Was this a good adaptation?
>>67850243
im pretty sure that's the original
intentionally bad adaptation
brilliant film
/thread
Nope, The book was better but plebs here will tell you otherwise because they dont read books. Its the most try hard pretentious piece of film ive ever seen. The useless shots in the name of "art" just a lot of hamfisted symbolism and absolutely no character development from Jack Nich. There is no sense of descent into madness. He already seems borderline crazy from the start. 1000 takes on 1 scene=! Well made scene.
Its just a side effect of his autism.
>Kubrick makes intentionally shitty movie full of amateur mistakes
>critics still gobble his dick
>>67850300
read a book once in your life you fuckin screenlord mouthbreather
>>67850243
It doesn't matter is it a good adaptation, the only thing it matters is is it a good movie.
A movie can be based on a book and completely go the other way and that's fine as long as it works, why should copying a book as close as possible be considered as the best, maybe it doesn't work as a visual medium that way.
The shining is a good movie, bad adaptation on purpose. And that's fine. It wouldn't be fine if it was marketed as STEVEN KING ADAPTATION BEST BOOK BEST MOVIE IT IS ESSENTIALY THE SAME WATCH IT
>>67851146
Honestly how is this movie better than sub average though? I clearly remember being bored for the majority of the viewing. Do I need to rewatch?
>>67850243
It was good enough for you.
Book is way better. Movie is considered amazing because no one read the book. I thought the movie was amazing until I read the book.
>>67851355
I think you have to view each work as a separate entity though. It's not fair to compare two completely different mediums imo
>>67851236
Maybe you need a rewatch, maybe you don't. Opinions on movies are subjective, even if a movie is objectively good atleast on a technical level that doesn't mean that you will automatically like it. Have your own opinion don't base it on others.
Then again you are most probably used to modern blockbusters if you thought The Shining is boring. Can't imagine what would you say if you watched for example Werckmeister Harmonies or Solaris
>>67851355
it's just that you drawed upon previous experiences in your life to fill in the bits of the book that require imagination.
No-one else has had the same previous life experiences as you so there's no gaurantee that others will think the book is better than the movie as well.
>>67850846
but critics didn't even like this film at the start, this shit was critically panned as fuck
>>67851414
YES! the best bit of The Shining by Stephen King is when i related my experience of being emotionally molested by hedge animals to that of the main character!
in my opinion the book is an above average horror novel where as the movie is the greatest horror film ever made.
king has good ideas, but kubrick is the true artist.
>>67851454
You don't have to relate, you fill in the blanks. When you read a sentence in a book you create that scenario in your head, and everyone who reads the book imagines different images and scenarios based on their personal life experience.
That's why most people who read a book before the movie don't like the movie because it probably isn't what they imagined it to be or look like
>>67850243
Yes.
You have to remember what the word means.
>>67850243
It wasn't an adaptation
