Why does Stephen King hate The Shining so much?
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Why does Stephen King hate The Shining so much?
Why does Stephen King hate The Shining so much?
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
If Kubrick is so great how come he's dead?
Sometimes dead is better.
I don't wanna be buried, in a Slavic cemetery
Why does he have two copies of shadowman?
King has done a few detective books lately.
One is probably for reading and the other is for taking notes in the margins as he reads.
He really liked the remaster and bought a physical copy
Dean Koontz sisters… we’re vindicated.
Built for Big Chechen wiener
holy shit, is the zombie
Oh yeah, that happened.
>...he's dealing with me.
>*shills AA at Putin until he dies of cringe*
And then everyone cheered
War is peace.
if hitler was so great how come they never made a hitler 2?
Because THEY killed him
because stephen king is a hack.
in every one of his novels, he wants the unexplained paranormal phenomenon to be a metaphor for the male protagonists unresolved alcoholism and childhood trauma / daddy issues.
Name 5 books
>Name 5 books
all of them
>Gerald's Game
>Dolores Claiborne
>'Salem's Lot
>Under the Dome
>It
NTA but I just named 5 with pedo shit for you.
Nobody asked for that, pedo.
No, The Shining is the other type of story he does, how fathers are perfect and the only people who love their children and not their b***h c**t ex wife frick you margeret i said sorry if i can't drink on a tuesday maybe you gotta nut the frick up
How would YOU feel if someone stole your donut steel, completely changed it and the public liked it better than your own creation?
I've long felt that Torrance was a stand in for King outside of breaking a kids arm. The film Torrance was straight crazy from the start. King never forgave Kubrick for that change.
Ol Stepeen didn't like the thought that he wasn't such a lovable drunk. That, maybe, he was a real fricking butthole.
AI is fricking amazing
he wuz king
The book was about his addiction, alcoholism and eventual sobriety. Making it one of King's more personal books.
The movie was more about an abusive guy going crazy because of isolation.
You almost got it
In the book, the hotel (substance abuse) is a corrupting influence that makes good people do bad things. In the end, the hotel is destroyed.
In the movie, the hotel merely reveals what is already there - Jack and the previous caretaker were clearly already fricking crazy. There is no redemption for them, and the hotel remains. It is a very direct attack on the thesis of the book - the car the family drove in the book is crashed on the side of the road to the hotel in the movie.
Thats how I always looked at it and I don’t see why King shouldn’t be pissed, even if you don’t like his stories, it’s not like his contempt for the adaptation is unwarranted
So Kubrick sees through addicts horseshit and reveals they are terrible selfish people and that’s why they are addicted
Kino
I love how quickly you guys are driving AI into the ground. Please keep saturating everywhere with this generic AI look, it’s the only argument needed.
Kek
Keep seething artpig
Because the movie was pure uncut kino.
ABC's The Shining is what happens when Kang got his way
>Kubrick if he were a Jack Black Leprechaun hybrid freak
why tf do these ai slop images all have a cartoony look to them? Is the program not capable of producing realistic images or are you too moronic for prompts?
Because it's not even close to being an adaptation of the source material. Kubrick wanted to cash out and Stephen King adaptations always rake it in.
Kubrick used book adaptations as framework to tell his own story but The Shining is the one that has very little to do with it and he went out of his way to do the opposite of nearly everything in the book besides the haunted hotel and Jack going crazy. Just a few examples but every character is a complete opposite of to the characters in the book personality wise
That was
>Most of the character development in the books are done in the minds of the characters reflecting on the past and current events
All of King's books do that and I can't fricking stand it.
IT is a little better in the respect but yeah he leans on it pretty heavily. Introspection is good but for God's sake it's only 1/3 of the ways you could communicate character development
IT was the worst with it because we have whole chapters of nothing but character intetspection only for said character to die at the end of the chapter.
Cujo was 3/4 that and 1/8 Cujo's wholesome non-rabid adventures and 1/8 muh cereal is making kids puke blood, oh wait it's just the food coloring making them sick lol, whew
How is that bad character development? Yes, people think about their actions, do you not? What are you, a Black person?
Every character does it and they do it in the same voice and it gets fricking annoying after the first time.
NTA, but if you read the Shining and think about character interactions, you realize that 90% of development occurs in the minds of each character and these characters barely interact with eachother, nor do they DO anything.
