The Shining OAR or MAR (1 Viewer)

[Dave Mack]

Ok Y'all!
HERE's a stumper! In the opening interview scene, Stuart Ullman the mgr. mentions hiring a "Charles Grady..."
Later on Jack meets a "Delbert Grady..." !!!!
Continuity gaffe? Hardly likely knowing Kubrick...
A "nickname"...?
Or, since Delbert appears in the "20's" themed ghost stuff, could he be Charles Grady's father?
Would be odd since he mentions his "girls". Another co-incidence?
Another odd thing is when Jack mentions to Grady reading about him in the newspaper..., since in the beginning he reacts to the Grady incident tale as he had never heard anything about it. In the book and miniseries, there is a scene where Jack finds a scrapbook in the basement detailing much of the hotel's past. Perhaps this scene was in the original Kubrick script too and was cut...
AND....Wouldn't Charles be more likely dressed in "70's" clothes?
Or has the overlook just assimilated him, (them) and melded people and memories.
Something to ponder and I have NEVER heard the definitive explanation!!!!
Peace! D

 

[Ash Williams]

This thread appears to be going way off topic, but if you don't mind then neither do I. Spiolers ahead........ One thing I have never been able to figure out is way is Jack pictured in the photo at the end? Did he die and become reborn only to follow the same fate as before? I have seen this movie at least 20 times but have never figured it out. I guess thats why I keep watching it. None the less, it truly is a masterpiece of modern horror.

 

[Mitchell Kaufman]

I don't know what Kubrick thought (though everyone in the video industry seems to "know"), but this I can tell you:
The Shining DVD cropped top and bottom to 1.78:1 on my DLP FP looks just about perfectly framed. Unmatted (as presented on the disc), it's got miles of excess headroom and "legroom" (for lack of a better word).
This film clearly looks like it was framed for 1.85 exhibition. If Kubrick preferred full-frame, I've got to think it stemmed from archaic notions of what people would see in a letterboxed presentation on their TV screens.
BTW, as for Strangelove, those so-called "variable aspect ratios," which are supposedly as the director intended (I believe the old Columbia LD made this claim) look to be the result of an attempt by the video producers to unmatte the entire film wherever possible (one would assume at Kubrick's behest); the thin, ragged mattes evident in some shots are probably hard mattes that couldn't be removed (or else we'd probably have the whole thing on video at 1.33:1).
See, I can read Kubrick's mind, too.
MK

 

[Greg_Y]

One thing I have never been able to figure out is way is Jack pictured in the photo at the end?

Quite simply, he was always there. His essence was part of the Overlook, part of its evil. The photograph at the end was a way of showing that to the viewer.

 

[TheoGB]

Ryan, have you read the book? It's one of King's best and very very worthwhile. It may explain some of the stuff to you as well.

 

[Damin J Toell]

BTW, as for Strangelove, those so-called "variable aspect ratios," which are supposedly as the director intended (I believe the old Columbia LD made this claim) look to be the result of an attempt by the video producers to unmatte the entire film wherever possible (one would assume at Kubrick's behest); the thin, ragged mattes evident in some shots are probably hard mattes that couldn't be removed (or else we'd probably have the whole thing on video at 1.33:1).

the variable aspect ratios appeared on the Criterion LD, which stated that the transfer was personally supervised and approved by Kubrick.

DJ

 

[JonZ]

I thought The Shining,Full Metal Jacket and Eys Wide Shut were all filmed 1:33 but where projected 1:85 for the theaters.

I read somewhere that even though he filmed at 1:33, he put mattes up as they would be presented theatrically for the editing process.

 

[Simon Massey]

I understand also that the R1 and R2 versions are substantially different in that the R2 version is around 20 minutes shorter - apparently Kubricks wasn't happy with the initial edit, and re-edited the film for Europe, trimming a lot of scenes. (the visit by the doctor to see Danny at the beginning I am sure is not on the R2 version).

I presume this means the R2 version is Kubrick's preferred version, but I do like the R1 version that I have.

