I think the various ways in which Jack types "All work and no play..." is representative of him going through the creative process. If he was struggling, creatively, he would just write it out in straight lines. What we actually see, is Jack trying different ideas out.
Whoa, I was right. You DO think the same as me. I've been thinking about making my own video [my theory runs deeper than this, every single scene can be used to support the theory.] and knowing that I'm not crazy to think this, is encouraging.
Okay. I don't agree with everything. But the central theme is spot on. You just need to get over the idea that Jack is evil. He's actually a very loving, and appreciative, husband and father. The character that Jack writes, is inspired by his own biggest fears, that he could be a monster who would harm his family, and it all rests on him overcoming his writer's block. The character in the book represents who Jack might become if he fails. He might decide that a shot of whiskey could help, but that would represent a failure to quit drinking, driving him deeper into his despair. We also need to ignore the idea that Jack goes stir crazy, in the isolation. He is an author, who specifically seeks out the isolation, in order to be able to get passed his most mundane ideas, and confront his deepest feelings. It is different to a seasoned hotel worker, constantly surrounded by guests, thinking they can survive a winter, alone, in the same hotel that is usually filled with an abundance of life.
I think Kubrick made this movie abstract and ambiguous so that literally any interpretation could come of it. Instead of walking the audience through with a straightforward film, he instead invites them to be the co-writers of the movie. Absolutely ingenius.
My wife bought a Nissan Cube. Inside some models was this weird shag rug on the dashboard. The dashboard was oddly raised, making you feel less exposed. The ceiling has this water drop effect, like the ripples of water in a complete still pond. The speaker grills on the doors also had 'water' elements. So. I've often asked other buyers of the same car what they make of these odd design choices. For the life of them they've never been able to put it together. But Google has, because I found the designer and he explained it: it's a hot tub. The car is designed for comfort, like a water tub. The round shag was not a reference to the 60s but instead a rug you might have when you step out of a tub. It's nice to have theories about things. But if there is an ultimate design we are likely not smart enough to see it. The above author wants you to be believe he's seen something that Kubrick never mentioned and that King has never noticed. Yeah right.
wrong. that's the approach of a hack. both lynch and kubrick have solid ideas in their head which they translate to the screen. they like to say all theories are valid because it's nicer than saying, no you're wrong, to 99% of the people who try and analyze their films
@@cagneybillingsley2165Because Kubrick had already made 2001 a Space Odyssey, which got a huge reaction from viewers who did not understand what it was about, or who wrote essays on what it was about, I think Kubrick very well could have wanted to do the same thing in the The Shining. Trigger people to try to explain it. However, The Shining did not get that much of a reaction, at the time of its release.
i always felt that too, even as a kid id have this strange interpretation if the photo being some kind of giveaway to it, like its a hotel, hotels have all different kinds of people behind closed doors,and the movie both shows behind the doors of the rooms into their shared/family lives, the into the doors of their heads, hence doorways and mirrors and all the overarching things, i dont know anything but to me i have always seen it that way, especially heightened as i got older and realized jack is drawing inspo the entire film and theres contrast between the family life and then into his with writing just like mentioned in this very video
I have said for thirty years that the Shining is a movie showing what is being written in the caretakers book. No one has ever agreed with me. Thank you for making this video.
You are completely correct!! Once the continuity errors really begin we are now in the story being written! Sculpture missing from big table in main room and the typewriter change are the biggest signs of the switch…not to mention when you see kool aid in the scene
Charles Grady is the name of the man whomst the Hotel Manager said killed his family. Delbert Grady could EASILY be the name which Jack used in his writing in order to protect the name of the REAL person. Jack is writing a book "based on true events" (the past-happenings of what happened in The Over-look Hotel). Some names have been changed to protect the identities of the people involved. The difference is that in Jack's version of the story, the wife and kid survived and the father died; when, in real life, the father killed his wife and children. Jack, simply input his own wife and kid into the story of the past; however, since he loves his wife and child so much, he didn't want them to die even in the story; so, he let his beloved wife and beloved child live. But, every horror story needs to have some sort of death/pain for it to be exciting. That's where Dick Hallorann comes into the fray. In every horror story, the well-meaning black-man always dies. So, in a story about a man killing people with an axe...why not kill the black-guy? This video has an EXCELLENT theory. This is definitely in my Top 3 Favorite Shining theories.
@@johnbutler2780 as explained in the video: the part where he wrote "All work no play..." over and over again was during the Jack the CHARACTER segments, not Jack the WRITER.
Another key element that would align with this theory is the fact that during the interview, Mr. Ullman says that Grady came up with his wife and "two little girls about 8 and 10", but the two girls we repeatedly see are clearly identical twins, who have to had been born at the same time and be the same age.
Even after 42 years of it’s release, the film is still being debated with countless theories and interpretations. That is the genius of Stanley Kubrick ! He made a cinema masterpiece for sure.
Kubrick annoys me since he regularly omits important information to keep people talking about them. But then I prefer Ken Russel's ' hit you over the head' theatrical style.
He is looking at himself, as we all do, in a mirror. His eye contact is with Writer Jack, and begins as soon as he hears the story about Grady and the murder/suicide. In point of fact, it’s precisely after he finishes the line “I’m outlining a new writing project…”
@travisg.4283 you say that we see the first supernatural event of the film when Danny talks to Tony. I think it is actually when Jack first looks into the camera.
There is a theory supporting the "Two Different Jacks" theory that pushes the idea that the face that we see in the film is not even really Jack's real face. Jack, "the writer" saw the picture from the 1921 ballroom photo and used that guy as the antagonist for the story. So in a way, the whole movie is broken down into "REAL" moments and fictional moments from his novel. What do you think? it would be the most logical answer as to why Jack is in the 1921 photo. Almost as if Kubrick is giving one last wink to the audience.
@@WayTooClose Yes. the continuity "errors" themselves are vast and ubiquitous throughout the film eg. dopey sticker, missing chairs, missing light switches etc. Kubrick uses these small changes as indicators about what is REAL vs NOT. I read somewhere that Kubrick explained that he hated how there was a conventional trope of how dreams in cinema are represented. He wanted to create subtle images so that the viewer would subliminally be conscious that something wasn't quite right. That would be the "false" reality. The question would then be "who's false narrative is this?" There are many interpretations: a major one is the one that i told you before. the REAL Jack is writing a novel called the Shining. That is when we are seeing all of the drama and ghosts. There is another crazy theory called "THE WENDY THEORY" that you should check out on RUclips. I honestly think that Kubrick created many layers of possible interpretations as far as who is envisioning the "FAKE" Reality. All of them might have validity. That is the point. He is trying to confuse and keep the audience unbalanced. There are no ghosts. There was no murders. The novel was published. Could it be a cruel dissertation on Stephen King himself?
@@wrestledeep @wrestledeep I totally agree that there's a lot he puts in to subconsciously disorient the viewer, and a lot that doesn't add up. As Jan Harlan, his long time executive producer (and brother-in-law) said, "It's a ghost story. Of course it doesn't make sense." You're right that he looks down on Stephen King. Diane Johnson, hs co-writer on The Shining, all but confirmed this. Kubrick and DJ have been surprisingly critical and condescending of King's work over the years. I actually made a video about it a while back if you want to check it out: ruclips.net/video/WwxJemRlOrk/видео.html
yes! the final scene is the only one where the furniture is covered with cloth, like if a hotel is actually going to be temporarily closed. That is the real writer scoping out the place and seeing the picture of the man who would inspire the work.
@@jameswalker4249 Yes. i wish this theory was examined more. I think that Kubrick slipped in little hints like that as a sly way of winking to the audience that this is all in the writer's head. I am sure that there are even MORE clues to back up this theory if you just look for them in the movie.
Tthe more I watch The Shining, watch documentaries about The Shining I am more sure that: 1. The Shining is one of the most complex films if all-time 2. The Shining has at least two plots and even probably more than two plots
Its important for USA people to understand that most of the world has a shorter cut missing several key scenes (like the hotel covered in cobwebs and skeletons). It is a much better movie with the US fuller version.
I think there are even some trims mid-scene. There's a youtube video of Jack and Lloyd where it skips past Jack taking his first sip of bourbon as his eyes go blank. I assume that's the international version?
There are a number of hidden narratives, for certain. The film is so full of weird little details. The making of documentary is also full of strange details. I'll give you an example. You'll have heard the theory that Jack is sexually abusing Danny, I'm sure. In the making of, Jack Nicholson (in his Jack Torrance garb) is introduced to James Mason (who weirdly is dressed like one of the party goers in The Gold Room ball scene). James Mason famously played Humbert Humbert in Kubrick's version of Lolita.
@@__teles__ I disagree. The skeleton scene takes ALL horror straight out of the film. Almost laughable. So much better without... I wouldn't call any of the other scenes cut from the European version is of key value either.. (hence they were cut-worthy)...
@@davidlean1060 I do think there is a very strong intention in this movie (maybe the entire point of the movie) to infer that Jack molested Danny (not the least of which is Wendy actually saying so directly: "You did this") We see Jack sitting on the bed both alone (in contemplation?), we see the look of "fear and knowing" on Danny's face when he walks in and realizes his father is awake (and they are alone together), and then we see Jack drawing Danny onto his knee lovingly while Danny is clearly terrified of him. This mirrors (literally mirrors, as in the man on the bed is sitting in a mirrored position to Jack), the later scene of the two men engaging in an act of implied oral copulation in one of the rooms during the climactic scenes of the unravelling of minds that impacts the entire family (does this scene imply that Wendy has realized the whole truth about her husband's actions with her son?). The fact that one is dressed in a costume and is kneeling at a child's height "masks" the notion that the unidentified person is in fact Danny. We are initially given the explanation that Danny told Wendy there is a woman in the upper hotel room that did this to him, thus giving her the temporary reassurance that Jack did not "do this to Danny." Following this revelation, we see Jack go to investigate that room. I would suggest is it not a wise move to let an accused person investigate himself. We are privy to a possible hallucination of the same woman taunting Jack, first as a beautiful woman (implying Jack is just a normal red-blooded male who finds a beautiful naked woman tantalizing) and then in the mirror with her decayed body, implying the truth is much uglier and that Jack has glimpsed the horror of what he has done.) This entire scene seems to imply that Jack, despite realizing the truth of his actions, has decided he will go along with Danny's made up story to keep Wendy from finding out the truth (and perhaps blocking from it from his own mind.) Jack locking the door is symbolic of denying what he has done and forgetting about it by literally locking it away. We know he has succeeded when he returns to Wendy and in fact tells her there is "nothing" in that room, effectively implying none of it has happened. I personally feel this makes the most sense, because most of how we see Jack descend into insanity begins when he confronts Lloyd the first time and admits while he is taking his first drink after a period of sobriety, that he did hurt Danny in the past. This is why they have even come to the Overlook, to start over and turn a corner on their troubled past. But, like all people with internal demons, whereever you go, there you are. Kubric was a master at exposing the darker forces of this world, forces that are in fact masquerading as demons but are just good old fashioned evil humans doing evil things.
