The Shining Book vs Movie

[@cdolan13]

As always, good video! I read The Shining in 1979 and is still the only book to scare me. So I was so disappointed with the movie, I could not divorce it from the book. Also, with the disrespect Kubrick blatantly showed King, by banning him from the set because the rights were his and not King's? So, since I love the book so much I judge the movie very, very harshly. So yes, I hate the movie and the book wins, in a landslide. The only pluses I will give the movie are the tone, the soundtrack and the cinematography. All in all, the movie 'looks' good. But now, the bad: For one (and again, I am judging them side by side, and not separating them as King and Kubrick creations), I hated Jack Nicholson's performance/Kubrick's direction. As soon as you see his first closeup in the movie he already looks evil, so there is no room for the character to grow from loving family man, who will do anything for his family, to becoming so weak that he is finally able to be 'possessed' by the hotel. You automatically know he is the villain/killer. In no scene does Jack show any love or affection to his family. He seems so bitter and tied down that you can never sympathize with him. In now way do you blame the hotel for possessing him, you just end up hating Jack for his actions. As you stated, King is great with bringing characters to life, but Kubrick and Nicholson failed to capitalize onbringing this flawed and tragic character to life. Second, the only actor in the movie that shows any amount of range is Shelly Duvall. All the other actors are stiff and superficial - including Danny, who should be very emotional. I guess, as Kubrick protected him by making him think this was a family drama that he divorced Danny from the immense role he actually played in the story. After all, The Shining is Danny's power that the Overlook wants. It does not just want Jack, as the movie makes it seem, with that last picture of Jack with all the guests at the New Year's ball, dated 1921. Kubrick just misplaced the focus. Speaking of Danny, Kubrick directing Danny to use his finger to say 'redrum' just was ridiculous. I could go on and on, but I won't waste your time. Suffice to say, for my money the movie version of The Shining is just pretty to look at, and has a wonderful mood of dread, but the horror absolutely misses the mark. King does horror well because he has said that real horror comes from caring, and he writes characters you care about. If you don't feel for a character there is no way you will be affected by their circumstances. We are scared for what a character goes through only if you care what happens to them. And I didn't care what happened to the characters in the movie. Another great comparison, thank you!

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thanks for sharing! Yeah I think had I read the book when it came out and then seen the movie I would have been very disappointed! But since I saw the movie first, and decades later when it was considered so iconic I think that changes things for me. I agree with everything you say though. I really see them as two different stories and for that reason I wouldn't say it is not a good adaption but it is a great movie.

[@dawnadriana1764]

SAME!!!!!! Thank you!

[@bartholomewesperanza3442]

You’re wrong

[@LongdogBookReviews]

It's no surprise that "It" and "The Shining" are set in the same universe. There are so many similarities, it's not even funny.

[@thevolunteerfiredepartment816]

And all of King’s work connects back to the Dark Tower

[@matthewhewitt4145]

It takes place in the same universe as "Misery" as well because the character Annie mentions the Overlook Hotel where the caretaker went crazy and burned it down

[@InktoFilm]

Sorry to hear about the struggles with your husband’s alcoholism. Completely agree about SK writing from such a deeply personal place, it lends a lot of power to the book. Appreciate the personal tangent, btw, no need to apologize for it 😊 And thank you so much for shouting out our long-winded analysis! 😅

[@InktoFilm]

Love all the quote analysis, btw. Great way to highlight the strength of SK's writing.

[@WhytheBookWins]

@@InktoFilm Thanks! I am wanting to use my channel as a way to open up more dialogue about addiction because it tends to be something people feel like they have to keep secret. Since making this video I've listened to the rest of your episodes on The Shining and it was amazing as always! I love how detailed you guys are! And you are able to be detailed without being boring haha which isn't always easy to do.

