The Shining: Analysis of Kubrick's Film & Psychosis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 июн 2022
- This is my complete and comprehensive explanation of the classic 1980 Stanley Kubrick film "The Shining" and a deep dive into film making and mental health. Things aren't always what they seem.
Let me know what your thoughts are. Leave a comment below and let me know who you think the killer is.
If you have not seen "The Shining" or if you have not seen it in a while, I have added the links below for where you can rent or buy it here on RUclips or Through HBOMAX.
The Shining is available to rent or buy here on RUclips:
• The Shining
And it is available to watch with an active subscription to @StreamOnMax
If you enjoy my content,please make sure to hit the "subscribe" button.
Why are there cigarettes next to Jacks typewriter when its only Wendy who smokes?
I never noticed that. Good catch 😳
@@contextwithjohnmalone Im on the spectrum lol
This is an excellent question.
Jack smoked in the book actually….
Nicholson was a chain smoker when he was in The Shining.
While your analysis of this is interesting, there are a lot of places where your theories don't stand scrutiny. If part of the scene when Mr Ullman meets Jack for the first time is Wendy's hallucination or imagination, there would be far more than a cluttered desk incorrect. Wendy has never seen or met Ullman, so how is he accurately seen, and matches the man who gives them the tour later.
And when Halloran is talking with Danny over ice cream, Wendy isn't there - so either part of the scene is her imagination or none of it is. Danny can't be confused by what Halloran is asking him because that's real, then in a change of camera position, he becomes Wendy's vivid imagination.
It makes sense to try to figure out why the continuity errors are present, but the Wendy theory doesn't fit, in my opinion.
I agree...if there is no Shine..then how come the title of the book and movie is The Shining?
We can interpret this as a telling of the story after the fact, in which case it's from the point of view of Wendy or Danny.
I do think Kubrick is making a harsh criticism on Wendy as the first scene we see her she is smoking right next to danny as he eats, and the pediatrician is shocked at her "my husband pulled his arm out of his socket" story. I don't think Wendy is the actual killer, but her attempts to rationalize and defend Jack put her son more and more at risk.
I think Kubrick might have hated the book. I kind of see why, its a book you can read as an alcoholic/abuser apologist story. Kubrick depicted the Torrence's as horrible as the would be if they were really doing this with a 5 year old stuck in-between.
@@susantieken646 , I had adopted the idea that the family were all essentially hallucinating (for lack of an accurate description 😅) and then, last night 6/16/23 I watched a documentary called Kubrick by Kubrick released this year which features interviews with Stanley Kubrick himself. He acknowledges that the ambiguity is intentional but he, as a film maker has to accept that the story is real. That remark too is open to interpretation but mine is that “shining” is real, as is the evil that exists within the Overlook, independent of the Torrance family. I don’t think the “Wendy theory” holds water but I applaud the work people put into analyzing a forty-three year old film decades after Kubrick’s passing. It exemplifies the greatness of the film and its makers.
@@notaraven Back in 1980s everyone smoked and blew the deadly second hand shit into the faces of children. I know. I was there.
The continuity errors can be explained by Kubrick being a human being.
The deliberate continuity errors in the set pieces come in all shapes and sizes. They range from chairs to koolaid canisters, to the huge bear rug in the lounge. But the smallest continuity trick may be the coolest - at the end of the interview scene, in the Final shot of Jack as it transitions to Danny brushing his teeth, there’s a tiny white speck placed in the middle of his green tie. As others have pointed out that tie looks like the maze, so it’s foreshadowing to jacks final resting place as soon as he accepts the job.
Damn! That is incredibly insightful.
"As soon as he accepts the job", he's screwed.
Red Dye #5 Cherry Kool-Aid, Olive Oil red Sleeves. TANG is in the Hotel Kitchen Pantry along with "Tony the Tiger" Frosted Flakes Cereal.
They drank Tang on the Apollo flights.
There are so many ways to disassemble the arguments made here, but I will be brief. The reason Danny confides in Dick Halloran and not the doctor is because Halloran communicates to him mentally: "Do you like ice cream, Doc?"
The reason it can't be Wendy's imagination is because she has to imagine Delbert Grady's knowledge of Danny's ability. She has no idea who Delbert Grady is because there is no way she would have stayed there to begin with if she did.
If one were to subscribe to this theory, however, it could be said that this was merely the way Wendy imagined the interview in her mind. Being a "confirmed ghost story and horror film addict", it would make sense that Wendy might insert a sinister back story into her fantasy. I don't subscribe to the theory laid out in this video, but mine is similar in that I too believe the majority of the movie is a fantasy. I believe the events that take place after Wendy leaves the Colorado Lounge where Jack allegedly berates her actually occur only in the book as Jack is writing it. There are numerous clues, dialogue, musical cues and prop placements which support this theory and after watching it a few dozen times, I find it to be the most viable theory.
I saw this film in the theater with my emotionally distant father when I was 11 years old. My mom was in the hospital and so he took me to see it to distract me. Oh, it distracted me.
I'm pretty sure Danny just trusted Halloran and not the doctor. The doctor is an outsider capable of breaking up his family, an intuitive child would definitely understand that. Most abused children simply want peace in the family, not to be taken away. The importance of family is also a major theme in the book.
Keep in mind that Stephen King has stated many times that the movie has almost nothing to do with his book.
@@contextwithjohnmalone King described both Jack’s and Wendy’s parents at length in the book…
Really nice comment. 👍
@@AndySalinger33 ❤️😭💫⚜️💙
@@pagalmasalathe movie has nothing to do with the book. I don't why that concept is so hard for people
Ok, now I have to watch The Shining again. That’s so crazy. I never noticed any of these things and I think I’ve seen this movie at least 50 times throughout my life.
Also; watch The Wendy Theory on you tube that was put out a couple of years ago.
You might not have noticed bit your brain did.
@@DavesArtRoom then watch Rob Ager's debunking of The Wendy Theory.
So I haven't watched much of this but from what I gather, it's just "The Wendy Theory" under a different title. Jack never seems like nice, ordinary guy: he's a condescending jerk throughout the entire movie. In the interview he's clearly lying to get the job and there is always a special sort of "evil" behind his eyes. Kubrick himself said about the ending: "It's supposed to suggest a kind of evil reincarnation cycle, where he (Jack) is part of the hotel's history, just as in the men's room, he's talking to the former caretaker (Grady), the ghost of the former caretaker, who says to him 'you are the caretaker; you've always been the been the caretaker, I should know I've always been here". This cycle of abuse is not only presented in the family but in the Native American and WW2 imagery as well. Is it so hard for people to believe that Kubrick would address the cycle of abuse? Why is it that so many people have to attempt to disprove that Jack is an abuser and a child molester to boot? I mean I can believe the moon landing theories over this perpetual need to constantly blame the victim(s): Wendy and Danny. Subscribers to the theory that this is all Wendy's psychosis based on misplaced props seems like utter rubbish to me. Are you going to say that the Native American genocide references are all in her head as well? Not to mention the fact that Kubrick himself said that the hotel is SUPERNATURAL. It's not Wendy's mind creating the inconsistencies, it's the hotel itself. I mean he also said to interpret the film as you will but in my opinion, this theory is incorrect. It's also a classic tactic to disbelieve and discredit victims of abuse. Don't drink the Kool Aide folks: it's the hotel preying on Jack's weaknesses and innate abusive tendencies, not an entire film that doesn't actually occur because it's all in Wendy's mind. Give Kubrick some credit here: sadly he even went so far as to gaslight and abuse Shelly Duvall into acting like a true woman who has been abused by her husband. Part of the beauty of the film is the blending of the supernatural and real life traumas. The hotel intentionally chooses Jack because he's always been there. And Danny knows EXACTLY what Halloran is talking about: it's THE SHINING, the name of the movie. Carl Jung is all about exposing the shadow self and in this case is Jack's shadow that is revealed. Instead of acknowledging his unconscious and dark urges, he succumbs to them and ends up being engulfed by his shadow.
