The Shining

Typical Stanley Kubrick. There is not a single moment in this film that is not part of the elaborate mosaic of a psychological labyrinth. Everything is perfectly timed and fluid, with the camera moving most of the time at right angles and in parallel with the walls of the stereotypical hotel. There isn’t a single note in the music that isn't necessary. It’s creative and musical minimalism of the coarsest grain, perfectly enhancing the oppressive feeling of the empty setting in which the story takes place. We don’t just watch Jack Nicholson as a movie character, but we become him thanks to Kubrick’s visually naturalistic directorial approach. As in Nicholson’s character, nervousness builds up within us until we fear what we would be capable of if we were in his shoes. It’s almost impossible to give The Shining the “horror” label, which belongs to ordinary horror movies for genre entertainment. And though it’s a shame that its coldness and precise calculation don’t allow me to experience the story of the main characters in any way different from what Kubrick intended, I’m giving The Shining a full five-star rating. I respect the depersonalised path that Kubrick took, because I'll find something new in this madness with every viewing. (05.06.2002)

The excellent minimalist soundtrack couldn't be better, and some scenes, especially the bathroom scene and the boy's vision of dismembered children in the hotel corridor, are truly horrifying, but I still have some reservations. Jack Nicholson, as excellent as he is, overacts disgustingly in some scenes; if that's the director's intention, I didn't quite get it. And Shelley Duvall, as she runs around the hotel with a knife in her hand, tries to play scared, but you can see in her face that she's not very good at it. But these are just tiny blemishes on the beauty of the whole. (11.11.2003)

The only horror film in the filmography of the great Stanley Kubrick. It might sound like a paradox, but I prefer other films of his. Regardless, The Shining is extraordinarily well made. (25.08.2007)

I may be strange, but I tried to read King's book three times, and I always put it down about 100 pages. I didn't like it. But the film immediately got to me through its suggestive atmosphere of creeping terror, in which Jack Nicholson's masterful performance plays a big part. He plays Jack Torrance like a harp, first quietly with all the dark undertones, and then suddenly he starts to yank on all the strings. Jack's transformation into a monster is gradual, and he's basically "making" this film. Kubrick admirably managed to create fear without darkness and cramped spaces. The fear of The Shining is an airy, light, spacious fear... And that's absolutely unique. The film also feels authentic because the evil seems to have no source – is it "from inside" Jack, or is it evil embodied in the genius loci? Is Jack's madness really just the work of his bruised psyche? The viewer is stuck in the same uncertainty as the main heroes of the film - it is difficult to determine the distribution of forces between reality and the supernatural. But everything only leads to one thing... REDRUM... did it also give you goose bumps? (30.01.2004)

Redrum. Redrum. Redrum. The main asset of this movie is neither Nicholson, nor Kubrick’s precise directing, but the flawless atmosphere in the mountain top hotel. Kubrick’s loose adaptation of King’s novel is attractive due to it being actually only very loosely based on the motifs in one of King’s best stories and is not a mere idealess “one to one" adaptation (however much I may think that Torrance’s fall was far too sudden in comparison with the gradual descent in the book). redruM! (30.01.2007)

Stanley Kubrick met with horror for the first and last time in 1980 to elevate the genre to slightly different dimensions, creating a valuable piece and one of his more digestible works. Nicholson's devilish one-man show and the musical accompaniment composed of disharmonies and squeaky sounds heavily contributed to this, maintaining an unpleasant feeling of tension throughout. However, the result somewhat pales in comparison to King's brilliant source material, possibly due to inadequate psychological groundwork. 70% (31.03.2006)

I'm sure I'd have liked it a lot more if I didn't have to watch it in two parts (after about an hour of watching it, my roommate couldn't take it and we had to turn it off and put on HIMYM); the next day the atmosphere was gone, so I kind of thought about it, rolled my eyes, and gave it 5 stars. But maybe it wasn't really there after all, it just ended in kind of a lackluster way, and at the exact moment the black guy called, I told myself he was going to go there and get slaughtered. Yup, and that’s exactly how it turned out... I would have given it the 4 stars for the psycho music, for Jack, who at the beginning looked like he was from the Bohnice Insane Asylum, and for that bloody hallway, but as I mentioned I closed one eye (and plugged up one nostril, but you don't need to know that) and was giving it the damn 5 stars. I guess it's because I live over a cat cemetery. Nah – I opened my eyes, looked again, and it's still just 4 stars. (19.01.2011)

