Monday, August 05, 2013

Ask JKM a Question: Is The Shining (1980) really one of the scariest movies ever made?


A regular reader, Trent, writes:

“I've seen hundreds of horror films and I am continually surprised to find that Kubrick's 'The Shining' is consistently on the scariest horror films list.

Now let me qualify that by saying that I believe Kubrick's film is a masterpiece. It is the most beautifully-shot horror film in history, the product of a master manipulator of both the camera, and the audience, at the peak of his powers. The opening sequence alone told you that this was going to be a special film. And the tracking shot of Danny Torrance on the big wheel is film school material.

That notwithstanding, while I find the film mesmerizing, I did not find it to be scary....at all. I found more scares present in 1980's 'The Changeling'. I thought Nicholson was too Nicholson-esque from the very first shot. That the relationship between Duvall and Nicholson was emotionally cold, robbing the film of the emotional wallop of the events to come. And that Kubrick ultimately did not understand horror and what made films scary.

Ultimately I believe that the high ranking of Kubrick's film is more the product of the film-goers low expectations and easy dismissal of horror films. That the stunning visuals, masterful direction, (and Nicholson's performance) are the true winners and not the scares.

Your thoughts please...”


Trent, that’s a wonderful and thoughtful question, and I certainly understand where you are coming from in your assessment of The Shining: as a great film but not necessarily one of the scariest films ever made.

No less a respected authority than Stephen King has voiced a similar opinion.

In particular, King felt that the horror (or scare…) set-ups and scenes in the film didn’t work in the way a good example of the genre should. He has also complained about Nicholson as Torrance.  

His concern, essentially, is that you know from Frame One that Nicholson’s Torrance is bad news, and therefore there’s no meaningful character arc going forward.

As far as my own perspective, I feel that the “Nicholson-esque” approach is very fresh in The Shining (1980), but today -- after  thirty years of similar performances from the actor -- it seems more pro forma (and therefore less effective…) in some sense.  

In other words, since The Shining we have seen Nicholson as the Devil in The Witches of Eastwick (1986) and as the Joker in Batman (1989).  He’s also been a territorial werewolf in Mike Nichols’ Wolf (1994).  So we now know very well how this (great) actor does the “madman” role.

But go back to 1980 -- the release date of The Shining -- and there are almost no prominent instances of the Nicholson “mad” persona as we understand it today.

It’s true that he’s always been wild-eyed and nutty (Little Shop of Horrors, Easy Rider), but we had never before seen him in the role of a homicidal maniac.  So I do feel that we reflect “back” on The Shining a familiar performance when in fact the opposite is true: Nicholson’s trademark, remarkable performance set off a chain of similar ones, but at the time was quite original and new. It's spiky enough that it raises significantly the scare quotient in The Shining, but familiarity softens its impact today. 

Regarding whether or not The Shining is scary overall -- and perhaps one of the scariest films ever made -- I tend to think that it is, although in an admittedly unconventional way.  It’s not a jump scare kind of movie to be certain, and The Shining isn’t scary in the sense of a haunted house movie like Poltergeist, where you feel deeply invested in the survival of the characters.

But there is more than one way to skin a cat (forgive the expression…), and more than one way to make a scary horror movie.  


For example, I have spoken with many individuals over the years that grew up in the home of an alcoholic father and find this film absolutely terrifying...to an almost unbearable degree.  The way that Torrance is unpredictable -- friendly one moment and caustic the next -- is, in and of itself, scary.  You never know what mood you're going to find this mercurial "Dad" in, and that fact sows uncertainty, the necessary precursor for heightened cinematic fear.  

Because of the winter and the isolation of the Overlook Hotel, there’s no escape from this intemperate, hot-and-cold, dangerous "bad father" and so his menace grows increasingly oppressive (and physically intimidating…) throughout the film.   

With apologies to to the genius of Stephen King, no character arc is really necessary here: the whole setting is a pressure-cooker...constantly inching towards a boil.  Accordingly, the film does feature a kind of adrenaline-provoking build-up of terror as Torrance's madness threatens to erupt…and then, finally, does erupt with bloody results.

