Paparazzi photo of Jack Nicholson caught offguard in public.

[Don Jacob]

actually i own it on vhs and dvd. lol. i like the movie. but my point is. it's not half the film as pulp fiction.

you're basing all of your info on personal OPINIONS

while i'm basing mine on statistics and General/average Opinions.

from variety magazine off rottentomatoes.com

With everything to work with, director Stanley Kubrick has teamed with jumpy Jack Nicholson to destroy all that was so terrifying about Stephen King's bestseller.
In his book, King took a fundamental horror formula - an innocent family marooned in an evil dwelling with a grim history - and built layers of ingenious terror upon it. The father is gradually possessed by the demonic, desolate hotel.

With dad going mad, the only protection mother and child have is the boy's clairvoyance - his 'shining' - which allows him an innocent understanding and some ability to outmaneuver the devils. But Kubrick sees things his own way, throwing 90% of King's creation out.

The crazier Nicholson gets, the more idiotic he looks. Shelley Duvall transforms the warm sympathetic wife of the book into a simpering, semi-retarded hysteric.

[Version reviewed ran 146 mins. Kubrick cut pic soon after its premiere.]

(Color) Available on VHS, DVD. Extract of a review from 1980. Running time: 142 MIN.
 



Variety is striving to present the most thorough review database. To report inaccuracies in review credits, please click here. We do not currently list below-the-line credits, although we hope to include them in the future. Please note we may not respond to every suggestion. Your assistance is appreciated.


and another 


The trappings are brilliant, but Kubrick ultimately loses the essence of the source material — and he's too good to expect anything less.


that is the common complaint by more than most reviewers and even the original writer.  the source material was good but the interpretation by kubrick wasn't as great.  the strength of the film is the style and the production value (the music by bela bartok, the visuals, ect.) that's what makes this film a film, not the screenplay, not the writing.  and even if you consider that GREAT it still PALES IN COMPARISON to pulp fiction, which is one of the greatest screenplays and most well written movies of all time.


stop trying to argue this point, this is like saying steve nash is a better scorer than kobe bryant. no.

[hisairness]

The general consensus amongst film professors, film critics, film lovers, and average film fans is that Tarantino's screenplay is better in it's "Original Screenplay" category than the Shining is in it's "Adapted Screenplay" category. 

Really? Because every film professor I've spoken with (and I've taken many film courses) has said that Kubrick owns Tarantino and that "Pulp Fiction" is great, but overrated. I honestly believe "The Shining" would get the nod over "Pulp Ficiton" in almost ANY film classroom in America...PeACe

How do you find the time to take many film courses when you have to lug Kobe's jock around all day?

BTW, a film course doesn't mean you watching "Inside the Actor's Studio" on Bravo.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

actually i own it on vhs and dvd. lol. i like the movie. but my point is. it's not half the film as pulp fiction.

you're basing all of your info on personal OPINIONS

while i'm basing mine on statistics and General/average Opinions.

from variety magazine off rottentomatoes.com

With everything to work with, director Stanley Kubrick has teamed with jumpy Jack Nicholson to destroy all that was so terrifying about Stephen King's bestseller.
In his book, King took a fundamental horror formula - an innocent family marooned in an evil dwelling with a grim history - and built layers of ingenious terror upon it. The father is gradually possessed by the demonic, desolate hotel.

With dad going mad, the only protection mother and child have is the boy's clairvoyance - his 'shining' - which allows him an innocent understanding and some ability to outmaneuver the devils. But Kubrick sees things his own way, throwing 90% of King's creation out.

The crazier Nicholson gets, the more idiotic he looks. Shelley Duvall transforms the warm sympathetic wife of the book into a simpering, semi-retarded hysteric.

[Version reviewed ran 146 mins. Kubrick cut pic soon after its premiere.]

(Color) Available on VHS, DVD. Extract of a review from 1980. Running time: 142 MIN.
 



