Why does King hate Kubrick's version of The Shining?
Because King is a pleb of the lowest order.
Because he wants to make a shittier version of it.
Butthurt because King wrote it about his struggle with alcoholism or something akin to that, and Kubrick just took the base concept and made it about insanity
>>69878131
because everyone agrees it's better than the book
>>69878131
The book was very personal and was a way of King to deal with his own problems with alcoholism and parenting. Jack (King's self-insert) was a more sympathetic character and redeemed himself in the end of the novel.
The movie kind of threw all that away and just made Jack a crazy person.
Doesn't mean the movie's worse though.
King had been legally blind since like 1981.
Why anyone even listens when he talks about movies is beyond me.
Would you listen to a deaf persons opinions on the vibrations they get from music? Because Stephen King is reviewing vague colored shapes and swirls.
Because the movie is much better and scarier than his book
>>69878268
basically this
kubrick did what kubrick usually does, took the source material and warped it in such a way that the concepts, the themes and the overall message became something completely different
if i were the original author i'd probably be pretty annoyed about that
>>69878320
what do u mean legally blind can u be illegaly blind what the fuck is this some american thing that in some states ur not allowed to be blind?
>>69878131
because he's a hack, who decided he has an artistic"vision" from all the success with plebs.
>>69878340
I'd be annoyed except for the fact that the book was mediocre and wasnt even a best seller until Kubrick came and adapted it into something much much greater
King should be happy about the boost in book sales
The movie removes like 70% of the story, where the plot is like 60% Jack, 30% Danny and 10% Holloran.
It doesn't even actually really follow Danny, and Holloran is just a side bitch who happens to bring a snow plow.
For some fucking reason it decides to make the wife, I can't even remember her name, the main character. And that'd be fine except she becomes some weird cartoon character in the movie, like holy shit that radio call between her and the ranger.
But yeah that's the way I see it, if you read the book it really smeared a 300 page novel built up around Jack in King's face. He had like no personality in the movie aside from the interview scene.
That being said I liked both the movie and the book.
>>69878432
there's different levels of blindness
"legally" blind means you're so fucking blind it classifies as a disability, and you need special permission and certificates from a series of opticians to even be allowed to operate a small vehicle
the movie and book are both good but the movie is a shit tier adaptation
thats all there is to it
>>69878615
You took the B8.
Because Kubrick was forced to help fake the moon landing and used his films to subliminally tell the truth about it
https://youtu.be/KS3blm2kjuo
https://youtu.be/1_mjDA9pI04
https://youtu.be/_u4A5tJ2j3o
https://youtu.be/7hRgQ-Qk7u8
https://youtu.be/rR4pf6pp1kQ
https://youtu.be/z-qfMHgzYME
https://youtu.be/Sy0Lc7uX8Ug
WAKE UP SHEEPLE
>>69878131
Because Wendy in the books is a rocking hot blonde with a fabulous pair of tits that Jack plays with on a regular basis. We got Duvall instead. I'd be pissed too.
wasn't kubrick quoted as saying he tries to turn bad books into good films
>>69878747
>ywn be that midget
jdimsa
>>69878320
Because he gave us Maximum Overdrive. Thank you based Stephen
>>69878646
oh know, i typed 2 sentences
he got me good
Was that rumor about Kubrick calling King in the middle of the night autistically ranting and calling him a hack for talking shit about the movie real?
>>69878340
I'd have been cool with it. It's like having a song sampled or remixed. As long as you get fairly compensated and the adaptation is being made with honest intent at artistic expression (and not like a porn parody or propaganda or something), the only thing to worry about is misrepresentation.
I know the general public is so fucking stupid that (comic/book)=/=(move/tv show) is still a huge problem for them but whatever, idiots are idiots.
>>69878761
King thought Jack should be played by Richard Dreyfuss or someone equally nebbishy, so it's much more of a shock when he goes nuts and tries to kill his family.
With Jack Nicholson, you know he's going to lose it, that's the whole point of hiring him.
![tumblr_not669vscv1qej1i6o5_1280[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/037Ee7V.jpg "tumblr_not669vscv1qej1i6o5_1280[1].jpg")
>>69878131
I love the irony of it all
King's book was tailored to be adapted as a movie. Just look at the hotel exploding and hedge animals going apeshit in typical Hollywood fashion
Then Kubrick tailors the film adaptation more like a novel and removes the shit Hollywood ending of the book, like it should have been in the first place. Everybody remembers the movie. Nobody gives a shit about the book really.
In all honesty, the first half of the book was a good, scary read though.
Because King is a braindead moron who doesn't understand the principles of "Based on", he just doesn't fucking get it. The book was mediocre and Stan the Man made into a bigger-than-life kino.