In regards to the Duvall/Nicholson relationship, I feel that it almost perfectly mirrors the relationship of a victim/abuser in a domestic violence situation.  She’s a little shut-down, a bit of a people-pleaser, and she’s scared to death of her husband, especially when he’s been drinking.  The movie’s unique brand of “psychic” fear emerges from this dynamic of the bad, abusive and alcoholic father, and not necessarily from the ghosts it features.   

But importantly, the end result is the same: a deeply-layered sense of looming dread, building towards a fever of madness and violence.  I find almost the entire movie suspenseful, because the bomb that is Jack Torrance is going to go off...it's just a question of when.

Given Kubrick's deployment of brilliant film grammar, and the bravura performance by Nicholson, as well as the icy, relentless chill of familial breakdown, I can certainly understand why people remember The Shining as one of the scariest movies ever made.    

Here's an example that may make my point clearer.  I have a dear friend who doesn't like The Descent (2006) at all, and claims that it it is only scary if you happen to be claustrophobic.  In other words, the viewer's own, pre-existing fear of tight-spots does a lot of the movie's heavy lifting in his opinion.

Similarly, The Shining plucks a certain set of fears and dreads -- about family, fathers and alcoholism -- but as always, individual viewer mileage may vary.  

In  the end, fear may be a subjective emotion...but The Shining, as you say, has scared at least a couple of generations silly...

Great question!  Don't forget to ask me more at Muirbusiness@yahoo.com

9 comments:

  1. Add to all that you've said (or, that you've both said) the slowly encroaching feeling of dread, exacerbated by the great, wide loneliness, and to a lesser degree (and certainly a niche fear) the clutching desperation to finish something creative *because you have all the time in the world.* I didn't really feel much of this the first few times I saw it over the years, but was more mesmerized by the clean, tight shot making. But about a month ago, I saw it for the first time in a theater, and the big rooms were ten times bigger, the sound design ten times more enveloping, and the look of abject terror in Duvall's eyes ten times more believable and identifying. I was more with question asker Trent before that viewing and more with Mr. Muir after. It's like you said, a different kind of scary - the scary isn't in the ax or the hedge maze or the voices in the head... the scary is in the air. It's in the overwhelming space. It's in the *feeling* that evil is controlling behavior, subtly, then - not so subtly - and then the even subtler idea that, well, you know, it's "always been here" - and you've been living in it forever. You can't separate a discussion of Kubrick from a discussion of psychology - this is a psychological horror movie that, in a weird way, *suffers* from eventually moving into tangible axes and hedges. All that said, Nicholson's die hard hamminess was ten times bigger, too, and all that that requires, audience member wise.

    ReplyDelete
  2. John, simply brilliant explanation of what truly makes THE SHINING(1980) because it explores the horror about family breaking down, fathers and alcoholism. Kubrick delivers an impressive looking film and directed film. A simple scene in the red bathroom between Jack Torrance and Delbert/Charles Grady direction is engaging with the camera position changing with the character that has the upper hand. Even though King disliked it, it was far superior to the later 1997 miniseries that was closer to the book with far less interesting results. I hope the planned prequel that examines what happened at the Overlook is done well.

    SGB

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of the scariest films ever made? Hold that thought. One of the funniest films ever made? Absolutely. Stanley Kubrick’s The Shinning is hilarious. Comedy gold.

    Really, this shouldn’t come as a surprise, as every film Kubrick directed post Spartacus is laced with high-end absurdity. Doctor Strangelove is an obvious example; almost too obvious. Too easy. Better yet, I propose that even during its most tragic moments Barry Lyndon is a riot of irreverent daft, like Monty Python on morphine drip. It’s damn near impossible to explain logically in detail why something is humorous, but the opening scene with our protagonist attempting so ineffectually to find the ribbon hidden on cousin Nora Brady’s person epitomizes just how ridiculous of a man he is; the way it’s shot, the music, Ryan O'Neal’s pitch-perfect, coldly indignant yet frivolously obsessive performance. It sets the tone for the whole film, even all the way up to its climactic duel between Barry and Lord Bullingdon; a scene that achieves equal parts sincerity and preposterousness.

