The Shining (1980) 4K

3 Stars

It looks like The Shining is coming to 4K BD this October. The news has been leaked by a couple sites Italian, and German.
https://www.4kfilme.de/stephen-king-shining-4k-blu-ray-remaster/
I can’t wait.

Published by

Kevin Collins

administrator

119 Comments

  1. Josh Steinberg

    I hope Warner upgrades the regular BD at the same time, like they did for 2001.

    I'm sure they will. 'The Shining' is by far the best Stanley Kubrick film in my opinion. This may be the 4K disc to accelerate my purchase of a 4K projector.

  2. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

    All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy:

    All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy,
    all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy;
    all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
    All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy,
    all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy;
    all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

    All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy…all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.​

    All
    work and
    no play makes
    Jack a dull boy.

    All work and no play
    makes Jack
    a dull boy.
    ;)​

  3. Bryan^H

    I'm sure they will. 'The Shining' is by far the best Stanley Kubrick film in my opinion. This may be the 4K disc to accelerate my purchase of a 4K projector.

    While Warners did have the new upgraded master on the Blu-Ray included with the 4K 2001 & THE MATRIX, unfortunately they did not wIth BLADE RUNNER, THE MATRIX RELOADED and THE MATRIX REVOLUTIONS. So here's hopin'…

  4. The Shining is a very good film, so this is great news. Another Kubrick film that in my opinion needs sprucing up is A Clockwork Orange- a
    masterpiece. I think the last BluRay release looks a bit soft, with bland colors. Maybe this one could be tweaked?

  5. Worth

    I think Clockwork could look a little bit better, but most of the softness is inherent in the original photography.

    That is on the schedule in 4K Blu-Ray later this year as well.

    I'm starting to think we will get a Stanley Kubrick box set in 4K BD By Christmas. Still waiting to hear about Full Metal Jacket, and Eyes Wide Shut.

  6. THE SHINING in 4K is now official. The new scan will debut at Cannes:

    https://bloody-disgusting.com/movie…-kubricks-shining-heads-cannes-film-festival/

    A new home video release can't be too far behind, and I would be thrilled for a reasonably wide theatrical release to accompany it. The film turns forty next year. As for A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, the sooner the better, as Warner has apparently been sitting on a 4K master for some time now,

  7. I highly recommend last year's documentary Filmworker, about Leon Vitali and his role as the conservator of Kubrick's legacy. The transfers on the recent releases of Barry Lyndon and the 4K UHD of 2001 were made possible by his years of experience in checking colour timing on film prints for Kubrick, while at the same time being Kubrick's willing slave for 25 years. A new 4K of The Shining, supervised by him, will look superb.

    View attachment 57862

    And the latest Sight & Sound features an interesting article on the graphic design of Kubrick's posters and film titles, including the original Saul Bass one for The Shining.

    View attachment 57863
    View attachment 57864

  8. Having Leon Vitali involved is good enough for me. He ensured 2001 was done properly so I have no doubt Leon & the Kubrick estate will ensure The Shining is about as good as it can be on 4K:thumbsup:

  9. This is great news – can't wait to see the results.

    I very much hope both cuts are on this release. Alternatively of course, I'll just have to buy the US and UK releases separately, just as I did with the BD!

  10. I do think that the cover art is very imaginative and gripping, capturing the tone of the movie wonderfully and bringing back some vivid memories. I'll be looking forward to reviews of this before I consider buying, however.

  11. The Warner press release makes it sound like the new version will include the 'lost' 2-minute hospital scene that was cut from the film in the few days following its initial premiere (the US home video release has always been 144 minutes):

    The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 146 minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980.

    If this is really accurate, I'm surprised Warner's isn't making the inclusion of the lost footage more prominent, with words like "rarely seen lost ending," "new footage," or something similar.

  12. English Patient

    The Warner press release makes it sound like the new version will include the 'lost' 2-minute hospital scene that was cut from the film in the few days following its initial premiere (the US home video release has always been 144 minutes):

    The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 146 minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980.

    If this is really accurate, I'm surprised Warner's isn't making the inclusion of the lost footage more prominent, with words like "rarely seen lost ending," "new footage," or something similar.

    I've never heard that the original ending was 'lost'. It was deleted by Kubrick and WB a day or two after the opening of the film. I saw it twice and it didn't leave any lasting impression. It would be 'great' if the new release had all three versions…but if it is going to be the one version then let it be the original release.

  13. I sincerely doubt they would reinstate the hospital scene. The hard rule with Kubrick films is they are not to be altered from how he left them. Until there is nobody left around to uphold that rule I don't think they will stray from it.

  14. PMF

    As with Barry Lyndon, I am confident that through Mr. Vitali we will receive a disc of satisfaction.:thumbs-up-smiley:

    And through Mr. Vitali we will be getting the version that Stanley Kubrick would have given us.

  15. Reggie W

    I sincerely doubt they would reinstate the hospital scene. The hard rule with Kubrick films is they are not to be altered from how he left them. Until there is nobody left around to uphold that rule I don't think they will stray from it.

