If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Review of Stephen King's Shining sequel Doctor Sleep. M-O-O-N, that spells redrum   (nydailynews.com) divider line 86
    More: Scary, Doctor Sleep, book reviews, American Communist Party, New England town, Danny Torrance, Billy Crystal, Dan  
•       •       •

4766 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 17 Sep 2013 at 1:24 AM (52 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



86 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-17 01:40:46 AM
Meh, I'll wait until Spielberg directs the movie version in memory of Kubrick.
 
2013-09-17 01:42:17 AM
It will be so awesome when hollywood ruins it!
 
2013-09-17 02:06:48 AM
Will Jack Nicholson be in this one too? Will Kuberick be risen from the dead solely to give the movie tie in the care it needs to become entertaining?
 
2013-09-17 02:16:29 AM
I'm not going to read a review for fear of spoilers. I will say this: Stephen King has a very scary upper lip.
 
2013-09-17 02:45:07 AM
I must read this, that said, I liked Kubrick's version of The Shining.
 
2013-09-17 03:03:53 AM
There actually is a spoiler in that review with no warning.
 
2013-09-17 03:06:17 AM
Been rereading King lately.
Gotten through The Stand, The Tommyknockers and now on The Dead Zone.
So... relevant to my interests.

/Couldn't figure out why things seemed to be missing from The Stand
//Realized I have the original cut version.
///M-O-O-N that spells longer version is better.
 
2013-09-17 03:47:44 AM
I'm an alcoholic, and I tend to well have odd mood swings, so I was trying to insist the girl read The Shining so, you know, she would know where I was coming from.

No really, I thought this was a good idea.
 
2013-09-17 04:28:58 AM
It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

Stephen King looks bizarrely like my dead uncle - John Edwards who dropped dead from a ruptured berry anuerism back in 2003.
 
2013-09-17 04:30:28 AM

coolpapabell: There actually is a spoiler in that review with no warning.


Yeah I thought that. It seems that for a book like that it would be built around suspense, but that comment kinda gives away the ending.
 
2013-09-17 05:59:27 AM

kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.


You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.
 
2013-09-17 06:11:00 AM

karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.


The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.
 
2013-09-17 06:40:26 AM

karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.


Yeah.  It took him a good chunk of the book to start going crazy.  The movie has him losing it almost immediately.
 
2013-09-17 06:43:29 AM

robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.


Oh you...
 
2013-09-17 06:45:08 AM

robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.


It was closer to the book. I wouldn't say it was better.
 
2013-09-17 06:47:40 AM

Abacus9: robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.

It was closer to the book. I wouldn't say it was better.


If you replaced Jack Nicholson with some random dude, it wouldn't be anywhere near as beloved. I think most of the praise is from Nicholson/Kurbrick polesmoking.

The tv movie was way, way closer to the book. King himself has disavowed the original movie numerous times.
 
2013-09-17 06:54:24 AM

robohobo: The tv movie was way, way closer to the book. King himself has disavowed the original movie numerous times.


That doesn't make it a better film. The movie version of Jaws strays from the book a lot and is far superior. In  The Shining miniseries Jack had more time to go crazy because it was well, a miniseries. The movie was better in every other way.
 
2013-09-17 06:55:54 AM

robohobo: Abacus9: robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.

It was closer to the book. I wouldn't say it was better.

If you replaced Jack Nicholson with some random dude, it wouldn't be anywhere near as beloved. I think most of the praise is from Nicholson/Kurbrick polesmoking.

The tv movie was way, way closer to the book. King himself has disavowed the original movie numerous times.


I think the movie is a fine movie, impeccably made (no surprise from Kubrick).  I don't think it's as good as many people make it out to be.  People forget the initial reception was pretty lukewarm (I remember my own Seattle Times giving it, I think, 2 stars out of 4).  It's worn pretty well over time, and a lot of that initial reception may have been disappointment from comparisons with the book, but still.  I agree Nicholson is a huge part of the continuing nostalgia.

But having said all of that, there's really no comparison to the TV movie.  The TV movie may be closer to the book in terms of story points, but that doesn't make it a better film - Kubrick's film is a clear A-list type of movie, whereas the TV movie is, well, it's a TV movie.  Campy acting, low production values, laughable special effects - ok for a TV viewing on a boring night but nary a scare to be found, and certainly not up to the quality of the film adaptation.