Variety is striving to present the most thorough review database. To report inaccuracies in review credits, please click here. We do not currently list below-the-line credits, although we hope to include them in the future. Please note we may not respond to every suggestion. Your assistance is appreciated.


and another 


The trappings are brilliant, but Kubrick ultimately loses the essence of the source material — and he's too good to expect anything less.


that is the common complaint by more than most reviewers and even the original writer.  the source material was good but the interpretation by kubrick wasn't as great.  the strength of the film is the style and the production value (the music by bela bartok, the visuals, ect.) that's what makes this film a film, not the screenplay, not the writing.  and even if you consider that GREAT it still PALES IN COMPARISON to pulp fiction, which is one of the greatest screenplays and most well written movies of all time.


stop trying to argue this point, this is like saying steve nash is a better scorer than kobe bryant. no.

To doucherag who doesn't understand opinions,

"The Shining" is considered a top 100 film by anyone who knows anything about films. Any list without "The Shining" is a joke. Now, you are somehow tryna make it seem like "The Shining" isn't a top-notch classic. For that, you should bang your head on the wall like this ...You can find bad reviews for ANY film, rag. Your punkass even uses Rottentomatoes to try and discredit "The Shining" when it got an 85%. I can do the same thing with "Pulp Fiction"...


There's cleverness at work...but Tarantino’s 154-minute film rambles with nihilist fantasy and pop in-jokes.
-Thomas Delapa, BOULDER WEEKLY

This fictional world, though rendered imaginatively, can't sustain the movie
-Marc Vincenti, Palo Alto Weekly


You see? Bad reviews, and it's not even a horror film, rag...You obviously don't know shit about "The Shining", considering I had to point out to you that Stephen King was against it. Then you all of a sudden tried using that in this argument, LOL. The point is, Stephen King acknowledged that it was great as a film, he just didn't believe the story stayed true to his novel, which takes nothing away from its cinematography...Please understand that you're just being a doucherag again by refusing to accept others opinions...Thank you.

[Don Jacob]

To doucherag who doesn't understand opinions,

"The Shining" is considered a top 100 film by anyone who knows anything about films. Any list without "The Shining" is a joke. Now, you are somehow tryna make it seem like "The Shining" isn't a top-notch classic. For that, you should bang your head on the wall like this ...You can find bad reviews for ANY film, rag. Your punkass even uses Rottentomatoes to try and discredit "The Shining" when it got an 85%. I can do the same thing with "Pulp Fiction"...

i do understand opinions. i understand that in your opinion you think the shining is better than pulp fiction. however, institutions and film experts disagree with you right and left. i couldn't find a single list that supported your claim. The Academy and the American Film Institute, agree that pulp fiction is the superior film. Rotten tomatoes' survey has pulp fiction at 96% . IMDB has pulp  fiction at #5. ect. ect.

you're the one who doesn't understand opinons here , your opinion is one of the 4% who doesn't like pulp fiction. i like both films and i can say with an unbias heart that pulp fiction is far superior film. at the end of the day your opinion is bias and has no support, and my opinion is unbias and is supported by almost every film instituion.

You obviously don't know shit about "The Shining", considering I had to point out to you that Stephen King was against it. .

just because i don't know trivial facts about the film doesn't mean i don't know the film, could you tell me who did the score for the film without looking it up, probably not, but this isn't a debate about who knows more trivia about the two movies at hand it's a debate about quality. and at the end of the day pulp fiction was the better written film, with better actors, better editing, and equally great directing. why would you help my argument by adding that stephen king didn't like the writing.lol. anyways without that there are many film reviewers who commonly discredit kubrick and his other writer here. sorry nik but pulp fiction slays the shining's screenplay. and like 95% of almost every other film.

The point is, Stephen King acknowledged that it was great as a film, he just didn't believe the story stayed true to his novel, which takes nothing away from its cinematography...Please understand that you're just being a doucherag again by refusing to accept others opinions...Thank you

like i said what made the shining the shining was the exercise in production and style. the blood running down the hall, the heavy breathing in the cold, the garden maze and the bela bartok score with the palindromes ect. ect.  however the common complaint about the film was the writing. even steph king agreed with that notion.


and i'm not rejecting your opinion . you're the one guilty of that, you're not accepting the opinions of hundreds of critics, experts, and most of this baord. like i said your opinion is your opinion but it's an opinion only recorded by you and trauma.

