The Shining vs. The Shining

 Thoughts from someone who's a fan of both King and Kubrick

I'm both an avid reader of Stephen King's works, and an avid viewer of Stanley Kubrick's films, so it's quite natural that I'd eventually hear about the controversy over Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of the Stephen King novel The Shining.

Much to my surprise, the room didn't immediately burst into flames when I put these next to each other...

 

I'd say that overall, when it comes to film adaptations of books, I'd rather have a loose adaptation that makes for a good standalone film than a super-close adaptation that makes for a mediocre or poor film.  Also, both mediums have their own strengths and weaknesses, and what works well in print might not translate well on screen (or vice-versa).  Indeed, many of the most iconic scenes in the Kubrick adaptation of The Shining weren't in the book, while many scenes in the book that I liked (including the fire hoses attacking Danny like snakes, or when Danny is playing in a concrete pipe in the hotel playground and hears something scratching and crawling around in the pipe with him) would have been either difficult to pull off special-effects-wise, or would have been confusing on screen.  Also, it must be kept in mind that films are meant to be viewed in one sitting, while books can be read on-and-off, so a lot of content has to be cut for time as well.

This wasn't in the book...

Neither was this...

In the book Jack used a roque mallet, which just doesn't look as menacing as an axe...

One of the biggest controversies about the changes was the decision to change the sentient topiary animals into a hedge maze.  While part of this was probably due to the technical difficulty of making convincing animated/animatronic topiary animals, especially in a pre-CGI world where the only options would have been Harryhausen-style stop motion, puppets, or actors in suits (although The Empire Strikes Back was filmed at around the same time, and it made Yoda and the AT-AT walkers quite convincing using puppets and stop-motion), I think the maze worked better thematically with the visuals used to depict the hotel itself as a maze-like environment, with its distinctly labyrinthine carpet pattern and long hallways.

 I think another factor that inadvertently made me a defender of the Kubrick adaptation was that I got into Kubrick before I got into King, so I saw the film first and then read the book; one unintended consequence of doing so was that it raised my expectations of the book to frankly unattainable heights.  In the discussions of the book vs. the movie that I read, King fans seemed to praise the book as some kind of transcendent masterpiece that the film absolutely butchered, so when I did read the book I was let down somewhat by the fact that it was (to me at least) a very good but still flawed book rather than the magnum opus it was hyped as.

Some other thoughts and observations on the two works:

• I think that a big part of why King hated the film so much was because the book was an extremely personal work for him, as he wrote it (in part) to deal with his own alcoholism and drug addictions, so I think that had Kubrick adapted a different one of King's works and changed it in a similar matter King probably wouldn't have objected to the same extent
• Of the 4 films Kubrick made between 1971 and 1987, The Shining is the only one that doesn't have any kind of narration; A Clockwork Orange and Full Metal Jacket both had voice-overs of the main protagonist (often quoting the books verbatim), while Barry Lyndon had a third-person omniscient narration (compared to the book's use of a self-serving first-person narrator with the occasional editorial note)
• Another change I liked was making the nature of the Overlook Hotel's haunting ambiguous for much of the film, up until the ghost of Grady unlocks the pantry door; before then, the audience is left to wonder about how much the possibility is that the hotel is haunted, and how much is it the effects of the isolation of being alone in a place that manages to be both claustrophobic and agoraphobic at the same time.  Another factor lending credence to the idea that the ghosts are all in Jack's head is that whenever he interacts with a ghost before the pantry scene, there's a mirror present, and the first ghost Jack talks to is wearing a maroon jacket that's the same color as Jack's jacket:
  
  
  
  
  
• If Jack used a roque mallet like in the book, it would have been a lot less menacing, and a lot more looney tunes-like for me; when he hit someone with that mallet, my first thought probably would have been something like "Are there now going to be stars or birds circling around the victim's head, or is a comically large lump and "NO SALE" sign going to stick out of the top of their head?"
• One of the criticisms I've heard about Jack Nicholson's portrayal is that he's crazy from the start rather than starting out good and then descending into madness, but in the compressed timeline of the film I feel that this was necessary (plus, when he does snap, he's appropriately menacing)
  

My first and last films, by medium

 The other day, I saw a selection of short films from the Manhattan Short Film Festival at the Palace Theater in Danbury, which made me realize I hadn't seen a feature-length film since 2019, which in turn made me think about the subject of this post, namely what the first and last films I saw (or bought) in the various formats there have been over the years.  Here's my list:

In theater: 

The first film I saw in the theater was All Dogs Go to Heaven, but the first film I actually remember seeing in the theater was Super Mario Bros (the 1993 film).  The first film I went to without my parents was The Fifth Element (I went with a friend), and the first film I went to on my own was Clerks 2.  The last feature-length film I saw in the theater was Darkest Hour; I was never much of a cinema-goer, and lockdown really killed off that habit.  That said, since lockdown's end, I have gone to 3 short film festivals at the Palace Theater, 2 of which were international short film collections and one of which was a collection of science fiction short films.