Honestly, I think the book is better than both of them, and I'm looking forward to reading this new one.  Kubrick left a lot of good cinematic ideas out of his movie for no apparent good reason.  Contrast with, say, Jaws, which also differed greatly from the book but all for the better.  The Shining could have been an even better movie if it had more closely followed the tone and plot points of the book.
 
2013-09-17 07:00:27 AM

karmachameleon: robohobo: Abacus9: robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.

It was closer to the book. I wouldn't say it was better.

If you replaced Jack Nicholson with some random dude, it wouldn't be anywhere near as beloved. I think most of the praise is from Nicholson/Kurbrick polesmoking.

The tv movie was way, way closer to the book. King himself has disavowed the original movie numerous times.

I think the movie is a fine movie, impeccably made (no surprise from Kubrick).  I don't think it's as good as many people make it out to be.  People forget the initial reception was pretty lukewarm (I remember my own Seattle Times giving it, I think, 2 stars out of 4).  It's worn pretty well over time, and a lot of that initial reception may have been disappointment from comparisons with the book, but still.  I agree Nicholson is a huge part of the continuing nostalgia.

But having said all of that, there's really no comparison to the TV movie.  The TV movie may be closer to the book in terms of story points, but that doesn't make it a better film - Kubrick's film is a clear A-list type of movie, whereas the TV movie is, well, it's a TV movie.  Campy acting, low production values, laughable special effects - ok for a TV viewing on a boring night but nary a scare to be found, and certainly not up to the quality of the film adaptation.

Honestly, I think the book is better than both of them, and I'm looking forward to reading this new one.  Kubrick left a lot of good cinematic ideas out of his movie for no apparent good reason.  Contrast with, say, Jaws, which also differed greatly from the book but all for the better.  The Shining could have been an even better movie if it had more closely fo ...


I've always wanted a book concerning Dick Hallorann in between IT and The Shining. Although he didn't seem more farked up in The Shining, so he probably had a relatively normal night. Hell, I really just want another IT book. And double hell, I'd be perfectly happy with a book filling in the days of the Losers Club during that summer of 58. Charming stuff.
 
2013-09-17 07:10:27 AM

robohobo: I've always wanted a book concerning Dick Hallorann in between IT and The Shining. Although he didn't seem more farked up in The Shining, so he probably had a relatively normal night. Hell, I really just want another IT book. And double hell, I'd be perfectly happy with a book filling in the days of the Losers Club during that summer of 58. Charming stuff.


I was always hoping he would wright a sequel to It set 27 years later, with an even older Loser's Club, dealing with a handful of offspring hatched from eggs they missed in the dark sewers.  These infant creatures would be less powerful than Bob Gray, but there would be more of them, and the Losers would all be in their 60s.
 
2013-09-17 07:21:29 AM

Heffaloo: robohobo: I've always wanted a book concerning Dick Hallorann in between IT and The Shining. Although he didn't seem more farked up in The Shining, so he probably had a relatively normal night. Hell, I really just want another IT book. And double hell, I'd be perfectly happy with a book filling in the days of the Losers Club during that summer of 58. Charming stuff.

I was always hoping he would wright a sequel to It set 27 years later, with an even older Loser's Club, dealing with a handful of offspring hatched from eggs they missed in the dark sewers.  These infant creatures would be less powerful than Bob Gray, but there would be more of them, and the Losers would all be in their 60s.


Well, Big Bill was born in '46, so he'd be 67 now. Minus Eddie Spaghetti and Stan the Man, that leaves 5. Bob Gray has been spotted in books since, but it's undecided whether or not it canonical, but given King, I'd say it was. It would certainly be interesting. I would fear for the remaining group.

50's flashback chapters would be required.

It was nice to see Ritchie and Bev in 11/22/63.
 
2013-09-17 08:20:38 AM

robohobo: Heffaloo: robohobo: I've always wanted a book concerning Dick Hallorann in between IT and The Shining. Although he didn't seem more farked up in The Shining, so he probably had a relatively normal night. Hell, I really just want another IT book. And double hell, I'd be perfectly happy with a book filling in the days of the Losers Club during that summer of 58. Charming stuff.

I was always hoping he would wright a sequel to It set 27 years later, with an even older Loser's Club, dealing with a handful of offspring hatched from eggs they missed in the dark sewers.  These infant creatures would be less powerful than Bob Gray, but there would be more of them, and the Losers would all be in their 60s.