    The listed running time and press release would indicate that it WILL include the coda, though. Why else point out the 146-minute running time and specifically say it's the "premiere" version otherwise? The Kubrick powers-that-be have changed their minds before, from first claiming that Kubrick wanted his "flat" films all presented in open-matte 1.33:1, to insisting that 1.77:1 was the proper aspect ratio for BARRY LYNDON for a time.

    Vincent

  16. Vincent_P

    The listed running time and press release would indicate that it WILL include the coda, though. Why else point out the 146-minute running time and specifically say it's the "premiere" version otherwise? The Kubrick powers-that-be have changed their minds before, from first claiming that Kubrick wanted his "flat" films all presented in open-matte 1.33:1, to insisting that 1.77:1 was the proper aspect ratio for BARRY LYNDON for a time.

    Vincent

    Yeah, I'm very much confused by this. It seems to me, given what Kubrick has said about that ending, that it would never been shown because he specifically removed it and never approved a release with it. This would go against his wishes. While I'm very excited to see it again (I saw the film opening night), I'm disappointed that they are not respecting his wishes–especially Spielberg who you would think would not support such a clear disrespect of the filmmaker's wishes.

  17. owen35

    Yeah, I'm very much confused by this. It seems to me, given what Kubrick has said about that ending, that it would never been shown because he specifically removed it and never approved a release with it. This would go against his wishes. While I'm very excited to see it again (I saw the film opening night), I'm disappointed that they are not respecting his wishes–especially Spielberg who you would think would not support such a clear disrespect of the filmmaker's wishes.

    What is Spielberg's connection to this release?

  18. owen35

    Yeah, I'm very much confused by this. It seems to me, given what Kubrick has said about that ending, that it would never been shown because he specifically removed it and never approved a release with it. This would go against his wishes. While I'm very excited to see it again (I saw the film opening night), I'm disappointed that they are not respecting his wishes–especially Spielberg who you would think would not support such a clear disrespect of the filmmaker's wishes.

    Yes, but that hospital scene was in his original cut, I don't know why he removed it after the film had opened, maybe the audience reaction was not what he thought it would be. I'd think his wife, Christiane Kubrick & assistant, Leon Vitali would know. Saying that, I'd be surprised to see it back in. I'm looking forward to seeing the longer US version, as I've only seen the shorter UK cut.

  19. It was removed after the first day in most locations (it was supposed to be removed prior to that, but WB couldn't get to every location). The chief projectionist at a theater I worked at (a few years later) that premiered it with the scene the first day told me that WB sent an editor opening night after the late show and he physically spliced out the scene and took the footage with him. A replacement reel without the splice arrived a few days later.

  20. Peter Apruzzese

    It was removed after the first day in most locations (it was supposed to be removed prior to that, but WB couldn't get to every location). The chief projectionist at a theater I worked at (a few years later) that premiered it with the scene the first day told me that WB sent an editor opening night after the late show and he physically spliced out the scene and took the footage with him. A replacement reel without the splice arrived a few days later.

    Sounds like a quintessential Kubrick decision! 🙂 I'd love to see the scene included as an extra, but if he didn't want it in the finished film I have no interest in seeing it tacked on in this release.

  21. I genuinely believe the when Warner says it’s the premiere version, what they’re actually trying to convey is that it’s the longer US cut and not the shorter UK cut. But I can completely understand the confusion.

    Much like the 20 minutes trimmed from “2001” after its premiere, I don’t expect to see this footage on disc either. I really wish we could get them as bonus features but it’s not a dealbreaker for me.

    My hope is also that Warner will upgrade the BD version as well with the new master, as they also did for 2001.

  22. Paul Rossen

    I've never heard that the original ending was 'lost'. It was deleted by Kubrick and WB a day or two after the opening of the film. I saw it twice and it didn't leave any lasting impression. It would be 'great' if the new release had all three versions…but if it is going to be the one version then let it be the original release.

    'Lost' isn't the correct word – 'rarely seen' would be more accurate. But the overall point is that Warner seems to be indicating that this will be 2 minutes longer than all the existing US home video releases… but if it does indeed have footage that's never before been available in a US home video release, it seems odd that they wouldn't trumpet that fact. At least include words like "never before seen on home video" or something to that effect. For most movies, the addition of newly reinstated footage wouldn't be that big of a deal, but Kubrick seems to be in a rarefied class where this would be a huge deal. Even if the scene is ultimately pretty forgettable, its mere inclusion would be an excellent marketing hook.

    I tend to think this is just a marketing mix-up – I agree with the people on this forum that Kubrick was pretty clear about what versions he wanted in the public domain, so it would surprise me if the hospital scene is included. I work in a company where sometimes the marketing department and the content department aren't on the same page, so it isn't unusual for press releases to be inaccurate.

