning of this post, but don’t expect this to be a drooling fanboy review about how The Shining is the greatest, deepest horror movie *ever*, because it’s not. Now, it is probably the deepest, but it is not the greatest horror movie ever made.

Not to say that it isn’t good, because it is. This is the most psychologically complex and ambiguous horror movie I have ever seen. With the exception of one or two events, you’re never really sure whether there really are evil spirits at the Overlook Hotel or whether Jack is just going insane (or even not going insane – see analysis below). Also ambiguous is what role Danny’s titular “Shining” plays in everything. This is in sharp contrast to the original Stephen King book, where it was really obvious it was evil spirits. King is known to have disliked Kubrick’s adaptation of his book (again, more on that below) to which I say: too bad. You should know by now what sort of movies Stanley Kubrick makes. If you didn’t want a Kubrick movie made from your book, why did you give him the rights in the first place? Besides I like the fact that the movie is different from the book. If you want just the straight-up story of the book, why don’t you read the book? Not to say that a movie adaptation of the written word should vary TOO much from the source material, but part of the joy for me in watching such things is seeing what the director changed and tweaked from the original.

Anyway, on the plus side the visuals in The Shining are gorgeous; the cinematography is (per the usual Kubrick) amazing. He really does give you a sense of the creepiness and emptiness (or not) of The Overlook with all of his innovative camera shots, both still and moving (especially in the oft-cited tracking shot of Danny on his tricycle, with the noise/silence combo of the wheels on the rugs and wood floors). The interiors and the sets are awesome. The scares are genuine and for the most part not forced. A lot of the horror of The Shining comes from the simple scenario of being trapped in a strange hotel with a man trying to kill his family. The acting, is for the most part, great. Jack Nicholson is genuinely frightening and creepy (until the end, see next paragraph for more details), Shelley Duvall makes for a convincingly frightened (and annoying) wife and Danny Lloyd is one of the greatest child actors ever. It's a shame that this is the only movie he ever did. Also worth mentioning is Scatman Crothers, who does a great job doing the avuncular yet enigmatic psychic chef, Dick Halloran.

I only have two problems with this film. The first is that Kubrick is too loud and bombastic with the music score. There were a lot of slow, creepy scenes where I thought, “wow, this would be way more effective if the director would just turn the music down – or even off.” The other problem I had was the fact that while the first ¾ of this gem is subtly creepy and intelligent (except for the music) the final quarter is just too over-the-top and, dare I say it, funny. Now, I know that I have a really sick and twisted sense of humor but hear me out. I’m not crazy about this. Jack Nicholson chews so much scenery during his famous final rampage that it’s hilarious. Let me put it this way: man trying to dismember his family with an axe = horrifying. Man trying to dismember his family with an axe while spouting Ed McMahon catchphrase = hilarious! Look, I know it would be scary in real life but on screen it’s sidesplitting (in more ways than one). So for me the final comic quarter of the film with Nicholson mugging all over the place with an axe and howling like a wild animal in a hedge maze makes me slightly downgrade The Shining from “Absolute Horror Classic” to “Minor Horror Classic That You Should Probably Still See Just Be Prepared To Laugh You Ass Off In The Final Quarter.” And before you say anything, yes, I love Evil Dead II and other comedy/horror films as much as the next guy but I don’t like it when the two genres aren’t mixed from the get go and an otherwise intelligent and terrifying horror film abruptly switches gears near the end. Anyhow, to wrap this up, see The Shining. If you like horror movies you’ll have a good time and if you’re a fan of Kubrick then you can watch and enjoy this, just understand that it’s not his best (that would be 2001 – damn, I’m mentioning that movie a lot lately).

Analysis (Spoilers Ho!)

I know that The Shining has been analyzed and dissected to death (hah!) but let’s do it again anyway. This is a movie ripe for analyzing and dissecting to death. Just don’t expect anything new. It’s probably all been said before.