Well, Big Bill was born in '46, so he'd be 67 now. Minus Eddie Spaghetti and Stan the Man, that leaves 5. Bob Gray has been spotted in books since, but it's undecided whether or not it canonical, but given King, I'd say it was. It would certainly be interesting. I would fear for the remaining group.

50's flashback chapters would be required.

It was nice to see Ritchie and Bev in 11/22/63.


Yeah but George just came off as a creeper in that part for some reason. I did like It calling him from the sewers.
 
2013-09-17 08:27:09 AM
I usually like Stephen King books best if I only read from page 30 (or so) to about two-thirds of the way through.
Just as it's entirely possible that the story could be longer than the book, it's also possible that the book is longer than the story.
I do read the pages in the correct order though.
 
2013-09-17 08:40:15 AM
I hate Stephen King so much...  I have never forgiven him for what he did to me as a young teen with "Salem's Lot"... I was cheeped out just reading the first few paragraphs of this review...  Had to stop.

//am a Mainer
///hate having him in the same state.
 
2013-09-17 08:44:56 AM
The review makes it sound a lot like Insomnia.
 
2013-09-17 08:49:52 AM
Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining
 
2013-09-17 09:07:09 AM

Erix: The review makes it sound a lot like Insomnia.


I was thinking Black House.
 
2013-09-17 09:14:41 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather

Bladerunner
The Shining

Wrong.
 
2013-09-17 09:16:32 AM

robohobo: The tv movie was way, way closer to the book. King himself has disavowed the original movie numerous times.


I seem to recall reading that he's backpedaled (at least a bit) from that original negativity.
 
2013-09-17 09:23:38 AM
It's surprising how cheaply made and poorly acted the TV version of the Shining was. The hedge animal scenes were laughable and not scary at all. There wasn't anything scary in the TV version. Steven Weber and the kid who played Danny were miscast. Especially Weber. He was believable at the beginning but he really doesn't come off as evil at the end because it seems he doesn't have that acting range.

And the director of the tv version did a mediocre job as well.
 
2013-09-17 09:25:39 AM

stupiddream: Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining

Wrong.


Bladerunner shared only the basic premise (and character names) from Electric Sheep. It's an apples to oranges comparison
 
2013-09-17 09:29:30 AM

Derwood: stupiddream: Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining

Wrong.

Bladerunner shared only the basic premise (and character names) from Electric Sheep. It's an apples to oranges comparison


Kind of like comparing "Total Recall" and "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale."
They really don't have much in common.
 
2013-09-17 09:30:54 AM
Or the book "Starship Troopers" and that piece of shiat that Verhoeven made.
 
2013-09-17 09:37:27 AM

Confabulat: I'm an alcoholic, and I tend to well have odd mood swings, so I was trying to insist the girl read The Shining so, you know, she would know where I was coming from.

No really, I thought this was a good idea.


......did it work?
 
2013-09-17 09:42:23 AM

give me doughnuts: Derwood: stupiddream: Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining

Wrong.

Bladerunner shared only the basic premise (and character names) from Electric Sheep. It's an apples to oranges comparison

Kind of like comparing "Total Recall" and "We Can Remember It for You Wholesale."
They really don't have much in common.


Bladerunner is an amazing movie which made the source material better.

Here's more that belong on the list:
Children of Men
Fight Club (again, the movie made the book better)
Sahara (Clive Cussler's novel has all the bad things trimmed and the good things made better - how can you top Dwight from the Office as Rudy Gunn?)
Die Hard (Nothing Lasts Forever)
The Prestige (the book, jeez, how did it even get published?)
The Princess Bride

I'm sure there's more.
 
2013-09-17 09:47:47 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining


Atlas Shrugged
 
2013-09-17 09:49:23 AM

robohobo: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

The Steven Weber tv movie was far superior to the film version. By leaps and bounds.


As many have stated, it was better in the sense that it was extremely faithful to the book. It's hard to compare a TV Miniseries to a Stanley Kubrick directed movie starring one of the most talented actors alive today, though, no matter how fast and loose it plays with the source material. As an avid fan of The Shining, I love both adaptations, but for different reasons.

I'd absolutely love to see HBO get their hands on the rights to The Shining and make a movie/miniseries, though. If you could take the best elements from both adaptations - the movie's acting talent, use of music, and excellent camerawork, and the miniseries' screenplay and sets, you'd have the perfect adaptation of a truly excellent horror novel.
 
2013-09-17 10:03:20 AM
JerkyMeat


It will be so awesome when hollywood ruins it!
You can't ruin any of $K's post van work. It's already dogsh*t.
 