  23. Billy Batson

    Yes, but that hospital scene was in his original cut, I don't know why he removed it after the film had opened, maybe the audience reaction was not what he thought it would be. I'd think his wife, Christiane Kubrick & assistant, Leon Vitali would know. Saying that, I'd be surprised to see it back in. I'm looking forward to seeing the longer US version, as I've only seen the shorter UK cut.

    I seem to recall Kubrick's daughter speaking about it on a podcast recently. The decision to remove was because Kubrick felt the ending muddied up the film, adding an additional layer of supernatural (Danny's ball rolling into the hospital room) that took away from the film's overall meaning. I also do recall that in the original cut, we went from Jack frozen in the snow, then transitioned into the hospital room for that scene, and then finally dissolved to the photo on the wall. Adding the hospital scene greatly diminished the impact of the photo's immediate connection to Jack; another reason for the excising of that scene. Granted, I'm going off of very old memories, but it was the correct decision to make.

  24. AcesHighStudios

    What is Spielberg's connection to this release?

    From the press release: "Filmmaker Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick's former personal assistant Leon Vitali worked closely with the team at Warner Bros. during the mastering process."

  25. I wonder if Spielberg was actually "closely involved" or if it's now Warner Brother's MO to attach a famous current filmmaker's name to these projects (i.e., Nolan being "attached" to 2001).

    Vincent

  26. Spielberg has played this role before, perhaps most famously with convincing Paramount to restore The Godfather. While I don’t blame the studio for using a prestigious name to help market the product, which ultimately helps protect the investment, Spielberg has always been a huge fan of that film and I have no problem believing his involvement is genuine.

  27. WB publicity is the innocent party here. They need not understand the technical niceties of cuts, dates and lengths, and must merely mimic what they’re told by the tech people.

    When one has various cooks involved in projects, marketing and truth become muddled.

    I recently saw a 4k screening of a film called 2001, being publicized as the “un-restored” version, presumably the Nolan cut.

    That would be the 4th, or possibly 6th version of the mysterious film, presumably produced by scanning the 65/15 printing negative, and down-rezzing, after trimming all of the extraneous black that was added, so that it would fit a screen.

    Some venues haven’t a clue what they’re running.

    As to The Shining, the WB publicity is crystal clear. The forthcoming 4k disc, at least, is described as follows: “The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 146 minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980.”

    Simple.

  28. People elsewhere are already expecting this to have the deleted two-minute hospital scene at the end. I don't believe it will be, not for an iota of a second. As someone has already pointed out, the Cannes runtime is 143 minutes, not 146. Someone from some article somewhere said he deleted the sequence during the third week of its run – which is balderdash. I was deleted the first weekend. I saw it on opening day, it was in, and then about five days later and it was out.

  29. haineshisway

    People elsewhere are already expecting this to have the deleted two-minute hospital scene at the end. I don't believe it will be, not for an iota of a second. As someone has already pointed out, the Cannes runtime is 143 minutes, not 146. Someone from some article somewhere said he deleted the sequence during the third week of its run – which is balderdash. I was deleted the first weekend. I saw it on opening day, it was in, and then about five days later and it was out.

    Hi, Bruce. I would have agreed with you, about the 143 cut being released on 4K, as opposed to the 146 minute cut. However, balderdash or not, I received the following in an email from WB today, which I assume everyone else who has ever bought anything from the WB shop received as well.

    "Widely regarded as one of the greatest horror films ever made, Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining comes to 4K Ultra HD on October 1st.

    The 4K remastering was done using a new 4K scan of the original 35mm camera negative at Warner Bros. Motion Picture Imaging. Filmmaker Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick’s former personal assistant Leon Vitali worked closely with the team at Warner Bros. during the mastering process.

    The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 146 minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980."

  30. I think in the end you'll find that it is the cut that has always been since the two-minute sequence was deleted, but I'm happy to be surprised, but NOT if it's actually part of the film. As an extra or an alternate version, fine.

  31. Vincent_P

    The Kubrick powers-that-be have changed their minds before, from first claiming that Kubrick wanted his "flat" films all presented in open-matte 1.33:1, to insisting that 1.77:1 was the proper aspect ratio for BARRY LYNDON for a time.

    I recall a lot of internet debates about there being differences in how certain films should be shown but if I recall correctly when people actually went back to look at that and things Kubrick himself had said that what they discovered was there was no real debate. Kubrick had always been consistent with how he wanted his films presented. The only discussions he had about presenting the films differently came with regards to how they would appear on old TV screens and hence on VHS or other earlier forms of home video formats. In terms of how he wanted them shown in a theater I do not think there was ever a debate and he remained quite clear. So, on aspect ratios I think, to the best of my memory, the debates about that were overblown and really ended up not representing Kubrick's thoughts at all.

    On showing footage Kubrick had cut from films, well, if I recall correctly Vitali addressed that when it came out that all the cut scenes from 2001 still exist. His answer was a definitive "It will never be seen again." and the reasoning was if Kubrick cut it, he did not want an audience to ever see it because Kubrick's feelings were if you saw it you could change how you feel about the film. I think what Vitali actually hinted at is if Kubrick were around when that footage was rediscovered he would have asked for it to be destroyed…for the specific purpose of eliminating the chance that someone would attempt to show it again after he was gone.

