How good is that trailer? There are so many little things that make it work, from of course the shocking imagery itself, Wendy Carlos' music, the slow build up to the doors opening. One thing I never noticed until this time is that the image is slightly off centre, the lifts aren't right in the middle of the frame. I bring that up because this is a Stanley Kubrick film; the guy was such an obsessive perfectionist, he made sure that for Dr. Strangelove, the War Room table was a very precise shade of green felt (same as a poker table)... despite the fact that the film was in black & white! Thus having the camera a bit off centre is probably a very deliberate move in here, like the various tricks of the Overlook's internal architecture, it's a subtle way of getting our brains going "something's wrong here". Above all, this trailer gives you a solid idea of what the tone of the film is like, without giving any real story away.
I have to stress something though; whilst I admire the extraordinary effect of this film, I cannot condone what Kubrick put his cast and crew through to make it. Having his cast do absurd numbers of takes, effectively a long form psychological torture on them, to the point of genuine tears on set. I don't care how good it looks in the end, it in no way justifies that behaviour. Shelley Duvall damn near had a nervous breakdown, and at one point veteran character (and cartoon voice artist!) Scatman Crothers was just sobbing "Mr. Kubrick, what do you want?". If anyone other than someone with as much clout as Stanley Kubrick had did something like this, it would overshadow everything else about the film. So as such, though I still think it's a horror masterpiece, I do so with the important asterisk "No-one should make a film like that ever again!". Kubrick was in a lot of ways a genius filmmaker, but man was he also kind of an arsehole!
Phew, that was cathartic! If more people read this blog, probably going to get some hate mail for that last paragraph. To balance things out, let's discuss something I bought up in the opening paragraph; the matter of the different versions of this story, Stephen King novel vs. Stanley Kubrick film. Having experienced both, I'd say both are fine; some things work better in the book (like the characterisation of Wendy, more character beats, a thrilling climax), some work better in the film. Hard to say which is better; the film certainly has a massive reputation, although the book has been the gold standard by which most of King's other output has been judged for years. However, I will say that in his attempt to present his case that Kubrick missed the point of the story, King did himself no favours with the TV version of the story.
Now I will admit that it's been years since I saw this version, and I don't think I saw the whole thing in one sitting when it played on Channel 5 many a moon ago (I haven't seen any Channel 5 in yonks come to think of it), but I do recall being very not impressed. The fact is Mick Garris is not-even-close to a level of talent you could compare to Kubrick, he's more on the level of "vaguely point the camera in the right way, and make sure no-one flubs their lines". What's more, it includes quite a few details from the book not in the film... and immediately shows why the film left them out, such as the very silly looking walking topiary (being realised in late 90s TV CGI didn't help either). I might go back to this one at some point to give it a fair reappraisal at some point; maybe if I find a copy in time, one for next year's October Challenge. Whilst I'm at it, I really need to sit down and watch Room 237 in full too.
Back to the Kubrick film though, here are a few little extra clips to end with. First, check out this remarkable recreation of various moments of the film for a More 4 screening.
That is uncanny how well some bits are done! Next, here's a newer trailer for the film the BFI made for a rerelease from a couple of years ago.
Here's a fun video by Super Eyepatch Wolf, a nice little analysis of the film. His whole channel is great, I have a solid anime viewing list thanks to it now.
A curio that turned up recently; about an hour and a half of raw footage shot for a Japanese documentary that goes behind the scenes of the film. Curiously, this wasn't made by a film journalist; the guy behind it, Junichi Yaoi was apparently a UFO buff, and this was an excuse for him to get to talk to Kubrick about the ending to 2001! Also, you get a nice glimpse of Elstree during the 80s!
Finally, have the bizarre act of cinematic graffiti that is... The Chickening!
1 comment:
On Kubrick's attention to detail and how he uses it to make everything seem slightly off in the movie: one of the things which struck me about Room 237 is that a lot of the more off-the-wall theories about The Shining (and Kubrick's movies in general) seem to be based on this kind of basic misunderstanding of cinematic technique.
You have people who are vaguely aware that Kubrick set everything up in his movies with a very deliberate purpose, but they work off the assumption that this was always a purpose based on communicating a narrative or an idea - they don't seem to get that sometimes the purpose is solely aesthetic, to set up a particular atmosphere or mood, so they convince themselves that there must be something more to it than that and end up with Moon landing conspiracy theories.
Post a Comment