The Shining

Rating:
Summary: If you want a GOOD, INTELIGENT horror movie this is the one!
Review: This is one of the best horror movies I've seen. It has some really nice done scary parts like the sisters (Watch this movie and you'll know what I mean ;o) ). Plus it has a lot of parts that make you think! This is not your regular Friday the 13th... This is a very good, serious and well done horror movie. I really recommend it.

Rating:
Summary: Wow. Now that book was so scary, I could have sworn...
Review: ...that this movie was going to be just as good. Well, guess what. IT WASN'T! I have often rated actors and actresses to be ham, i.e. they act too much, but in this movie, there was too little. Jack Nicholson's over-the-top performance (no, make that, under-the-bottom) was poorly done. For the first half hour or so of the movie, his character is a complete jerk, and we don't really know if he is like this all the time or not. All of a sudden, he is going crazy. Shelly Duvall's acting goes from Miss Goody-good wimpy-poo to oh-god-help-me-why-me in the same time. She is very shallow the whole time, and never lightens up. All through the movie she is either crying or making some strange variant of scream-like noise. And Danny, Mr. This-is-the-reason-this-movie-is-called-The-Shining. He has a very stupid attitude, and either is on his own and scooting around on his tricycle like a little wind-up toy, or is croaking in his alter-ego invisible playmate "Tony" voice, "Redrum... redrum." He just doesn't shut up, and when he does, he acts like he's posessed (oh, yeah, he *is* posessed. In terms of how accurate the movie is to the book, it only has these things in common: the character names, the settings, and a tiny, tiny bit of the (mildly effective) power that Danny has. Otherwise, the movie is simply inspired by the book, nothing more. Mr. Kubrick, I'm sorry, but you did a poor movie. I've seen longer movies that were better (The Green Mile is 3 hours and 17 minutes long--awesome movie!), but this movie (2 hours 24 minutes) was so slow-paced, it was like trying to enjoy watching a giant redwood tree grow from a seed to it's full height. There was simply nothing good about this trash movie. The book is the best Stephen King book I have ever read, but this movie... Uck. Some of you might be wondering, "if this kid didn't like this movie, why did he bother to write this giant review?" Well, I'll tell you why. It's because I am warning all of you who want to see a good movie, look elsewhere. I *have* heard that the ABC miniseries is better, but you can only order that through foreign companies, such as Amazon.co.uk . Horrible movie.

Rating:
Summary: great
Review: a Great Movie, even though it doesn't follow the book word for word(like so many people have hissy fits over, if its not 100% like the book). this movie is very chilling. If you want to see a movie that is nnot a gorfest but still very very good and well written for screen then this movie is for you. Plus there is great acting by the main characters. and great screen play

Rating:
Summary: Absolutely the best
Review: This must be my all-time favorite. I think this is the scarriest film I have ever seen. Not in a way you fall out of your chair suddenly, but it was constantly scary. The hotel is totally empty (except for the family) and very quiet, but sometimes there are a lot of people, dancing and drinking. These imaginations are worked out really good. If you haven't seen this film yet, go kick yourself and make sure you see this film ASAP!

Rating:
Summary: The Photography Steals The Show
Review: The best parts of this movie are the scenery, the creepy camera angles & the music. The acting could've been much better. Nicholson has the look, but he was a real ham. I thought the whole idea was that his character slowly lost it the longer he stayed in the hotel. The problem is he never HAD it to begin with. The way Nicholson played it, he was off the deep end from the beginning. And Shelley Duvall's whining is just irritating after awhile.

Rating:
Summary: Hypnotic, Terrifying and Disturbingly Decadently Entertainin
Review: The Shining is one of the scariest best films ever made. It is best to view it as a seperate entity from the book. Obviously, one film couldn't have contained the rich terror and subplots of the King novel. The Shining is great for its arresting images, Nicholson's over the top performance, the creepiness of the two girls... Though Danny's "shine" can be at times laughable and silly and the ending is pretty bad, this film is really worth seeing for the performances and cinematography alone. A winner.

Rating:
Summary: Well....
Review: Well...the first time i saw it, I fell asleep. That's how scary it is. there are some scary scenes in it, like the two girls who suddenly appers in the hallway, and some of the scenes with JN. I mean, the actors are truly amazing ( that's why the movie get's three stars) But the movie really should have been more like the book. I think the 1997 version is better.

Rating:
Summary: Scary, but the book was better.
Review: I read the Shinning when I was 11, and that's how old I am now. The movie had some very scary parts (and of course "REDRUM") but the book was better. I say read the book if you're one of those people who only read the book or see the movie. I did both. Read "The Shinning" or see the movie!1

Rating:
Summary: Quite Possibly The Best Horror Film... Ever
Review: Not only a great horror film, "The Shining" is one of my favorite movies of all time. Jack Nicholson's acting was terrifyingly superb, not to mention the faces that Shelley Duvall made. I think Jack Nicholson's eyebrows alone deserve an Oscar (a little exageration). Kubrick did a great job of directing as well. I've never read "The Shining", but just might some day. "REDRUM!"

Rating:
Summary: The best war film ever made!
Review: This is my favorite Kubrick film to watch because it is his most "extreme"- in language, violence, and subject matter.What makes this movie so much better than all other war movies is the fact that it doesnt concentrate on one facet of war, such as a battle, man or mission. It focuses on the complete process of dehumanization of men in war.From drilling it into their heads in basic training, to "pacifist" Joker wasting the sniper, and thus, completing the process.Kubrick really seems to capture the essence of men in the Vietnam War. Commanders only intent on creating killing machines, soldiers simply killing for amusement, and no one thinking of the consequences for anyone. I've read a lot of criticism of the second half of this movie-the battle scenes-for being boring(compared to the first half) and unrealistic. I feel I must point out that the first half is so savagely brutal that the revelation of the meaning of life would probably be a letdown. As for it being unrealistic, Vietnam is not just one big jungle, and war is not made up simply of planes flying overhead and bombs being dropped. These scenes, I feel, capture the isolation and sense of terror in being in a situation in which you have little or no control, and can be killed at any moment. I hope that those of you who don't lile the second half will go back and rewatch it. It is certainly worth the extra effort, for it is what makes the film a classic.