    So, it would never be added as a special feature and it would certainly never be reinstated in the picture to recreate an earlier cut. The final word was if Kubrick cut it while he was alive, it was never meant to be seen again in any form.

    I mean my feeling was it would be interesting to view footage Kubrick cut from an educational standpoint but even in that regard the people that support Kubrick's wishes do not condone showing cut footage it would seem.

    So, while The Shining is the only Kubrick film with two "authorized" versions…well…I do not think based on their previously stated positions that we will see the hospital scenes again. Not as a special feature, not on a train, not on a plane, and not with a side of green eggs and ham.

    UNLESS…

    At some point in the future when nobody is left around to defend Kubrick's position somebody decides to go for a cash grab by showing his cut footage again. Even that though seems pretty unlikely.

  32. Yeah, if there were 16:9 TVs 20 years earlier, then Kubrick wouldn't have been at all fussed about 4×3 for his films. I'm thinking that he couldn't bear the thought of his films being panned & scanned for TV…& I don't think we'll be seeing the hospital scene (but I would like to see it as an extra).

  33. I took a day off from work and stood in line all morning on Friday, May 23rd, 1980 so that I could see the first showing of "The Shining" at the Sutton on NYC's Upper East Side (the ad I found in an archive for the NY Times shows 12:45 as the first playtime). I stayed and watched the film three times that day (maybe four times actually as the ad indicates that they had a midnight showing, too) with different audiences. Each time there was a laugh at the shock edit reveal of Jack in the snow following the hospital scene. There was something about the transition from the mundane tranquility of the hospital scene to the abrupt close-up of Jack frozen in the snow, that triggered a laugh. When I went back on Saturday to watch the film a few more times, the hospital scene was gone – and there were no laughs at Jack's reveal. I'm sure my memory of the editing that included the sequences with the hospital scenes is faulty — but I remember it as Danny backtracking and escaping from the maze and getting into the rover driven by his Mom, Jack wailing and swinging his axe in the maze, then the rover disappearing into the snow storm, then a transition to the hospital with elevator doors (!) opening to reveal Mr. Ullman, then the scene with Danny in the hospital bed, his Mom, and Mr. Ullman, then the shock cut to Jack in the snow, then the dolly into the photo, and…the end.

  34. John, I also saw THE SHINING at the Sutton on opening day, and my memory of the hospital scene is different then yours. Yes, audiences laughed at the hospital scene, but not because of the shock cut, which came before the hospital scene, but because what was being said seemed so mundane and out of place, and also kind of silly. It's probable that Kubrick intended the humor of the hospital scene purposefully, to kind of bring people back down gently from the horror, but it didn't work with that audience.

    If I'm not mistaken, Kubrick was at the Sutton that day, gauging the audience reaction, and it was his decision to cut the scene, which I think was a good one. I'm not certain if they are actually putting back the hospital scene at the end of the film, but it may play better in the comfort of one's home. It didn't work at all with the audience at the Sutton, though that wasn't the typical Sutton audience, which was usually a middle-aged art house crowd. (I managed a theater around the corner, so I know where of I speak. At the time, we were playing CALIGULA, and the two ticket holder lines became intertwined, and it was my job to separate them. Both groups were pretty rowdy, though I would say the audience for THE SHINING was more oriented towards teenagers.)

  35. really love that cover.

    I don't think i'm going to buy the movie though. first vhs I ever bought (with Time Bandits bought at a mall that is now gutted and looks like it could be the location for The shining 2 lol ), 2 DVDs, and finally the blu ray that looks damn good. I might be done.

    might.

    be.

    danny.

    danny BOY!!!!!

    oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to

    oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to
    oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to
    oh no!!! I'm not going to buy the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to

    oh no!!! I'm not going to
    buy the movie
    again
    not
    going to buy the movie again
    not going to oh no!!! I'm not going to buy
    the movie again not going to buy the movie again not going to

  36. Robert Crawford

    Man, Best Buy is making some profit margin off these exclusive steelbook releases. Not for me though, as I can't justify spending that extra $5 for some cheap metal.

    I notice they often tend to still have a ton of them in the stores these days. I like the Steelbook cases when they have excellent, thoughtful art, but many of the Best Buy ones are pretty generic and not worth the extra dough.

  37. Thanks for the corrections to my faulty memory — in looking at stills of the hospital scene, several of them show Mr. Ullman interacting with Danny at a nurses station in the hallway which I had blanked out, too. For me at least the problem was that the film had been built up as the epitome of terror and horror — and the trailer with the elevator gushing gore, while brilliant, really "oversold" the film in terms of gore and bloodshedding terror. The audience, and thanks for your recollections, was really primed for an ultimate, gory, horror film. "The Shining" certainly wasn't that film. I recall that there were also a few laughs when there was a dramatic insertion of a simple time and date with a music cue. The film has grown on me over the years but I find it more of a black-comedy domestic tragedy now rather than an all-out horror film.