When Jack throws the ball in frustration for the final time in the scene where he has writer's block, it lands on the exact future spot where Hallorann is killed. Perhaps an inspiration for writer Jack? Sound, logical theory.
I think writer Jack could have changed Grady's first name and some of the other details because he wanted to ensure people knew his novel was fiction while also making it clear he was inspired by the original murders.
There are two blonde twin women carrying suitcases dowstairs, as they initially walk through the hotel, suggesting the two "twIn character" theme, and I recall a scene where Jack can only be seen entering a door via his reflection first before entering the frame. The use of twin doors and symmetry throughout would certainly reinforce the theme of two Jacks.
There's also a scene when Jack goes by himself for his initial interview and then calls Wendy from the lobby. If you look past him and past the Manager and his assistant, there is a "man"? (creepy almost alien looking thing) standing at the far end of the room looking at the maze model. It is a mirror to a scene later in the movie when Jack stands and looks at Wendy and Danny from above in the maze.
The thing I absolutely love about this theory is that you never once say that this is definitive and you constantly say words like "maybe" and just suggesting that things could be this way, rather then saying "this is the way it is." Very interesting and plausible theory as well
This theory is one of the most compelling of the lot, I think it could be just one of the many layers that Kubrick put into all his films. I think the shinning is about what Carl Gustav Jung called the shadow, in all its forms, the individual's shadow and the shadow of the dark history of America all the way through to the shadow of human kinds soul and it's believed the The Red Book ( Liber Novus ) makes an appearance in the film in the interview scene. Jack could even be exploring his own shadow while he writes, other Jack is real Jack's Shadow.
The maroon jacket is one of the tells that we are seeing character Jack. When writer Jack first came into the lobby there was the caretaker at work across the room wearing that same jacket, and the scene showed him pointedly staring at the caretaker.
Here's another detail to support. Jack's typewriter changes colour. It is light grey when we first see it, but it is, appropriately, a much darker tone within the story Jack writes.
As a poet and on again off again artist this theory genuinely recontextualised the whole movie for me. Like I've always thought at points Jack was genuinely a chill guy while at most others it looks like he's perpetually two steps away from becoming a full blown looney tune but this makes me look at the film like a colour spectrum, like where does Jack the writer end and Jack the character start? I've since started rewatching it with this in mind and I look at things like the first time we see Jack the writer driving up to the hotel in the opening credits, which to me now feels like that's actually the move in day for him and his family and the interview we see is Jack the character as part of the writers story now that the writer has settled in and started on his project.
That could be why Jack driving to the hotel compared with the family driving to the hotel seem to be going in different directions with different landscapes. Interesting.
Excellent theory. In the job interview he says that his wife loves ghost stories, could that have been his motive for taking the story in this direction?
It's possible. I'm not certain though because Jack could just be lying to be more affable to get hired; the one book we see Wendy reading is Catcher in the Rye, which isn't horror.
I agree this is the most accurate explanation for what we're actually watching in the movie, which is why it's so terrifying; because in character Jack's world, there's a scary ghost in room 237 that's abusing Danny, but in writer Jack's world, Jack is abusing Danny.
The maze appearing several times larger than it actually is in the aerial shot indicates a break from reality to me. The maze to me is a metaphor for the mind of Jack. It's twists and turns mirroring the complex subconscious. You can also get trapped in a maze, much like Jack (the character according to this theory) is trapped in his own head in his isolation, unable to escape his growing insanity. The maze also seems to change it's layout on a couple times. This could be a hint to the fact that some events in the movie are happening in someone's imagination. You could probably make the case for the supernatural events in the movie being the product of any of the character's imaginations.
More possible evidence to support this theory: The CARETAKER of the Overlook can be seen at 20:47. Jack notices him and mocks the "limp" the Caretaker/2nd Jack will have later when chasing Danny in the maze. He is the only one not wearing the same "coveralls" the rest of the staff are wearing in the scene. He wears very similar clothing as the "2nd Jack". The "twins" theme/motif features prominently throughout the film from the opening shot of the mountains and their reflection in the lake so it makes sense there would be two "Jacks" as there are two Gradys, two hags in the bathtub, (one with long hair who walks after Jack and the other in the tub with short hair), two doors in room 237, two pictures of women in Hallorann's bedroom, two sets of two girls that say goodbye to Mr. Ullman on Closing day, twin VW Bugs in the parking lot and so many more examples including numbers 24, 42, 12, 21 - too many to list them all here and definitely more fun to discover them yourselves...
Some very good questions are raised in this video and by doing so, it's honesty one of the best videos on RUclips about The Shining (and I've seen quite a few at this point). Well done.
Interesting theory! It makes sense of an anomaly I’ve noticed in the family’s drive to the hotel, which is that they seem to be driving away from it. When Jack drives to it for the interview the landscape falls away to the left. But when the family drives to it the landscape falls away to the right, as if they changed their minds about staying there. So all of the film from that point would be Jack’s book, and Jack thinking about the book. Stephen King stayed just one night in the Stanley Hotel, where he came up with the original story.
Interesting idea, but it could also mean nothing. At the start of the movie they say the sidewinder is a 25 mile long road. If you've ever driven through a national park in the mountains, you see sometimes the valleys are on the right side and sometimes on the left, all as you're driving the same direction relative to the park entrance gate.
@@CR3271 Very interesting! And it makes me think that a lot in the movie means something or nothing, like the doors to nowhere and the two Gradies and so on. To me, all the ambivalence and uncertainty is Stanley saying, We know nothing! Are there ghosts? Does life continue after death? Was Jack in the hotel in a different lifetime? Et cetera. (Is going to the hotel a homecoming for Jack?)
Interesting take. One thing I'd never picked up on was Jack saying, "Forever and ever and ever", being pretty much exactly like the twins said it....and I've watched the movie countless times. So at least thank you for showing me that. 👍
I lean towards the 2 Jacks theory too - so this video makes a lot of sense to me. I don't think Kubrick did continuity errors - not in his DNA - so changing from one shirt to another back to the first in the same day is deliberate, the missing sticker on Danny's wall, the fact that they go in one door to the food storage unit and come out an apparently different door, etc etc. I don't think the scene where Jack rips up his paper and berates Wendy happened - I think that was part of his book. In short - I like this video a lot!
@@THECARS7879 King hates the movie because it's at a level of higher intelligence. King likes to kill puppies and kittens in his stories in order to get an emotional response from his audience and he resorts to silly nonsense like coke machines that come to life and kill people. His imagination is limited and his stories always end up falling apart into the absurd. Kubric took the stupid parts out and created a psychological masterpiece. In short, he is the true author of The Shining as we know it because we tend to discuss the movie far more often than anyone ever talks about the original storyline other than to give credit to King for the initial concept.
@@johnbrowne3950 granted, but in the Shining we have things being inserted into or taken out of the shot in the middle of shot-reverse-shot segments that were clearly filmed at the same time. At certain points the only explanation is that he deliberately said take this out of the shot or put this in the shot.
Like Jack the Writer and Jack the Character, Charles Grady and Delbert Grady are also two separate characters and all four of them are forever trapped in that place.
Spot on. On the most macro level this film is about a writer overcoming writer’s block. The movie transitions from reality to the story that eventually gets written. Jack conflates his and the hotel’s history to overcome his writer’s block. That is why inconsistencies occur in the hotel and character details (i.e. the sisters and Grady, disappearing chairs, decals) Change in typewriter and color of clothing are clues to which world we are experiencing. How he contemplates the maze and types… The audience is transitioned into the story Jack is writing.
I really like this theory , as it addresses the horror-author struggling to write the story of a horror-author struggling to write a story .... by a horror author (king) going through thr struggles of writing the story... so many writers reflect themselves and the process of their writing within the narrative itself, so I like that this is Kubrick's creation of blurring lines between artists' sanity and insanity, persona and characters, fiction and imagination. Nice theory I enjoyed this ty
Yes! I just posted how I like this meta nested quality. Reading your comment, I just had the idea that the extremely important theme of mirrors and symmetry has an interesting and perhaps additional relevance to this nested quality; when you face two mirrors together you get that infinity effect- so writers writing about writers ad infinitum! ("Forever and forever and forever and....")
Seeing Jack's image in the July 4, 1921 picture, that leads me to a theory that everyone in that picture lived in the hotel at certain points, and they had passed away inside or around the hotel, and their souls are added to the guests of attendance, and the most recent addition, being Jack at the time, since he was the current caretaker, is place in the bottom middle of the picture.
After watching and contemplating videos arguing both for and against the "wendy" theory, this "writer" theory is a breath of fresh air! I like it. Btw- Someone should mention the nested meta-ness of the writer, Stephen King, a horror writer, writing about a writer, Jack, writing horror. Thanks!