Having just watched The Shining last night for approximately the 50th time, I totally agree with you. The "Wendy Theory" is total nonsense garbage.
You seem way too emotional for a rational movie analysis.
@@JapanischErfahren Why's that?
I agree. This analysis is strange because the author just starts from the premise that Wendy is nuts (with no evidence) and then explains every scene that doesn't fit with his theory as "this must be Wendy being nuts again." Why would they leave Danny with Halloran? Uh, because the story requires it. Halloran can tell Danny has this thing and he is poking around to see just how strong it is. How is that less likely than "none of this happened, Wendy is imagining it." Why not just say that none of this ever happened? Just say that the whole thing is a psychotic break in Wendy's head? Nonsense
Agreed, he starts immediately with the "Wendy theory" and never leaves it for a second, he also completely lost me at a father dislocating a child's arm is a common thing that frequently "happens" 😳 victim blame much
If you read the novel Wendy had to completely take over Jack's duties. In the novel Jack has hallucinations and is communicating with The Overlook. The boiler room was important because Jack neglected it until it exploded.
I have read the novel. I’m only talking about the movie in this video. And my observations of Kubrick’s film and psychosis.
Okay
Though I appreciate this commentary/interpretation just as much as all the others I've read and listened to, I have to say I think the idea that it's all Wendy's fantasy is garbage. There are myriad 'discontinuities' (for want of a better word) that Kubrick put in throughout the film - in decor, objects, set decoration etc.. I think to make these part of Wendy's specific fantasy is mistaken. Madness takes hold of them all and Danny is gripped by Oedipal longings. Kubrick's use of the 'uncanny' to unsettle the audience manifests in countless ways.
Hello John and thank you for the work and time you put into this. The reason why I don't think this theory fits is because Kubrick wanted to explore themes of abuse and trauma, and Jack has abused and traumatized Wendy and Danny. Also, when he says, "White man's burden, Lloyd, my man. White man's burden", it is a reference to both genocide of the native Americans, and slavery, as there is so much evidence for The Overlook representing America symbolically. More generally Kubrick is talking about cycles of evil that have happened throughout time in all societies and time periods. Most Sincerely, Chris Howley, Wollaston, Massachusetts
Some have speculated "white man's burden" for the meaning of this film has to do with alcoholism.
@eugeniaskelley5194 that’s makes sense. Could also be that he’s referring to the burden of the guilt of America taking away the land of indigenous people.
It’s one of those MacGuffins that’s brought up a time or two and never expanded on or explained again.
@@contextwithjohnmalone”white man’s burden” refers to the idea that it is the white man’s responsibility to “civilize” those deemed savage. It has nothing to do with alcohol.
@@turkeyseaweedI'm thinking of Manifest Destiny. Yes.
I’ve watched this video a few times and I’m pretty sure that it has ripped a hole in the space time continuum lol
I'm about 30 min into this film. It seems to me that every unusual situation is blamed on Wendy's hallucinations! You said that neither Danny nor Halloran can shine. The name of the film as well as King's novel is called The Shining! If no one can shine, why give it that name?
In the movie Knives Out, nobody is ever stabbed. Yet it’s in the title. Movie titles like the caption on my thumbnail, can be MacGuffins. Movie titles like The Shining are a plot device just like the ability to shine is a plot device to help steer the film into whatever direction the director wants.
Take Star Wars A New Hope . The MacGuffin is the plans for the Death Star. We are told about the plans by Darth Vader in the opening scene and for the first 5-10 minutes of the film it’s all about getting the plans of the Death Star to Obi Wan Kenobi. And throughout almost the entire film we never hear about the plans again until the end of the film.
@@contextwithjohnmalone In the Knives Out example they also never said that the knives would be physical knives. Sometimes people will use the expression of knives out to indicate that they are being attacked in some way.
You got 30 minutes into a movie, stopped and came to RUclips?
@@Amberlynn_Reid I wrote that I was 30 min into the film so that people would know how much of it I had seen. It was at that point that I knew I didn't want to watch anymore of it! I didn't stop the film to go to youtube, I was already at youtube watching the film!
Knives Out is a phrase that means everyone is ready for a fight. The movie isn’t called that to imply stabbing but to be a representation of the main character dynamic.
And the plans of the Death Star aren’t intended to be gotten to Obi Wan by the plot, but to the Alliance. They are the clear reason for the ability of the Battle of Yavin to take place at all, and are the key Macguffin the entire plot hinges on. They’re not mentioned constantly because there’s more to Star Wars than just the procurement of the blueprints.
If you notice at 2:00:38, Jack's reflection in the mirror doesn't line up with where he is in the hall, then no reflection at all in the next mirror before entering the Gold Room.
1:15:20 You must have forgotten one of the opening scenes in the car, Jack clearly has a deep distaste for his wife and son.
Just before that scene Jack is on his interview speaking highly of Wendy and then he called her and was loving and happy when speaking to her on the phone. So could that scene in the car on their way to the resort be one of Wendy's active imagination episodes?
It was my interpretation that Tony is adult Danny communicating with his child self from the future & the reason Danny opens up and talks to Dick over the ice cream about his abilities is because he's never encountered another person who can do what he can, finally somebody believes and understands what he's experiencing and can be sympathetic
Wendy is my favorite character because she has an arc. Her denial of the abusive husband grows with each viewing. Jack barely can restrain his sarcastic rage and has the fake smile & lies throughout (going more obviously insane). Danny's abuse is never seen but Tony, the man inside his mouth who goes in his stomach & teddy bear pillow, bears in a picture above his bed suggest Wendy finally sees the sexual abuse as the bear man with butt exposed gives oral. I like that the Shining has room for lots of interpretations Blame the mother is a bit of a Coked up Freud take but why not
Blame the mother, I mean, why not!!!!
Blaming the father is even more Freudian than blaming the mother.
The physical violence , the ideas of murder telepathically transmitted and the shouting is enough abuse for a young Child without the need for adding sexual abuse on top of that. Already with that , it justifies the need for Danny to exhibit disassociative behaviour and create a split personality via Tony
I saw a light fixture in the bedroom on the ceiling, didn't notice the foyer. When they were first being shown their living quarters. The light wasn't on.
The fixture was not on, but it cast a shadow against the wall above the apartment entry.
Danny is reliving the trauma of the accident when Jack dislocated his shoulder. The shot of the blood pouring down the walls, transitioned into Danny's open mouth, represents the taste of blood when you suffer a serious injury.
I've always been a fan of what I consider "Thriller" movies. Not your traditional "Horror" movies were you have a single main antagonist like Jason from Friday the 13th or Michael from Halloween. Or any of the 1930's Frankenstein or Dracula movies.
I mean "Thrillers", these movies to me are more like an adventure. You aren't quite sure who the antagonist is in a thriller movie and I think that "The Shining" is a perfect example of that. We are all led to believe that Jack is slowly losing his mind and is doomed to continue the cycle of caretakers killing their families at this haunted hotel. When in reality,after watching your video and explanation it is very evident that it's Wendy who is losing her mind and that she has been the antagonist the entire time.
Nice job, it's a lot of work speaking for almost 3 hours. I do feel you barrowed a lot from Rob Navarro (which is ok - I know Rob Navarro is a fake account - doubt he or she will complain)...