[Killa Cam]

pulp fiction>the shining

you scared b

[Don Jacob]

pulp fiction>the shining

you scared b

english mother fucker do you speak it?!

[Killa Cam]

pulp fiction>the shining

you scared b

english mother fucker do you speak it?!

killa!

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

To doucherag who doesn't understand opinions,

"The Shining" is considered a top 100 film by anyone who knows anything about films. Any list without "The Shining" is a joke. Now, you are somehow tryna make it seem like "The Shining" isn't a top-notch classic. For that, you should bang your head on the wall like this ...You can find bad reviews for ANY film, rag. Your punkass even uses Rottentomatoes to try and discredit "The Shining" when it got an 85%. I can do the same thing with "Pulp Fiction"...

i do understand opinions. i understand that in your opinion you think the shining is better than pulp fiction. however, institutions and film experts disagree with you right and left. i couldn't find a single list that supported your claim. The Academy and the American Film Institute, agree that pulp fiction is the superior film. Rotten tomatoes' survey has pulp fiction at 96% . IMDB has pulp  fiction at #5. ect. ect.

you're the one who doesn't understand opinons here , your opinion is one of the 4% who doesn't like pulp fiction. i like both films and i can say with an unbias heart that pulp fiction is far superior film. at the end of the day your opinion is bias and has no support, and my opinion is unbias and is supported by almost every film instituion.

You obviously don't know shit about "The Shining", considering I had to point out to you that Stephen King was against it. .

just because i don't know trivial facts about the film doesn't mean i don't know the film, could you tell me who did the score for the film without looking it up, probably not, but this isn't a debate about who knows more trivia about the two movies at hand it's a debate about quality. and at the end of the day pulp fiction was the better written film, with better actors, better editing, and equally great directing. why would you help my argument by adding that stephen king didn't like the writing.lol. anyways without that there are many film reviewers who commonly discredit kubrick and his other writer here. sorry nik but pulp fiction slays the shining's screenplay. and like 95% of almost every other film.

The point is, Stephen King acknowledged that it was great as a film, he just didn't believe the story stayed true to his novel, which takes nothing away from its cinematography...Please understand that you're just being a doucherag again by refusing to accept others opinions...Thank you

like i said what made the shining the shining was the exercise in production and style. the blood running down the hall, the heavy breathing in the cold, the garden maze and the bela bartok score with the palindromes ect. ect.  however the common complaint about the film was the writing. even steph king agreed with that notion.


and i'm not rejecting your opinion . you're the one guilty of that, you're not accepting the opinions of hundreds of critics, experts, and most of this baord. like i said your opinion is your opinion but it's an opinion only recorded by you and trauma.

It's like your brain can't absorb what I type...like I said, "Pulp Fiction" is a cult film. It has a huger following and higher ratings anywhere you check because of that. Being a music head, you should know that popularity does not equal quality...Stephen King never complained about the writing, he didn't like the way Kubrick envisioned his story, he didn't think it captured King's intent...The blood in the hall, the garden maze, the score, all the shit you said "made it"...Those are all things King was against....AGAIN, has nothing to do with the cinematography. Kubrick was PRAISED for his screenplay and directing in "The Shining"...Only your ass is tryna make it seem like "The Shining" ISNT a classic...PeACe

[Fuck Your Existence]

BTW, a film course doesn't mean you watching "Inside the Actor's Studio" on Bravo.

lol

[Don Jacob]

"Pulp Fiction" is a cult film. It has a huger following and higher ratings anywhere you check because of that

.

NIK pulp fiction was generating HUGE buzz in Cannes, before it was even shown to mass audiences in the united states. critics were going ga ga over the film before it got a cult following. it was getting all sorts of huge praise and awards BEFORE it had a cult following. your argument here is null and void>.....NEXT.

