Yeah but he played Pennywise in it. Both characters scared me at an early age. Is it wrong to be effected so much by a killer clown and a transvestite alien?

I am either going to be

A) not frightened of IT anymore (cos it's only frankenfurter)
or
B) Terrified of RHPS (cos it's p________)

wonder which way it'll go.

Lol, you'll know when it happens. It's all in the smile. When you see him smile in one of the movies and it reminds you of the other -- watch out!

i luv that movie..it´s one of my favs ever!

That scene was freaky.

Hahaha!!

ok, now i read the book and seen the movie a million times, but i still have a question regarding the movie version:

ok - according to the movie, jack has always been the care taker of the overlook, as seen in the photo at the end, i just don't get that. so he was the caretaker after grady in the 1920's but was then reincarnated as thesame person years later? i don't get how jack could've "always been the caretaker" it's not like he was a spirit, he was a real person with a family from vermont. in the book it's explained better but i don't understand how stanley could make the movie like that with so many questions lingering. or, am i just not getting it?

I LOVE The Shining. Jack Nickolson rules, and the lady that plays his wife just suits perfectly.
Surprisingly, I wasn't scared when I was watching it the first time, but I was shit scared when I watched it the 2nd time

Kubrick's The Shining In 30 Seconds (And Re-enacted By Bunnies)

http://www.angryalien.com/0504/shiningbunnies.html

thats what ive always been confused by

Same. The ending always makes me feel like such a dumbarse because I don't get it.

The ending makes more sense if you've read the book, even though it's significantly different to how King ended the original story. The hotel's collective presence (as fuelled by all the spirits bound there) took over Jack and he, like Grady and others before him, ended up a part of The Overlook's sad and haunted history. The line 'you've always been the caretaker' is just meant to imply that it is inevitable he will die in the hotel and be forced to haunt it... like the many people who have done nutty things there and died.

Did that sort of make sense? Total Kubrickian psychobabble, really. The book was much more straight forward and was a lot clearer than the questionable surrealism of Kubrick's interpretation.


x

the movie is fucking cool
but the book really REALLY makes me shit myself.
especially the part all about the guy dressed in the dog costume - with his insane barking and fuck i don't even want to think about it.

That dog costume scene was very weird. It was about that time when I thought to myself the Shining had reached levels of bizarreness that few movies dared cross.

I'm guessing the ending was about Jack Nicholson's character having always been possessed by the house, because he is in a picture from 1921. The ending to Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey also confused the hell out of me, until I watched the movie several times.

__________________
We're about to enter a whole other realm of music...we're talking Beethoven, Bob Marley, Men at Work territory

I had to read the book.

has anyone seen the film version of "the shinning" by stephen king?? some people say its crap others say it explains the story better, but somehow ive just never gotten round to watching it

OMG bunny videos

brokeback mountain,rocky horror,the shining, fight club, reservoir dogs


those bunnies make everything sooo amazing! theyre such perfect parodies. theyre not too drawn out (30 seconds) and they get the dialogue and the images so close to the actual film. and pick the most perfect parts to make fun of

um that is what the thread is about.

or wait do you mean the other version that was made? i heard that sucked.

this thread is about the stanley kubrick version not the stephen king version. i heard the stephen king version sucked but other people say it stuck more closely to the book and explained the story better