[@InktoFilm]

@@WhytheBookWins Love that message! And thanks so much :D

[@cdolan13]

Thank you for always replying! I appreciate your perspective in your thoughtful responses. You make your channel so interactive, which sets you apart from the rest.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thank you so much! ☺️☺️

[@SLang-xk4dj]

I was SO BEYOND DISAPPOINTED that George Hatfield wasn't even mentioned in the movie. He was such a crucial part of the novel (between this and 'It', I wonder if Stephen King either had a stutter himself when he was younger, or knew someone who did). I also couldn't believe that they left out the resurrected wasps- that was the first part that really creeped me out.

[@bartholomewesperanza3442]

You would’ve made a really shitty movie ngl. Resurrected wasps? Stupid. Stephen King is an awful writer, Kubrick was an incredible director. The film is way better than the book

[@playerkit]

​@@bartholomewesperanza3442 lol

[@javi6845]

Kubrick's ok

[@LiirThropp2687]

​@@bartholomewesperanza3442 You are 100% WRONG! The movie is as bare bones as you can get. It's pretty to look at and that's all. The characters are one dimensional. They have no substance. Jack's crazy and Wendy's a nervous wreck. That's it. That's their characters. The movie is held together by only bits and pieces of the story. The book dances all over the movie. Sorry.

[@dogsaresocool__2491]

I just finished the book, and i definitely like the book more, but i think both are still really great in their own ways! For me the acting and the set design really made the movie!

[@hn-yj8pp]

I finished the book a couple days ago (finally accomplished my goal of reading a stephen king book in my life) and what struck me most and stuck with me was how sad it was. The supernatural parts of the book didnt scare me (not to say that its not not scary if i imagine myself in those situations) but the cruelty of the family members toward one another because of generatinal trauma was quite painful. And how the hotel used their painful past and personal struggles against them was the real horror. And because the movie is so huge of course i knew what ending to expect but i like that even to the very end the novel focuses on the love that the 3 characters had for one another even though the overlook forced them into hurting themselves. Also, as with any book to movie adaptation its a shame that many key characters and events were left out. But the movie is great a stand alone

[@thewickerman4083]

What a brilliant insightful video. I'm reading/rereading Stephen King novels and have just finished The Shining. Watching your video has made me appreciate the amazing book even more.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Awesome! I'm glad you love the book even more now 😊

[@b.w.22]

It’s funny you say that you couldn’t put this book down. I’d seen the film long before, but I’d always had this feeling that if the movie scared me like it did, the book was going to be intense. This wasn’t helped by a version on my parents bookshelves when I was a kid that was shiny metallic with a spooky, blank child’s face on the spine. When I finally got to it as an adult at my gf’s beach house, I literally couldn’t put it down and read it to its conclusion at 5am. Edit: I think Kubrick’s adaptation when compared to the 90’s miniseries shows how something directly ripped from the page may not be as effective as something changed to create something timeless.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Definitely! Some of of favorite adaptations are the ones that have been changed to some extent. I've seen that metallic edition and plan to add it to my book collection at and point! Definitely a great, eerie cover. It's been just a few months since reading it but I'm already tempted to do a reread because of how great it was.

[@b.w.22]

@@WhytheBookWins - You know what? That’s a great idea! I haven’t had a proper “Stephen King” weekend with one of his books in some time, though I tend to reread The Stand every two years or so. I also liked the first few of the Gunslinger series, but it sort-of lost my interest after awhile, just being so complicated. But the Shining is a nice, single novel not overcomplicated with Pennywise being in there somehow or that Danny is somehow “Dudditz” as he likes to weave his books together nowadays. What I need more than anything is to find some printing thats not in micro-font! I don’t need to scowl for three days at a 450 page book that should be 700! So yeah, great idea and I’m looking forward to checking out more of your work - I really enjoyed this! Edit: subscribed, too. :)

[@WhytheBookWins]

@@b.w.22 thanks! And I do a lot of my reading on my kindle and you can adjust the font! I know some people really dislike e-readers though

[@8pagesdeep]

As I'm rereading the story again and watched the movie last night, each one brings such good elements to their own respective stories that it really makes it hard to choose which is better! Kubrick's version had amazing atmosphere and tone that just made the overall presentation more chilling in comparison to King's supernatural approach (without including the incredible descriptive language as you pointed out.) But the characters within King's story are more fleshed out and provided the narrative a lot more substance, making it a more engaging read. By comparsion, Kubrick's characters were more shallow and basic (which honestly, is probably was he was going for) to satisfy the story he was trying to tell. I feel like if they both of their strengths were mashed together, we would've had something truly spectacular 😁Great review, Laura!