    That was the genius of Kubrick, which, in The Shinning, he took to heights that have yet to be matched by any other filmmaker. I kid you not, this movie cracks me up. For me, the very joke is that Nicholson’s Torrance is so obviously batshit insane from moment he first enters the Overlook for his interview. Again, the manner in which that scene is shot -- the vaguely comically pronounced framing and composition -- that tacky Thousand Island dressing colored wallpaper and the way Nicholson’s reaction to the hotel’s horrid history of murder is so subversively superficial, as if he had merely been informed that the place suffered from inept rain gutters: "Well, you can rest assured, Mr. Ullman, that’s not gonna happen with me. And, uh, as far as my wife is concerned, uh, I’m sure she’ll be absolutely fascinated when I tell her about it–she’s a, uh, confirmed ghost story and horror film addict." Cue wolfish grin façade.

    The car ride scene with the family that delves into the topic of the Donner Party is another instance where an unsettling tone, in both the content and the music, is sharply contrasted with the blatantly presented fact that Jack Torrance fucking hates his family. Eyes glaring, he mocks them: "Ya see? It’s okay. He saw it on the television." I can’t explain it. That moment just makes me laugh. This, in part, is where the film earns its stripes as being one of the scariest of all time. Sure, the slow creep of supernatural evil that pursues little Danny whenever he’s alone -- flash images of twin girls and rivers of blood -- firmly grounds the viewing experience in a constant state of dread, but there’s also a kind of phantom cognitive dissonance in how Jack discovers his inner axe-murderer potential. It’s not tragic, but inevitable. His is not a downward spiral; he blossoms.

    And I love the whole interpretation of Wendy (the impeccably cast Shelly Duvall) as the sheepish wife who is just so 'in-the-way' of Jack being Jack. The ultimate killjoy to his madness. It’s freaky, because we actually, dare I say, empathize on some deep rooted, taboo level why he cannot stand her, even though, logically, she’s perfectly good, caring and innocent. I genuinely feel bad for Wendy as she endures the ever-increasing nightmare...but...I also get a kick out of watching Jack torment her. It’s during these scenes that Kubrick is inside my brain. Invader!

    I’ve only skimmed the surface here. I won’t go any further, suffice to say that any horror film that, with a straight face and without breaking its unnerving tone, cuts to a shot of Scatman Crothers lying on a motel bed beneath a framed picture of a naked black chick with an outrageous afro is clearly operating on multiple tiers, like a Los Angeles freeway overpass.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have to chime in here. There are a couple of moments in "The Shining" that still get to me, and they are because of the way the sequences are composed and how the dread is so palpable in the film. That moment when Danny sees the twins in the hallway is one of those moments of dreamlike horror. They seem "wrong" in so many ways. They don't belong there. We know they are ghosts, and yet, there they are in the harsh light of day. It is that dreamlike effect (or more accurately nightmare effect) that works so well in this film, and is something Kubrick was very good at.

    I think David Lynch is one of the few other directors that can trump him when it comes to creating the feeling of a waking nightmare. It's a rare ability to catch that uncanny dread. I've seen it attempted badly before where it falls flat. But I think "The Shining" nails it, and that is one of the reasons it gets regular play every year around October. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous11:14 PM

    Thanks for the response John! As usual, your analysis is enlightening. I am VERY dismissive of King's directorial criticisms of the Kubrick film. Recalling he directed Maximum Overdrive, one of the truly boring and absurd horror films I've ever seen.

    When you mentions Nicholson's penchant for crazy, you only address his post-Shining efforts (Easy Rider notwithstanding).  But I'm 43, I recall his pre-Jack Torrance roles of eccentric or outright crazy such as his roles in Five Easy Pieces, The Last Detail, One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, and Goin South. It would be as if he was a werewolf in scene one in Wolf....where else can he go from there?

