The Shining: Book vs Movie?

[phaga]

In all honesty I like both the book and the movie equally. I think there are unique scenes in both the movie and the book that really stand out. From the movie: The elevator scene with the two girls is insanely creepy, and the "all work and no play..." scene is a classic. From the Book: The hedge animals and the playground scene as well as how it delves deeper into Jack's alcoholism and self loathing. Unfortunately I saw the movie before reading the book so as I was reading I couldn't help but picture the actors that played the characters in the movie. I have to say, Jack Nicholson is the only Jack Torrance for me, but then that may just be because he was the first representation of that character for me...

[Samantha_]

The book.

[LindainLondon]

Always, the book. The Shining was uncomfortable, bizarre, scarrrry, and sad. Cujo? Sure, the movie was paced well, but the plot was different, wasn't it? The books are so much more character driven, and I love a good character. I'd much rather imagine machines coming to life than to see it, less ridiculous, more back brain reaction in reading and imagination. The world I walked through, thanks to Stephen King's words in the Dark Tower books was pretty cool.

[Silhouette86]

I personally can't say that I like the book better than the movie or the movie better than the book. Isa the movie(the original) and couldn't help but laugh whenever Jack Nicholson swore. I don't know what it was, maybe his tone.
Is it odd that I haven't read the book? In a way, I kinda think it is.

[Robert 'Bob' Gray]

I think it is very rare for a film to match the book it is based on, especially if you have just read the book, in which case you will be looking out for all sorts of small details which may be left out in the movie. However, I particularly enjoyed the Shining mini-series, but the movie was okay. The book is definitely the best though

[Delita]

Man, I watched the miniseries since I feel that I was obligated too. So far it is pretty bad (Courtland Mead is despicably awful compared to Danny Lloyd), Rebecca De Mornay "looks" the part in the book but she is horrible at acting. Plus, they went out of their way to make sure it seemed more like a cliche ghost story (OMG THE DOOR CLOSED BY ITSELF/THE CHAIR IS ROCKING WITH NO ONE IN IT)

The only good things are Steven Weber and Melvin Van Peebles. Steven Weber may not be as good as Jack Nicholson, but he is a pretty decent actor and seems fine in the role (right now at least... the "foreshadowing" has revealed that he changes his voice to sound stupid towards the end) and Melvin Van Peebles is okay.

But the miniseries I will give a 3 (compared to the movies 10)

I am sick and tired of hearing that Jack Nicholson was crazy from the start. He seemed pretty normal to me at the interview and just a bit irritated for the beginning.


The book honestly had a lot of things that I didn't like. What in the world possessed Stephen King to give away the end of the book in the first few pages? You had Watson saying "Make sure to check the boiler everyday or it will explode" (theres a hint) and of course, Danny always seeing the bloody mallet or hearing COME OUT AND TAKE YOUR MEDICINE over and over. Jack going crazy should have been a surprise, it shouldn't have been something which we knew would happen in the beginning of the story.

Plus, Kubrick got rid of the stupid scenes like the fire hose scene and the dumb topiary garden. Kubrick knew what he was doing, thats for sure.

So yeah, the movie combined the best parts of the book with Kubricks genius and artistic film making which makes the movie far superior to the book in my opinion.

[ArthurKidd]

I agree with a lot of what Delita has said about the miniseries. I thought it was ok, but no comparison to Kubrick's movie. The Shining (Kubrick's) is actually one of my all time favourite movies - I don't like his other films though.

I too thought that Courtland Mead was very annoying in the miniseries. In fact, I thought all of the acting in the minseries was very annoying.

[ArthurKidd]

I forgot to mention in my last post - I really enjoyed the book, but I prefer Kubrick's masterpiece.

[MistahJ]

I assume you are talking about the Stanley Kubrick version. The book had things that, in the movie, just wasn't important. It bothers me that in the movie he just goes crazy and never really fights the losing battle he has with alchohol...It's only mentioned briefly in the film but it doesn't have anything to do with Jack's downfall

[Stillreading]

1) Although I have come to respect the movie for what it offers in it's own right* I'm not so convinced Kubrick was a genius -- but that's a matter of opinion.

2) If we're talking about depth, complexity, imagery, imagination, etc. in a direct comparison then, for me, it's no contest, the book is far superior.


*I must admit I have a really hard time taking Jack Nicholson seriously in this role -- I always want to laugh at precisely the moments I'm suppose to be scared. Not so good for a horror film.