Although you did add a few things at the table, that cool... Good point about the Red Book (I've been trying to find something that would remove it from the hotel red book and I believe you made an excellent case). Such as Danny not being scared by seeing the Twins when he's escorted to the gold room... Although, The Game Room, Gold Room and the Maze don't actually exist. I do like the idea that Jack dies from falling down the stairs... But I think otherwise (and sure this story will be forever and forever open for interpretation.) I wished you talked about some of the stuff Rob Navarro didn't address, such as the missing knife, the Freezer (not the storage room) and the air vents. look at www.youtube.com/@theobjectofart for the air vents...
As for the Kool-Aid - The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Electric_Kool-Aid_Acid_Test
My theory is Rob Navarro is Vivian Kubrick (or such on my suspect list) the person made the Wendy Theory video to show proof that Dr. Sleep is not a book end to Stanley Kubrick Shining and to troll Rob Ager (because he copyrighted his blog that suggests Stanley Kubrick mistreated Shelley Duvall - and the Dr Phil Show was trying to cancel Stanley Kubrick). If you looked at the Wendy Theory video, you'll notice the video was published 1 year and 1 day after the official release of Dr. Sleep. Also, of you look up Navarro... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navarro,_California (formerly known as Wendling)
2:00:32 Everytime he walks in front of a mirror he jerks and has a reaction. All of the times he interacts with the ghosts he's in front of a mirror. The bartender at the bar and Charles/Delbert Grady in the bathroom, the girl in room 237, Grady again when he's in the storage room, the door is polished and shows a partial reflection.
I watched this video yesterday and last night I rented The Shining here on RUclips because I haven't seen it in a few years. I was amazed that I never noticed any of the things that you pointed out. But they are there if you look. I agree with you. I think it was all part of Wendy's "now" mental health issues. I just remember always knowing that Jack had lost his mind. But after watching it again. It definitely is Wendy who lost it. Just goes to prove that you can't always believe what you see.
I couldn’t finish this after the 45 minute mark with the “two dead girls” quote from you.
How would Danny know they were dead?
They didn’t reveal themselves to be dead until it was just him, the mom and dad there. In that hallway.
For all Danny knew they were just little girls looking at him.
Thanks for the comment Tim. I am asserting that Danny never see’s the girls. That it’s all in Wendy’s mind. I’m suggesting that Danny is in the game room playing and nothing is happening. I explain it all is the video goes along.
@@contextwithjohnmalone yeah, thanks for explaining that. I couldn’t go along with blaming the mom, too mysoginist for me.
@@allnightman27 how are facts “misogynistic”? Just curious to your rationale.
If you were a detective at a crime scene would you ignore the evidence if it led you to a female criminal?
@@contextwithjohnmalone you ignored Jack pulling Danny up by the arm and dislocating his shoulder. You’re assuming everything about Wendy.
@@allnightman27 when did you see that happen in the movie? You only hear Wendy’s account of the story from her perspective.
My brain doesn't know what to make of this. I have always seen this movie for what it was. A 1980's Horror Film. I never thought much about it. After your explanation, I am wondering if everything I have ever known in life is wrong? I am serious. lol Now I am questioning everything. Are you going to now do a Star Wars video and tell us all that Darth Vader was actually the good guy? lol But seriously, great job with this video. You do a wonderful job of laying out all of the facts and make it easy to understand. I am going to watch The Shining tonight with my wife now and see if she notices these things as well.
Wait till this guy sees the prequels and episode 6. Mind will be blown again.
It's all Bullshit.
@@nak3dxsnake... That is because George Lucas became a delusional idiot from his crew artistically rendering Star Wars after 1977. In movies after Star Wars I saw only just a movie editor talent (which he was coming into Star Wars) but no really from the heart of a moviegoer story teller. That is why 1999 was a movie let down after a regeneration in 1995 to get movie audiences big time into movie theaters. Now all schooled producers in 1999 actually did outperform George Lucas and 1999's Star Wars long run vs a zap and then a burp of ... 😬 geeze WTF am I thinking? 🤯
Watch the other twenty videos on the hidden "things" in this film. Your head will absolutely explode lol
I guess it's an interesting lens to watch the movie through. But it seems like a bunch of BS. I think the best and only evidence is when they are watching the impossible tv that's definitely where Wendy has lost it a bit but no where near as much as jack.
This Wendy Theory, is a fun idea, but it only works if you completely ignore the source material. Most of what is said in this video completely ignores so much of the book. Of course, Kubrick, changes much from the book, but he also keeps a lot in. The book is from Jack's perspective. Danny, since he was an infant, which is important, has had some sort of odd ability. As he got older, he "shined" even though he didn't know that term yet, to the point where his parents knew something was going on with Danny. He knew things that he shouldn't know. He would tell them where lost items were. He predicts things, as well as reads minds. Halloran suggests that Wendy might shine just a little, but Jack doesn't shine. He does, however, have something inside of him, but he doesn't know what. Then he goes on to say Danny shines harder than anyone That Dick has ever met. This video was right about something, Kubrick doesn't make mistakes, but he did like to mess with the audience. Too many meanings are being assigned to things that just have no meaning. But, why not? it's being done out of love for the film. Even though I don't agree with this theory at all, it was still fun to watch.
Why not ignore the source? Kubrick did.
But that's the point -- the movie stands apart from the book. They are two very different approaches to the thematics involved as well as having very different salient details about virtually everything/body involved. TWT is actually a pretty compelling approach to the movie, even if the video concerning "The Wendy Theory" from a few years ago is itself missing some key points that actually better support its suppositions and at the same time may be a degree of trolling towards Ager (lol). (My first conversation conjecturing that Wendy may be a valid interpretation for how to look at the movie was back in '89 with some friends/film buffs that went well into the night; we wound up watching the film again later and there really was some notable points involved. Many years later when the lines, imagery and even props that Kubrick used from the Thriller episode "Come out, Come out, Wherever You Are", with Lynda Day George, was pointed out in a couple different analyses, it helped give another view as to how the woman at the hotel (Wendy in The Shining's case) may actually be the one responsible for "x", despite being not seeming so on the surface, though in Day's case she was more directly malignant whereas with Wendy it's the mirror opposite of Jack: instead of being psychopathic and narcissistic, Wendy is unware that she is mentally unstable and has been having hallucinations and dissociative mindsets for many years.)
@@soxpeewee In Re: Kubrick ignoring the source material. That's an oversimplification. Kubrick actually included many elements from the book, including many hidden references (books/stories alluded to in the novel being present in the background of the film). It's just that he took the essential story and really went super-deep in terms of presentation and layering. King's book was more directly personal/emotional; Kubrick's take was more para-psychological and again set in layer upon layer of perception, both conscious and (more so) subconscious about what was actually going on on the screen.
I don’t think the Wendy theory is fun at all tbh, its lame
@@desko2041 Just curious -- why do you think it's lame? (It's as valid a theory, when fully analyzed, as any of the other non-supernatural theories over the decades: "It's All Part of Jack's Novel", "Jack is just Insane", "Danny is having Seizures and Hallucinations", "Everyone Is Hallucinating At Different Times", et al.)
I actually watched your entire 3 hour synopsis without interruptions. I was fascinated... and now I can't watch the movie the same as I had before! I found an inconsistency with the Torrance bedroom scene when Jack flies off the handle with Wendy. There is clearly a light in the hall entrance (even though we initially don't see the actual fixture, but just its light), yet you (I believe, I'll have to check again) said it was reality.
Anyways, great digging and theorizing... probably the best theory I've seen (and I've seen a lot) so far.