    However the alchoholism aspect does mitigate some criticism. And in that regards it would be the greatest psychological thriller in film history in which the audience was led to believe that their were ghosts present, only to find out that it was a broken human mind. I'm thinking Jacob'a Ladder or Session 9. All the supernatural events could have been kept in Jack'a broken mind. But Kubrick without a doubt lets us know that the place is haunted....locked pantry doors do not unlock themselves. And it is just that dichetomy that does not work for me personally. Still a great film, not in my personal top 10, but as a psychological thriller and not a haunted house film, certainly one of the best.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, its clearly not the greatest "cheap scare" movie of all time but I do find it very scary even after seeing it dozens of times over the years and I would say its definitely in the top 5 of genuinely scary movies . The entire movie has a very unsettling property to it that hits you in the pit of your stomach. (I like the comparisons to David Lynch.) The framing, the slow moving camera, the music, the use of space, and the way the Overlook appears to be a maze in its layout all contribute to a heavy sense of dread that permeates every frame of this film.

    One thing I would like to point out that I find interesting and very clever in this movie is how Kubrick presents the character of Dick Hallorand (played by the amazing Scatman Crothers). (I have never read the book so I'm can't comment on how he was portrayed there.) Very early on in the film Hallorand is setup as the one person who truly understands the psychic landscape of the hotel. He understands the son's psychic powers. He understands the concept of "Shining". He can speak with telepathy. He is basically setup in such a way that you know when the crap starts hitting the fan he is going to be instrumental in saving the family (or at least the son) in final act.

    (SPOILER ALERT!)

    As the horrors of the hotel start mounting you see Hallorand (who is on vacation in Florida, I think, by this time) sensing the evil awaking there and he frantically spends a large part of the movie trying to get to the overlook. The fact that he is having such a hard time getting there helps ratchet up the tension and the suspense because you have been convinced at this stage that he is the only one who can help this family fight the mounting evil of the hotel.

    And then finally he gets there, we get a glimmer of hope that the family just might be saved and then WHAM! Axe to the chest and he is killed instantly before he can do anything. At that point, all bets are off and you are scared shit-less (if you weren't scared already) for the rest of the movie because the one hope of salvation has been killed. Kubrick spends a lot of time on this character and then pulls the rug out from under the audience.

    Great film.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Got to meet Joe Turkel at the inaugural Mad Monster Party here in Charlotte. A top class actor and gentleman who talked to me for 20 straight minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If King doesn't like 'The Shining', what does he think of all the other Turkeys that have graced the screen under his name.

    Are we suggesting someone would rather watch the mini series of 'The Stand' that watch this?

    I understand the argument about Nicholson's performance tipping the films hand , but the very implication there is that the ONLY way to make a film work is by watching the gradual decline into madness.. as John so clearly states, knowing Nicholson is a bomb works well too.

    More importantly, for me at least, the film is scary, it is hypnotic and it has a rhythm all of it's own.

    One of the pleasures of watching much world cinema (and one of the reasons Ringu made such an impact) is that the tone, tempo and visual dictionary of so many US films is all of a type. The Shining.. well what is it? Well it does not have the aesthetic of the savage cinema of the seventies, it is not pointing towards the flashy technique of the eighties, it is what it is.

    The only thing I occasionally get reminded of is Sergio Leone.

    I can happily rewatch it, it never fails to unnerve me and King should be damn proud.

    He had a good run in the early eighties, Carrie, Dead Zone, Christine (rather under rated I feel) Cujo... but the Shining is probably the best, (then Christine, the Dead Zone) and has and will stand the test of time.

    People just seem hung up on the plot / character, due to it's literary origins.

    Svankmajer can disturb through images and editing alone, and Kubrick has that kind of power.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous4:07 AM

    good movie

    ReplyDelete

30 Years Ago: Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994)

The tenth birthday of cinematic boogeyman Freddy Krueger should have been a big deal to start with, that's for sure.  Why? Well, in the ...