[@WhytheBookWins]

Very well said! Glad you liked my video 😊 Are you covering this one soon??

[@8pagesdeep]

@WhytheBookWins Yup! Planning on doing a Halloween episode this year, so getting ahead of the prep work and research while I go through my second reading. Hopefully I get it out on time 😅

[@DarkestStarASMR]

my absolute fave modern horror book.. And Kings best!

[@WhytheBookWins]

It's so amazing! One of my favorites of King's as well.

[@eternalenigma1628]

I had a battered old copy of the book that I read every once in a while, and when I watched the movie it didn’t even occur to me that they were the same story. I think they’re both classics, but can see why Steven King didn’t like it as an adaptation.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Yeah very different! I love the movie but try and separate from the source. (aside from when I made this video where the whole point was to compare them lol)

[@realhousewifeoftransylvania1.0]

Wow, you said TWO DAYS! That blows my mind! lol I only wish I could do that!

[@WhytheBookWins]

Lol I didn't have work and I was obsessed!

[@realhousewifeoftransylvania1.0]

@WhytheBookWins Even if I'm obsessed I would never be able to finish a whole regular sized book in 2 days. I guess I'm just a slow reader and I fall asleep 😂

[@PrinceAliTheGreatest]

Kubrick’s films were never about adapting source material into accurate adaptions, since most of what he was adapting didn’t fit his vision. King’s Jack doesn’t fit Kubrick’s vision. Neither does Wendy or Danny. Kubrick’s films had a glint of unrealism, actively exaggerating for either comedic or satirical, or metaphorical effect. Just watch Dr. Strangelove or Lolita as evidence. Jack in Kubrick’s film behavior is practically all over the place.He breeds a mixture of normality and slight annoyance and apathy. As the film progresses, it turns into derangement and bitterness with a hint of goofiness. It’s even extends to subtle things. For example, he a adult with responsibilities, but prefers playing ball like a child. He’s a grown adult capable of controlling his emotions, yet throws tantrums like a child when he doesn’t get his way or when he’s upset. He says he has work too do, yet oversleeps. He’s a married man, yet looks at play girl magazines and cheats on his wife inside the bathroom with the dead woman. This all collimates when Jack enters the Hedge Maze, a literal representation of his psychic, as he gets more lost and lost and lost inside the Hedge maze, he’s left to freeze in the cold, and his own insanity. The hotel itself isn’t alive, or so we believe. The Hotel’s spiritual element being so hidden and subtle, yet all over the place is mirrored in Jack’s degrading psyche being all over the place. Jack is The Overlook by some extent. Jack is a representation of our minds turning against itself. A hidden element we’ve never come across finally starting to show its colors. Wendy and Danny in Kubrick’s film, represents the banality of abusiveness in family relations. It’s so common, it actually goes hidden in the background so often. Kubrick isn’t going to hold the audiences’ hand and spoon-feed them, which is what most King fans wanted him to do while watching this film.

[@hoibsh21]

The movie would've been better if it had showed a saner, warmer side of Jack before the Overlook drove him mad, that way we'd feel more of his struggle to keep his family together.

[@carolhowley7158]

Thank you so much for your thoughts and work in putting together this video. I suggest checking out the video under the name Malmrose Projects, The Shining. In this video the themes Kubrick was trying to explore are explained. It is very well done and in it, he explains why some of the changes from the book to film were made. I think you will enjoy it. Most Sincerely, Chris Howley, Wollaston, Massachusetts

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thanks! I'll check that out!

[@erichmyles4481]

The movie coming out 3 years after the film is kinda crazy, doesn't feel like that's enough time to fall in love with the source material, so you know the movie wasn't made cause Kubrick loved the book so much.