Being a music head, you should know that popularity does not equal quality...

are you daring to say that Pulp Fiction isn't a quality piece of work? you're argument here is null and void....NEXT

Stephen King never complained about the writing, he didn't like the way Kubrick envisioned his story, he didn't think it captured King's intent...

lol EXACTLY even the writer didn't agree with the direction of the film. like i said there are people who say the book>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Film.  this along with the fact that The shining is criticized for it' screenplay  give pulp fiction the edge when talking about screenplays and writing. many more professionals say more positive things about pulp fiction's screenplay/writing/dialouge than they do about the shinings..

Pulp Fiction>The shining

your argument here is null and viod.....NEXT

The blood in the hall, the garden maze, the score, all the shit you said "made it"...Those are all things King was against....AGAIN, has nothing to do with the cinematography.

lol so the "lighting" of the film is what puts the shining over pulp fiction, what are you trying to say. again like i said what makes the shining the shining is the production values and the exercise in style.

your argument here is null and void ....NEXT

Kubrick was PRAISED for his screenplay and directing in "The Shining"...

by who? lol was he nominated for anything for the screenplay? lol and like i said Tarintino is more praised for his directing than kubrick was for this film.....nothing about the shining puts it above pulp fiction.

your argument here is null and void....NEXT

Only your ass is tryna make it seem like "The Shining" ISNT a classic...PeACe

when did i ever say it wasn't a classic.....your argument here is null and void......OWNED

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

"Pulp Fiction" is a cult film. It has a huger following and higher ratings anywhere you check because of that

.

NIK pulp fiction was generating HUGE buzz in Cannes, before it was even shown to mass audiences in the united states. critics were going ga ga over the film before it got a cult following. it was getting all sorts of huge praise and awards BEFORE it had a cult following. your argument here is null and void>.....NEXT.

None of my arguments are "null", Jake...you're just a stubborn dickhead who can't comprehend, that's all. Cult films have huge followings. Are you saying that all the high ratings on IMDB, Rottentomatoes, all its hype etc. has no connection with its cult status? Your brain=null.

Being a music head, you should know that popularity does not equal quality...

are you daring to say that Pulp Fiction isn't a quality piece of work? you're argument here is null and void....NEXT

WOW. Where did I say that. Are you seriously braindead? I called "Pulp Fiction" great NUMEROUS times in this thread. All I was pointing out to your slow ass was that just because "Pulp Fiction" has a huger following doesn't neccessarily make it better. Learn how to understand shit, then maybe you wont butt heads with people as often...

Stephen King never complained about the writing, he didn't like the way Kubrick envisioned his story, he didn't think it captured King's intent...

lol EXACTLY even the writer didn't agree with the direction of the film. like i said there are people who say the book>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Film.  this along with the fact that The shining is criticized for it' screenplay  give pulp fiction the edge when talking about screenplays and writing. many more professionals say more positive things about pulp fiction's screenplay/writing/dialouge than they do about the shinings..Pulp Fiction>The shining

your argument here is null and viod.....NEXT

AGAIN, SLOW GUY. The knock on "The Shining" was NOT its screenplay. The knock was that it didnt stay true to the book. STILL, as a film of its own, it's STILL considered amazing. What don't you get here? Stephen King produced his own version in 1997, but it's STILL not rated NEARLY as high as Kubricks AS A FILM.

The blood in the hall, the garden maze, the score, all the shit you said "made it"...Those are all things King was against....AGAIN, has nothing to do with the cinematography.

lol so the "lighting" of the film is what puts the shining over pulp fiction, what are you trying to say. again like i said what makes the shining the shining is the production values and the exercise in style.

your argument here is null and void ....NEXT

The lighting? What the hell? Do you even know what cinematography is? Holy shit man, just stop. You're OBVIOUSLY arguing for the sake of arguing.