You nailed it. I believed this idea for years. Its the only theory which floats, cannot be debunked and explains the disappearance of props as being omitted or added in the visual depiction of Jack's story thought process and writting. The missing last scene confirms it too much so it was deleted. Charles /Delbert is an obvious clue. Good work, you deserve more views and credit. Jack actually sees a guy in the lobby working on the first day that he uses his image for the character that he writes in his novel here's the link to the video source for that ruclips.net/video/0V4TYCn2qZg/видео.html
Idk but without looking into it - disturbed father with psychological trauma from abilities he had growing up as a kid ( Dr sleep - Danny drank to cope- Jack did the same until towards the end to stop) Jack’s powers are sight ( shining ) as any others who can see - it gives life to those who can no longer be seen( the dead - souls stuck - earth bound ) etc and the mental break of letting such “ghosts” take control or allow them to influence Jack into murder…. The other theory It all takes place in Jack’s Head Danny is Jack when he was a child - his subconscious changed his “ son’s “ name The Wife - isn’t real neither- the whole hotel is his subconscious- a gathering if you will of his Subconscious identities with filler personalities etc The father/ jack is who he is currently The murderous Jack crazy drunk is jacks subconscious unregulated emotional- damaged etc Danny is Jack when he was a little boy who “SAW” could see the horrors of life shown to him aka trauma- abuse etc The abuser disturbed Jack tired to harm Danny ( Jack ) because he was a reminder of past trauma- hurt - pain etc There are no ghost or anything- it’s hurtful memories of Jack growing up what he could see - was exposed to Everything is taking place in Jack’s mind - everything The mind can create and make everything so real - with no ripple or disturbances or anything- it protects itself and so on- the mind can only take so much…. When Jack finally Snaps - he is letting go - moving on - by trying to end his wife ( the idea of love - marriage- etc ) and Danny ( his childhood, idea of responsibility- growing up -trauma) The murdering Jack ( subconscious) dies but his childhood ( innocence -prior to being hurt ) And his wife ( the idea of love - having a companion etc) stays alive….. Idk - may sound idiotic- who knows
The scrapbook next to his type writer is the news clippings he refers to with Grady in the restroom. It’s full of stories of murder and tragedy from the Overlook.
I always thought Wendy was an amalgam of his mother…Danny is and amalgam of a young Jack….Jack is a trickster mime…he is dead. At 1:42 if you pause it the only box open is Hilton Willapoint oysters….an aphrodisiac
You sold me with the inconsistent costume changes on Jack. The disappearing chair also fits into the Two Jack theories. When we write fiction, not every scene, every line delivered in our heads, can possibly be the same.
That's a pretty good analysis. I think I agree. The wardrobe change seems to be the smoking gun. And I agree that Hallorans pinups are a distracting choice, unless they are a clue.
Regarding Haloran's posters of naked women, I think this fits the "people with the shining get sexually abused" theme, which often leads to inappropriate hypersexualization as adults. Another thing I noticed about Haloran is, maybe difficult to discuss, he's a very old fashion black man who puts on submissive act. He's too old fashioned in this way for the 1970s, it's more like he is from the 1920s.
so whenever we see Danny having some supernatural vision early on like seeing the Grady twins or the blood elevator that’s referring to “story Danny” who his father is writing about, yet many of these events take place early on, before Jack begins writing, maybe he’s telling us the story from the beginning and is filling out the early part too, like a prelook, for example while they are on the tour, and Danny sees the girls Jack writes this later on and inserts it into the timeline before he actually started writing?
Essentially yes. In this interpretation, those early "supernatural" scenes occur in Jack's mind as he's coming up with ideas (iirc, the first supernatural shot occurs after Jack learns of the Grady murders).
I love the theory, and since Kubrick was such a perfectionist it would all fit. He wouldn’t be so casual about continuity the clothes changing the hair being messed up and such would be something he planted to reinforce his vision.
As Kubrick was meticulous and didn't make mistakes, there has to be meaning to (1) the changing colour of the typewriter (beige to gray), (2) the scultpure disappearing in the Colorado room, (3) Danny's bike looking different when he is riding it from when he is not, and (4) the chair behind Jack's desk disappearing and re-appearing. All of this suggests moving back and forth between 2 different stories/realities. These are things that support your theory.
I've seen it put forth that Kubrick did this to disorient the viewer. Yeah some could just be continuity errors but hard to believe all of them knowing how, as you say, meticulous the man was. One in particular was when Jack chopped the bathroom door. He only chops through one panel but when he stops to listen to the approaching snowcat both panels are suddenly out. No chance in heII that was just an "error".
@@coinraker6497 Yes I recall that being said before in relation to A Clockwork Orange when Alex is having dinner. The 'changes' serve to heighten the tension because although your focus is on the main characters, your brain is telling you something has changed and is 'not right' but it is not immediately obvious what it is, hence the unease.
Seems that analysts always play up the Dopey decal. I think it was just a continuity issue. Speaking of continuity (or lack thereof), what’s up with the Monarch Skiing poster in the rec room? It was clearly stated that the Overlook looked down upon winter sports. Minotaur my ass! Kubrick was a gifted director and worthy of high praise. But, the notion that he did the disappearing Dopey and skiing poster were done intentionally and cryptically for us to trip over years later seems a bit far fetched. Just one man’s option.
Wendy clearly glances at where the Dopey sticker once was while exiting Danny's room, giving the viewer a visual hint. Why would every other sticker on that door remain exactly the same, except for Dopey? Also, while the camera zooms in on Danny at the bathroom mirror, there was clear intent on making Dopey visible and more important than the other stickers.
If you pause and squint your eyes on that downshot of the maze -- 2:42 -- you will see Tony. (with a grimace face, two angry eyes and three SSS's for teeth. There are light beams coming out of his face (i.e he's shining). That's what Jack is seeing, I believe.
Note we see Tony again (before this) in a face on Danny's rye bread sandwich he's eating at the breakfast table. If you look closely you will see that as Danny takes his hand of the bread theres another impression of Tony's evil looking / angry face in the bread. Then after we cut back to Danny, that part of the bread is eaten and Danny starts talking like Tony / with Tony's voice. 'Tony is the little boy who lives inside his mouth'
Spot on. The interpretation you offer here is the strongest one. I've always thought the axe wielding Jack was the protagonist of the writer Jack's book. King's book is a tale about a writer who goes nuts and tries to murder his family. Kubrick's film represents that situation. It "reflects" it even.
The film is made with the knowledge that what we perceive of it is subjective. Having said that, Kubrick did say in an interview that this film is about evil and the reincarnation of it. Another view could be that Danny is experiencing what Jack is writing because of his shining ability, but based on Kubrick's own words, Danny is seeing what happened in the past and Jack is the reincarnation of the evil that took place.
Great contribution to Kubrick analysis. Have you thought of doing more on his other films? You may have noticed these Kub vids get you the most views by far.. something to think about.
Thank you. I'm not sure if you saw my two videos on 2001 (with another down the pipeline) and my remix of Kubrick movies to Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot. I love Barry Lyndon, and there's something in my head to say about it, but I haven't articulated it yet. I'm tentatively planning another Shining video for May/June (what can I say? It's my favorite Kubrick movie.🤷♂️)
Interesting how this movie can feed so many "real meanings" and straight up conspiracy theories when Kubrick himself says it's just a ghost story. There is much available on his making of it and the writing of the script with Diane Johnson. But this is a testament to incredible craft of Kubrick that it inspires so much thought and analysis to this day.
I didn’t think there would be anyway you’d convince me of this but after seeing it all put together it seems like the most likely story that Kubrick would be telling. It’s not the Jack of the novel, but I think it very likely is the Jack of Kubrick. Thanks for posting
Brilliant. Possibly the best theory so far for what’s actually happening. There are other things on other levels that Ager goes into but this is the correct surface narrative in my opinion!
You nailed it on the head! Well, you and Marten Go did. Look up his videos on YT about The Shining. Between the two of you, the true interpretation of Kubrick's intentions are very clear, at least to me anyway! It is quite simple really. Jack is writing a book. A horror novel. All ghosts, shining, all paranormal activity occur in Jack's Book! So some of the movie, especially towards the beginning, is reality. And then slowly Kubrick introduces scenes from Jack's book and also his brainstorming ideas that he hasn't written down yet, along with ideas from a dream he had. This transformation is not completely linear; that would make it too easy for the viewer to figure out what is going on. There are dozens of visual clues, disappearing and reappearing items, that Kubrick put into this movie to show us which scenes are "real", and which are total fiction, as they are only in the novel he is writing. Kubrick has been quoted as saying, and I am paraphrasing here, that he doesn't like "ghost stories and horror movies with supernatural phenomena". Well, there are actually None of those elements in this movie, or at least , not in "reality". Only in Jack's fictional novel. So, in his brilliant manner, he has made a movie that actually has No Supernatural Events in it at all. Those elements are all in Jack's mind, in his horror novel. A masterpiece of misdirection!
I love your thesis! The many layers to this film astound me. Kubrick created something that is unlike any other film I’ve encountered. I could endlessly discuss this film. Well done! ❤
I always thought that it was a "flaw" in the film when they showed the naked women pictures in Hallorann's bedroom. Because Hallorann never came off as the kind of guy who would adorn the walls of his room like that. But this theory you've presented, it makes a lot more sense. The Hallorann with the naked women portraits is how racist writer Jack viewed the decorative tastes of African-American men.
@@WayTooClose it definitely fits with those scenes being from Jacks perspective, and the framing of each picture with the light spots has a kind of skull motif to it, implying a more dream like quality. Later on, when Jack is talking to grady, if you take the stance that nothing supernatural is happening (which Kubrick left a lot of other little pointers towards, as well), his and Grady's concern over Halloran and why Danny is possibly attractive to Halloran is amplified with the overt sexuality of those paintings. Jack assumes Halloran wants to use Danny as he has been. I think you are dead on with large sections of the film being within Jacks novel, that last shot of him writing is so out of place, discrepancies in the maze entrance and other physical objects in the hotel also tying in to the "real" and fictional storyline. I think the story Jack is writing is one on familial abuse that appears to be a ghost story on the surface...or i've tied 2 seperate story threads that Kubrick wove in, that aren't meant to be XD
@@watermelonlalala Sure there was. in those so-called "blaxploitation" movies that were just winding down at the time of "The Shining". Movie like "Shaft", "Superfly", "Foxy Brown" and so on.