[@jacoblesperance2208]

Kubrick's simplification works great for me. Sometimes simpler is better. Leaves room for the viewier to speculate and fill things in how they'd like. If it werent for the movie's streamlining of the story we wouldnt have as much discussion about it. Theres a certain intrigue about mystery and keeping things more mysterious can be better. The book explains too much for me. Takes the mystique out and this some of the fun of speculation. Just my take.

[@jackiesliterarycorner]

Great comparison, but now I want to do a reread. I just want to read the Stephen King's book that I haven't read first. I feel like I should a few his books I haven't read before I reread a favorite.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Yeah same, he has so many!

[@jackiesliterarycorner]

I created an Excel chart on my MAC computer to organize where his books fall in his universe and I can mark what I’ve read so far. It feels like I have read a lot but I have only scratched the surface of his work.

[@Melvinshermen]

When Will you do Burgess and George

[@douglaskilgore1788]

Do you think Jack was drinking the cooking sherry in the book? I’d need to do a close read, but I remember thinking it was a strong possibility when I last read the book a few years ago…

[@WhytheBookWins]

I hadn't thought of that! I kind of like the idea that there was literally no alcohol around though which makes his drunkenness just a symptom if the Overlook which is so creepy!

[@erickus36]

We all have our struggles in life! Tell him that he can make it without alcool it's not easy but with Jesus all things are possible! This book The Shining is one of my favorite and Jack in the movie is wonderful!

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thank you 😊 And agreed! Love this book so much!

[@Seldarius]

Thank you for your videos, have been binging them lately. I’d like to add that Stephen King did write and produce an adaptation of his own, a mini series which is very close to the book and generally considered… not great. So, maybe a great book doesn’t necessarily translate well onto screen without considerable changes. Here, two masters of their craft have produced two different versions of a story. I can’t be mad at Kubrick for running with his own vision of a book that obviously inspired him. I even kind of wish that King would be able to embrace a master piece that he has inspired - even as it diverges from his personal vision. That said, I understand it can be hard to see your “baby” completely overhauled and Kubrick doesn’t appear to have been very nice about it.

[@WhytheBookWins]

I bought a later printing of The Shining, and in the introduction he talks about Kubricks movie in a positive way. So it seems he has at least somewhat embraced the film. Glad you like the channel and thanks for commenting! 😁

[@anyonymswede]

Have you read and reviewed Laura both film and book?

[@WhytheBookWins]

No but it has been on my list for a while! I was thinking of doing a "noir November " and doing it then

[@Whitestripe71]

I'm around halfway into this video - I'm enjoying it very much btw (It always annoyed me that Halloran died in the film - it felt anti-climactic to me after the build up of him journeying back to the hotel - just for him to die as soon as he arrived there. I never liked it.) and you're talking about alcoholism and addiction - and a book has just popped into my head that I want to mention/recommend to you - The Outrun by Amy Liptrot. It is on the surface a memoir about addiction & recovery - but it's done in such a singular, unique and literary way. She's from the Orkney Islands, north of Scotland - an extremely isolated, remote community - and the book is as much a description of the natural landscape and wildlife of Orkney as it is about her recovery from addiction. It's a fabulous book, and if you're ever looking for a book that deals with these subjects then I absolutely recommend it. Right, back to your video...

[@WhytheBookWins]

Yeah I was sad he died too. And I'll see if my library has that book!

[@PhilipWeisman-dl4ik]

There was a tv movie mini series of THE SHINING in 1997starring Steven Weber which Stephen King liked better than Kubrick's movie.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Yeah, I need to watch that one still!

