Kubrick was one of those genius filmmakers who put tons of detail and attention into everything he created. Set decorations and tiny background details all feed into the thematic meanings of his films. The five people interviewed for this film believe they have found keys to unlocking the hidden meaning of the Shining. One guy argues that the movie is about the slaughter of Native Americans, another says it is about the Holocaust, another says it is his filmed confession that he staged the Apollo moon-landing, one thinks you need to watch it forwards and backwards at the same time to understand it and the last person is obsessed with Kubrick's use of space in the movie. The last person is actually the only one that makes any affective arguments, to my mind.
There is a psychological concept called Confirmation Bias. Your mind bends facts to fit theories instead of the other way around. Like Verbal Kent says in The Usual Suspects, "You have a dead guy, you think his wife killed him, you're gonna find out you're right." The Holocaust guy, the moon-landing guy and the Native American guy all make huge leaps in logic (my favorite might be the moon-landing guy trying to argue that the key for "Room No. 237" is a secret message saying "moon room" because a lot of the letters are the same). They want their theories to be right so every continuity error or prop choice becomes part of Kubrick's master plan. While he did exercise extreme control over his movies, I don't think that Nicholson reading a Playgirl (that you can't even see) while eating lunch was meant to imply Danny was sexually abused. The fact that Ullman's assistant has dark hair doesn't make him a stand in for subservient American Indians. Lots of this was just pure bullshit, to be honest.
 |
| I mean, I'm gonna try to kill ya, do we need the implication of kid diddling, too? |
The guy who watched the movie forward and backwards at the same time sounded exactly like a stoner burnout trying to explain why The Dark Side of the Moon and the Wizard of Oz were made to be seen together.
One thing I do agree with is that Kubrick very much controlled the idea of space in the movie. The only two scenes I found convincing were one in which Danny's big wheel ride around the hotel is shown to be a ride through the psyches of his parents (due to where he encounters weirdness) and that the window in Ullman's office is impossible. These, I can believe were Kubrickian touches (especially the window) meant to create a sense of unease in the viewer. Hell, the whole movie casts this sort of pallor on your soul as you watch it (The Shining, that is, not this one) from the soundtrack to the color choices. No one mentioned it but I noticed that the movie starts with shots perfectly balanced in frame and, as Jack's madness progresses, the balance is lost more and more. That seems like a smart, artistic choice. Making the carpet look like the launch pads in Florida? Not so much.
 |
| I can practically smell the orange groves. |
Anyway, I chose this movie as my first for the season because I want to dissect these horror movies I watch both alone and with friends. Really great horror, like every kind of great story, is about something besides the plot. I think the guys who believe the Shining is a metaphor for the slaughter of Jews or Indians are partially right in that Kubrick is trying to say that human history is flush with acts of barbarous evil. The evil in Jack is the potential evil inside anyone. That makes The Shining scary.
I know I will see a lot of BS and low-class productions with nothing on their mind besides a cheap scare but I hope to see something that tries to transcend the genre, too. Join me, won't you?
But you can skip Room 237.
 |
| I say, just enjoy the goddamn thing and quit picking it apart. |
No comments:
Post a Comment