Very interesting theory. When you think about it, a lot of things make sense, he is a writer writing his story and we as viewers experience parts of that story.
I like this theory. Authors, as creators, must be able to hold their dangerous creations within their minds with antiseptic care. All possibilities become playthings within a clear mind. Then all manner of bad guys and ghouls can be imagined with remote playfulness. One thing to note: Kubrick told an interviewer that his film The Shining was a tale of hope because it was about ghosts which implied further realms beyond death and that meant the game continued with further possibility of fixing past mistakes. Is not the realm of imagination that very place where all wrongs can be righted? A sort of after-life nirvana available right now.
You can search RUclips for Stephen King Stanley Kubrick. King tells a funny tale about getting a late night call from Kubrick to talk about the optimism of ghost stories.
The two jack's share the screen as jack and Wendy, Ullman and summer caretaker? enter the Colorado lounge on the grand tour. All workers are in coveralls, but if you look at the first column between the windows a man is polishing the display case. He is dressed in the red jacket and blue jeans that crazy jack is partial too. He's got the same type of hair including the thinning at the crown. Nobody noticed him, but jack did. He does a double take, checks for confirmation with the chap behind him. Is this, when writer jack gets his first bit of inspiration, can't remember the accompanying sounds. Or is it, maybe the first ghost on show, helping out for the busy season to come, 🔪🤫 In the next inspiration before the maze, as jack is introduced to Halleran a worker goes off screen right between all in the foreground, But then, LOL 👻 as Halleran is introduced to Wendy a ghost appears between Wendy....being carried by the worker, or the hoted foreshadowing. The movie that keeps on giving, 🤦
A very interesting theory. This actually can explain how jack escapes being locked in the room with the food. The character jack just escapes it by something written but not shown. Its a plot hole by choice.
Thanks. In this interpretation, we could debate whether Jack is actually a good or bad writer. If Kubrick intended him as a stand-in for King (which he is in the book), then he might have considered him not an especially good writer. Not to toot my own horn... but I made a video touching on this a while back if you're interested.👍 ruclips.net/video/WwxJemRlOrk/видео.html
@@WayTooClose I saw the video yesterday after watching this. Good video. I can see Kubrick critiquing king in this theory. All the plot holes can be ghosts to cover any details. It possibly explains how the space or areas of the hotel dont match up. Sometimes writers dont take that into account. I wonder if Kubrick's writing partner supported critiquing king like this.
It was never a plot hole. It's very clear in the movie that Grady opens the door. The only thing that made it a plot hole was the assumption that none of it was real, which makes it a hole in a nonexistent plot.
This video has done it for me. I have no idea what the movie is about any more. Just going back to when I was 14 and saw it for the first time and just enjoyed it as a scary thriller movie at school camp. Our teacher was amazing. He teased us about how good it would be to have hot buttered popcorn, and then gave us big bowls of popcorn. This movie is now popcorn and high school camp. That is all.
Super interesting take. Regarding the bear costume scene and the magazine reference, you can check out Rob Ager's theory to consider another dark side of Jack's character within your theory.
I have seen The Shining several times and never has this theory occurred to me. Honestly, I don't think there are definitive answers to the mysteries in this movie and I think Kubrick carefully designed it this way. Perhaps each scene is shot and placed very deliberately in order to allow for multiple interpretations and explanations, each of which is equally valid. Having said that, I find yours particularly intriguing as it is intelligent and makes excellent sense. In fact, the next time I watch The Shining I will make sure to watch it with your theory in mind. Kudos to you, Mr. G.
You could take it a step further into breaking the fourth wall, and say it's a commentary by Kubrick on Stephen King, and other writers like him. It would also explain why King hates it so much.
Nice theory that ought to be explored but the conclusion jumps the shark I feel...it's as if you are trying to pander to modern "sensitivities" or something.
So many excellent theories concerning The Shining, many of which have me thinking, "Yes! This is the one that makes the most sense!", then lo and behold, you come out with this one, and once again, I'm like, "Yes! This is the one that makes the most sense!"
This is the best explaination for the continuity stuff which is all very intentional. I thought the same as this theory before I saw your video. I think we are seeing an unfinished idea. And Kubrick also didn't want to, or was not allowed, to significantly depart from the book. He was constrained by King's immature narrative and left it ambiguious so we could see better ideas in the story.
I think he chose the books he did to make into movies because he saw ways to elevate the material beyond what the author intended. Other examples include Barry Lyndon and A Clockwork Orange. Thanks for the comment!
I think the photo of Jack is the guy who Jack the writer (who doesn’t look like the character) bases his character and story around. I actually came up with this theory that it’s a spliced reality and story on my own but I like your video a lot.
Does your theory explain why Jack's wallet is empty one time when he is sitting in front of Lloyd the bartender, but he has "two twenties and a two tens" another time? I've always felt Kubrick was trying to say something with those two scenes, but I'm not sure quite what.
Kubrick is commenting on the "Gold Standard". Jack's 1980 twenty dollar bill isn't worth the same as a twenty dollar bill in "1921" where everyday is July 4, 1921 at the Overlook.
My father was a writer; not famous like Steven King, but he would take real life experiences and small details of everyday life and make them his own in a fictional story. Jack does the same thing with the Charles Grady story that he hears from Stuart Olman, and makes his book about himself and his family. Like Delbert Grady, based on Charles Grady, was actually a waiter working during the summer months, with his wife and twin daughters staying in the staff wing of the hotel while Grady works. Delbert is obviously the killer in Jack's book. But unlike Charles Grady, Jack can not seem to write about himself killing his own family. Hence, we get the ending of Jack's book with Wendy and Danny escaping, while fictional Jack dies in the hedge maze. FYI, there is no hedge maze in the ariel shot of The Overlook Hotel at the very start of the movie. That was writer Jack's creation for his book.
I think the man wearing the bear costume is a fear of Wendy. She saw Jack with the porno mag coming back from the tour with Jack's boss. So all the ghost appearances happen due to their projected fears from the hotel itself. I loved the video . If you could do an analysis on hellraiser 2 hellbound would deeply enjoy it thanks.
Excellent work, Travis! This is one of those things that require careful and thorough cogitation, rather than a quick YES or NO answer! (Maybe that's really the point, eh?)
Very interesting and perfectly plausible interpretation - and quite different from the other prevalent interpretations. Just shows how kaleidoscopic this great film is
Inverting Mythology in 2021's Lamb, my newest video:
ruclips.net/video/t3HFKo_E_fQ/видео.html
Yep. The Jack, in the film. And the Jack in Jack's book.
I think the various ways in which Jack types "All work and no play..." is representative of him going through the creative process. If he was struggling, creatively, he would just write it out in straight lines. What we actually see, is Jack trying different ideas out.
Whoa, I was right. You DO think the same as me. I've been thinking about making my own video [my theory runs deeper than this, every single scene can be used to support the theory.] and knowing that I'm not crazy to think this, is encouraging.
Okay. I don't agree with everything. But the central theme is spot on. You just need to get over the idea that Jack is evil. He's actually a very loving, and appreciative, husband and father.
The character that Jack writes, is inspired by his own biggest fears, that he could be a monster who would harm his family, and it all rests on him overcoming his writer's block. The character in the book represents who Jack might become if he fails. He might decide that a shot of whiskey could help, but that would represent a failure to quit drinking, driving him deeper into his despair.
We also need to ignore the idea that Jack goes stir crazy, in the isolation. He is an author, who specifically seeks out the isolation, in order to be able to get passed his most mundane ideas, and confront his deepest feelings. It is different to a seasoned hotel worker, constantly surrounded by guests, thinking they can survive a winter, alone, in the same hotel that is usually filled with an abundance of life.
Do you assume that Jack brought the magazine with him, or that he picked it up in reception?
I think Kubrick made this movie abstract and ambiguous so that literally any interpretation could come of it. Instead of walking the audience through with a straightforward film, he instead invites them to be the co-writers of the movie. Absolutely ingenius.
My wife bought a Nissan Cube. Inside some models was this weird shag rug on the dashboard. The dashboard was oddly raised, making you feel less exposed. The ceiling has this water drop effect, like the ripples of water in a complete still pond. The speaker grills on the doors also had 'water' elements.
So. I've often asked other buyers of the same car what they make of these odd design choices. For the life of them they've never been able to put it together. But Google has, because I found the designer and he explained it: it's a hot tub.
The car is designed for comfort, like a water tub. The round shag was not a reference to the 60s but instead a rug you might have when you step out of a tub.
It's nice to have theories about things. But if there is an ultimate design we are likely not smart enough to see it.
The above author wants you to be believe he's seen something that Kubrick never mentioned and that King has never noticed. Yeah right.
wrong. that's the approach of a hack. both lynch and kubrick have solid ideas in their head which they translate to the screen. they like to say all theories are valid because it's nicer than saying, no you're wrong, to 99% of the people who try and analyze their films
@@cagneybillingsley2165Because Kubrick had already made 2001 a Space Odyssey, which got a huge reaction from viewers who did not understand what it was about, or who wrote essays on what it was about, I think Kubrick very well could have wanted to do the same thing in the The Shining. Trigger people to try to explain it. However, The Shining did not get that much of a reaction, at the time of its release.
Exactly, all interpretations can be true in this sense and THAT gets to the ultimate message of the movie.
i always felt that too, even as a kid id have this strange interpretation if the photo being some kind of giveaway to it, like its a hotel, hotels have all different kinds of people behind closed doors,and the movie both shows behind the doors of the rooms into their shared/family lives, the into the doors of their heads, hence doorways and mirrors and all the overarching things, i dont know anything but to me i have always seen it that way, especially heightened as i got older and realized jack is drawing inspo the entire film and theres contrast between the family life and then into his with writing just like mentioned in this very video
I have said for thirty years that the Shining is a movie showing what is being written in the caretakers book. No one has ever agreed with me. Thank you for making this video.
