Rating: 
Summary: Faithful, But Not Scary
Review: Most are familiar by now with the criticism connected with the Stanley Kubrick version of the The Shining - It was not faithful to the novel in many ways and, most egregious, it had Shelley Duvall in it. I agree with those who have these complaints. In the end, though, Kubrick's movie is great. It is genuinely scary, and while Nicholson's portrayal of Jack makes it seem like he was nuts from the first minute of the movie, his descent into craziness ("HEEEEEEEEEERE'S JOHNNY!!!" will never be beat for pure terror/comedy), Danny's visions of blood-filled hallways, the dead twin girls, and the rest get under your skin. Kubrick's movie gets under your skin, and will stay with you.The complaints that the Kubrick version was not faithful to the book miss one very important element: Much of the terror in the novel is internal. It is not something which translates well to film, and arguably, Kubrick's liberties with the plot were necessary in order to make the FILM better. It did not improve the story as told by King, but as anyone who has seen Christine or some other flops adapted from King novels knows, sometimes being faithful to the book makes for a bad movie. Kubrick's version has become a classic. Will this version be a classic in twenty years? No. This version moves at a lethargic pace, and should have been much shorter. I love the book - it is one of my King favorites behind The Stand, Dead Zone, It and The Dark Tower series, but this version is lacking something. The performances are mostly great, even by Steven Weber who has the unenviable task of following Nicholson in the Jack Torrance role. The kid who played Danny, however, was highly annoying and was just terrible in the role. He did not ruin it, but the second most important character in the story was a zero as far as bringing credibility to the role. The end result is this: This mini-series was not that scary. After the first disc, which is good, the film goes downhill. And like I said, this was just not that scary. For an adaptation of a great horror novel, that is pretty much all that needs to be said.
Rating: 
Summary: Major doubt - Subtitles
Review: This doubt of mine goes out to anyone out there who has the Region 1 Dvd: could you please CONFIRM which subtitles can one choose from?
I'm very dubious on whether to pick the R1 or R2 version of this dics, please help me out.
Thanks.
Rating:
Summary: Stephen King vs. Stanley Kubrick... And the winner is King!
Review: Oh my gosh. If you even considered Kubrick's being better than this then you desperately need to go to your library and pick up the book. Kubrick's version is very far from anything of the events in the book. Stephen King's follows right along. All I have to say is if you read the book, you'd find this version much more satisfying...
Rating: 
Summary: So far so good............
Review: Alright I couldnt wait to finish the movie to write the review, sue me. I really wanted to just give some perspective to the movie for the people who have not watched it yet. I was torn between the people who hated it and the people who loved it. I think people are being WAY too hard on this movie. I really do like it, if you like miniseries, etc, you will like this. The little kid's acting isn't TERRIBLE so it was fine. You want terrible? That little girl outta the Langoliers. That was terrible, this is not that bad at all. So far the story is really interesting, and its just different enough from the other Shining to own them both. I personally liked it. The dreaded "bathtub" scene was eerie, as well at the topiary animals. I would say that the miniseries is more psychologically spooky than "BOO" scary. In any case, its definately worth a watch when you are cooped up in the house for 4.5 hours!
Rating:
Summary: An Equally Good Movie Version
Review: I'll start by saying that I really like Kubrick's version of "The Shining." But, I don't consider it to be an adaptation of the King novel because it does go so far from the source material. The ABC Mini Series version does a far better job of capturing King's original story. Overall the acting is great, the atmosphere is creepy and there are a few nice shocks thrown in for good measure. I do disagree with the "happy ending" that is tagged on. But, on the whole, it's a very minor complaint. Room 217 alone is worth the price of admission.
Rating:
Summary: Shine on crazy Jack!!!