On VHS:

I don't remember what my first film on VHS was, but I do remember the last two VHS tapes I bought: 28 Days Later, and a 3-episode tape of Father Ted (Titled "Nuns! Nuns! Reverse! Reverse!", and containing the episodes Competition Time, And God Created Woman, and Grant Unto Him Eternal Rest).

On DVD: 

The first film on DVD my family owned was Rat Race; I don't recall what the first DVD I bought for my own use was, but I think it might have been either A Bridge Too Far, or Lock, Stock & 2 Smoking Barrels.  As of this post, the most recent DVD I have purchased was The Odessa File.

On Blu-Ray:

The first Blu-Ray I bought was The Lego Movie and the most recent one was Big; I purchased both because they were a dual-format DVD/Blu-Ray set.  I only got a Blu-ray player last Christmas, so the first film I actually watched on Blu-Ray was Clerks, which my brother had given to me for Christmas the year before (he bought a Kevin Smith-signed copy from Jay and Silent Bob's Secret Stash).

Plastic Soldier Review: Mars Red Army WWII Infantry

 

 

 

Overview: This set depicts a group of Soviet Red Army infantrymen in the winter uniforms introduced in January of 1943 (featuring traditional shoulderboard rank insignia and standing collars) and in use during the winter months for the rest of the war, up to and including the Battle of Berlin (in the Red Army, summer clothing was usually issued in May and the Battle of Berlin occurred mostly during April of 1945 so most Red Army troops in Berlin were still wearing winter gear).  

 

They are wearing a mixed set of uniforms, including the telogreika padded jacket and trousers, greatcoat, and gymnastiorka tunic with the plash-palatka rain cape (I'm not sure how historically accurate this would be, with members of the same squad wearing such a variety of uniforms at the same time...).  Headwear is a similar mixture, with some wearing the M1940 helmet, others wearing the ushanka fur cap, and others wearing the pilotka wedge cap.  The uniforms are rounded out with sapogi boots.  The troops with their rain capes on have their equipment covered up, but the remainder of the troops wear typical Red Army gear, including ammunition pouches, entrenching tools (either in a carrier or tucked into their belts), and the veshmeshok pack or small haversack.  The officers are wearing leather Sam Browne belts with mapcases and pistol holsters.  

 

The troops are armed with typical small arms of the time, including PPSh and PPS 43 submachine guns, Moisin-Nagant rifles, Tokarev pistols (carried by the officers) and a Degtyaryov machine gun.  In addition, one soldier has a captured German Mp38/MP40 slung across his back, and another is carrying an ammunition container for a Maxim gun.

 

Sculpting: The sculpting is well-done, with a variety of quite interesting and dynamic poses (I particularly like the pose of the soldier in the greatcoat working the bolt of his rifle, and the soldier in the rain cape firing the PPSh).  The only questionable one I found was the officer with his arm in a sling; would someone with an injury like that still be leading troops in battle, even in the Red Army?  While the detail is somewhat basic and "flat" (especially the slung MP40), all the typical equipment is present on the figures and accurately-depicted.  As far as I could tell, there were no major anachronisms, missing equipment, or other inaccuracies in the sculpting.  Also, all the figures stand up easily, with no balance issues.

 

Packaging: The set came in a cardboard box with stylized artwork on the front and a painted example of each figure on the back.

Molding: The figures are molded in a very hard dark green plastic, with no parts bent or broken off.  Like other Mars models, however, the flashing was very bad, and had to be carved away before painting (a somewhat difficult task, given that the parting line was in the middle of each figure's face).

Selection: Two of each pose are included, except for the machine gunner (who only comes one to a set).  Put together, they generally make for a convincing unit (although like I said earlier, I'm not sure how accurate it would be for one unit to wear such a variety of uniforms at the same time), although it might have been a better selection to have two machine gunners and one officer.

Scale: The figures in this set are somewhat on the diminutive side for 54mm scale, even compared to other Mars figures (let alone 60mm figures).

Left to right: Airfix Afrika Korps, Mars Red Army, TSSD 60mm Red Army

With Mars British Infantry

Overall: While I have some reservations about the set's accuracy and the flashing, I think this set also has a lot going for it with its excellent poses and representation of an often-overlooked force from WWII; all in all, I'd say the whole is better than the sum of its parts.

The whole set (minus one figure; see below for details)

One figure was painted with Tamiya Copper paint and now serves as a statue on my East German-themed model train layout