You should've made a RUclips video about it
My wife thinks I'm mad for thinking this lol. It's so obvious though
You are completely correct!! Once the continuity errors really begin we are now in the story being written! Sculpture missing from big table in main room and the typewriter change are the biggest signs of the switch…not to mention when you see kool aid in the scene
@mskid1166 Can you elaborate... what do continuity errors have to do with being in the story being written?
Charles Grady is the name of the man whomst the Hotel Manager said killed his family. Delbert Grady could EASILY be the name which Jack used in his writing in order to protect the name of the REAL person. Jack is writing a book "based on true events" (the past-happenings of what happened in The Over-look Hotel). Some names have been changed to protect the identities of the people involved. The difference is that in Jack's version of the story, the wife and kid survived and the father died; when, in real life, the father killed his wife and children. Jack, simply input his own wife and kid into the story of the past; however, since he loves his wife and child so much, he didn't want them to die even in the story; so, he let his beloved wife and beloved child live. But, every horror story needs to have some sort of death/pain for it to be exciting. That's where Dick Hallorann comes into the fray. In every horror story, the well-meaning black-man always dies. So, in a story about a man killing people with an axe...why not kill the black-guy?
This video has an EXCELLENT theory. This is definitely in my Top 3 Favorite Shining theories.
He didn’t write anything tho he wrote the same line over and over. U can’t argue that.
He wrote the same line (with a few changes here and there) over and over again IN THE STORY he wrote. @@johnbutler2780
@@johnbutler2780 as explained in the video: the part where he wrote "All work no play..." over and over again was during the Jack the CHARACTER segments, not Jack the WRITER.
This is what I thought when I first watched eye video too
Another key element that would align with this theory is the fact that during the interview, Mr. Ullman says that Grady came up with his wife and "two little girls about 8 and 10", but the two girls we repeatedly see are clearly identical twins, who have to had been born at the same time and be the same age.
I'm not so sure they are clearly identical twins just because they have the same style.
One of them actually looks older and is taller i think
They're not twins. They're just sisters wearing similar clothes. They're 10 and 8.
Even after 42 years of it’s release, the film is still being debated with countless theories and interpretations. That is the genius of Stanley Kubrick ! He made a cinema masterpiece for sure.
So true
Wow
Do u know exactly which theory is used in this movie? I need for my project.
Kubrick annoys me since he regularly omits important information to keep people talking about them. But then I prefer Ken Russel's ' hit you over the head' theatrical style.
He had his assistant burn all his deleted scenes after his death. What a loss!
And the fact that Jack has looked right at the camera several times and there's an audience applauding at the end. Definitely a super sound theory
You're right. Very interesting.👍
He is looking at himself, as we all do, in a mirror. His eye contact is with Writer Jack, and begins as soon as he hears the story about Grady and the murder/suicide.
In point of fact, it’s precisely after he finishes the line “I’m outlining a new writing project…”
@@perriergrey WOAH! Idk how I never noticed that
@travisg.4283 you say that we see the first supernatural event of the film when Danny talks to Tony. I think it is actually when Jack first looks into the camera.
When is there an audience applauding?
There is a theory supporting the "Two Different Jacks" theory that pushes the idea that the face that we see in the film is not even really Jack's real face. Jack, "the writer" saw the picture from the 1921 ballroom photo and used that guy as the antagonist for the story. So in a way, the whole movie is broken down into "REAL" moments and fictional moments from his novel. What do you think? it would be the most logical answer as to why Jack is in the 1921 photo. Almost as if Kubrick is giving one last wink to the audience.
That's very interesting and would explain the ending pic.
Is there any way to tell which parts of the movie are "real" vs not?
@@WayTooClose Yes. the continuity "errors" themselves are vast and ubiquitous throughout the film eg. dopey sticker, missing chairs, missing light switches etc. Kubrick uses these small changes as indicators about what is REAL vs NOT. I read somewhere that Kubrick explained that he hated how there was a conventional trope of how dreams in cinema are represented. He wanted to create subtle images so that the viewer would subliminally be conscious that something wasn't quite right. That would be the "false" reality. The question would then be "who's false narrative is this?" There are many interpretations: a major one is the one that i told you before. the REAL Jack is writing a novel called the Shining. That is when we are seeing all of the drama and ghosts. There is another crazy theory called "THE WENDY THEORY" that you should check out on RUclips. I honestly think that Kubrick created many layers of possible interpretations as far as who is envisioning the "FAKE" Reality. All of them might have validity. That is the point. He is trying to confuse and keep the audience unbalanced. There are no ghosts. There was no murders. The novel was published. Could it be a cruel dissertation on Stephen King himself?
@@wrestledeep @wrestledeep I totally agree that there's a lot he puts in to subconsciously disorient the viewer, and a lot that doesn't add up. As Jan Harlan, his long time executive producer (and brother-in-law) said, "It's a ghost story. Of course it doesn't make sense."
You're right that he looks down on Stephen King. Diane Johnson, hs co-writer on The Shining, all but confirmed this. Kubrick and DJ have been surprisingly critical and condescending of King's work over the years. I actually made a video about it a while back if you want to check it out:
ruclips.net/video/WwxJemRlOrk/видео.html
yes! the final scene is the only one where the furniture is covered with cloth, like if a hotel is actually going to be temporarily closed. That is the real writer scoping out the place and seeing the picture of the man who would inspire the work.
@@jameswalker4249 Yes. i wish this theory was examined more. I think that Kubrick slipped in little hints like that as a sly way of winking to the audience that this is all in the writer's head. I am sure that there are even MORE clues to back up this theory if you just look for them in the movie.
Tthe more I watch The Shining, watch documentaries about The Shining I am more sure that:
1. The Shining is one of the most complex films if all-time
2. The Shining has at least two plots and even probably more than two plots
Its important for USA people to understand that most of the world has a shorter cut missing several key scenes (like the hotel covered in cobwebs and skeletons). It is a much better movie with the US fuller version.
I think there are even some trims mid-scene. There's a youtube video of Jack and Lloyd where it skips past Jack taking his first sip of bourbon as his eyes go blank. I assume that's the international version?
There are a number of hidden narratives, for certain. The film is so full of weird little details. The making of documentary is also full of strange details. I'll give you an example. You'll have heard the theory that Jack is sexually abusing Danny, I'm sure. In the making of, Jack Nicholson (in his Jack Torrance garb) is introduced to James Mason (who weirdly is dressed like one of the party goers in The Gold Room ball scene). James Mason famously played Humbert Humbert in Kubrick's version of Lolita.
@@__teles__ I disagree. The skeleton scene takes ALL horror straight out of the film. Almost laughable. So much better without... I wouldn't call any of the other scenes cut from the European version is of key value either.. (hence they were cut-worthy)...
@@davidlean1060 I do think there is a very strong intention in this movie (maybe the entire point of the movie) to infer that Jack molested Danny (not the least of which is Wendy actually saying so directly: "You did this") We see Jack sitting on the bed both alone (in contemplation?), we see the look of "fear and knowing" on Danny's face when he walks in and realizes his father is awake (and they are alone together), and then we see Jack drawing Danny onto his knee lovingly while Danny is clearly terrified of him. This mirrors (literally mirrors, as in the man on the bed is sitting in a mirrored position to Jack), the later scene of the two men engaging in an act of implied oral copulation in one of the rooms during the climactic scenes of the unravelling of minds that impacts the entire family (does this scene imply that Wendy has realized the whole truth about her husband's actions with her son?). The fact that one is dressed in a costume and is kneeling at a child's height "masks" the notion that the unidentified person is in fact Danny. We are initially given the explanation that Danny told Wendy there is a woman in the upper hotel room that did this to him, thus giving her the temporary reassurance that Jack did not "do this to Danny." Following this revelation, we see Jack go to investigate that room. I would suggest is it not a wise move to let an accused person investigate himself. We are privy to a possible hallucination of the same woman taunting Jack, first as a beautiful woman (implying Jack is just a normal red-blooded male who finds a beautiful naked woman tantalizing) and then in the mirror with her decayed body, implying the truth is much uglier and that Jack has glimpsed the horror of what he has done.) This entire scene seems to imply that Jack, despite realizing the truth of his actions, has decided he will go along with Danny's made up story to keep Wendy from finding out the truth (and perhaps blocking from it from his own mind.) Jack locking the door is symbolic of denying what he has done and forgetting about it by literally locking it away. We know he has succeeded when he returns to Wendy and in fact tells her there is "nothing" in that room, effectively implying none of it has happened. I personally feel this makes the most sense, because most of how we see Jack descend into insanity begins when he confronts Lloyd the first time and admits while he is taking his first drink after a period of sobriety, that he did hurt Danny in the past. This is why they have even come to the Overlook, to start over and turn a corner on their troubled past. But, like all people with internal demons, whereever you go, there you are. Kubric was a master at exposing the darker forces of this world, forces that are in fact masquerading as demons but are just good old fashioned evil humans doing evil things.
This is one of the best and most cohesive shining theories I've ever seen, and I've seen M A N Y!
no. ager's analysis is the best and most definitive. these other theories always miss the forest for the tree
@@cagneybillingsley2165 lol you can't compare folks to Agar, that's not fair. This theory is solid. Agar's analyses are on another level.
I was gonna say the same thing.
@@daveross2265 no the Wendy theory is straight bs but abusive men like to gaslight women and say they're crazy and it never happened so there's that.
By far, I totally agree.
When Jack throws the ball in frustration for the final time in the scene where he has writer's block, it lands on the exact future spot where Hallorann is killed. Perhaps an inspiration for writer Jack? Sound, logical theory.
Interesting. I definitely think Hallorann is a surrogate for native Americans, so that would make sense.
I thought the ball disappeared. It never bounced back that last time.
@@KutWrite I believe he means when he's throwing it in the Colorado Lounge, not the hallway later.