Review: What makes these Stephen King made-for-TV miniseries' so much fun? Could it be the plot, the characters, or the absolute absurdity of them all? Maybe all the above? "The Shining," a 1997 ABC miniseries is no exception, and possibly one of the best King adaptations so far. If a 4 and a half hour movie is watched in one sitting and feels like 2 hours, then it must be good. And "The Shining" is definitely good. Steven Webber, Rebecca De Mornay and Courtland Mead are superb in their roles as the Torrance family, an Elliot Gould has a fun cameo as the manager of the Overlook Hotel. A more faithful adaptation of the King novel than the 1980 Kubrick film, I cannot say which is better because they both have their redeeming qualities, and they are both equally fascinating. Steven Webber is no Jack Nicholson, but he gives such a chilling performance. I believed him as Jack Torrance, and frankly, I was freaked out. Weber convincingly humanizes his character, and wonderfully conveys all of the conflicts that are brewing up inside him--his struggle with alcoholism, the desperate need to be a good father since he didn't have one, and his desire to succeed in life despite his father's criticism. De Mornay is perhaps a better Wendy than Shelley Duvall ever was, but Courtland Mead (although good) cannot compare to the performance of Danny Lloyd as the original Danny. I did like many aspects of this version better--the fleshed out characters, delving into the hotel's past (and its haunting), and of course, the hedge animals and wasp nest, which made great additions to the story (I'm sure they were in the book). Of course, the sappy ending to this version doesn't work very well, and the running time becomes a bit tedious toward the end, but overall, the movie is great, all the more due to Webber being so convincingly chilling when he starts to slowly go insane. As far as TV movies go, this is one of the best.
Rating:
Summary: How Times Change
Review: It's amazing. When Kubrick's version hit theaters twenty odd years ago, it was universally panned by critics, fans and King himself. Very little positive was said about it, from Jack's overblown performance, to Shelley Duvall's non-performance, to Kubrick's butchering of the story.
Yet, today, it's hailed as a hallmark of horror cinema and a Film Master's under-appreciated masterpiece.
How times do change...
Which brings me to the mini-series. Perfect? Of course not. Horrible? Not at all. Well made, well cast and well written (by King himself no less...so I have to laugh at stabs on the writing), it offers a tour through the Overlook fans were denied in 1980. Some moments work, others don't.
But all in all, still a fun ride through the haunted house.
Sort of like Kubrick's "The Shining" when it first came out.
Let's see what people have to say about this one in twenty years.
Rating:
Summary: The Shining ABC Miniseries
Review: This is a great movie and takes Stephen King back to where he wrote the original story. If you like the First Shining with Jack Nicholson, then you'll love this version. It's filmed in a nice quite Colorado town and has much better effects than the first one. I highly recommend watching it at least once. :-)
Rating:
Summary: Stephen King's Story Finally Shines Through
Review: For those of us who enjoyed Stephen King's novel, The Shining, we finally get to see the original story unfold in this version starring Steven Weber.
Accompanied by a great cast, Steven Weber is astounding in the role of Jack Torrence. Unlike the Jack Nicholson version of the character, Weber brings a subtle intensity to the story.We don't feel like we are simply watching a horror movie psycho lurch around with an axe in search of someone to bloody up. Instead, we watch as Weber convincingly humanizes the character of Jack Torrence, and deftly conveys all of the conflicts that are brewing inside of him; the struggle with alcoholism, the need to be a good parent, the desire to succeed in life despite a father's harsh criticism, and the battle to remain sane in a hotel full of ghosts. By the end of the story, you find that despite everything, you are rooting for Jack Torrence, hoping he will beat the odds and all of the demons that torment him.
This version of "The Shining" will pull you in and entertain you every step of the way.
Rating:
Summary: More Psychotic Please
Review: I liked this much better than the Kubrick version simply because it was much more in line with the novel besides the ending and the previous winter caretaker killing his whole family (in this movie, only killing himself is mentioned and nothing about killing his entire family) and a completely different sappy ending much too corny for me. Courtland Meade did a terrible job playing Danny, but Danny Lloyd did an equally awful job in the Kubrick version. Steven Webber wasn't psycho enough but that wasn't his fault -- chillingly brutal lines were not written for him and that tempered his portrayal of Jack. I suspect Webber could've been better with the right writing. King himself wrote the screenplay and I am bewildered why Jack Torrance was held back. Rebecca De Mornay is perfect as Wendy and the rest of the supportng cast is up to par. All in all, Kubrick's version is an entirely different story and shouldn't even have King's name on it. But both films stand on their own. But if you want to watch the book on film, this is the version for you.
|
