« Asianish and Others | Main | ridiculous »

01.11.06

shine

As I’ve mentioned before, I don’t do all that well with remotely scary movies. However, I’m still pursuing my cinematic education. These two issues are not necessarily compatible, especially when you factor in the fundamentalist kid’s residual adversion to occult flicks. It’s probably pretty apparent that I’d never seen The Shining, which has many justified claims to fame. It’s Kubrick, of course, and it regularly shows up on Top 100 Films of All Intergalatic Time lists. When Mister Husband spied the DVD in a $9.99 bin, we had to get it.

So we made dinner, turned off all the lights and opened a window to set an appropriate atmosphere, and dug in. I expected to be tense and so therefore was. The opening sequence and soundtrack are masterworks of atmosphere and mood, and I was peering out over the edge of my blanket as the family moved into the hotel and began their descent into madness and weirdness and fear. I was a bundle of nerves right up until the famous “Here’s Johnny!” scene.

(Warning: I’ve been informed that this is the part where I ruin everything. If you hold this movie particularly sacred or haven’t seen it and don’t want it spoiled, you might want to move along.)

I have never been one to be bothered by continuity problems in films (or even notice them much), but there’s one here that ruined things for me. We see Jack hacking through the right-hand pane of the door with eyebrow-waggling glee, and Shelly Duvall sobbing with terror as she waits for him. But right after she slices his hand and the camera pulls back on the other side of the door, it shows both panes whacked out. Seeing that snapped me right out of the movie, and I was never able to re-engage in quite the same way.

Perhaps this is why I think The Shining is three-quarters of a masterpiece, but I’d argue that there are other reasons. It seems to me that the ending is completely junked up with unnecessary elements, as is the first fifteen minutes of the script. As the Torrance family prepares to move to the hotel, we’re told that the father is abusive, the kid may have a split personality or be possessed, one of the previous caretakers hacked his family up, the hotel is situated on an Indian burial ground, and that it’s close to where the Donner party ate each other. Any two of those elements would have been sufficient; taken altogether, it’s atmosphere laid on with a putty knife. Likewise, the ghoul scenes in the last quarter seem ancillary, thrown in, as if to say “This is a horror flick! Yes! Alert! Scary!” If the writers and director had been confident enough to keep things pared down, it would have been much more effective. All you need to keep things moving along is: crazy dad getting crazier; paranormal kid getting more paranormal; previous caretaker’s murder spree curses the joint. There you go. Mix relevant elements like the party scenes from Jack’s mind, the murdered girls, Scatman Crothers, and boom, finish with a wee touch of reincarnation. Scary, scary stuff. The rest of the ooh, haunted scenes don’t really contribute anything.

I also got massively irritated by Sherry Duvall’s character, especially after I watched the included ‘Making of’ documentary. As she explained things, Kubrick insisted that the character be snivelling and irritating, and he and the crew treated Duvall badly in order to make sure that the portrayal would be authentic. She was pleased with the performance and respected the process as a means to an end, but wished that she had been pushed in a less painful way. All of this is fine; it’s process. And I agree that Wendy should be portrayed this way, because otherwise she would become an immensely sympathetic, heroic character. The film only works if the only sympathetic folks are the ones who shine, and we’re only able to be partially sympathetic with Danny because of his possession. But on the other hand, I wonder why the hell she shouldn’t be allowed to become a heroic figure? Male characters assume that sort of status all the time in films like this. Why not a woman? The setup could easily swing that way: she’s married to an admittedly abusive man, brought to a place with no choice in the decision, forced into extraordinarily bad circumstances. She’s watching the dissolution of an already bad marriage and worried about the health of her son. Eventually, she has to worry about keeping herself and her kid alive, which she does manage to do. Why shouldn’t we be able to like her enough to cheer her on?

Also, we never resolve the problem of Danny’s possession. We never see him come out of it, although it seems that he must have in order to be able to flee and follow directions. He never seems particularly wild-eyed when he’s running from his father. I don’t need to know what happens to Wendy and Danny after they drive up over the ridge, but I do need to know about this element.

In the end, I wasn’t particularly scared. I went straight to sleep afterwards and slept right through the night. Of course I’d rather sleep well, but I feel like I’m missed out on a common cultural experience by not being properly awed. I think the film has many masterful elements; the cinematography is impeccable. The general setup is very strong. The acting is wonderful, even with Jack chewing the scenery. The maze scene is striking, as is the soundtrack. Kubrick has an extraordinary sense of timing. If only things had been stripped down a bit, this movie would have been about ten times scarier than it was.

Comments

Phew. You've watched The Shining so I don't have to. Thank yo so much!