He throws it against a Yei Navajo mural. The Yei ceremony is overlooked in the analysis. It’s very important.
I think writer Jack could have changed Grady's first name and some of the other details because he wanted to ensure people knew his novel was fiction while also making it clear he was inspired by the original murders.
There are two blonde twin women carrying suitcases dowstairs, as they initially walk through the hotel, suggesting the two "twIn character" theme, and I recall a scene where Jack can only be seen entering a door via his reflection first before entering the frame. The use of twin doors and symmetry throughout would certainly reinforce the theme of two Jacks.
Also Jack checks them out for a quick but clear second. Kubrick wanted to show us a overshadowing scene
There's also a scene when Jack goes by himself for his initial interview and then calls Wendy from the lobby. If you look past him and past the Manager and his assistant, there is a "man"? (creepy almost alien looking thing) standing at the far end of the room looking at the maze model. It is a mirror to a scene later in the movie when Jack stands and looks at Wendy and Danny from above in the maze.
So this could be seen as the Good ending where Jack wrote a successful book and found happiness with his family once again.
The thing I absolutely love about this theory is that you never once say that this is definitive and you constantly say words like "maybe" and just suggesting that things could be this way, rather then saying "this is the way it is." Very interesting and plausible theory as well
Thanks! I know there's a fair amount that's subjective, so I'm trying to balance that with the "harder" evidence.
@@WayTooClose beautifully done. A theory is always a lot more believable when it's not presented as definite fact
This theory is one of the most compelling of the lot, I think it could be just one of the many layers that Kubrick put into all his films. I think the shinning is about what Carl Gustav Jung called the shadow, in all its forms, the individual's shadow and the shadow of the dark history of America all the way through to the shadow of human kinds soul and it's believed the The Red Book ( Liber Novus ) makes an appearance in the film in the interview scene. Jack could even be exploring his own shadow while he writes, other Jack is real Jack's Shadow.
The maroon jacket is one of the tells that we are seeing character Jack. When writer Jack first came into the lobby there was the caretaker at work across the room wearing that same jacket, and the scene showed him pointedly staring at the caretaker.
Here's another detail to support. Jack's typewriter changes colour. It is light grey when we first see it, but it is, appropriately, a much darker tone within the story Jack writes.
It doesn't turn darker; it turns beige. And everybody's mother commented on that before you.
As a poet and on again off again artist this theory genuinely recontextualised the whole movie for me.
Like I've always thought at points Jack was genuinely a chill guy while at most others it looks like he's perpetually two steps away from becoming a full blown looney tune but this makes me look at the film like a colour spectrum, like where does Jack the writer end and Jack the character start?
I've since started rewatching it with this in mind and I look at things like the first time we see Jack the writer driving up to the hotel in the opening credits, which to me now feels like that's actually the move in day for him and his family and the interview we see is Jack the character as part of the writers story now that the writer has settled in and started on his project.
Perhaps Kubrick wanted to explore the Venn diagram of an author's work vs his personal life, himself included(?).
That could be why Jack driving to the hotel compared with the family driving to the hotel seem to be going in different directions with different landscapes. Interesting.
I cannot stop myself from watching Shinning analysis movies. This rabbit hole has consumed my entertainment for a month now! Thanks for the vid.
This is the best theory I've heard yet. I find most Shining theories to be nonsense, but this really makes me look at it in a different way.
Excellent theory. In the job interview he says that his wife loves ghost stories, could that have been his motive for taking the story in this direction?
It's possible. I'm not certain though because Jack could just be lying to be more affable to get hired; the one book we see Wendy reading is Catcher in the Rye, which isn't horror.
This would also explain why jack gets drunk, when the manager of the hotel there is "not a drop in the house"
This is one of the best Shining theories I've seen. Well thought out and well presented. You may have just cracked Kubrick's code. Great job, man!
I agree this is the most accurate explanation for what we're actually watching in the movie, which is why it's so terrifying; because in character Jack's world, there's a scary ghost in room 237 that's abusing Danny, but in writer Jack's world, Jack is abusing Danny.
The maze appearing several times larger than it actually is in the aerial shot indicates a break from reality to me. The maze to me is a metaphor for the mind of Jack. It's twists and turns mirroring the complex subconscious. You can also get trapped in a maze, much like Jack (the character according to this theory) is trapped in his own head in his isolation, unable to escape his growing insanity. The maze also seems to change it's layout on a couple times. This could be a hint to the fact that some events in the movie are happening in someone's imagination. You could probably make the case for the supernatural events in the movie being the product of any of the character's imaginations.
More possible evidence to support this theory: The CARETAKER of the Overlook can be seen at 20:47. Jack notices him and mocks the "limp" the Caretaker/2nd Jack will have later when chasing Danny in the maze. He is the only one not wearing the same "coveralls" the rest of the staff are wearing in the scene. He wears very similar clothing as the "2nd Jack". The "twins" theme/motif features prominently throughout the film from the opening shot of the mountains and their reflection in the lake so it makes sense there would be two "Jacks" as there are two Gradys, two hags in the bathtub, (one with long hair who walks after Jack and the other in the tub with short hair), two doors in room 237, two pictures of women in Hallorann's bedroom, two sets of two girls that say goodbye to Mr. Ullman on Closing day, twin VW Bugs in the parking lot and so many more examples including numbers 24, 42, 12, 21 - too many to list them all here and definitely more fun to discover them yourselves...
I like the twins idea a lot. Even Danny sorta has one in Tony. Fits with the mirrors theme too. 👍
That character is wearing a red and white checkered long sleeve shirt, nothing at all like Jack's jacket.
Some very good questions are raised in this video and by doing so, it's honesty one of the best videos on RUclips about The Shining (and I've seen quite a few at this point). Well done.
Interesting theory! It makes sense of an anomaly I’ve noticed in the family’s drive to the hotel, which is that they seem to be driving away from it. When Jack drives to it for the interview the landscape falls away to the left. But when the family drives to it the landscape falls away to the right, as if they changed their minds about staying there. So all of the film from that point would be Jack’s book, and Jack thinking about the book. Stephen King stayed just one night in the Stanley Hotel, where he came up with the original story.
Interesting idea, but it could also mean nothing. At the start of the movie they say the sidewinder is a 25 mile long road. If you've ever driven through a national park in the mountains, you see sometimes the valleys are on the right side and sometimes on the left, all as you're driving the same direction relative to the park entrance gate.
@@CR3271 Very interesting! And it makes me think that a lot in the movie means something or nothing, like the doors to nowhere and the two Gradies and so on. To me, all the ambivalence and uncertainty is Stanley saying, We know nothing! Are there ghosts? Does life continue after death? Was Jack in the hotel in a different lifetime? Et cetera. (Is going to the hotel a homecoming for Jack?)
@CR3271 100%. Ive driven Going to the Sun Road in Glacier Park which is the riad in the film, and this is indeed the case.
Interesting take. One thing I'd never picked up on was Jack saying, "Forever and ever and ever", being pretty much exactly like the twins said it....and I've watched the movie countless times. So at least thank you for showing me that. 👍
I lean towards the 2 Jacks theory too - so this video makes a lot of sense to me. I don't think Kubrick did continuity errors - not in his DNA - so changing from one shirt to another back to the first in the same day is deliberate, the missing sticker on Danny's wall, the fact that they go in one door to the food storage unit and come out an apparently different door, etc etc. I don't think the scene where Jack rips up his paper and berates Wendy happened - I think that was part of his book. In short - I like this video a lot!
Kubrick's movies are filled with continuity errors. For example, there's no hedge when we see the first view of the hotel.
@@johnbrowne3950 errors from films other than the shining would make a better counter argument.
I have to watch again to see when the shirt changes. Thats an amazing discovery . King hates the movie so much because it can compete was his book.
@@THECARS7879 King hates the movie because it's at a level of higher intelligence. King likes to kill puppies and kittens in his stories in order to get an emotional response from his audience and he resorts to silly nonsense like coke machines that come to life and kill people. His imagination is limited and his stories always end up falling apart into the absurd. Kubric took the stupid parts out and created a psychological masterpiece. In short, he is the true author of The Shining as we know it because we tend to discuss the movie far more often than anyone ever talks about the original storyline other than to give credit to King for the initial concept.
@@johnbrowne3950 granted, but in the Shining we have things being inserted into or taken out of the shot in the middle of shot-reverse-shot segments that were clearly filmed at the same time. At certain points the only explanation is that he deliberately said take this out of the shot or put this in the shot.
Like Jack the Writer and Jack the Character, Charles Grady and Delbert Grady are also two separate characters and all four of them are forever trapped in that place.
Spot on. On the most macro level this film is about a writer overcoming writer’s block. The movie transitions from reality to the story that eventually gets written. Jack conflates his and the hotel’s history to overcome his writer’s block. That is why inconsistencies occur in the hotel and character details (i.e. the sisters and Grady, disappearing chairs, decals) Change in typewriter and color of clothing are clues to which world we are experiencing. How he contemplates the maze and types… The audience is transitioned into the story Jack is writing.
I really like this theory , as it addresses the horror-author struggling to write the story of a horror-author struggling to write a story .... by a horror author (king) going through thr struggles of writing the story... so many writers reflect themselves and the process of their writing within the narrative itself, so I like that this is Kubrick's creation of blurring lines between artists' sanity and insanity, persona and characters, fiction and imagination. Nice theory I enjoyed this ty
Yes! I just posted how I like this meta nested quality. Reading your comment, I just had the idea that the extremely important theme of mirrors and symmetry has an interesting and perhaps additional relevance to this nested quality; when you face two mirrors together you get that infinity effect- so writers writing about writers ad infinitum! ("Forever and forever and forever and....")
Seeing Jack's image in the July 4, 1921 picture, that leads me to a theory that everyone in that picture lived in the hotel at certain points, and they had passed away inside or around the hotel, and their souls are added to the guests of attendance, and the most recent addition, being Jack at the time, since he was the current caretaker, is place in the bottom middle of the picture.
