Comments on: Stephen King Turned Off “Room 237” Halfway Through, Calls It ‘Academic Bullsh*t’

By: Luke

Luke — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

Kubrick is great but there\’s something in his movies that brings the crazy in some people.Between the people of this doc and the people who believe he faked the moon landings he has some CRAZY fans.

By: hank

hank — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

calling it "academic" is a bit of a compliment, isn\’t it? that movie was more like a bunch of community college students who took some bad drugs and then the movie "revealed itself"… no surprise here that Jagernauth liked it.

By: Dan S

Dan S — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

Stephen King had his shot at making "The Shining" his way with the abysmal mini-series he worked on in 1997. King demonstrated that Kubrick was wise to depart from the book in order to make it more cinematic.

By: EB

EB — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

So, I read the Rolling Stone interview. What struck me the most in regard to King\’s averse response to Kubrick\’s adaptation of "The Shining" is that King clearly had very little involvement in the development of the film. In the RS interview, it is also noted that King and JK Rowling are friends – she had sooo much involvement in the making of Harry Potter (I LOVE Jk, but I also heard she was a nightmare to work with on set when it comes to her vision – trust me, i have my sources…) Anyway, what I\’m trying to make clear is this: I can understand why King hated Kubrick\’s "The Shining" – it was King\’s idea, it was King\’s baby. However, I can also understand why Kubrick strayed from the original vision to make it his own. They were, at the time, two authors (one of film and one of literature), with two very big jobs and two very big reputations, therefore two very big egos (Maybe Kubrick\’s was bigger at the time..? Allowing him to think he could freely wander over the work an up and coming visionary, perhaps?). Well, a compatible vision between the two would have been nearly impossible, and it\’s just a situation where the only way King could ever get his vision for "The Shining" across on film is if there was a remake and he was as involved in the filming process as JK is with that of HP, **with a director that will bow down to him the way that Kubrick wouldn\’t**. (But then it makes me think whether or not it would ever top Kubrick\’s "The Shining" .. so many issues…)

By: josh

josh — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

Mr Cocks your incredibly full of shit. Kubricks fans are in love with the sound of thier own voice as much ad they love this directors movies that for so!e reason fascinate people who seems to have so!e level of intelligence. You want a obsessive director to be obsessed with try Francis Ford Coppola. Kubrick is a bore and so are his fans. Mr. King was correct he did slaughter the source material he would know he wrote the damn thing.

By: Christian

Christian — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

Stephen, let it go already.

By: Geoffrey Cocks

Geoffrey Cocks — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:56 +0000

It is no surprise that Stephen King does not "get" Kubrick\’s The Shining. That is because King clearly does not understand Kubrick\’s interest in the history of the modern era (including the Holocaust and the decimation of Native Americans by European settlers). Kubrick was very knowledgeable about the horrors of modern history and attempted to explore and explicate this history in his films. He changed King\’s The Shining to reflect these concerns, which is why the film is different from–and, in my view, better (or at least more intellectually ambitious–than King\’s novel.

By: Mattie Appleyard

Mattie Appleyard — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:55 +0000

First, Stephen King wrote the story and then was ASKED what he thought about the Kubrick film which changed the story. So, he\’s just letting people know how he felt – it was not his vision of the book. I thought the film stunk for the same reasons as Mr. King, and also because the other changes [**Spoilers**] . . . were stupid (e.g., Wendy\’s helplessness, the killing of Scatman Crother\’s character, the complete ignoring of one of the freakiest scenes on the book – the moving, snarling animal topiary). Personally, I think Kubrick made three good movies in his entire career (the Killing, Paths of Glory and Strangelove). The rest of his films, IMHO, were sel-conscious, artsy crap. The guy does not belong among a list of the great directors (e.g., Kurosawa, Murnau, Coppola, Renoir, Scorsese, Leone).

By: Dave Again

Dave Again — Mon, 23 May 2016 05:05:55 +0000

Of course Mr. King would consider "academic" as an insult, coming from the man whose pulp horror by his own admission is "the equivalent of a burger from McDonald\’s".