 

[Ryan L B]

As for who the girls are (pay attention to the initial interview sequence, and pay attention to the conversation between Jack and the waiter in the bathroom later on) and why Halloran knows to call Danny "Doc", yes these are very obvious if you watch the film.

I actually thought that the two girls were apart of Danny's imagination. As for the girl in the bathtub, Jack sees a nude person coming up to him, then he sees the dead woman rise up and chase him, he runs away. Now does he just run away or is he running away from nothing. I know this question is pretty stupid but what does "Here's Johnny" mean if anything, was it just to scare his wife or did it have a meaning. Lastly, I do believe that Jack dies and freezes.

 

[Paul Richardson]

I'm lucky enough to be watching a 35 print of the film tomorrow in class. And it's coming straight from Warner so it should be a good one. I'll let you guys know what the aspect ratio was.

The aspect ratio is determined by the projectionist (assuming the film isn't hard matted), so actually it won't answer any questions at all.

 

[Ryan L B]

Does the restored version have the little featurette or is it bare bones. How does it sound.

 

[Luc D]

The film was presented in 1:85 ratio.

 

[Dwayne]

Does the restored version have the little featurette or is it bare bones. How does it sound.

The restored version does, in fact, include the making-of documentary that was shot by Kubrick's daughter, Vivian. This appearance of the documentary short features a recently recorded audio commentary by Vivian. I can't remember how the sound of the doc compares to the previous disc. The sound and picture of the feature on the new disc is absolutely f***ing beatiful compared to the trash that comprised the previous release. The new disc wins hands down. Listening to Wendy Carlos' score is simple unnerving in 5.1.

 

[Ryan L B]

The restored version does, in fact, include the making-of documentary that was shot by Kubrick's daughter, Vivian. This appearance of the documentary short features a recently recorded audio commentary by Vivian. I can't remember how the sound of the doc compares to the previous disc. The sound and picture of the feature on the new disc is absolutely f***ing beatiful compared to the trash that comprised the previous release. The new disc wins hands down. Listening to Wendy Carlos' score is simple unnerving in 5.1.

I agree that the older version sucks, I would buy this new version in an instant. Is it still 19.99. I thought the simple score would sound terrible in 5.1 IMO

 

[Chad Gregory]

Ryan,

You may want to continue the talk about the movie itself over in the movie forum. If it continues to be the topic of discussion in this thread, it will be probably be moved.

Edit: Poor grammar

 

[Philip Klein]

But, about the aspect ratio, on the Vivian Kubrick doc. you can see Kubrick framing his shots on the video monitor which is 1:33:1, I think, it has been a while.

 

[David Von Pein]

Anybody else (besides me) think that the MAKING OF THE SHINING 34-minute documentary by Vivian Kubrick was very, very good? I just wished it was longer. Some nice behind-the-scenes clips with Jack, Shelley, and Stanley.

Heck, I thought they filmed The Shining at an actual hotel. Guess not, after watching that doc. It was done on soundstages. (Mostly, it seems.)

 

[Brian Kidd]

Yup. The same stages where much of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK was filmed.

 

[Mark_vdH]

The commentary by Vivian Kubrick on the doc is also pretty nice...
I remember when Stanley Kubrick died in 1999, the BBC aired "Making the Shining" as an hommage to Kubrick (along with Dr Strangelove, Day of the Fight & Flying Padre BTW).
In a sort of prologue, a reporter/TV host (I forgot his name) said that the doc was originally aired on the BBC as a sort of personal favor by Kubrick for the reporter.
He then told that there were actually two cuts of the doc, one by Vivian and one by Stanley, and that he had the oppotunity to choose the best version. He chose the cut by Vivian, to the annoyance of the master himself.
The reporter concluded by saying that it was actually a very easy choice: Stanley Kubrick cut himself almost totally out of his own version....
(P.S. This story to the best of my recollection.)

 

[Timon Russo]

I still have the original DVD release of this - haven't upgraded yet. Can anyone confirm that the new master also clearly shows the helicopter shadow and rotor blades in the beginning? Seems crazy that they would allow this.