Stephen King has been known to have opposed the casting of Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrence because he felt that someone more ordinary was needed to portray someone who (while a recovering alcoholic battling his demons) was on the whole not a bad person descending into madness brought on by an evil presence in an isolated environment. But you know what? I think Nicholson was perfect for the role – as Kubrick interpreted it. Jack in Kubrick’s version is not very nice at all – not only is he an alcoholic and prone to violence, he’s also just a generally nasty character. He manages to disguise this well with others (i.e. the interview at the beginning) but in reality Jack is just a massive prick. He’s misogynistic – he calls his wife a “sperm receptacle.” He is dismissive and short with his family – see how he interacts with them in the car when they’re driving up to the hotel for the first time. The look on his face says “I do not want to be with these people.” And I think this is also the core defining trait of Jack: he really hates his family. By the end of the movie when he’s swinging an axe at the bathroom door and auditioning for the Tonight Show he hasn’t been driven to do something he would never consider doing; he’s doing something that he’s always wanted to do, deep down inside: kill his family. And if I can play Amateur Bio-Psychologist here for a second I’ll say that he’s doing what a lot of males – especially what a lot of alpha-type or alpha-wannabe males down on their luck (Jack is a *struggling* writer and ex-schoolteacher, remember) – really want to do at a primal level. I think the reason a good number of men don’t stick around after their kids are born is because they think that they don’t have to. Their basic biological purpose is fulfilled, why get involved with that parenting and family bullshit? That’s the female’s job. Now, I’m not saying that all men are like this or even most – this is more like a subset of a certain type of male that cannot overcome basic biology. And Jack is that type of male. He probably feels resentful of the fact that he has a family at all – especially a family that consists of a timid, insipid wife and a weirdo son who talks to his finger all the time.

Speaking of which, Wendy is also different in this movie than she was in the book. In the original novel she is not as wimpy or weepy (I think. Admittedly it has been a long time since I’ve read it). I think her portrayal in the movie is a means of showing the kind of woman that would be married to a man like Jack in the first place – the easily duped, needy and abused wife. Unlike most abused spouses however Wendy actually picks up a knife (and a bat) and defends herself in the latter half of the movie when pushed too far. Yay! One sad thing in her relationship with Jack is that she evidently does not trust him (would you?). The first thing she suspects when Danny comes downstairs after being attacked in Room 237 is that Jack did it to him, despite the fact the Jack was probably asleep for how many hours before. Another sad thing about her marriage to Jack is that he probably (in addition to hating her and having no respect for her) doesn’t even find her sexually attractive. Why do you think he tries to get it on with Freaky Bathtub Lady? Personally, if I were in a hotel where no one was supposed to be except myself and two other people and I found a naked lady – no matter how beautiful – in a place where she wasn’t supposed to be my first reaction would not be “leer at her and then make out with her.” I think there might be some real sexual repression going on here.

But enough character analysis. How about interpreting what’s *really* going on in The Shining? I think part of the fun of this movie is that you’ll never really be able to figure out what the hell is going on, but go ahead and give it a jab anyway.

Possibility #1: The Overlook Hotel has evil spirits and they are influencing Jack to kill his family and absorb him into the fold.

This is the most basic explanation, but then why include Danny’s “Shining” at all? Why not just portray a man being influenced by evil ghosts to kill his family without all the psychic stuff?

Possibility #2: The hotel is inhabited by Native American spirits out for revenge.

This may be supported by the fact that the Overlook is built on an old Indian burial ground. This may also be supported by (as Bill Blakemore points out in his essay on the film) all of the Native American imagery in the film. But again, why the Shining?

Possibility #3: Jack is just going crazy and is hallucinating all this.

This might be true except for the fact that something lets Jack out of the storage room near the end. And also, why would Danny be able to see the visions he does? Again, why include the Shining?

Possibility #4: Jack is just going crazy and Danny has the Shining.