  38. John, I don't know if I have the stamina to discuss whether THE SHINING is a horror film, let alone a good one. Everyone I know has a different opinion on the matter. When I first saw the film I also felt that the humor and links to historical as well as inherited trauma made the film less scary, but now I am of the opposite opinion. For example, Jack Nicholson was much criticized at the time the film came out for acting crazy from the beginning, and not giving a modulated performance. In later interviews, he revealed that he tried to give a subtler performance, but Kubrick wouldn't let him, as he kept filming hundreds of takes, trying to get Nicholson to act more outrageous, which Nicholson tried to resist, but finally at take 300 or so finally gave in, gave Kubrick the cartoonish exaggeration he wanted, and Kubrick would only print the last take. Yes, Nicholson is funny, but also really scary. The reason he is scary I think is found in what one of the ghosts say to Jack Torrence, "You have always been here." And of course, that final tracking shot–which is why the hospital scene didn't work because it interrupted the flow from the shock cut of Jack Torrence's frozen form–to a photograph of Jack Torrrence at the Overlook in 1921, I believe. Jack Nicholson's Jack Torrence acts crazy from the beginning because, unknown to him, he is already a ghost when the film begins; haunted by the sins of the past, which have through osmosis or inheritance become his sins, He's always been at the Overlook. It's in his blood and his genes. In fact, all of us have always been at the Overlook. And today I find that concept absolutely chilling.

    Beyond that, and I don't know, John, if you would consider this important, but as a horror film, THE SHINING has been incredibly influential. In particular, a major influence on what I consider three of the greatest and most influential horror films of the 1980's and early 90's: VIDEODROME, POLTERGEIST & NIGHTBREED.

  39. Robert Harris

    Running time corrected to 144 minutes

    And there you have it. Hopefully that will stall any further speculation. There was no way they were putting that scene back IN the film, no possible way.

  40. Vincent_P

    And yet it still says "the version that premiered on May 23, 1980"! It's like they're trying to torture us 🙂

    Vincent

    They’ll get to it. The line stating that this is the non-restoration, also must be added. The film is still b/w, I presume. Shot on short rolls from Strangelove.

  41. 4k presentation last night of The Shining of TIFF Lightbox was a bit of a let-down. The PQ upgrade was most noticeable in the close ups, starting with Jack Nicholson's close up during his job interview, which had perfect clarity and lovely film grain. The medium and wider shots, however, (helicopter opening shots, shots of 4 characters touring the hotel) looked softer/hazier by comparison, which is kind of disappointing in that the Overlook is another character of the film who should get "close ups" with the same vivid quality as the human actors. Or is the hazy-ness an artistic choice to make things the hotel look "ghostly"? Or does this come down to 4k laying bare the lens quality of the production, with the close up lenses being the best in the camera department's package? Also The Shining isn't 65mm sourced like the 2001 4k release so this could never be the stunning revelation that release was. And I assume that Lightbox's projector isn't HDR capable so I'm curious how the reds, browns and golds of the ballroom and Jack's jacket will look on the October disc release. The impact of the scary music in surround was a highlight of this presentation.

  42. Chuck_Kahn

    4k presentation last night of The Shining of TIFF Lightbox was a bit of a let-down. The PQ upgrade was most noticeable in the close ups, starting with Jack Nicholson's close up during his job interview, which had perfect clarity and lovely film grain. The medium and wider shots, however, (helicopter opening shots, shots of 4 characters touring the hotel) looked softer/hazier by comparison, which is kind of disappointing in that the Overlook is another character of the film who should get "close ups" with the same vivid quality as the human actors. Or is the hazy-ness an artistic choice to make things the hotel look "ghostly"? Or does this come down to 4k laying bare the lens quality of the production, with the close up lenses being the best in the camera department's package? Also The Shining isn't 65mm sourced like the 2001 4k release so this could never be the stunning revelation that release was. And I assume that Lightbox's projector isn't HDR capable so I'm curious how the reds, browns and golds of the ballroom and Jack's jacket will look on the October disc release. The impact of the scary music in surround was a highlight of this presentation.

    I mostly agree about the softness, but I think that's just down to the lighting choices, lenses and film stock of the time.

    But surround? I didn't hear any surround or stereo separation. It sounded good -and loud – but everything was coming from the front. Sounded like the original mono mix to me.

  43. moviebuff75

    Was the hospital scene cut before the film opened nationally?

    It was cut during the opening weekend of its limited platform release. The wide release was a month or so later and all those prints contained a new final reel with no splice.