After watching and contemplating videos arguing both for and against the "wendy" theory, this "writer" theory is a breath of fresh air! I like it. Btw- Someone should mention the nested meta-ness of the writer, Stephen King, a horror writer, writing about a writer, Jack, writing horror. Thanks!
You nailed it. I believed this idea for years. Its the only theory which floats, cannot be debunked and explains the disappearance of props as being omitted or added in the visual depiction of Jack's story thought process and writting. The missing last scene confirms it too much so it was deleted. Charles /Delbert is an obvious clue. Good work, you deserve more views and credit. Jack actually sees a guy in the lobby working on the first day that he uses his image for the character that he writes in his novel here's the link to the video source for that ruclips.net/video/0V4TYCn2qZg/видео.html
Idk
but without looking into it - disturbed father with psychological trauma from abilities he had growing up as a kid ( Dr sleep - Danny drank to cope- Jack did the same until towards the end to stop) Jack’s powers are sight ( shining ) as any others who can see - it gives life to those who can no longer be seen( the dead - souls stuck - earth bound ) etc and the mental break of letting such “ghosts” take control or allow them to influence Jack into murder….
The other theory
It all takes place in Jack’s Head
Danny is Jack when he was a child - his subconscious changed his “ son’s “ name
The Wife - isn’t real neither- the whole hotel is his subconscious- a gathering if you will of his Subconscious identities with filler personalities etc
The father/ jack is who he is currently
The murderous Jack crazy drunk is jacks subconscious unregulated emotional- damaged etc
Danny is Jack when he was a little boy who “SAW” could see the horrors of life shown to him aka trauma- abuse etc
The abuser disturbed Jack tired to harm Danny ( Jack ) because he was a reminder of past trauma- hurt - pain etc
There are no ghost or anything- it’s hurtful memories of Jack growing up what he could see - was exposed to
Everything is taking place in Jack’s mind - everything
The mind can create and make everything so real - with no ripple or disturbances or anything- it protects itself and so on- the mind can only take so much….
When Jack finally Snaps - he is letting go - moving on - by trying to end his wife ( the idea of love - marriage- etc ) and Danny ( his childhood, idea of responsibility- growing up -trauma)
The murdering Jack ( subconscious) dies but his childhood ( innocence -prior to being hurt )
And his wife ( the idea of love - having a companion etc) stays alive…..
Idk - may sound idiotic- who knows
The scrapbook next to his type writer is the news clippings he refers to with Grady in the restroom. It’s full of stories of murder and tragedy from the Overlook.
This is THE ONLY THEORY that floats! How would you explain the deleted last scene on regard to fitting in with the theory?
I always thought Wendy was an amalgam of his mother…Danny is and amalgam of a young Jack….Jack is a trickster mime…he is dead. At 1:42 if you pause it the only box open is Hilton Willapoint oysters….an aphrodisiac
I don’t comment very often but I have to say I really liked this theory. Well played sir!
You sold me with the inconsistent costume changes on Jack. The disappearing chair also fits into the Two Jack theories. When we write fiction, not every scene, every line delivered in our heads, can possibly be the same.
Nicholson's performance in this movie is nothing short of amazing. Extraordinary.
Read the book. It’s not a Kubrick thing but a Stephan King thing. There’s Jack and then the Overlook Hotel taking over Jack’s body.
That's a pretty good analysis. I think I agree. The wardrobe change seems to be the smoking gun. And I agree that Hallorans pinups are a distracting choice, unless they are a clue.
Regarding Haloran's posters of naked women, I think this fits the "people with the shining get sexually abused" theme, which often leads to inappropriate hypersexualization as adults. Another thing I noticed about Haloran is, maybe difficult to discuss, he's a very old fashion black man who puts on submissive act. He's too old fashioned in this way for the 1970s, it's more like he is from the 1920s.
Excellent…well researched and presented. It’s as plausible as many I’ve seen
so whenever we see Danny having some supernatural vision early on like seeing the Grady twins or the blood elevator that’s referring to “story Danny” who his father is writing about, yet many of these events take place early on, before Jack begins writing, maybe he’s telling us the story from the beginning and is filling out the early part too, like a prelook, for example while they are on the tour, and Danny sees the girls Jack writes this later on and inserts it into the timeline before he actually started writing?
Essentially yes. In this interpretation, those early "supernatural" scenes occur in Jack's mind as he's coming up with ideas (iirc, the first supernatural shot occurs after Jack learns of the Grady murders).
@@WayTooClose pretty cool theory, this movie has so many interesting ways to interpret it, im sure that Kubrick would be pleased.
I love the theory, and since Kubrick was such a perfectionist it would all fit. He wouldn’t be so casual about continuity the clothes changing the hair being messed up and such would be something he planted to reinforce his vision.
I would say this represents the inherent duality within man. The shadow and the ego. When alcoholism takes over.....people get murdered.
I like it!
As Kubrick was meticulous and didn't make mistakes, there has to be meaning to (1) the changing colour of the typewriter (beige to gray), (2) the scultpure disappearing in the Colorado room, (3) Danny's bike looking different when he is riding it from when he is not, and (4) the chair behind Jack's desk disappearing and re-appearing. All of this suggests moving back and forth between 2 different stories/realities. These are things that support your theory.
I've seen it put forth that Kubrick did this to disorient the viewer. Yeah some could just be continuity errors but hard to believe all of them knowing how, as you say, meticulous the man was. One in particular was when Jack chopped the bathroom door. He only chops through one panel but when he stops to listen to the approaching snowcat both panels are suddenly out. No chance in heII that was just an "error".
@@coinraker6497 Yes I recall that being said before in relation to A Clockwork Orange when Alex is having dinner. The 'changes' serve to heighten the tension because although your focus is on the main characters, your brain is telling you something has changed and is 'not right' but it is not immediately obvious what it is, hence the unease.
@@coinraker6497I've always thought that he just continues to chop the door down off screen.
Seems that analysts always play up the Dopey decal. I think it was just a continuity issue. Speaking of continuity (or lack thereof), what’s up with the Monarch Skiing poster in the rec room? It was clearly stated that the Overlook looked down upon winter sports. Minotaur my ass! Kubrick was a gifted director and worthy of high praise. But, the notion that he did the disappearing Dopey and skiing poster were done intentionally and cryptically for us to trip over years later seems a bit far fetched. Just one man’s option.
Wendy clearly glances at where the Dopey sticker once was while exiting Danny's room, giving the viewer a visual hint. Why would every other sticker on that door remain exactly the same, except for Dopey? Also, while the camera zooms in on Danny at the bathroom mirror, there was clear intent on making Dopey visible and more important than the other stickers.
If you pause and squint your eyes on that downshot of the maze -- 2:42 -- you will see Tony. (with a grimace face, two angry eyes and three SSS's for teeth. There are light beams coming out of his face (i.e he's shining). That's what Jack is seeing, I believe.
Note we see Tony again (before this) in a face on Danny's rye bread sandwich he's eating at the breakfast table. If you look closely you will see that as Danny takes his hand of the bread theres another impression of Tony's evil looking / angry face in the bread. Then after we cut back to Danny, that part of the bread is eaten and Danny starts talking like Tony / with Tony's voice. 'Tony is the little boy who lives inside his mouth'
The Shining is a great example of a movie's subtext being so blurry that you can have thousands of different interpretations of the movie.
Spot on. The interpretation you offer here is the strongest one. I've always thought the axe wielding Jack was the protagonist of the writer Jack's book. King's book is a tale about a writer who goes nuts and tries to murder his family. Kubrick's film represents that situation. It "reflects" it even.
The thing I like about this 80s horror film is that it's not as cheesy as any other 80s and 70s horror film.
The film is made with the knowledge that what we perceive of it is subjective. Having said that, Kubrick did say in an interview that this film is about evil and the reincarnation of it. Another view could be that Danny is experiencing what Jack is writing because of his shining ability, but based on Kubrick's own words, Danny is seeing what happened in the past and Jack is the reincarnation of the evil that took place.
The only theory I’ve seen that actually makes sense
Great contribution to Kubrick analysis. Have you thought of doing more on his other films? You may have noticed these Kub vids get you the most views by far.. something to think about.
Thank you. I'm not sure if you saw my two videos on 2001 (with another down the pipeline) and my remix of Kubrick movies to Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot. I love Barry Lyndon, and there's something in my head to say about it, but I haven't articulated it yet. I'm tentatively planning another Shining video for May/June (what can I say? It's my favorite Kubrick movie.🤷♂️)
Interesting how this movie can feed so many "real meanings" and straight up conspiracy theories when Kubrick himself says it's just a ghost story. There is much available on his making of it and the writing of the script with Diane Johnson. But this is a testament to incredible craft of Kubrick that it inspires so much thought and analysis to this day.
This is one of the best theories about The Shining. This makes a lot of sense.
Great work, Travis. Narration and editing really good
I didn’t think there would be anyway you’d convince me of this but after seeing it all put together it seems like the most likely story that Kubrick would be telling. It’s not the Jack of the novel, but I think it very likely is the Jack of Kubrick. Thanks for posting
This is the best Shining theory I've heard. Makes a lot of sense.
Brilliant. Possibly the best theory so far for what’s actually happening. There are other things on other levels that Ager goes into but this is the correct surface narrative in my opinion!
You nailed it on the head! Well, you and Marten Go did. Look up his videos on YT about The Shining. Between the two of you, the true interpretation of Kubrick's intentions are very clear, at least to me anyway! It is quite simple really. Jack is writing a book. A horror novel. All ghosts, shining, all paranormal activity occur in Jack's Book! So some of the movie, especially towards the beginning, is reality. And then slowly Kubrick introduces scenes from Jack's book and also his brainstorming ideas that he hasn't written down yet, along with ideas from a dream he had. This transformation is not completely linear; that would make it too easy for the viewer to figure out what is going on. There are dozens of visual clues, disappearing and reappearing items, that Kubrick put into this movie to show us which scenes are "real", and which are total fiction, as they are only in the novel he is writing. Kubrick has been quoted as saying, and I am paraphrasing here, that he doesn't like "ghost stories and horror movies with supernatural phenomena". Well, there are actually None of those elements in this movie, or at least , not in "reality". Only in Jack's fictional novel. So, in his brilliant manner, he has made a movie that actually has No Supernatural Events in it at all. Those elements are all in Jack's mind, in his horror novel. A masterpiece of misdirection!