They're not "thinking about their actions" so much as exposition dumping their stream of consciousness. At times this is compelling but if you were to adapt it to film 1 to 1, it would be absurdly dry and boring
Read more King. Almost any character that appears will most likely be lost in introspective Lala Land while the vampire/drider/ghost/rabid dog/whatever is about to pounce. Any character. A random security guard who appears only in one scene just to die at the end? You better believe 90% of the chapter is Gary the Guard stream of consciousness-posting while performing routine duties until suddenly and horrifically dying to the monster.
Cujo is way worse
Yeah it's literally not scary at all. The dog is just so fricking friendly and any time it's "attacking" the characters it's painfully obvious that it's just licking them.
>Oh is that right? It's a very personal work for you, is it? You have some suggestions for the script, do you? You have to the count of five to get the frick out of my office and I promise to keep the pedophilia only subtextual.
Ahahahaha consumer-grade stable diffusion is gold for helping lazy yet funny anons express themselves. MS paint for our dystopian burgerpunk reality.
Good luck, we’re all counting on you.
>another angry digital """art""" chink
lol
Reread it
kubric's the shining is not very scary, the filmography is just good
the book is significantly better
You are probably the first person to every say the shining book is better.
It was crap
the book is way better
the film has no "descent into madness", jack nicholson is totally unbelievable for the first half of the film as a sane ex-alcoholic. Kubric's shining has a lot of great scenes, great acting and filming, great setpieces, but the overall story and writing falls flat. There's not enough time spent in the movie developing the characters, everyone's just fricking crazy and the kid just does some weird voice, and Shelly Duvall seems actually traumatized.
The novel has time for actual character development, side characters, missing scenes like the topiary animals, more of a full third act, etc. It has the many advantages in writing and characters that almost all books have over their adaptations.
Go to bed, Steve
you know I'm right
or you don't, because you haven't read it
I know you're a homo
>the film has no "descent into madness"
Nor does the book. Jack literally flips between psychotic monster and introspective ex-drunk on a dime constantly in the book.
>jack nicholson is totally unbelievable for the first half of the film as a sane ex-alcoholic
He's absolutely believable as a man who's just barely concealing a deep seeded rage, as he is in the books.
>There's not enough time spent in the movie developing the characters
Most of the character development in the books are done in the minds of the characters reflecting on the past and current events. This plays poorly in a movie. Do you really want a 10 minute scene of Nicholson narrating his rock bottom drunk story while patching a roof?
>everyone's just fricking crazy and the kid just does some weird voice
No, just Jack, as he is in the books. Danny's voice changes to an "adult" voice in the books too while he's speaking as his future self. Turns out this is silly on screen, who knew?
>missing scenes like the topiary animals
Good, that scene is moronic. Especially Dick's fight with it towards the end
>It has the many advantages in writing and characters that almost all books have over their adaptations.
Such is the nature of adaptation
because Jack was a self insert in the novel which is why King redeemed him in the end with the sacrifice, whereas Kubrick portrayed him as an irredeemable psycho who freezes to death trying to murder his family lol.
Tldr: Kubrick shits on King for almost 3 hours
If only mid-2010s sewer gangbang and drider threads could see us now.
Best threads ever
People act like the book is SOOO much different from the movie but the reality is that the only significant difference is that scatman crothers dies in the movie but not in the book. Oh and the hotel blows up. Last 30 pages are the only real tangible difference
Book had moronic the moronic hedge animal attack too.
True, I sorta figured the hedge maze was the movie's substitution for that scene. Especially how Jack is fixated on the diorama of the same maze reminded me of him seeing the hedge animals move and hiding that info from his family.
Idk to me it just seemed like Kubrick cut out most of the moronic shit. It's a little too bad that he didn't find a way to naturally integrate the hit and run or the kid jack turned into a moron in into the movie tho
>True, I sorta figured the hedge maze was the movie's substitution for that scene. Especially how Jack is fixated on the diorama of the same maze reminded me of him seeing the hedge animals move and hiding that info from his family.
If Stephen King could get over himself, he'd appreciate the movie playing with something like that in interesting news ways.
Paraphrasing someone else
>if I didn't want to be scared by a pedophile I'd read a stephen king book
thoughts on this analysis?
the guy might have a point considering that King is a libtard and Kubrick is a...
Having watched Storm of the Century and Rose Red recently, I'll say his approved adaptations have very comfy first acts.
Because the movie is more well-remembered than his dimestore schlock
/thread.
King is a hack and Kubrick made something better and more well remembered than his schlock. He will seethe eternally as a result
It was better than his book.
King is a fricking cokehead loser and hates to be reminded that his stories can only be good if someone comes along scrubs all of his most moronic ideas out of them.