One thing to note about the final scene with the photo with Jack in 1921... there really is no indication of the time (1921 - 1980) this is shown. The furniture is covered... and even though there is no red couch... there also is no mirror to the left... the wall hangings are different as well.
Anyway, great work!!!
Thank you so much for the kind words. It’s such a fun movie to pick apart and to speculate over. The more you watch it, the more there is to notice.
George Clooney took a lot from this film in making (The Midnight Sky) on Netflix. In this film Clooney’s character finds a little girl who was left behind. (Spoiler Alert) the girl was a figment of his imagination the entire time. It was a coping mechanism to help him deal with his loneliness and despair. Just like Wendy’s coping mechanisms to deal with her inadequacies.
I don't care so much if your theory "holds water", it is fascinating and has given me yet another reason to enjoy watching this movie!
The continuity errors are not the unlit candle vs lit candle variety... they're too unexplainable without your theory.
For example, the light switch beside the Fort Knox freezer door (btw, why do there need to be ANY locks?) doesn't have a conduit tube (?) like the light switch a foot away... lending credence to your Wendy theory. Same with the Ullman office light switch, which doesn't need to be there at all.
Also, Jack and Wendy's bed width changes because when there is no end table between the bed and bathroom door frame, it's not like there's an extra space on the bed's othere side. Besides, who would move their bed back and forth so often?
The Kool Aid containers beside the Tang help me understand why there are 3 KA containers out in her own kitchen.
I think because SK was an Atheist and therefore didn't believe in the Supernatural, he played the movie out from Wendy's POV, rather than explaining the happenings through ghosts.
There is no other explanation as to how Jack would get out of the freezer... he wasn't in there to begin with.
Jack is shown frozen at the end, not with his back against the hedge as we last see him before he gives up chasing Danny, but instead a few feet out. How Wendy mustered the strength to drag his dead weight out to the maze though still has me scratching my head.
This is all why The Shining is in my Top 5 movies of all time!
Crazy. Literally. I need to re read the book now to see why King was so upset with Kubrick. I think it is truly possible it WAS Wendy the whole time. It can also explain why she was treated so horribly by Kubrick and by order of Kubrick (everyone was forbidden to talk to her, they surprised her with that axe scene, etc). Thank you for doing so much work on this! Truly appreciated!
this is one of those videos, that the more I watch it, the more I am absolutly convinced that he is correct.
There is so much disinfo about this movie. If you watch the behind the scenes of the movie, you can clearly see and hear the staff talking to Shelley. I’ve also seen footage of them filming the axe seen, she was not surprised and knew exactly what was happening. He made her to a lot of takes, but he did that in all his films.
She even did an interview after the movie where she said that it was extremely hard work, but she was happy she did it and she didn’t say anything bad about Kubrick. And yet so many idiots believe that he “abused” her so horribly.
I read The Shining. The novel doesn't support these theories. A novel has the ability to go into greater detail. The narrative by Stephen King indicates Jack is abusive, and Jack had an abusive upbringing. There is nothing to indicate Wendy's having any episodes.
Correct that’s is what King intended for his novel The Shining. But King has said repeatedly that he completely upset by how Kubrick completely changed everything in The Shining the movie. They have almost nothing to do with each other. This is pretty common knowledge amongst King and Kubrick fans. Almost every novel is changed or altered somehow when turned into a screenplay. This is also common knowledge in the film industry.
I’m suspicious of theories that hinge on the idea that Stanley Kubrick is the only director in history to never make an unintentional continuity error. 18:13
Enjoying the analysis so far though…but whenever I hear that, and you hear it in a lot of Shining theories that hinge on intentional continuity errors.
I think it more or less gives the reviewer license to interpret something as anything they want as they are certain of something they actually can’t have any level of certainty about.
Kubrick shot on film and did single scenes over several days while developing the script at the same time and editing it up to the point of even altering it significantly after the release…which kind of blows away the idea that he doesn’t make mistakes, and is a process that 100% result in unintentional continuity errors.
It’s one thing to say “I think this error is intentional, here’s why”, but it’s another thing entirely to give Kubrick super human abilities.
Anyway, I am enjoying this video quite a bit..just a pet peeve of mine in Kubrick theories.
Hang in there and you’ll see why. Just be patient. And let me know what you think when you’re done.
@@contextwithjohnmalone I made it to about 1:40 so far, but I'll be watching to the end. Quality work here, very engaging, but we have completely different reads of the film. I might even make a video of my own on the topic.
Anyway, good stuff here. I look forward to watching more of your work.
@@WokeSoros well this is why I play the movie for you while I stop to show you what’s going on. I’m counting on the viewers using their eyes. You are just getting to the really good parts that explain everything.
Exactly. Kubric isn’t God. Only God is perfect. Gotta laugh whenever someone says, “Kubrick doesn’t make mistakes.” Riiiiiiight
@@johnkim4526 I’m working on it. I’ll be responding to many of the questions and comments in this video as well as some more in-depth explanations.
This seems like one of those Mandela effect moments. Collectively we all have known that Jack was the killer in this movie. But now 40 years plus later, it’s actually Wendy? My mind is blown away. Great video. 👍🏻
Either the Mandela effect or Parallel Universe.
Wow, just wow. What a great video and excellent explanation. I think you are right. Stanley Kubrick was a genius. He never would have made all of those mistakes. It has to be intentional. As if he was leaving clues for us the entire time. Great work John.
@@johnkim4526 What's that supposed to mean? Everyone knows they superimposed Jack's head on someone elses body. There's photos of the real person/photo online.
I watched your video the other day and last night I watched The Shining again on HBOMAX. And I think you are 100% correct. I think it was all about Wendy's mental health. Although we are never told what is wrong with her specifically. I would venture to say that she is suffering from Bi-Polar Manic Depression or Schizophrenia. Or a combination of both. Either way, Kubrick would never have made that many mistakes or let there be that many continuity issues unless they were intentional. Great Detective work.
I am glad to see that I am not the only one who did that. I watched John's analysis the other day and last night my girlfriend and I watched it on HBO last night and we were both blown away. Like how did we not see any of this before. It felt like the Mandela Effect.
I did the same thing. I subscribed to HBOMAX on my SmartTv and I think I've wateched the Shining 4 times since watching this video. My mind is blown away. lol
Me too 🤯
I find all of these theories about the Shining totally bonkers. Everyone says "Oh Kubrick was a perfectionist." Yeah, ok he's a perfectionist. But he's not all powerful. The way movies are made, stuff gets moved. Sometimes part of a scene is filmed and it is finished weeks later. You think Kubrick is checking EVERY possible prop placement in EVERY scene? The kool aide, the lamps, the chair? I would need to see a detailed shooting schedule before I would assume that continuity breaks are anything other than mistakes
I think it would be strange for Kubrick to be planting the seed that Wendy doesn't have a voice, when she does more talking than Jack does, in their tour of the hotel. She literally leads from the front the entire time.
Rather than hallucinations, I think the correct term for her episodes is "delusions".
The problem I have with this version of the Wendy Theory is the fact that this boy is in an abusive family. Children will often not confide to people of authority like a doctor, but can talk to someone that shows interest in them and probe. Danny has obviously had physical and sexual abuse. This is coming from a nurse's point of view. The movie is loaded with sexual inuendo. You did not even touch upon the obvious topic. The abuser is not going to say they are. They put up a front. When victims don't fit what is expected, the narrative goes sterotypical. Furniture may change because Jack is a busy boy. There is something going on with Wendy. She is abused and also an abuser. I was abused. The abuser will never admit what they do.
Children can be distant to the other parent when they allow the abuse to happen.
Mr. Halloran has his own dark secret. What about the nude pictures. Hotels usually don't offer that. Maybe he was once abused. Over sexy images and actions can help abuseres cope.
