We tried to see this today and near me it only has one or two showings a day in the smallest theaters. This movie was getting good buzz and is only 2 weeks old so I was pretty disappointed that there were not many options for showtimes. Guessing making room for Frozen 2?

Its underperformed pretty badly unfortunately

Looking forward to seeing it.

Sex Panther said:

---

Its underperformed pretty badly unfortunately

---

Opening a "horror" movie a week after Halloween isn't timed real well.

But ultimately there was never that much buzz for it. I'm a King/Kubrick/Shining fan and I still haven't gotten around to catching it, simply because I know the source material really isn't that great.

I've actually heard it's very well done -- and I liked Haunting of Hill House enough to watch it twice so I trust in Flanagan.

The book just wasn't good enough to make me rush into theaters to see it, and the previews pimped The Overlook so much (which was such a minuscule part of the book) that was actually a bit turned off by the marketing.

Def go see it. I really liked it. And I didn't know Flanagan did it until after. That guy is absolutely fantastic.

Finally got around to watching it last night. Probably did myself a disservice by not watching it in theaters as just like the original some of the massive shots likely would have looked a lot better.

To be fair I didn't love the book... but King's Shining is probably my favorite novel of all time. Much of what I feared from the previews reared it's head -- just "The Shining" knocking you over the head at every turn, despite it playing such a little role in the book. Especially with the scene near the end on the Overlook stairs. Between this and Ready Player One it seems like a lot of story is being tossed in favor of nostalgia-porn.

What I did like:

Danny's struggles. I think they did a good job of showing just how bad things got for him and making one realize that yeah going through that **** as a kid probably screwed you up pretty bad.

The score. Obviously very heavy on Kubrick's movie, but I thought it was very well done.

The acting. All the way around I thought the acting was good, including the kid. Seems to be a pretty common theme in Flanagan films as I was impressed all the way around with HauntingofHH and Oculus, even when the stories dipped.

The Shining 2.0. While I already mentioned I didn't like how much they were going back to The Shining, I thought they replicated the older scenes -- down to Wendy's goofy arm motions when running and the side shot of Jack as the bartender looking like Kubrick's Jack. Incredible job done there.

The vampires. I thought they did a good job of balancing that while they are bad people, they are also a family just trying to survive.


What I didn't like:

Too much Shining. The scenes in the beginning of young Danny were just too much filler and made the movie about a half-hour too long.

The ending. Spoilers for those who haven't read either book. In choosing to be a "movie sequel" to re-visit the Overlook rather than a book sequel (where the Overlook is burned down), they had to change the ending... and while it's a very obvious homage to the book with the boilers, in the movie it comes out of left-field and doesn't stand on it's own very well at all. "Not Danny, you are just wearing a mask.", "You forgot something.", etc, etc... Those were all major players in The Shining novel but didn't play off anything we had seen in the films. But in changing the book ending they left out what I thought was one of the key themes in the novel - forgiveness. When Dan meets his father again at the bar, they are still at odds with one another, he still hates him for what he did. In the novel when they revisit where The Overlook once stood and Jack exists as one of the ghosts, he assists Danny as a form of redemption and you feel like Danny can finally remember that his Dad truly was a good person, but his demons (whether it be alcohol or... well, ghosts) overcame him. You don't get that here.


Overall, worth the watch but doubtful something I'd revisit again (much like the book). I feel like in both Kubrick and Flanagan's movies they miss the key element that this once was a family that was "making it" but life's demons corrupted them.

Saw this movie this weekend on a Redbox rental. I liked it fine, but have to agree, Rebecca Ferguson is well worth the price of admission.

Proposition Joe said:

---

Finally got around to watching it last night. Probably did myself a disservice by not watching it in theaters as just like the original some of the massive shots likely would have looked a lot better.

To be fair I didn't love the book... but King's Shining is probably my favorite novel of all time. Much of what I feared from the previews reared it's head -- just "The Shining" knocking you over the head at every turn, despite it playing such a little role in the book. Especially with the scene near the end on the Overlook stairs. Between this and Ready Player One it seems like a lot of story is being tossed in favor of nostalgia-porn.

What I did like:

Danny's struggles. I think they did a good job of showing just how bad things got for him and making one realize that yeah going through that **** as a kid probably screwed you up pretty bad.

The score. Obviously very heavy on Kubrick's movie, but I thought it was very well done.

The acting. All the way around I thought the acting was good, including the kid. Seems to be a pretty common theme in Flanagan films as I was impressed all the way around with HauntingofHH and Oculus, even when the stories dipped.

The Shining 2.0. While I already mentioned I didn't like how much they were going back to The Shining, I thought they replicated the older scenes -- down to Wendy's goofy arm motions when running and the side shot of Jack as the bartender looking like Kubrick's Jack. Incredible job done there.

The vampires. I thought they did a good job of balancing that while they are bad people, they are also a family just trying to survive.


What I didn't like:

Too much Shining. The scenes in the beginning of young Danny were just too much filler and made the movie about a half-hour too long.

The ending. Spoilers for those who haven't read either book. In choosing to be a "movie sequel" to re-visit the Overlook rather than a book sequel (where the Overlook is burned down), they had to change the ending... and while it's a very obvious homage to the book with the boilers, in the movie it comes out of left-field and doesn't stand on it's own very well at all. "Not Danny, you are just wearing a mask.", "You forgot something.", etc, etc... Those were all major players in The Shining novel but didn't play off anything we had seen in the films. But in changing the book ending they left out what I thought was one of the key themes in the novel - forgiveness. When Dan meets his father again at the bar, they are still at odds with one another, he still hates him for what he did. In the novel when they revisit where The Overlook once stood and Jack exists as one of the ghosts, he assists Danny as a form of redemption and you feel like Danny can finally remember that his Dad truly was a good person, but his demons (whether it be alcohol or... well, ghosts) overcame him. You don't get that here.


Overall, worth the watch but doubtful something I'd revisit again (much like the book). I feel like in both Kubrick and Flanagan's movies they miss the key element that this once was a family that was "making it" but life's demons corrupted them.

---

Finally saw this, thought it was good although there were some big changes due to all the Kubrick tie ins that obviously weren't in the book. Agree on the ending was interesting in that they took the ending from the original book, but traded Jack with Danny.