Yes! And as indicated by the “Overlook” hotel.
Mind blown 🤯! This video was amazing!
I love your thesis! The many layers to this film astound me. Kubrick created something that is unlike any other film I’ve encountered. I could endlessly discuss this film. Well done! ❤
This is a very intriguing theory. I feel the shining is a movie that’s all about determining reality from fiction
I always thought that it was a "flaw" in the film when they showed the naked women pictures in Hallorann's bedroom. Because Hallorann never came off as the kind of guy who would adorn the walls of his room like that. But this theory you've presented, it makes a lot more sense. The Hallorann with the naked women portraits is how racist writer Jack viewed the decorative tastes of African-American men.
It's definitely a very unusual choice by Kubrick.
Is there any way to view it other than the stereotypical depiction of a black man's room?
@@WayTooClose it definitely fits with those scenes being from Jacks perspective, and the framing of each picture with the light spots has a kind of skull motif to it, implying a more dream like quality. Later on, when Jack is talking to grady, if you take the stance that nothing supernatural is happening (which Kubrick left a lot of other little pointers towards, as well), his and Grady's concern over Halloran and why Danny is possibly attractive to Halloran is amplified with the overt sexuality of those paintings. Jack assumes Halloran wants to use Danny as he has been. I think you are dead on with large sections of the film being within Jacks novel, that last shot of him writing is so out of place, discrepancies in the maze entrance and other physical objects in the hotel also tying in to the "real" and fictional storyline. I think the story Jack is writing is one on familial abuse that appears to be a ghost story on the surface...or i've tied 2 seperate story threads that Kubrick wove in, that aren't meant to be XD
@@WayTooClose I don't think there was a stereotype of a black man's room in those days. Or even now.
@@watermelonlalala There isn't unless you see "muh rAcIsM" in everything.
@@watermelonlalala Sure there was. in those so-called "blaxploitation" movies that were just winding down at the time of "The Shining". Movie like "Shaft", "Superfly", "Foxy Brown" and so on.
Very interesting theory. When you think about it, a lot of things make sense, he is a writer writing his story and we as viewers experience parts of that story.
This theory makes sense, and smooths out any other plot holes.
I like this theory.
Authors, as creators, must be able to hold their dangerous creations within their minds with antiseptic care. All possibilities become playthings within a clear mind. Then all manner of bad guys and ghouls can be imagined with remote playfulness.
One thing to note: Kubrick told an interviewer that his film The Shining was a tale of hope because it was about ghosts which implied further realms beyond death and that meant the game continued with further possibility of fixing past mistakes.
Is not the realm of imagination that very place where all wrongs can be righted? A sort of after-life nirvana available right now.
You can search RUclips for Stephen King Stanley Kubrick. King tells a funny tale about getting a late night call from Kubrick to talk about the optimism of ghost stories.
The two jack's share the screen as jack and Wendy, Ullman and summer caretaker? enter the Colorado lounge on the grand tour.
All workers are in coveralls, but if you look at the first column between the windows a man is polishing the display case.
He is dressed in the red jacket and blue jeans that crazy jack is partial too.
He's got the same type of hair including the thinning at the crown.
Nobody noticed him, but jack did.
He does a double take, checks for confirmation with the chap behind him.
Is this, when writer jack gets his first bit of inspiration, can't remember the accompanying sounds. Or is it, maybe the first ghost on show, helping out for the busy season to come, 🔪🤫
In the next inspiration before the maze, as jack is introduced to Halleran a worker goes off screen right between all in the foreground,
But then, LOL 👻 as Halleran is introduced to Wendy a ghost appears between Wendy....being carried by the worker, or the hoted foreshadowing.
The movie that keeps on giving,
🤦
That guy in the lounge is wearing a red and black checkered long sleeve shirt.
A very interesting theory. This actually can explain how jack escapes being locked in the room with the food. The character jack just escapes it by something written but not shown. Its a plot hole by choice.
Thanks.
In this interpretation, we could debate whether Jack is actually a good or bad writer. If Kubrick intended him as a stand-in for King (which he is in the book), then he might have considered him not an especially good writer.
Not to toot my own horn... but I made a video touching on this a while back if you're interested.👍
ruclips.net/video/WwxJemRlOrk/видео.html
@@WayTooClose I saw the video yesterday after watching this. Good video. I can see Kubrick critiquing king in this theory. All the plot holes can be ghosts to cover any details. It possibly explains how the space or areas of the hotel dont match up. Sometimes writers dont take that into account. I wonder if Kubrick's writing partner supported critiquing king like this.
Oh yeah. Diane Johnson has been even more critical of King over the years.
It was never a plot hole. It's very clear in the movie that Grady opens the door. The only thing that made it a plot hole was the assumption that none of it was real, which makes it a hole in a nonexistent plot.
This video has done it for me. I have no idea what the movie is about any more. Just going back to when I was 14 and saw it for the first time and just enjoyed it as a scary thriller movie at school camp. Our teacher was amazing. He teased us about how good it would be to have hot buttered popcorn, and then gave us big bowls of popcorn. This movie is now popcorn and high school camp. That is all.
Relatedly, Kubrick wasn’t interested in a film adaptation of “The Shining” but rather a semi-biographical account of the process of writing it.
Wow, an impressive theory no doubt! You have wholeheartedly made me reconsider my initial synopsys of the film. Bravo!
Super interesting take. Regarding the bear costume scene and the magazine reference, you can check out Rob Ager's theory to consider another dark side of Jack's character within your theory.
I have seen The Shining several times and never has this theory occurred to me. Honestly, I don't think there are definitive answers to the mysteries in this movie and I think Kubrick carefully designed it this way. Perhaps each scene is shot and placed very deliberately in order to allow for multiple interpretations and explanations, each of which is equally valid. Having said that, I find yours particularly intriguing as it is intelligent and makes excellent sense. In fact, the next time I watch The Shining I will make sure to watch it with your theory in mind. Kudos to you, Mr. G.
You could take it a step further into breaking the fourth wall, and say it's a commentary by Kubrick on Stephen King, and other writers like him. It would also explain why King hates it so much.
Nice theory that ought to be explored but the conclusion jumps the shark I feel...it's as if you are trying to pander to modern "sensitivities" or something.
This theory is amazing it needs more recognition💯💯
I hope so!
This theory no longer works because in Doctor Sleep, there's a scene where it shows the axed door with Redrum.
This is the best analysis I have ever seen, you should write a book about it.
So many excellent theories concerning The Shining, many of which have me thinking, "Yes! This is the one that makes the most sense!", then lo and behold, you come out with this one, and once again, I'm like, "Yes! This is the one that makes the most sense!"
Great username!
This is the best explaination for the continuity stuff which is all very intentional. I thought the same as this theory before I saw your video. I think we are seeing an unfinished idea. And Kubrick also didn't want to, or was not allowed, to significantly depart from the book. He was constrained by King's immature narrative and left it ambiguious so we could see better ideas in the story.
I think he chose the books he did to make into movies because he saw ways to elevate the material beyond what the author intended. Other examples include Barry Lyndon and A Clockwork Orange.
Thanks for the comment!
I think the photo of Jack is the guy who Jack the writer (who doesn’t look like the character) bases his character and story around.
I actually came up with this theory that it’s a spliced reality and story on my own but I like your video a lot.
Does your theory explain why Jack's wallet is empty one time when he is sitting in front of Lloyd the bartender, but he has "two twenties and a two tens" another time? I've always felt Kubrick was trying to say something with those two scenes, but I'm not sure quite what.
Kubrick is commenting on the "Gold Standard". Jack's 1980 twenty dollar bill isn't worth the same as a twenty dollar bill in "1921" where everyday is July 4, 1921 at the Overlook.
My father was a writer; not famous like Steven King, but he would take real life experiences and small details of everyday life and make them his own in a fictional story.
Jack does the same thing with the Charles Grady story that he hears from Stuart Olman, and makes his book about himself and his family. Like Delbert Grady, based on Charles Grady, was actually a waiter working during the summer months, with his wife and twin daughters staying in the staff wing of the hotel while Grady works. Delbert is obviously the killer in Jack's book. But unlike Charles Grady, Jack can not seem to write about himself killing his own family. Hence, we get the ending of Jack's book with Wendy and Danny escaping, while fictional Jack dies in the hedge maze.
FYI, there is no hedge maze in the ariel shot of The Overlook Hotel at the very start of the movie. That was writer Jack's creation for his book.
I normally hate watch these Shining theories for a laugh, but this ones pretty sound, I like it.
I think the man wearing the bear costume is a fear of Wendy. She saw Jack with the porno mag coming back from the tour with Jack's boss. So all the ghost appearances happen due to their projected fears from the hotel itself. I loved the video . If you could do an analysis on hellraiser 2 hellbound would deeply enjoy it thanks.
Thanks!
That's a good interpretation for the playgirl.
I'm not familiar with Hellraiser 2, but it's going on my watchlist.🍿📽️
"No beer no TV make Homer go something something..."-Psycho Homer, The Simpsons, Tree House Of Horrors.
If the bathroom scene was in Jack’s novel, He could have changed Grady’s first name to avoid litigation from the real Grady’s family.
The fire blazing away screen left as we see Jack the writer for the last time is interesting.
Excellent work, Travis! This is one of those things that require careful and thorough cogitation, rather than a quick YES or NO answer! (Maybe that's really the point, eh?)
The Shining, the movie that just keeps on giving.
Very interesting and perfectly plausible interpretation - and quite different from the other prevalent interpretations.
Just shows how kaleidoscopic this great film is
Alright it’s a good theory. I’ll buy it . I want a full written summation on my desk by the end of the day !!