I do believe some of your theory but the longer I watched, it just did not fit that neatly.
Jack despises his wife and acts like groomer until he finally does the unthinable.
Also the abused will aid the abuser in some situations
Sorry but this take sounds like the Petitto incident. Abuse is not always overt.
i don't think that was a hotel Halloran was staying in. I think that was his home in Florida.
I think the biggest indicator to me that Danny was being sexually abused is the creepy conversation with Jack in the hotel room. Danny has this almost hesitation about him..Like he knows what's coming, or at least what sometimes comes, as a result of those types of interactions with his father. He's not accepting of Jack's "affection", which in itself seems to be fake and put on, but besides that there's just a "pregnant tension" between the two that seems a little deeper than just mere distrust due to physical abuse. Were there other things you noticed as well that led you to the conclusion about sexual abuse?
@@michaelhenderson7739Room 237 documentary shows that the magazine that Jack is reading is a real Playgirl magazine with an article about incest.
I was captivated by your ideas. Bravo. This is one of my favorite movies, never thought about it from your viewpoint, now I love the movie even more! Thank you! My brain is still churning all this over.
Halloran doesn't tell him a horror story. We think of t as a horror story because A] we've seen the film before, and B] what he describes sounds supernatural, when in fact it is perfectly natural.
He is, again, genuinely surprised when Danny askes about an unremarkable room, but reminds him that he has no rights going into any of the rooms. But because we know what is actually in the room we see it as spooky.
People say that Kubrick was meticulous but in other movies of his there are plenty of continuity errors. Something to remember when looking at every detail of the Shining.
I think he cared about what he cared about and he wasn’t as fixated on continuity as lesser minds always are
no shit...ridiculous. people are nuts and bored and starved for entertainment so they create their own. people talking endlessly about lamps and nazis... so dumb.
An odd set "error" that's always bugged me is when Danny goes on one of his trike rides. Just before he ends up at room 237, Danny passes by a stairwell. Hanging from the stairwell is a very large piece of clear plastic. There's no reason for it to be there and it's pretty noticable. Unless its just a set error.
Great theory. I’m convinced!
In fact I’d add that I think the interview scene in the beginning is a delusion too and that she imagined Jack not telling her the suicide story.
I say this because in the fascinating but hard to believe documentary Room 237, (2012) there are times that the blueprint of the hotel changes and this is one example. It showed that the Manager’s Office would be in the center of the building (remember the sign in the kitchen?). Yet it had a bright, attention grabbing window in it!
So Jack is in my mind, even more innocent. And since the last scene would be a hallucination, we have no idea what really happened to Jack. He could be fine!
Great opportunity for a sequel that freaks everybody out!
Great theory. Great catch. Great evidence. Thank you so much!!!
The truth of a thing is the feel of it, and not the think of it.
- Stanley Kubrick
There is also no indication it's Wendy's projections (hallucinating) what we only see Danny see in the game room. And yes Wendy could be worrying about weather.
When Danny stands in front of door 237, the door on the right is suddenly opened.
Good eye! I never noticed that. I’ll definitely have to watch for that. That’s what is so great about this movie. The Shining is like one of those how many items can you find in this picture games.
What a great observation Mike. Let me know what else you notice.
1:50:45 Check out the typewriter, just before and after Wendy "finds" Jack having a nightmare!
2:17:00 Jack knocks all the things of the tables in the kitchen that were empty at the start, when they arrived.
Has anyone ever tried to figure out when Jack is typing that it might be in Morse code?
Oh, wow! that would be interesting wouldn't it? The more I watch this video and the Shining itself the more it blows my mind.
Stephen King's The Shining. Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. The TV miniseries The Shining. The documentary Room 237. Various fan theories of Kubrick's The Shining. And this one here, John Malone's The Shining Analysis. Each one is its own rabbit hole of deep mysteries. No single version is the true one, but I say Stephen King's original novel, and its sequel Doctor Sleep, are the truest, yet they are still open to a vast range of confusions.
I am a believer now. I listened to another commentator that said the same of the Wendy Theory. I had to go with my instincts and not try to make this masterpiece movie a Stephen King movie adaptation.
It's Wendy's fantasy because she was told by Jack what happened there prior on one layer, and the other layer is the novel Jack is typing, Tony said it early in the film, it's like pictures in a book, it isn't real, none of it is, Wendy's horror film fantasy or the novel Jack was clearly there to create, he even has press clippings on his desk of the murders that took place, he is also clearly motivated by the possibility that he could do such a thing and it's the central piece of the novel we are watching unfold layered with Wendy's fantasy.
This is an interesting video in that it documents your, I assume independent, discovery of what has commonly referred to as the "Wendy" theory of the Shining. A number of people have posited this framing over the past decade. Rob Navarro did a very nice video on this particular take a few years ago. I find it compelling that this perspective has been independently arrived at by a number of spectators. Clearly, this is an interpretation of the film that strikes many people as viable. I have no idea if Kubrick dropped these breadcrumbs with the intention of suggesting this vision of the narrative, but it's certainly fascinating and compelling.
I would say Kubrick definitely encoded this point of view into the movie. Let's start with the process of playing chess, which we know was one of Kubrick's passions and aptitudes. When you evaluate the state of the board at any given moment, you go from piece to piece and evaluate the effect of every different move option. I have no doubt that Kubrick evaluated the ambiguities in the storytelling from the point of view of each and every moving piece. Once you do this shift of prospective, it's just a short trip to encoding a secret movie within the movie. On the first viewing, Jack goes insane. Somewhere along the line. One starts to realize the opposing threads. Then like looking at one of those background foreground visual examples, it shifts from one point of view to another. Finally one can see both the foreground and the background instantly and alternately. I believe the windy point of view is intentionally more subtle and is intentionally secreted.
Rob Navarros video was pretty bad though
@@desko2041 It's been a few years since I watched it. I recall finding it entertaining and well made but memory is, as they say, a terrible liar.
2:27:53 Little Problem here, in Europe, this scene wasn’t part of the movie 😅
On Jacks typewriter table what is the lamp plugged into! No chord.
49:05 they go into the freezer and the door handle on the right outside, but it opens and the handle is on the right inside, which means it would've been on the left, outside.
Interesting. But I think at this point, it's based on the book. The hotel is changing, it is alive. But as a second layer it is an interesting theory.
Are you talking about the missing driftwood centerpiece at 1:18:20? I noticed that Jack has moved from the center of the table at the initial zoom in to the left in the next shot, where a large object suddenly appears.
I think it's Kubrick's best also. So much to pick out. Thanks for the coverage!
The tour of the kitchen, and Halloran's chat with Danny, explains the entire film. It defines what shining actually is. Since it is Halloran who introduces it, then we have to take his word for it's meaning. And he was introduced to it as a young, highly imaginative child. To him, it is the ability to hold entire conversations without saying a word. In reality it was the love of his nurturing Grandmother, and her ability to sense what is wrong, just by looking at her Grandson. She would probably call it shining, like a guardian angel would shine. It is perfectly natural to Halloran's culture, but appears supernatural to American culture. Personally, my own grandfather used to shine, when he would tell me that a little dicky bird had told him exactly what I had been up to, so I don't find it that strange, or scary. He just knew the right things to say, in order to convince me.
I do find this point is where you argument for Wendy also having an active imagination, is strongest. It could well be that Wendy imagined him saying "Doc". But more importantly, as you point out, his reply was perfectly innocent and not to be doubted. As such, I think that he attributes this to his ability to shine. And, although this is weak, his explanation that Danny must look like a Doc, could be where he gets the idea that he had that conversation without saying a word.