[@PhilipWeisman-dl4ik]

@WhytheBookWins Wow you responded so quickly. But yes it is very different from the Kubrick film. Haven't yet read the book. Stephen King is for me a challenge. Good writer but like l was exhausted by it at the halfway mark. And THE SHINING & THE STAND are just daunting right now. However, l never say never. Plus l work in a Library

[@YoMrRice]

So i saw the movie a decade before i read the books and because i was in my teens when i saw it, things that I appreciate today about the film were not really noticed back in the late 80s. The cinematography is ground breaking ans legendary. The aerial shots of the overlook (minus the copter's rotors😅 and rhe obviously missing hedge maze) as well as inside were amazing. Scat Man did the best he could with what he was given. The fellow that played Gradey was awesome. That's all I have for this film. The extreme disappointment of what should have been (King's care for the abuse and abusers) is the main reason why I think its a poor adaptation, but as a kid, i didnt think this movie was scary at all compared to what wlse was out (Aliens, Alien, The Exorcist, etc). It really all boils down to the dumbing down of the plot to a simple slasher film that fans of Kubrick have created narratives around to solve for the continuity eras present all over the film (Jack Torrence doesnt smoke but Jack Nicholson does which is why theres an ash tray near his desk with butts). You have a character in Jack that just as well would have murdered his family at Disney as he's already tuned up and remorseless over what hes done tl Doc and Wendy. You have a Wendy character that is wildly incompetent and obnoxious instead of the warrior that Wendy is in the books. Forgetting the horrible acting (Wendy randomly has a twangy accent at different points), Shelley does not look or carry herself like someone giving her family one last shot at being whole. The kid was fine as he's a child but i find it hilariously that Kubrick woild spare him from ghosts but treat both Scatman and Shelley so poorly, they probably needed therapy. Imagine that.. a story of an abuser is being filmed by an abuser. Worse, the Overlook takes the back seat to goofy slasher nonsense even for 1980. Lined up with an actual masterpiece (Alien), you cant help but laugh at the screaming and "heres johnny". There's no Roque mallet No topiary animals No dead thing in the play ground Judt a guy in an axe that killed off the one dude you care about. The would be hero, since it really is just Jack and not a thing wearing Jack's body. And why? Because Kubrick knows better than king but everyone who loves the shining loves it for the views and not these people. Anyway... love the concept of your channel. Gonna binge 2 years worth of content to catch up!

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and I'm glad you like my channel 😊

[@gabrieldevoogel6225]

Fun fact: the shining the movie wanted to reference IT as a book, but it didn’t have time due to Dick dying in the movie

[@angelaholmes8888]

Shelly Duvall was great in the film but i didn't like how wendy was made into a weakling danny lloyd was also brilliant i was surprised that he retired from acting i also read the book version i did like it i do agree why king didn't like this version of the shining

[@salemslotandmore8278]

Great Video.😀 "SimPaTiCo"

[@TheStacanova]

I don’t believe Kubrick didn’t like King’s book or writing, he’s publicly complemented it. I think the alleged insults come from King and the press tour he went on to trash the film. Kubrick didn’t write The Shining script alone, he hired novelist Diane Johnson to co-write it with him and in interviews she’s done, it sounds like it was a great partnership, I think Kubrick didn’t want to use King’s script or work with King on it because it would eventually become an issue when they had to trim the story down to a feature film length. I think Kubrick’s method of adaptation is sound, to decide the story you’re going to tell and focus on that, when other adaptations try to include everything and nothing gets the screen time it needs to be successful. Having listen to Diane Johnson interviews it sounds like the 1st draft included nearly all of the book and they slowly had to woodshed it down to feature film length. I like this process, because most things in the book you can still imagine happened in the film, we just didn’t see it as an audience. Even when they began filming, they shot a scene of Jack finding and going through the scrap book from the Overlook. For whatever reason, Kubrick removed this scene and destroyed it, so no one has ever seen it, although the scrapbook prop can be seen sitting on Jack’s writing desk, so even though the scene was removed, it still happened in the continuity of Kubrick’s story. It is my suspicion, that many things shown at the the film, that come out of nowhere, if you haven’t read the book we’re actually introduced in the scrapbook scene, the woman in the tub, the man in the bear(dog) suit, etc. Kubrick never commented about why he removed the scene, did he not think it worked, or did he believe it made those appearances more unsettling if they weren’t explained, because your brain is trying to find the meaning, in something disturbing or confusing? The other changes Kubrick made are completely understandable for a film, hedge maze not animals, Axe instead of a Roque mallet(which King even changed to an oversized croquet mallet in his adaptation), and while no one wanted to see Dick die, it does raise the stakes and removes anyone who read the book comfort that they know what will happen, it becomes an “all bets are off moment”, no one is going to save Wendy and Danny, they have to save themselves, although Dick in a non-direct way did save them, distracting Jack and providing a means of escape. Also, the film is kinda clever, they show Wendy checking the boilers as part of the maintenance routine, so you could believe the hotel does eventually blow up, if you want. What I find odd is, for me, it’s very easy to reconcile much of the book with Kubrick’s film, I’m not sure why people view events in the film, like if they didn’t show it it didn’t happen? With Jack, Dick & Danny I can reconcile their characters from the book and the film pretty easily. We don’t hear their inner-monologues in the film, that’s where King put a ton of their character development. Nothing they do in the film contradicts this. Wendy is quite different, and I prefer the film version, she seems more believable as someone who would stay with Jack, which doesn’t mean she’s not strong, but it’s a different kind of strength, her family and keeping it together is so important to her, she puts up with Jack’s nonsense and dedicates a lot of her life to managing his moods, she does all of his caretaking work, because someone has to, and when she has to physically protect herself and her son, she does. She’s extremely selfless, which is somehow a quality people refuse to see as strong, when often it takes a lot more strength than simply standing up for yourself? To summarize, the film isn’t really that different from the book, we are just being shown a very narrow view of events, that Kubrick had time to show us and thought it would make a cohesive story to someone who has never read the book, however in the timeline of the film, most events from the book still happened or could have happened. The only stark differences are, Dick died and no hedges came to life, like I said, the hotel may have blown up.

