Get ready to experience an exclusive three-hour stay at the historic Overlook Hotel located in the beautiful Rocky Mountains of Colorado. The Overlook has it all — breathtaking views, rustic charm, exquisite food and drink, bleeding elevators, creepy dead girls, paranormal attacks — and don’t forget the cozy accommodations! Matt and Jason will be your guides throughout your visit by commenting on the 1980 release of The Shining. Points of interest will include book/movie comparison, relationship power plays, Jack Daniels memories, catchphrasing, the brilliance of children, and enough psychological deconstruction to keep you lost in your own mental hedge maze. When your retreat finally ends, join your handsome hosts as they discuss their recent DVD viewings. So, come listen to us… forever… and ever… and ever… and ever…

This Stanley | And THIS Stanley, too | This Steven? | No, THIS Stephen | And Another Wendy | And Why Not Some Jack? | Or The Other Jack | Timberline Lodge | Hong Kong Phooey | Elstree Studios | Keep A Liddy On It | Turkel in Blade Runner | Don’t Jerk The Merkin | Advocaat: Not A Gay Magazine | Danse Macabre | Calumet Is Indian For Oppression | Three Little Pigs | Jason Hates Pauline | Shaky Shelley | “Shining” Spoof Trailer

Share this post!

4 thoughts on “TT39: The Shining

  1. Brilliant episode, crappy flick.

    I think this is the only film you’ve done so far that I actually didn’t care for. Still, I listened to the episode in one sitting and enjoyed it quite a bit.

    My personal take on the casting of Nicholson was that Kubrick chose him because he was a big name star and his acting in a “horror” flick would generate some big publicity. As for Nicholson’s performance it’s hammier than a Protestant’s Easter dinner. Duvall’s performance, on the other hand, is masterful. It was well measured and built to a pitch perfect crescendo of panic, whereas Nicholson spent each laborious on screen second mugging for the camera like he was Charles Manson or something.

    As for Kubrick leaving the actual haunting of the hotel up to the viewer’s imagination, I never bought that for a second. I say this because of the “bunny” scene towards the end. If Duvall was going insane in tandem with Nicholson, why would she hallucinate that of all things?

    Actually, I did buy King’s criticism of the film, that Kubrick was just too much of an materialist intellectual to make a horror flick. Kubrick was always more at home on flicks like 2001 and A Clockwork Orange than he was here trying to navigate cinematic waters he was ill-equipped to sail. Kubrick’s style was just too cold and calculating for what was, essentially, just a big haunted house flick.

    This isn’t to say that the film isn’t gorgeous to look at, although what Kubrick film isn’t, but it just never scared me like the way a film like The Legend of Hell House did.

  2. I’ll take “All About Kubrick” and “All About Stephen King” and “All About The Shining”, to kick ass, Alex!

    This one packs it in balls deep. Thanks TT, I learned a bunch.

  3. Thanks Wally! We really attempted to bury the proverbial hatchet with info and critique on this one, despite gurgling our way through the episode under the haze of the mighty Jack D. I’m glad we struck a chord with you on this one as it also pleased us greatly, even if we are still hung over from it. Cheers!

  4. Hey, RW! I am tickled that you liked the episode despite disliking the film. I’m glad we could still entertain despite your antipathy towards what, as you know, we hail as a great film here in TT land.
    The reason I think Kubrick threw in the “bunny/dog man” figure at the end of the film was as a sort of concession to people who knew the book. Literally millions of people were already familiar with the source material and were anxious to see the film, so I think those little nuggets were for them as they are certainly out of context for those lacking familiarity with the story in the novel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.