A classic of the horror genre that hasn't aged and is an example of the director's creative approach to the literary source material. Kubrick had an exceptional talent for creating impressive visuals and working with actors, which, in combination with the screenplay, created a disturbing work with an atmosphere that is rarely seen in the genre today. Scenes such as the wildly moving toy car on the red carpet or the chase in the garden maze are etched in my memory forever. This was one of Jack Nicholson's best roles, perfectly portraying the gradual breakdown of the main character's personality. His loss of self-confidence as the family provider is gradually replaced by increasingly aggressive dominance, culminating in a horrifying finale. The final camera shot of the framed photograph on the wall is a clever touch that will please horror fans. The scenery of the monumental hotel complex set in an isolated mountain environment also plays an irreplaceable role. Overall impression: 95%. Interestingly, the author of the book, Stephen King, was not completely satisfied with the tone of this film, despite it being one of the best adaptations of his work. It seems that he was disappointed that he did not receive his usual minor role. (04.12.2007)

Incredibly chilling. When you watch one of today’s would-be horrors, you can’t not be shocked at what’s happened. Fear doesn’t come from cheap surprises, but from the stifling atmosphere that pushes the hero over the brink of madness. Is it the filmmakers or the viewers who are to blame? The drive-bys on the tricycle and the visit to room no. 237 are terrifying in their very essence (loneliness, vulnerability) and not because a ghoul jumps out at you. Nicholson is great, a little weird right from the beginning, but still sufficiently natural. The wife in her simplicity is “normal" most of the time, but visually looks very strange, to say the least. Unlike in the book, Danny is demoted from the main role to child medium full of fear, but paradoxically it didn’t bother me much. It works perfectly in Kubrick’s hands. The blood in the elevator is super, the finale in the maze excellently executed. Maybe better than with the boiler. (10.05.2016)

This is quite nice. However, I don't feel like Jack has done his best here. Something missing from his highlights from The Witches of Eastwick or Wolf. On the other hand, King adaptations can be absolute hell. And this one got a great Simpsons parody, and it's got the name of the anointed one inscribed in the crest. (02.04.2013)

I love it when a film takes me away for two hours and lets me wander in an unpredictable labyrinth of cinephile perfection, and in the end exhausts and decimates me emotionally and psychically. The Shining is the only film in my life that can fully do that several times. It’s no wonder that King doesn’t like this masterpiece, Kubrick is a visionary of such style that he playfully surpasses the narrative value and power of an otherwise great book, and he does it “only” with carefully built interiors and a minimalist staging of a space that is arranged in detail and expressively connected to the different perspectives of the three protagonists. What is reality and what is fantasy? Is the deranged Jack an instigator or an unfortunate victim? What do all those carefully constructed events represent and symbolise? Kubrick gives clues, ambiguously and cunningly, to constantly draw the viewer into a seemingly depersonalised world and at the same time force them to experience the simple story of the characters. The Shining is an incredibly complex product by a genius who likes to hide and wrap meanings, but also knows how to narrate with the intensity of a monsoon storm and entertain the viewer with an iconic direction of the scenes and the actors, who are exposed to the bone – Jack Nicholson delivers what’s probably his most amazing performance and he actually carries most of the film’s meaning. I strongly recommend to watch the shorter, 114 minute version, the longer one has redundant scenes that explain things for the dumber part of the audience and lack filmmaking zest. (17.11.2018)

The way Kubrick works with the story, the tension... The way he can create atmosphere – the way he works with the music, the setting, the actors – it's a joy to watch someone do something they're so damn good at. The Shining is a "horror film" (I'd be ashamed to give The Shining the slavish label of mere horror, hence the quotation marks :)) made in a timeless way that adds authenticity to an already terrifying story and, thanks to some truly memorable scenes, places it quite rightly at the top of its genre. --- Little pigs, little pigs, let me come in. --- (04.02.2010)