Halloran is a seasoned, and dedicated Hotel worker, with no family. Any paternal love he could have shared, he has given to the hotel. You could say the hotel is his baby. I've worked in hotels and know a few people like this. Suffice to say Hallorans ability to shine is manifested in his ability to know what a guest wants, before the guest does. A lot of that is down to certain tricks which I'm sure you are aware of. Such as how to occupy a child, while the adults conduct business. You offer them ice cream.
So, it's likely that Halloran was always going to offer Danny ice cream, in fact he states it in the vey next scene "We're just getting to the ice cream". So how does Danny come to imagination i is somthing supernatural? It happens in the dry stores. As they enter, Halloran and Wendy split off from Danny, leaving him in his own imagination [in case you're unsure the camera zooms in on him]. When they left the freezer where he was asked about his favourite food, Danny looks up to Halloran, expecting fries and ketchup, as promised. But he quickly sees they are not forthcoming, and instead wishes he had asked for ice cream. He is imagining Halloran asking him again. So when Halloran asks him he thinks he has read his mind.
"and he doesn't know his favourite flavour"
Great point.
In the scene where Halloran talks to Danny in the Gold Room Ullman tickles his nose with his finger wearing a sly smile, in the edited sequence at the end Ullman is doing the same action in the hospital while talking to Danny and Wendy.
If it was Wendy's hallucination, would Danny be so bewildered?
I don’t really buy this if you read the book it’s clearly obvious that jack is the unhinged one
But maybe Kubrick was trying to do the movie from a different perspective as it is alot different from the book as book gives a deep delve into the characters and their inner demons
Maybe it was the ghosts moving all the furniture around after all the place is supposed to be heavily possessed
But very interesting video it does give people something to pause and think about I will definitely watch again as I love the movie and have watched it many many times.
King hated the movie. He’s been very vocal about it, because the movie has almost nothing to do with the book. I wonder if that’s why King wrote Doctor Sleep in 2013. So he could finally separate himself from the movie and push his story more towards his original writing.
Yes King most certainly did hate the movie I don’t blame him as it’s a far cry from the book and he is right the movie was quite cold but that’s what made it so creepy
Also other videos I’ve watched have stated that if the hotel is so dam haunted then why only 2 caretakers go crazy in the last 50 years. The answer is quite obvious and is explained in the book it takes a very strong physic gift to wake her up and power the hotel maybe one of Grady’s family had a similar gift to Danny. Possibly all other caretakers over the years passed the time quite pleasantly and didn’t notice a thing as they didn’t have the gift as this is a rare gift that not alot of people possess.
I enjoyed Kings attempt to set things right with doctor sleep but the taking of the young boys life was emotionally unbearable to me so I now skip that scene whenever I watch the film other than that great flick.
@@tammylapworth8743 ...same... I only watched the baseball boy scene the first time I saw the film, and ffwd through it every time now. Too brutal. I have to say, the director's cut of Dr.Sleep is very cool (some "little Abra" stuff, etc, from the book that's awesome to see come to life), and worth checking out if you haven't already!
@@contextwithjohnmaloneinteresting how the film version of “Doctor Sleep” ignores the fact that the hotel was destroyed in King’s “The Shining” and includes Kubrick’s Overlook Hotel, same furnishings, layout, etc. This doesn’t look like King was trying to divorce his vision from Kubrick’s…quite the opposite, in fact.
Ive only seen the Euro version. Danny doesn't know those girls are suspect at that time in the gamesroom scene. There are still people leaving the Hotel, sure they're dressed the same and a little old fashioned but thats about all.
The main problem with this interpretation of the film is this: If Wendy has not been told of the murders (and, as you point out, we have no evidence she has) then it is impossible for her to hallucinate them.
She could have seen the overlook history book Jack has found in the basement
The only evidence that murders ever happened is in Wendy's mental image of Jack's interview. The same one in which we're told rather pointedly that W would "love that" as she's a big fan of reading about such stuff.
Exactly!
What if... the Jack we see (who's image matches the Caretaker's in the 1921 photo) is not the "real" Jack? We see no family photos and we never see Jack NICHOLSON at home, just in the car and at the Overlook. Maybe Wendy's imagination and guilty conscience shows us the projection of the Jack she's using to do him in? Or not, I could just be tired.
This is a very compelling analysis. I have seen variations of the Wendy Theory before and this one is the best. One big hole, though--if Jack thinks Wendy tried to kill Danny, why does he leave him alone with her for so long? I am also a devoted King fan, but I know Kubrick rejected Kings screenplay, thus making a far more compelling movie. To be honest, every time I watch an analysis I think that analysis is correct…even the moon landing thing.
Partial denial? Laziness? Misogyny? Necessity? Maybe he thinks he can prevent it? Lots of reasons.
What's always bothered me is how Danny ate that sandwich sideways, inturn destroying the structure and integrity of the sandwich.
Oh it wasn't Danny who ate the sandwich.. it was Wendy who ate the sandwich 🙄
Credit where credit's due. You're a genius...I was going to dismiss the Wendy theory. I always looked at The shining as there's two jacks and the scenes where violence appears and all that horrible stuff is just him writing/Jack's imagination into the movie scenes. I always knew it wasn't a ghost story because Kubrick only directs from logic.
Dare I say that watching this was more entertaining than The Shining itself? And I love The Shining. Sorry not sorry. ❤👊
🤯
Or what if Wendy put all those sheets there so she could murder Jack with that axe, but Jack got away and she chased him through the maze and finally killed him (ala Hallorann) and left him there. 😮Man you got me thinkin, so cool!!! Thanks and God Bless! :)
I'm thinking a lot of this is simply prop men making mistakes or others just assuming there has to be more because , the book was soo thick and detailed. But in the end it's just a movie about a HAUNTED HOTEL !!!
I have previously pondered that Wendy dragged him into the freezer, but in her mind changed it to the dry locker. Now I think that even more likely in that he ends up dead & frozen, but in her head, he froze to death in the maze instead of her killing him. I couldn't figure out the connection before, but your view helps me make a link.
@@johnkim4526 wtf? 🤣
Actually,in the beginning of the movie,there's no maze in front of the hotel. My Opinion.
Resident Evil Biogazard game the truth of it is that Mia Winters is not at all responsible for what happened to the Bakers family it was Eveline she made them psychotic they became different .
John by far,this is the Greatest Analysis of The Shining Ive ever seen. Great Job!! My Opinion.
Thank you. I truly appreciate that. 🙏🏼
What do you think about the surprising number of times Jack (Torrence AND Nicholson, lol) breaks the 4th wall & looks directly into the camera (at us!)? No one else does.
I think that they are breaking the fourth wall to show us again, what is reality and what is one of Wendy's active imagination episodes.
It's one of the great uses of the Rashomon Effect.
It makes you question who's story to believe.
@@contextwithjohnmalone Not just in the poverty shots; he glances at the lens when leaving a room, interacting with another character, making a movement, looking away... There's a deconstruction somewhere on YT where a guy freezes frames every time Nicholson looks at us briefly & it's astounding. Again, both K & N are far too perfectionist & professional for it to be accidents.
Pov shots, not poverty, lol! Fkng spellchecker
another theory is that the hotel is evil and it used Wendy to murder jack and eventually place him back in time as in the photo...you've always been the caretaker jack...
kubrick said in an interview that his movie is about some kind of „evil reincarnation cycle“ when asked about the picture at the end. However for him it was more important what the viewers make of it, so if the Wendy thing is what you get out of it, thats just as valid as any other theory
Sorry, no, it’s not just as valid as any other theory, regardless of what the filmmaker says
@@TomDavidMcCauley Everybody who makes these videos should say: Here is my theory, punch holes in it if you can.