[@michaelme1548]

I don’t think the problem is reconciling the book and the film. I watched the film (several times) decades before reading the book. I had a close friend who was a big Kubrick fan. We would occasionally watch the film. I never told him but I wasn’t impressed. Things just didn’t make sense and I didn’t feel invested in the characters. To be on record: I believe both the book and the movie are overrated but the book does make more sense, build the tension better and make me care about the characters more. Neither are very scary but both have a few scary scenes.

[@ColonelFredPuntridge]

My suggestion for “the book _loses”_ would be THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE. The movie is an iconic masterpiece and an important historical landmark which (together with DR. STRANGELOVE) conveys most clearly what the Cold War felt like for ordinary Americans. The book, in contrast, is barely coherent and reads like a first draft, with poorly realized characters; it’s also partly plagiarized.

[@WhytheBookWins]

I literally just got this from the library to start reading! I have seen the original movie and loved it!

[@ColonelFredPuntridge]

​@@WhytheBookWins Oh! Sorry to be a downer, but I was very disappointed by the book. Maybe you'll find something good in it which I missed. Other movies which are better (IMHO) than the books they are based on include: "Strangers on a Train", "A Clockwork Orange", and "Kind Hearts and Coronets".

[@katyrye]

You're a cutie pie. I ruined my curly hair!

[@George_M_]

King hates the movie because the movie is hostile to an abusive addict...King is/was an addict and wants a sympathetic treatment.

[@PrinceAliTheGreatest]

The Shining is a generic typical pulpy horror novel, with its only remotely interesting factor being its alcoholism with Jack Torrance. Everything afterwards is just banal, dull, and uninspiring stuff. Not bad by any means, just nothing I’d call special. Kubrick took the book and turned it into a multi-facet story with symbolism and metaphoric imagery, too lengths where people are still finding something new about it. All the themes of the film tie into everything. The Torrances, the multiple sprits hunting the hotel, the multiple paintings and background art, and even subtle things like sound mixing and the films’ soundtrack. It has more artistic merit and something to engage beyond other themes, while the book only has one element and factor.

[@BluePyramids]

I've been going through Kings books and watching videos/reading comments trying to get an idea of why people like his stuff. I was a totally blank slate a year ago, never read anything by him. I dont get it. His books have really good plots that just fall so flat for me. For example Pet Semetary was absolutely great until the undead just started talking shit. Like they literally just start cursing and listing your failures. And the ending is so bad. A lot of his books seem like they could be cut in half and be better with minimal re-writing. Going from horror stories like The Fisherman, At The Mountains of Madness or Haunting of Hill House to Stephen King is like going from filet mignon to Mcdonalds. I just dont understand. King feels like Mcdonalds. And reading about his personal life fills my heart with god level cringe. The Shining would have been better as a short story. It's aggravating how much boomer brained filler he asks you to sit through just to get to anything substantial.