Kubrick was PRAISED for his screenplay and directing in "The Shining"...

by who? lol was he nominated for anything for the screenplay? lol and like i said Tarintino is more praised for his directing than kubrick was for this film.....nothing about the shining puts it above pulp fiction.

your argument here is null and void....NEXT

WHAT DONT YOU GET ABOUT HORROR FILMS NOT BEING RESPECTED, ESPECIALLY IN THOSE DAYS?! Jeez, man... "Psycho" never got nominated, what a horrible film! Alfred Hitchcock is a joke! LMFAO@questioning who praised STANLEY KUBRICK for his screenwriting.

Only your ass is tryna make it seem like "The Shining" ISNT a classic...PeACe

when did i ever say it wasn't a classic.....your argument here is null and void......OWNED

You're the type of person that acts like one thing, and says another. Sorta like your hate/"love" relationship with the Lakers...PeACe

[Bay Area Jat]

u guys should check to see which movie is ranked higher on the AFI's top 100

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

u guys should check to see which movie is ranked higher on the AFI's top 100

Either way, this is a matter of OPINIONS. I'm willing to accept that Jake thinks "Pulp Fiction" is better. He's NOT willing to accept that I believe "The Shining" is better...It's obviously a matter of opinions, considering both films are accepted as classics. MOST horror fans will go with "The Shining"...Jake is just being a stubborn dickhead.

[Don Jacob]

None of my arguments are "null", Jake...you're just a stubborn dickhead who can't comprehend, that's all. Cult films have huge followings. Are you saying that all the high ratings on IMDB, Rottentomatoes, all its hype etc. has no connection with its cult status? Your brain=null.

IMDB maybe, but the main % on rotten tomatoes....no, those are reviews taken from when the movie first came out and didn't have a cult following yet. plus the hype came from BEFORE it was shown in mass theaters in AMERICA, so that's the point right there.

WOW. Where did I say that. Are you seriously braindead? I called "Pulp Fiction" great NUMEROUS times in this thread. All I was pointing out to your slow ass was that just because "Pulp Fiction" has a huger following doesn't neccessarily make it better. Learn how to understand shit, then maybe you wont butt heads with people as often...

then you should say that instead



[/quote]

AGAIN, SLOW GUY. The knock on "The Shining" was NOT its screenplay. The knock was that it didnt stay true to the book. STILL, as a film of its own, it's STILL considered amazing. What don't you get here? Stephen King produced his own version in 1997, but it's STILL not rated NEARLY as high as Kubricks AS A FILM.

alot of reviews knock that, and even if they don't that's not the strength of the shining.  and still pulp fiction is the better movie in this category, it's like saying steve fracis is a better scorer than kobe.

The lighting? What the hell? Do you even know what cinematography is? Holy shit man, just stop. You're OBVIOUSLY arguing for the sake of arguing.

Cinematography (from Greek: kinesis (movement) and grapho (to record)), is the discipline of making lighting and camera choices when recording photographic images for the cinema.

WHAT DONT YOU GET ABOUT HORROR FILMS NOT BEING RESPECTED, ESPECIALLY IN THOSE DAYS?! Jeez, man... "Psycho" never got nominated, what a horrible film! Alfred Hitchcock is a joke! LMFAO@questioning who praised STANLEY KUBRICK for his screenwriting.

ouch nik....you shot yourself in the foot for this

psycho was nominated for many academy awards. best director, best black and white art direction, and best black and white cinematography, and best supporting actress. (off the top of my head). Janet leigh also won for best actress at the golden globes.

You're the type of person that acts like one thing, and says another. Sorta like your hate/"love" relationship with the Lakers...PeACe

lol now i hate the lakers....lol kobe hates the lakers more than "i do".

fact of the matter is this, i keep it real without letting my bias get in the way.  i love goodfellas , my favorite movie of all tiem, however.....citizen kane in all honesty is the better film even though i can't stand the fucker.
see? it's called having an unbias. it's what judges exercise


i like the shining, no shit it's a classic. however , pulp ficiton is a superior film.
end of story.

[Don Jacob]

u guys should check to see which movie is ranked higher on the AFI's top 100

the shining- non existant
pulp fiction- #95