I’ll say this repeatedly; Kubrick even admitted the he thought the thrill of a movie is to whether or not the director consciously or unconsciously placed narratives in their films. 2 prominent narratives in The Shining are The Apollo story and the Wendy Story.
Kubrick did that in a lot of his movies didn’t he? Subvert your expectations, and add his own personal political beliefs and bias into his films. Not overtly, but with a wink and a nudge here and there.
Everyone goes with the moon landing was faked, but with the lady in room 237 I would ask, "What did we find on the moon that scared us so much we eventually stopped going back."
@eugeniaskelley5194 good point. Our technology is much better. The science is better, the mathematical calculations would be more precise today. Yet, no going back. It certainly makes you wonder doesn’t it.
Interesting...one cut scene includes the Ullman telling Wendy that paranormal and regular investigation showed nothing remotely unexplainable about what happened to Jack and them.
You didn't mention the moment where Jack was in the lobby reading a Playgirl magazine with the included article titled "Incest. Why do parents sleep with their kids?"
I thought I did. If not, I definitely mentioned it in responding to other comments.
That issue of Playgirl was from January 1978. It would have been published during filming. Playgirl was a popular magazine for intellectuals in those days. That magazine was popular for its articles, versus its counterpart Playboy.
In the 70’s, especially late 70’s there was a lot of discussion about sleeping/napping/cuddling with your kids. How old is too old? Is it inappropriate?
The magazine in the movie and its placement could either be a MacGuffin, or one of Wendy’s day dreams/delusions. Because no hotel would have had that magazine just sitting out on a coffee table in the lobby or anywhere else. Is it meant to distract us? Or is it completely benign and it was just something that Jack Nicholson was reading in between shots?
I hope this bring my theory of Wendy being the agressor into focus.
Jack was the first caretaker, after all. He wouldn't be alive.
'Tony' was likely the boy's dad that was killed by his mother.
🤷♂️
And hour twenty in... oh my, imagine the poor script supervisor..! June Randall. She was in charge of continuity. Or rather, she was in charge of the discontinuity. Most times, she would have to remember all the props as if she was a camera herself and have everything in exactly the same place... not this time... she would have to remember how many times and when she need to add and remove items. This would be while Kubrick would be changing up the script etc... wow. Just the scene with Ullman's office would be a nightmare. Pens, statues, ashtrays, and cigarettes all appear, move, and disappear at seemingly random points. I made gifs about the optical illusions and "errors".
So far, it's an interesting take. And I'm not opposed to the idea that Wendy has an imagination, but I'm doubtful as to whether it is any sort of psychosis.
I think what we see is three people, each with an active imagination, a family caught up in the American Dream, who get through by shining their love for one another.
Brilliant work. You sold me 100 when Jack is blowing off steam walking away from her madness..n the music changes to the dream sequence as he ends up at the bar.
Oh and the way Danny looked at her after 237...n his body language when she picked him yikes
Outstanding video. Noticed after rewatching he called Danny “Doc” a couple times around 49:22 and then right after Danny answers
1:59:20 The Producers used a dummy mannequin because they didn't want Danny knowing that there was an argument so you can tell it's a dummy
The big thing alot of people don't realize about The Shining is that the Kubrick pulled the original ending even after releasing it the first day in some parts of the country. Wendy is at the hospital with Danny and Ulman shows up and says they didn't find anything at the hotel. Halloran was never at the Overlook and the family may have realistically never been there themselves like you pointed out at the end. Moral of the story, if you're looking for the "answer" to the Shining, you'll never find it. There are too many layers and Kubrick is too smart. People will still be trying to figure this movie out 50 years from now.
Thanks Andrew. Yes, it’s almost like the Zapruder Film. All these years later, everyone has a different opinion. It’s what makes movies like this so appealing. It’s very much like Memento or Jacob’s Ladder. When those movies are over. You are left thinking “well who did it” or “was it all a dream”. Those are the best movies. Where the director lets you use your own imagination and doesn’t force feed you the story.
I love this film
The music is absolutely perfect too
Ive watched several analysis videos for this picture and I'm not sure that I've seen one that explores the idea of it being primarily a series of wendy's psychotic episodes
You are absolutely right about all of the intentional continuity issues
I'm sure it was originally considered to be the sloppiness picture Kubrick even made upon its initial release
Which is funny to me
I remember reading so.ething about how everyone thought Nicholson was WAY over the top in his performance too
and Kubrick simply made the observation that Jimmy Cagey was also considered to be over the top in his acting but authentic same time Cagnet was a great actor which I think gives us a little more insight into the choices that were made both in the selection of particular takes used as well as the approach to the the portrayal of characters
I'm thinking of Jack primarily have always thought Nicholson os absolutely brilliant here
Not to mention HILARIOUS
I have a weird sense of humor though
I agree that the choice of a subtly yet over the top number of incongruities and constantly mounting number of continuity issues was Kubricks way of placing you into a labyrinth
The hotel becomes a labyrinth
Its also an exploration of Wendy's mind as a labyrinth
I love Shelly Duvall in this role as well
Its an interesting theory of all of this being an exploration of mental illness
Of a feminine nature
I'm reminded of the wonderful Robert Altman picture "three women" with her in it
That's a very "shining" vibe to it
I'm sure that Kubrick must have chosen Shelly Duvall for this role based on her performance in that Altman film
Its a classic
With Sissy Spacek
I'm rambling
Like the halls of the hotel
Ha
Anyways I enjoyed this video
Check out "three women"
Peace up...I meme out?
Feels like I am betraying Rob Ager by watching this.
Are there any opinions out there as to the connection between the five months of sobriety and the five months of peace and quiet Jack needs at the Overlook?
The caretaker gig is a 6.5 month one... could it be Wendy somehow knew/planned for Jack's murder to occur at the end of March?
I never liked Danny getting that doctor checkup while he's not wearing his pants. Where his pants go???
42:51 there is a shadow on the wall that looks very much like a lamp shade. And it even pops into view, just a tiny bit that you might think was the boom if you didn't know Kubrick.
How about that cucumber? Have you seen those videos where cats react to cucumbers?
The Wendy theory is quite frankly the most flawed theory in The Shining universe.
Why is that?
What theory do you like?
@@contextwithjohnmalone Sorry to be boring but I like the well known theory of Jack falling deeper and deeper into his alcoholism but I do give it to you your theory is original and well articulated. Thanks for the new theory I do appreciate the opportunity to once again look into one of my favorite films.
@azovandy14.88 not boring at all. That’s also a great theory. It fits with the sign of the times from the late 1980’s. We were just starting to understand alcoholism in the mid 80’s. More and more actors, musicians, celebrities, etc were being open about their drinking and drug addictions. The Betty Ford Clinic was now in the zeitgeist. So it also fits that from a different perspective, that this is Jack being consumed by his addiction to alcohol.
The only issue I have with that is that seems to be a MacGuffin in this film. It’s mentioned, and never really brought up again. It’s not the central theme of the movie. That’s what’s so great about this film. You can watch it a dozen times, and find something that others haven’t noticed before. It’s like a puzzle. There is no clear outcome. There aren’t any character arcs. There’s no hero, no winner, so riding off into the sunset. So each individual gets to make up their own mind as to what they think happened. Brilliant if you ask me. I’ve never seen another film, evoke so many emotions and ideas from viewers. It’s awesome to spark a conversation about it.
Im not sure Kubrick doesnt make mistakes. In other films he made there are continuity errors. The missing cardigan in the shuttle terminal in 2001. They spotted the error during editing and added a voice over of a loudspeaker announcing they found the missing garment.