[@WhytheBookWins]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! His books definitely aren't for everyone. And I recently covered Pet Sematary if you want to hear why I actually loved the ending!

[@mrRambleGamble]

The movie is visually well done but horribly paced, acted, plotted, etc. It's not good story telling.

[@kenlau457]

Kubrick killed off the Scatman Crothers character because for a horror movie to work, one should not know what is about to happen and he felt this will throw everyone who read the novel off. And Stephen King was not happy that his hot blonde fantasy female lead Wendy was turned into a mousy brunette in the form of Shelly Duvall.

[@hovaneeeseotse1112]

I thought that instead of the overlook wanting danny for more power incruement. It was more because it was hungry. Which to me felt more horrific than the overlook being just another mustache twirling villain. Its a beast, or monster. Simply looking for a meal. The book felt less believable not because of the overt supernatural events, but because of the reactions of the characters paired with thier actions. Jacks a great comparison in terms of the book vs the movie. In the book he has an inner monologue, an almost constant narrative strung together with his thoughts in almost prose or overly desconstructive veiw. But people aren't like that, jack isnt just a alcoholic abusive wannabe writer, hes just a bad guy. The book seems to characterize him as a good man being changed or possessed, while also being an alcoholic abuser. It feels conflicted and uncanny. I get that you feel the book to 'feel to real' while as someone who was raised in that kind of household it doesn't feel real. Feels empty in its description of the abuse and trauma. In my opinion, the movie potrays a more honest view on the character of jack. He is an alcoholic, he is an abusive wannabe writer. The books jack is a cliche at best. Its funny you describe that the movie portrays jack as unlikable. I agree you shouldnt like jack. He doesn't deserve it. The book is at odds with its past, while the movie feels consistent in its characterization. E.g. wendy in the book is characerized as 'strong and smart'. If that were the case why is she with jack, why didnt she leave the hotel with danny when she realized the hotel was haunted? Why? Danny in the book is also odd, since he seems at times smarter than a child his age and dumber. Some of his written lines are hilarious. Wendy in the movie is portrayed as someone who is in an abusive relationship, and would be the kind of person who'd stay in that kind of relationship. The movie is perfect in terms of horror. Reading the book for the first time in the tenth grade I couldn't feel the horror, mostly because of the hammed up lines and inhuman interactions between the characters. While watching the movie for the first time in my final year of college, i felt a sense of terror i hadnt in any modern movie. The book is ok, the movie will be studied in film classes forever. A measure between the two is not clear though since they exist in different mediums. Although you could compare the King version of the shining that he made in 1997. Carte Blanche. Kubricks original release was wildy panned but in my opinion is way better of a horror movie

[@hinterwelter]

Way too much pointless exposition in the novel. It could have been far shorter without losing any of its strengths.

[@YoMrRice]

That is in no way true. Example There is a point where danny is waiting on Jack to come home after his interview for the overlook. He proceeds to describe one of his fears, which is his parents getting a divorce. He sees the word divorce in red, and it's terrified that that will happen. He also mentions that when you get a divorce, you have to go to court and because he is a child, he does not understand that is AA court of law and not a Tennis court or another type of court. A roque court. So red written on a wall and a court. There is no waste if you pay attention to the words.

[@hinterwelter]

@@YoMrRice Nah, you're wrong. It was overwritten. Not bad for being written in the '70s.

[@YoMrRice]

@hinterwelter i gave you a very specific reason why you're wrong. Can you point to something that was unnecessary in the writing?

[@danielbeckman6742]

The film was undeniably better. Everything that Kubric changed was an improvement. The film was a cinematic masterpiece, the book was mediocre and not scary.

[@ryankuchera9477]

Just watch the 97 TV movie that king himself made for the proof lol