This could be possible. Jack could be going mad and seeing the stuff he’s seeing based on the descriptions of what happened there by Mr. Ullmann coupled with his imagination (in addition to research into the hotel; he’s seen looking at a photo album at one point) while these thoughts are picked up by Danny via his Shining. What Danny is seeing is really his father’s twisted thoughts.

Possibility #5: Both Jack and Danny have the Shining.

This explains why both Jack and Danny are able to see things while Wendy for the most part cannot. I am not the first one to come up with this (watch the extras on the DVD). “Shining” runs in the family. Remember, Dick and his grandmother used to “shine” back and forth between each other. However, this doesn’t explain why Wendy can see some of the weird and scary shit at the end.

Possibility #6: The hotel is really inhabited by an evil, nebulous force that influences people, especially the psychically sensitive. The “ghosts” are nothing more than traumatic events recorded in space time and given life by that force.

This is the basic premise put forth in the novel (if I remember correctly). This is also the gist of what Dick Halloran says – that the images are scary but can’t hurt you. This has merit, although it does call into question how the apparitions DO eventually start hurting people (was Dick lying to Danny?) and how the different “images” were interacting with Jack in a sentient manner. Also, are fancy balls “traumatic?”

Possibility #7: Jack is somehow a reincarnation of someone from the hotel in the 1920s, and this is why he’s “always been the caretaker.”

This explains why Jack recognizes the bartender in the ballroom, although that could also just be a memory of a barkeep he already knew transposed into the Overlook. This also partially explains the picture at the end, although it is also possible that the hotel absorbed Jack into the past. It is also possible though that Grady is just bullshitting Jack when he tells him this.

My Unnecessarily Long and Convoluted Explanation, Just For Fun (Prepare To Shovel Vast Amounts of Bullshit, People):

There is a force that inhabits the point in three-dimensional space at the Overlook Hotel. This force was originally just a tear in space time. The Native Americans (perhaps through the Shining) sensed this and built a graveyard there. This began the process of adding memories and events that left psychic imprints. These began accumulating until they formed some sort of semi-sentient and then sentient entity (oh God, I feel like I’m writing an episode of Star Trek). Unfortunately, since human beings are on the whole rather nasty a large amount of these imprints were violent and/or evil, beginning a cycle where the force would influence psychically inclined people to acts of violence which would feed more evil into the force, and so on. Perhaps it was someone with the Shining who picked the spot for the Overlook Hotel. Over time the evil force became physically bonded with the hotel itself. Grady’s two girls had the Shining and sensed the evil of the hotel. The hotel knew this and to protect itself started influencing their father through them (even non-Shining people can be influenced by family members who Shine because of the bond they share). When they tried to burn down the hotel he “corrected them” (and as an aside, wow is that one of the most chilling lines in the movie). The hotel tried the same thing with Jack, using his psychic sensitivity to influence his father to kill him using the personal demons and personality flaws already inside him. Danny was able to escape though (and also telepathically connect with his mother – this is why she sees the scary stuff at the end). Jack was absorbed into the hotel at the end and because of the fact that it is a tear in space time was made a part of the hotel since the 1920s. How’s that for a time loop?

Non Sci-Fi Explanation, More Bullshit:

The Hotel is an evil entity made up of a bunch of malevolent spirits and psychic images. Jack is the reincarnation of one of them. This is why he feels like he’s always been there. This is why he got the job of caretaker in the first place – the evil force was trying to influence him to “come home.” It also wanted to prevent Danny from destroying the hotel like it had done with the Gradys. It also wants to eat people with the Shining – this is why it also wants to kill Danny and why it eventually influences Hallorann to come back through Danny. Jack is absorbed by the hotel and what we see in the picture at the end is his former self.

Obvious Explanation:

It’s all symbolic or allegorical and Kubrick is just fucking with us. Now stop overanalyzing a stupid movie and go outside and get some fresh air before

Ow, my head hurts. I’m never doing that again. I am never over-analyzing any movie like that ever again. Well, to recover from that here are some screenshots and some funny captions.

Screenshots