|
Post by endo on Dec 16, 2011 19:29:26 GMT -5
Most people probably would pick the classic original film by Kubrick, but, it's interesting to note that Stephen King himself was not happy with the way Kubrick did the film. There was a lot of stuff in the novel either glossed over in his movie or left out completely.
The mini series on the other hand stayed more close to the novel, but the cast was horrible IMO, with the exception of Steven Weber as Jack. The hedge animals were there, more detail about the hotel and some of the people that stayed/died there.
I've read the novel several times and watched both versions of the film. I'd have to pick the original. No, it's not as close to the novel as the mini series is, but it is great and covers the gist of it. The mini series left me with more questions than anything, and the movie is just what it is, a classic horror story of a guy losing his mind in a hotel filled with ghosts. I have to go with the original.
|
|
|
Post by thom10 on Dec 16, 2011 20:29:31 GMT -5
Voted original just because some of it was filmed at Mt. Hood here in Oregon.
I don't remember much from the mini-series other than I didn't think it was as good as the first movie. I agree with Dave about the cast being sub-par too, but that's what you usually get with made for TV movies.
The "Here's Johnny" line is about as classic as it gets too.
|
|
|
Post by NDX on Dec 16, 2011 20:33:12 GMT -5
No question about it. The movie wins.
|
|
|
Post by leroy on Dec 17, 2011 8:35:27 GMT -5
i give the 1980 movie my vote as i haven't seen the mini series.
|
|
|
Post by livingdeadgirl on Dec 17, 2011 15:40:07 GMT -5
I was really excited when the mini series first came out, because I knew that the original movie was not to Stephen King's liking. I had high hopes that the mini series would be truer to the book. Well, it was...but I ended up not liking it nearly as much as the original movie.
I'd still watch the mini series if it was on TV, though.
|
|
|
Post by leangreen76 on Mar 31, 2013 4:45:59 GMT -5
Even though the re-make tv series was closer to the book I couldn't get over running around with a mallet and the annoying "tv kid" actor, and I use that term loosely, playing Danny. Original all the way for me.
That said as I'm now older I would give it another go to see if my opinion differs, and look at it with a fresh pair of eyes.
|
|
|
Post by endo on Mar 31, 2013 14:38:13 GMT -5
I'd definitely watch it again if it came on. Even though it's been a few years since I've seen it, I doubt that my opinion on the kid playing Danny will have changed much, lol. Annoying is a bit of an understatement in his case to me.
|
|
|
Post by gorepolice on Mar 31, 2013 19:40:45 GMT -5
Original all the way. Even if it's not as close to the book as it could be, there's no denying that it's still a classic film.
|
|
|
Post by endo on Apr 5, 2013 0:41:42 GMT -5
Well, for one in the original, you had Jack Nicholson. That role couldn't have been cast better IMO, and I don't think anyone could ever do it better than him. So, even with some inconsistencies with the book, this movie is great just from Nicholson's performance. As leangreen76 mentioned, in the mini series he had a mallet as a weapon, rather than an axe. That was true to the book as a lot of the people that stayed at the hotel played Roque, a game similar to Croquet. But it did look kind of silly, especially after so many years of seeing the original and him with an axe in that. I gave the mini series props for being much more faithful to the book in the small details, and a pretty big one with the hedge animals and no maze. But, in the end the original movie just kills it for me.
|
|
|
Post by gorepolice on Apr 5, 2013 0:51:28 GMT -5
As nice as it is to have things faithful to the original material, sometimes making changes can be a good thing. Not all things in print translate well to screen, and it seems Kubrick thought of that.
|
|
|
Post by Evil_Eric on Jan 29, 2015 14:43:10 GMT -5
really do i need to even comment on this witch versions are we talking here there is 3 1. the original (jack nicolson) 2. the 3 part mini seris 3. the remake i personaly liked the 3 part miniseris for tv follows the book closer
|
|
|
Post by endo on Jan 29, 2015 19:26:46 GMT -5
Only ones I know of are the original and the mini series. What's the other remake?
|
|
|
Post by Evil_Eric on Jan 31, 2015 2:05:28 GMT -5
i think i was mistaken your right there is only 2 my bad nothing worse than failing on this one
|
|
|
Post by endo on Jan 31, 2015 17:07:06 GMT -5
No worries, I thought there was one I didn't know about and was like where is it??
|
|
|
Post by zombozo on Jul 21, 2015 14:35:19 GMT -5
Most people probably would pick the classic original film by Kubrick, but, it's interesting to note that Stephen King himself was not happy with the way Kubrick did the film. There was a lot of stuff in the novel either glossed over in his movie or left out completely. The mini series on the other hand stayed more close to the novel, but the cast was horrible IMO, with the exception of Steven Weber as Jack. The hedge animals were there, more detail about the hotel and some of the people that stayed/died there. I've read the novel several times and watched both versions of the film. I'd have to pick the original. No, it's not as close to the novel as the mini series is, but it is great and covers the gist of it. The mini series left me with more questions than anything, and the movie is just what it is, a classic horror story of a guy losing his mind in a hotel filled with ghosts. I have to go with the original. Considering The Shining was my first Stephen King novel (and I've read it quite a few times since then), I kind of prefer the mini series to Kubrick's interpretation. I just like that the mini series stayed closer to the novel & didn't **** up any of the characters. Especially Wendy, who was really freaking awesome in the book but an absolute mess in the movie. Oh yeah, Kubrick's portrayal of the lead characters pissed me off completely ~ none of them even came close to giving justice to the novel's characters ~ and there were some really frightening scenes that were left out of the movie. Just... I know the acting was better in the case of Danny, but other than that I just can't enjoy Kubrick's version of the story because I keep comparing it to the novel. I think my least-favorite aspect of Kubrick's movie is the way he portrayed Jack & Wendy's relationship - in fact, the entire family dynamic. It just... it didn't really do justice to the original story. Plus, in the novel they were only five- or six-years out of college, definitely not middle-aged... So basically, as far as technical matters regarding film are regarded, Kubrick's is more outstanding. BUT I'll always like the mini-series best because I read the book first & was soooooo excited the first time I sat down to watch the movie... & then I just got sad when I realized how awfully it had deviated from the novel.
|
|