2013-09-17 10:06:18 AM

Derwood: Wrong.

Bladerunner shared only the basic premise (and character names) from Electric Sheep. It's an apples to oranges comparison


OK let's not compare them then. These two facts are still true:

DADOES is a silly hot mess.

Bladerunner (depending on the cut) is a work of cinematic art.
 
2013-09-17 10:11:49 AM
Aren't Carrie and Firestarter both sequels (or perhaps companion works) to The Shining?  It's been a long time since I've read any of the three, so I can't remember how they fall out chronologically.  I vaguely recall reading some kind of epilogue in The Shining that mentions either Carrie or the girl in Firestarter.

/This vague and uninformative recollection brought to you by tillerman35 productions
//Look for our other products "um, I think I knew that guy once" and "didn't we see a move like that?"
 
2013-09-17 10:35:47 AM

CK2005: karmachameleon: kg2095: It's been a long time since I read the shining or saw the film but I thought that Kubrick was quite faithful to the book.

You must be high.  Aside from the basic premise, the book and movie couldn't be further apart.

Yeah.  It took him a good chunk of the book to start going crazy.  The movie has him losing it almost immediately.


To be fair, Kubrick tells you onscreen that he's hacked out a huge chunk of narrative with the captions he uses.

Of course, you have to have read the book to know why the captions are important.
 
2013-09-17 10:38:15 AM
Derwood:
Bladerunner shared only the basic premise (and character names) from Electric Sheep. It's an apples to oranges comparison

A faithful adaptation of "Do Androids..." (which IS good) would have felt quite dated in the 80's.  Whereas Blade Runner is freaking awesome.

A lot of Dick's best stuff is probably just too weird to film well, at least in any way that expects to make money.  He was a very weird guy who used tons of drugs, so no surprise there.
 
2013-09-17 10:41:56 AM

red5ish: I'm not going to read a review for fear of spoilers. I will say this: Stephen King has a very scary upper lip.


Looking at the picture in TFA, I was just thinking that Stephen King was creepy-looking back in the 1980s, when he didn't worry about how he looked.

Now that he's got a good barber and pays attention to how he dresses, he'd far creepier.

/and the upper lip is still there.
 
2013-09-17 10:51:53 AM
I should finish the book I'm currently reading tomorrow, at which point I will grab my old paperback copy of The Shining and whip through it (causing a couple sleepless nights I'm sure) in time for 9/24. Can't wait.
 
2013-09-17 10:54:49 AM
Having read the book and both movies, I don't find any of them different enough from each other for anyone to be buthurt over.  We're not talking WWZ here.
 
2013-09-17 11:01:57 AM

stupiddream: Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining

Wrong.


wRONGER
 
2013-09-17 11:09:22 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: Movies better than the book they were based on:

Jaws
The Godfather
Bladerunner
The Shining


You can add to the list:
Battlefield Earth
Much Ado About Nothing
World War Z
Interview with a Vampire
 
2013-09-17 11:24:47 AM

Welfare Peanut Butter: Stanley Kubrick directed movie starring one of the most talented actors alive today,


Meh, Jack Nicholson is one of the most talented actors alive today...as long as he's playing Jack Nicholson. It's ok to say audiences love his schtick, but hes no great actor, sorry.
 
2013-09-17 11:27:14 AM

Madbassist1: Welfare Peanut Butter: Stanley Kubrick directed movie starring one of the most talented actors alive today,

Meh, Jack Nicholson is one of the most talented actors alive today...as long as he's playing Jack Nicholson. It's ok to say audiences love his schtick, but hes no great actor, sorry.


He was talking about Shelly Devaul, not Jack Nicholson, over.
 
2013-09-17 11:41:24 AM

skinink: It's surprising how cheaply made and poorly acted the TV version of the Shining was. The hedge animal scenes were laughable and not scary at all. There wasn't anything scary in the TV version. Steven Weber and the kid who played Danny were miscast. Especially Weber. He was believable at the beginning but he really doesn't come off as evil at the end because it seems he doesn't have that acting range.

And the director of the tv version did a mediocre job as well.


Hence why Kubrick backed off some of the elements of the book. There really isn't a way to make hedge animals animated that wouldn't look cheap and cartoony.

Not that interested in the sequel because it was the story of Jack being torn between work and family to the point of madness that interested me in the original, not Danny's story.
 
Displayed 50 of 86 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report