  44. Chuck_Kahn

    4k presentation last night of The Shining of TIFF Lightbox was a bit of a let-down. The PQ upgrade was most noticeable in the close ups, starting with Jack Nicholson's close up during his job interview, which had perfect clarity and lovely film grain. The medium and wider shots, however, (helicopter opening shots, shots of 4 characters touring the hotel) looked softer/hazier by comparison, which is kind of disappointing in that the Overlook is another character of the film who should get "close ups" with the same vivid quality as the human actors. Or is the hazy-ness an artistic choice to make things the hotel look "ghostly"? Or does this come down to 4k laying bare the lens quality of the production, with the close up lenses being the best in the camera department's package? Also The Shining isn't 65mm sourced like the 2001 4k release so this could never be the stunning revelation that release was. And I assume that Lightbox's projector isn't HDR capable so I'm curious how the reds, browns and golds of the ballroom and Jack's jacket will look on the October disc release. The impact of the scary music in surround was a highlight of this presentation.

    That is too bad.
    I hope the UHD is great. I remember there was quite a few less than impressive reviews of the 4K 2001: A Space Odyssey screenings, but the disc turned out much better than I had hoped for.

  45. Worth

    But surround? I didn't hear any surround or stereo separation. It sounded good -and loud – but everything was coming from the front. Sounded like the original mono mix to me.

    The fidelity of the scary music sounded like a remix to my ears — like they went back to the original music elements/recordings rather than just use the 1980 mix. I wonder if there's an article about the audio restoration out there.

  46. Chuck_Kahn

    The fidelity of the scary music sounded like a remix to my ears — like they went back to the original music elements/recordings rather than just use the 1980 mix. I wonder if there's an article about the audio restoration out there.

    Did the audio need restoration?

  47. Robert Harris

    The latest from WB.

    Official word is that the film did, in fact, premiere on 23 May 80, at 144 minutes.

    No cuts.

    The 4k will present the original 144 minute premiere version, as it opened in NY and LA.

    I'm more confused than ever. We know the film didn't premiere at 144 minutes. It was 146 minutes with the ending changed a few days into the initial limited run, correct?

    I never really believed we'd be getting the initial version, but saying that the 144 minute version is uncut and how it premiered is just not true.

    Is WB publicity really that clueless or am I another victim of the trademarked RAH penchant for sarcasm?

    MY BRAIN HURTS

  48. Robert Harris

    The latest from WB.

    Official word is that the film did, in fact, premiere on 23 May 80, at 144 minutes.

    No cuts.

    The 4k will present the original 144 minute premiere version, as it opened in NY and LA.

    I heard from WB Publicity that Christopher Nolan is overseeing new 70mm & IMAX blowups for The Shining.

  49. Brian Kidd

    I'm more confused than ever. We know the film didn't premiere at 144 minutes. It was 146 minutes with the ending changed a few days into the initial limited run, correct?

    I never really believed we'd be getting the initial version, but saying that the 144 minute version is uncut and how it premiered is just not true.

    Is WB publicity really that clueless or am I another victim of the trademarked RAH penchant for sarcasm?

    MY BRAIN HURTS

    WB did not say the film is un-cut. Here is the precise corrected verbiage:

    BURBANK, CA, May 15, 2019 – Warner Bros. Home Entertainment announced today that
    The Shining, Stanley Kubrick’s terrifying 1980 horror masterpiece, will be released on Ultra HD Blu-ray and Digital on October 1. The 4K remastering is of Kubrick’s original 144minute version of the film which premiered in the United States on May 23rd, 1980.

  50. Robert Harris

    Did the audio need restoration?

    I interviewed Gordon Stainforth right before the 5.1 mix first appeared on DVD, and I recall he said the assembly of the music cues included needledrops. While i guess it is possible to go back to original tape masters, there was so much work that Stainforth did with the music cues (including layering elements of different Penderecki compositions), that I would be just happy to hear the orig mono and existing 5.1 mix (which I understand used the stems) in hi-res TrueHD or DTS Master.

    Edit: found my interview with Gordon Stainforth!
    https://web.archive.org/web/20040402011421/http://amateurhometheater.com/El Gatos Corner/Felix-Stainforth Interview.htm

  51. Brian Kidd

    I was confused by your post that said, "No cuts." Thanks for clarifying.

    It may be that different departments are simply mixing metaphors, along with post-production history, release information, and what each might be told.

  52. I saw the hospital scene in 1980; I must have seen it opening day. From this distant point it wasn't anything that special, and having seen this movie a few zillion times I've never missed it.

  53. I am not sure why anybody thought the inclusion of the hospital scene was even a possibility. Isn't it established lore that Kubrick destroyed all cut material, from the rushes down to the OCN? I know it is said that a print of the 2001 cuts are in Warner Bros. possession, but that was before Kubrick had achieved the unusual level of control he would wield in his later years. I don't think any of THE SHINING's trims existed outside of Childwickbury, which means they were incinerated.

    And it's too bad. That scene, and certainly the scrapbook discovery scene, would be great to see as standalone curiosities. But Kubrick was said to be afraid of studios recutting his films without his consent. Given some of the unsanctioned alternate cuts of movies that have come out over the years, I guess he wasn't so paranoid.