I might have misspoke when I said that Kubrick doesn’t make mistakes. When I was try to make the point that Kubrick is known to be a perfectionist. That the thinks I point out like appearing and disappearing light switches, light fixtures, furniture have been written off as continuity errors. Where I am asserting that this is Kubrick’s way of showing us Wendy’s “perspective”.
What director would go to such great lengths the remove a light switch (Outside of the food storage pantry), spackle and paint the wall, and then put the light switch right back again? What director would place a sticker on a door (Danny’s Bedroom Door)and film a scene and then remove one specific sticker and continue filming?
The disappearing chair behind Jack during the confrontation with Wendy at the typewriter. And all of the other inconsistencies I point out in this video.
My assertion is that these are done on purpose to show us perspectives. Hence the Rashomon Effect.
@@contextwithjohnmalone I agree, Kubrick was trying to say something, there's just way to many continuity errors. But also what makes it interesting is that most people don't notice any of this when watching the film. Some of those errors are just so vague and in many cases distant or through a doorway into the other room etc.
The whole supernatural ghost aspect is added by Wendy to retcon why Jack suddenly went crazy..
did you forget he was writing a story, likely a horror story?? this is the dumbest theory ever. so amateur.
Love this detailed analysis! I’ve seen the Shining so many times over the years but I’ve never noticed all of these discrepancies or considered so carefully Wendy’s point of view. Audiences always knew Wendy was nuts but I never considered that maybe she was the one pulling the strings. Very interesting commentary.
It’s definitely the most thorough explanation I’ve ever seen. My mind is blown away. Now I’m questioning my existence lol
Are you Rob Navarro? Is this part 2?
Thank you for your time and effort! I am only halfway through but I will finish tomorrow. Take it easy.
Well, you might as well have done what Rob Navarro never did, the part 2.
Bravo!
I think the Wendy theory is for real. That lady was a straight up schizophrenic who completely and totally lost her shit once the storm came.
I watched Navarro's The Wendy Theory, Tales of Tankard "Why the Wendy Theory Cannot be Debunked", and Miss M from "The Object of Art", she has made some great observations.
All RUclips channels......It was Wendy.
Tony was Danny's self defense mechanism for dealing with a schizophrenic mother.
When my wife and I first watched The Shining after watching Navarro's RUclips video, the scene where Danny is just staring through his crazy mother as she is accusing Jack, Jack is looking completely unaware and frankly innocent....yep,
Stanley Kubrick was the Man.
Tales of Tankard RUclips channel has some fine ideas on who Navarro may really be.
Nonetheless, congratulations to you on putting this together. You missed some things but man oh man, you did a fine job!
God bless and take it easy!
It is absolutely necessary though for the audience of Kubrick's The Shining to completely disassociate it from King's book. Kubrick did not set out to make King's book into King's movie. He chose the book and bought the rights to make his, Kubrick's, The Shining. The audience must understand that.
Anyway, I want to thank you for time and effort!
I really enjoyed that.
Please keep in mind until The Wendy Theory, I just was simply enjoying a great film made by an incredible artist.
Acting was superb on all accounts. I never, ever would have caught it.
I mean this is not M Night Shamalan stuff. This is the ultimate cinema hoax.
Brilliant.
Kubrick set up so many facets to this movie, just depends on what angle you look from. I think it's important to consider that there's 2 Jack's, it's not my original theory, but I see it's importance.
Jack is a writer, tells Wendy he's had no good ideas. As he walks towards the miniature maze, his head looks right at the bat. This man is sober, clean shaven, and has writer's block. His idea comes from what's right in front of him. A writer, and his family is staying at the Overlook. The hotel, the maze, the bat, the previous murders, and the scrap book, etc.. are the backdrop of his new idea for a book.
Jack, in a green shirt, is writing this book. Jack in the red jacket is the subject of the book he's writing.
Interesting, do you think these two Jacks are for us the viewer or are they in Wendy's mind? It's kind of funny also because Jack was in a movie titled The Two Jakes where he plays a detective. And Jack helped write the screenplay. Irony? lol
@@contextwithjohnmalone I think Kubrick purposefully made layers of plot perspectives. So, one can enjoy the movie from many perspectives.
The Wendy Theory is not wrong, because it's one possibility. But, Jack did say he's there to write a book. A clean shaven, sober Jack Torrence is the writer. The crazed Jack, in a red jacket, is one subject of the book being written by a writer, also named Jack.
Exactly, because didn't King write The Shining based on his own experience at a Hotel similar to the one in the movie? And I think that King often inserted himself into his Novels. Not all but some. As if we are getting King's perspectives. His experience. His psychosis. Is the old hag in the bathroom King's mother? Didn't his mother die a slow and agonizing death? I think I remember hearing that a very long time ago in an interview that his mothers death inspired his horror writing. A lot of writers inject a little of themselves like Ian Fleming in his James Bond novels. In Fleming's mind, James was the character that Fleming wished he was, charming, handsome, fearless, hero type. Not the scrawny, bookworm that Fleming truly was.
@@contextwithjohnmalone IDK, Kubrick bought the rights to King's novel. Can't use the novel as canon when analyzing the film. Kubrick just like the skeletal structure, and other details.
But, yeah the abstract or double layered plot exists for sure. A writer with writer's block, stays at a hotel, and is inspired by hotel to write about a writer with writer's block that's staying at a hotel. Confused yet?
Amidst that abstraction, we the viewer cannot possibly tell what's imagination, vs the actual writer at the hotel. It's a fantastic way to leave the audience unsettled.
Not confused at all. I love your thoughts. Have you ever seen Rashomon? If not it's a wonderful film from Akira Kurosawa. Through an ingenious use of camera and flashbacks, Kurosawa reveals the complexities of human nature as four people recount different versions of the story of a man's murder and the rape of his wife. It's where we get the spiderman pointing fingers meme. Many directors used Kurosawa's techniques like Christopher Nolan's Memento. I think The Shining is a lot like this, where it leaves you with more questions than answers. Which is great because it stirs up conversation. There is no right or wrong answer. I tried to approach this video the same way a detective would. (Never been a detective but watched way too much Columbo as a kid lol). If I had arrived on the scene, where would the facts lead me? Just following what we all can see. The disappearing light switches, the disappearing stickers on Danny's bedroom door, the disappearing chair behind Jacks table, the cigarettes next to the typewriter when only Wendy smokes, etc, etc.
I'm an hour in... I've known about all the continuity non errors before... but you're really convincing me with the "Hey" from Wendy that seems to be like the scene starting over from scratch. The trike and the music are also overlapping your "Wendy Fantasy" parts. The argument has been that the errors are to disorient you. However, like you said, breadcrumbs, it's not disorienting if you use Wendy as the compass. I'm still sitting on the fence about Wendy's fantasy, but I'm feeling unbalanced.
I dont see the green maze in front of the hotel in the start of the movie. I dont see how there could be a window in Mr.Ullmans office since Jack came in through the front. Also,notice when they
Are about to walk into the freezer Mr Haleran uses his left hand to open the door,but when they show the view from the inside,he's opening with his right hand.
Also,before they enter the freezer,theres no doors there,when they come out,you see 2 doors there behind them
Just a few more observations,that's my opinion.
Keen eyes! Great observations. That’s one of the great things about this movie. There are so many things that stand out to different people. It’s like one of those picture puzzles where you are supposed to find a list of items in an image.
When danny is playing in the hall,the ball rolls to him,when he stands up,the carpet changes direction. Also when Wendy & Danny are watching TV,I dont see any electric cord coming from the back of that television to plug into an outlet. My opinion.