    As for the reference to the European cut of THE SHINING being Kubrick's "preferred" version – I have heard this parroted before, but never sourced. All we know is that he made cuts in response to the movie performing soft in America. I have never seen any quote from Kubrick where he expresses a preference for one version over the other.

  54. I saw the 4K showing in San Francisco and can confirm there is no hospital scene or any other differences. The film and audio look and sound fantastic, btw. Much to be excited with this release.

  55. Got my hands on an early copy of the 4K release coming next week. I can say that it looks beautiful; It’s the best I’ve ever seen it. I think everyone is going to be very happy with this release.

    Oh, and there’s no hospital scene.

  56. owen35

    Got my hands on an early copy of the 4K release coming next week. I can say that it looks beautiful; It's the best I've ever seen it. I think everyone is going to be very happy with this release.

    Oh, and there's no hospital scene.

    Does it include both the US and European cuts, or just the one?

  57. Worth

    Does it include both the US and European cuts, or just the one?

    I only have an uncompressed file of the movie, not the whole disc. I get that on Monday. But I don't believe so, I think this release is only the US version. I saw someone post that it would have been great if they could've included the various versions (except original with the hospital scene) to show how Kubrick edited his films down for certain markets. But then you'd have the confusion of what is Kubrick's final version. All the information I've been able to read indicates this cut is it.

  58. Regarding the hospital scene. Is it possible that it was between the shot of Jack sitting down in the maze and the daytime close-up shot of him? The reason I ask is that the cut between these two shots looks wrong – it’s too abrupt. I would have expected a dissolve or perhaps a cutaway indicating the passage of time between these shots.

  59. Regarding the hospital scene. Is it possible that it was between the shot of Jack sitting down in the maze and the daytime close-up shot of him? The reason I ask is that the cut between these two shots looks wrong – it’s too abrupt. I would have expected a dissolve or perhaps a cutaway indicating the passage of time between these shots.

  60. The hospital scene was after the final shot of him frozen and before the tracking shot down the hallway to the photograph. The premiere engagement prints had a physical splice at that point, the later first run prints were from an edited negative, but there was always a little ‘bump’ at the cut point. Presumably, that’s been stabilized now.

  61. Looks like the trailer was left off, too. While I pre-ordered this and are definitely looking forward to the 4K remaster… you'd think this would warrant a bit more effort. Criterion included both mono and 5.1 for Dr. Strangelove and Barry Lyndon, as well as the original trailer remastered in 1080p. (and Dr. Strangelove even includes the lengthy exhibitor's trailer in 1080p). Even Warner Archive would never leave off a trailer, especially one as iconic as the one for The Shining.

  62. Peter Apruzzese

    The hospital scene was after the final shot of him frozen and before the tracking shot down the hallway to the photograph. The premiere engagement prints had a physical splice at that point, the later first run prints were from an edited negative, but there was always a little ‘bump’ at the cut point. Presumably, that’s been stabilized now.

    I'm curious where you got your information on the changes. Not that I question its accuracy, but I did see the film the night it opened and I always recalled Nicholson appearing AFTER the hospital scene. I do have a very faded memory of seeing it a second time, after Kubrick's edit, and being surprised that Nicholson's appearance in the snow was in a different place from when I saw it the night it opened.

  63. owen35

    I'm curious where you got your information on the changes. Not that I question its accuracy, but I did see the film the night it opened and I always recalled Nicholson appearing AFTER the hospital scene. I do have a very faded memory of seeing it a second time, after Kubrick's edit, and being surprised that Nicholson's appearance in the snow was in a different place from when I saw it the night it opened.

    I didn't see the film opening night, but a couple of days later and the physical splice was at the point I described.

    I seem to recall an online script that has the sequences in that order.

    Here's one source: https://cinephiliabeyond.org/screenplay-deleted-original-ending-shining/

  64. Found an interesting video comparing three home video versions of The Shining:

    Discusses aspect ratio, color correction, sound remix, changes in music mix and more. Examples of differences between the mono mix and the 5.1 mix (2007 blu) of the music track start approx. 14:31.

    Video also available here, with 5.1 audio:
    https://archive.org/details/ShiningPhilology

    Music editor Gordon Stanforth on the film:
    http://www.gordonstainforth.co.uk/shining-music-intro
    Contains valuable links to other sites with info about the film.

  65. Peter Apruzzese

    I didn't see the film opening night, but a couple of days later and the physical splice was at the point I described.

    I seem to recall an online script that has the sequences in that order.

    Here's one source: https://cinephiliabeyond.org/screenplay-deleted-original-ending-shining/

    Very interesting–and thanks for sharing. Clearly my memory is incorrect here. Regardless, I do remember seeing that scene and walking out of the theater around 3:00 am. If you can believe it, there was a line of people to see the next show (it was opening night in LA, so it was a BIG event). There was also an audible reaction with Danny driving his big-wheel over the carpeting and throughout the hotel. That steady cam footage was so new and exciting at the time, and Stanley definitely took full advantage of the the equipment.

  66. I was talking about the horizontal image. I was wrong though. The width on a full frame film remains the same if it is framed properly. The previous release framed the picture too close to the edge of the frame. They then opened up the vertical to make the ratio 1.78. This time, they framed the width to projection guidelines and the height to 1.78. So, same width as projected with a sliver more height.

  67. moviebuff75

    I was talking about the horizontal image. I was wrong though. The width on a full frame film remains the same if it is framed properly. The previous release framed the picture too close to the edge of the frame. They then opened up the vertical to make the ratio 1.78. This time, they framed the width to projection guidelines and the height to 1.78. So, same width as projected with a sliver more height.

    Yes, that is correct, which is why sometimes you will see boom mics and other things that weren't intended to be seen creep into the game on pan and scan versions. For a 1:33 image, the horizontal image remains the same and the top and bottom are typically opened up and you're seeing more information than was originally intended to be seen. I have heard some complaints that the new 4K version is 1.78 instead of 1.85, but I find the difference between the two pretty inconsequential.

  68. owen35

    Very interesting–and thanks for sharing. Clearly my memory is incorrect here. Regardless, I do remember seeing that scene and walking out of the theater around 3:00 am. If you can believe it, there was a line of people to see the next show (it was opening night in LA, so it was a BIG event). There was also an audible reaction with Danny driving his big-wheel over the carpeting and throughout the hotel. That steady cam footage was so new and exciting at the time, and Stanley definitely took full advantage of the the equipment.

    Yep, I saw it in LA opening night at the Chinese if I remember correctly – and it's frozen Jack, hospital, photograph. Then over the weekend prints were edited with the hospital scene removed and the splice exactly as Pete describes it.

  69. AcesHighStudios

    I have heard some complaints that the new 4K version is 1.78 instead of 1.85, but I find the difference between the two pretty inconsequential.

    It is. You don't see any extra picture with 1:85, it's just a tiny slither of black over picture info top & bottom of the frame.

  70. Billy Batson

    It is. You don't see any extra picture with 1:85, it's just a tiny slither of black over picture info top & bottom of the frame.

    And there would have been more variation than that from cinema to cinema when projecting 35mm.

  71. Just got back from seeing the new 4k restoration of The Shining in the theater with a good crowd. Wow. What a creepy movie! Kubrick got amazing performances out of everyone in that film. What great production design.

    PS And the picture and audio quality are fantastic.

  72. benbess

    Just got back from seeing the new 4k restoration of The Shining in the theater with a good crowd. Wow. What a creepy movie! Kubrick got amazing performances out of everyone in that film. What great production design.

    PS And the picture and audio quality are fantastic.

    How did the blood from the elevator look?

  73. UHD can represent a much wider color spectrum than BD, so the UHD version can reveal more while the color range has to be narrowed for the BD version. Between the different color spaces and the different calibration settings your TV uses to handle BD and UHD, that’s the most likely answer.

  74. Josh Steinberg

    UHD can represent a much wider color spectrum than BD, so the UHD version can reveal more while the color range has to be narrowed for the BD version. Between the different color spaces and the different calibration settings your TV uses to handle BD and UHD, that’s the most likely answer.

    I cannot calibrate for HDR/DV, and that’s always going to be a problem. Still, I haven’t seen such a dramatic difference on other UHD discs and their BD counterparts. Are you seeing the difference? It’s not at all all subtle.

  75. Am thrilled with the 4K release. I DID notice an anomaly with with the picture, however briefly. Before explaining this, I should mention that I have a 2 year old LG 55" OLED, mated with the Panasonic 820 UHD Blu-ray machine. When the film shows Wendy Torrance, after bopping Jack Torrance with the baseball bat, backing up the stairs and the background is flooded with light from the windows, there is a momentary STROBE effect with that light source. It's over with in 2 seconds! It occurs for me again when Jack is stumbling through the hedge-row maze, chasing Danny, and shots showing the ground-based flood lights, occasionally, will show a quick strobe of the light source. Are there any HTF members seeing this?
    All things considered, this is a minor quibble of an otherwise gorgeous release!
    Fritzl Dog

  76. Fritzl Dog

    Am thrilled with the 4K release. I DID notice an anomaly with with the picture, however briefly. Before explaining this, I should mention that I have a 2 year old LG 55" OLED, mated with the Panasonic 820 UHD Blu-ray machine. When the film shows Wendy Torrance, after bopping Jack Torrance with the baseball bat, backing up the stairs and the background is flooded with light from the windows, there is a momentary STROBE effect with that light source. It's over with in 2 seconds! It occurs for me again when Jack is stumbling through the hedge-row maze, chasing Danny, and shots showing the ground-based flood lights, occasionally, will show a quick strobe of the light source. Are there any HTF members seeing this?
    All things considered, this is a minor quibble of an otherwise gorgeous release!
    Fritzl Dog

    That flickering is in the original photography.

Leave a Reply