The Overlook Hotel - The Shining prequel

[spock rogers]

Just what we've always wanted, a prequel to The Shining. I'm really excited that we'll hear about Delbert Grady and his family, who that old woman in the bath was, who fellatio bear was. If there's one thing which makes films better it's fleshing out a story with a prequel. It worked for Star Wars!

http://variety.com/2013/film/news/glen-mazzara-in-talks-to-pen-1200349187/

[Noodle Lizard]

Ugh.  No.

[Steven]

Wasn't the fellatio bear some gangster bloke who liked to have dudes suck him off dressed in demeaning outfits, I think it was meant to be a dog-costume? The old woman was some drunk who drowned in her bath.

They really are scraping the barrel making this, the great thing about the Shining is all the unanswered questions, that gives the viewer a larger depth to the movie to wonder about. The end photo of Nicholson at a party back in the 20s or whenever it was - he's got what looks like a secret note hidden in his palm - I've always wondered what that was about, but I think Kubrick just got an old stock photo and put Nicholson's face on it - so the party note was just what it appears to be. But that is what was great about Kubrick, leaving these little odd details that you never know if he intended a deeper meaning to or not.

[Noodle Lizard]

Weren't they planning on re-releasing 'The Shining' with the helicopter shadow during the opening credits digitally erased?  Even that annoyed me.  This ... no, no.  Haven't we suffered enough with Stephen King's own attempt?

[Small Man Big Horse]

I think Dr Sleep will be the first King novel I've read in years, if only to see how preposterous it is. The wikipedia description is just bizarre.

With Doctor Sleep, Stephen King returns to the characters and territory of one of his previous novels, The Shining. The novel features the now middle-aged Dan Torrance (the boy protagonist of The Shining) and the twelve-year-old girl, Abra Stone, that he must save from The True Knot. The True Knot are a group of almost immortal travelers who cross the country feeding off of children with the gift of "the shining." Dan drifted for decades in an attempt to escape his father's legacy, but eventually settled in a New Hampshire town and works in a nursing home, where his remnant mental abilities provide comfort to the dying. With the aid of a cat that can foresee the future, Dan becomes "Doctor Sleep." After meeting Abra Stone, an epic war between good and evil ensues.

[Noodle Lizard]

I think Dr Sleep will be the first King novel I've read in years, if only to see how preposterous it is.

Your mum is preposterous.

[Thomas]

The True Knot are a group of almost immortal travelers...

Everybody's 'almost immortal', surely? It's just dying gets in the way. Lobsters and certain jellyfish, however... well.

But yeah, this prequel would be stupid. Sentence: non-canonicity.

[Blumf]

[Small Man Big Horse]

Your mum is preposterous.

Tis true. But you have to love her anyway.

[Custard]

I'm not usually too fussed about pointless sequels and remakes, if the original is really great it won't make the slightest bit of difference to it, but this news actually made me shout FUCK OFFFF at the screen

No one wants a Shining prequel. No one.

Get to fuck. That goes for Stephen King, an all!

[The Roofdog]

Everybody's 'almost immortal', surely? It's just dying gets in the way. Lobsters and certain jellyfish, however... well.

Tardigrades (commonly known as waterbears or moss piglets)

Have you just written this?

[Garam]

I'll get drunk and watch it. Even if it's total shit I'll get enjoyment out of it cause I love The Shining and a crap version of it would make me laugh. It doesn't effect the original. Who cares? If anything it'll raise awareness of the Kubrick film/King book, so it's a good thing. It makes more money for the artists (or their estate) you love, and are getting so defensive on the behalf of.


I don't understand people getting pissed about prequels/sequels/remakes. Don't watch them. It doesn't erase the original. NOBODY remembers the TV mini-series, aside from people like me who seek it out for a drunken chuckle.




Do you get angry at that Halloween episode of The Simpsons where they do a ten minute Shining spoof? HOW DARE THEY!! When a piece of art gains a certain level of pop cultural ubiquity it becomes public property to a degree. That's what happened with Pinocchio, Oliver Twist, James Bond, Huckleberry Finn, Peter Pan. Now it's happening to The Shining. It deserves it. Who knows, maybe it'll actually be good?

[spock rogers]

Do you get angry at that Halloween episode of The Simpsons where they do a ten minute Shining spoof? HOW DARE THEY!!

But that's an affectionate spoof. The prequel is only there to cynically make money off the back of the original.

[Jemble Fred]

The prequel is only there to cynically make money off the back of the original.

That seems a bit of a presumptuous leap. Are you saying The Shining has no artistic merit? If it has, then it can both withstand further fictional exploration, and can be said to deserve such attention. It's a testament to any fictional property's hold on the public imagination when it's expanded like this. If it's shit, it's shit, but there's no logic in immediately writing it off as a commercial exercise.

[Garam]

yes to all that ^, as well as the fact that it's just another adaptation like the Kubrick film was. There isn't a limit on how many interpretations you can make of a work, thank god.

[spock rogers]

If it's shit, it's shit, but there's no logic in immediately writing it off as a commercial exercise.

Of course there is, this is Hollywood we're talking about. How many prequels or sequels have been made in the name of artistic, rather than commercial, value by Hollywood? Not a week goes by when you don't hear about a reboot, remake, or sequel. This weeks reboot: Naked Gun.

Looking at imdb, between them, the producers/writers of this new Shining prequel also have the following in development: The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Robocop remake, Independence Day 2, Fantastic Voyage remake, Ghost in the Shell remake, Hancock 2.

[Noodle Lizard]

In come the contrarians.  Look, this will definitely be shit, let us whine about it.  There's no "high ground" to take, so don't ... y'know.  Don't do that.

[Jemble Fred]

Nothing remotely contrary about it, it's totally true and it's pathetic to decide out of hand that all extensions of all fictional creations instantly have no artistic merit.

That said, IN of hand, that list of other projects from the same people is extremely poor, so in this case, perhaps it is best to keep hopes low.

[Noodle Lizard]

Nothing remotely contrary about it, it's totally true and it's pathetic to decide out of hand that all extensions of all fictional creations instantly have no artistic merit.

Nobody said that, though.  We're talking about this one.

[Jemble Fred]

This thread seemed to become about writing off prequels and sequels in general long ago. Garam pretty much nails it, that the original is always there, forever unscathed by any subsequent reboot, remake, sequel or prequel.

Couldn't give much of a toss about folk building on The Shining in general, Stephen King's still alive, so whatever happens to it, it's his head on the block. It gets more complicated when the creator isn't around to say yea or nay. But even then, it's mostly harmless.

[checkoutgirl]

How many prequels or sequels have been made in the name of artistic, rather than commercial, value by Hollywood?

Two.

Schlindler's List 2: Let's Get This Party Started

and

Cannibal Holocaust: The Early Years

[mcbpete]

Unless The Caretaker does the soundtrack I'm not interested.

(As in this guy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL998ajnjN4 )

[checkoutgirl]

the original is always there, forever unscathed by any subsequent reboot, remake, sequel or prequel.

Certain people, lets call them nerds, have an attachment to the films of their childhood that they think are being trashed by sequels. Southpark did an episode about it where they basically suggested that Lucas/Speilberg were raping Indiana Jones with a terrible sequel, if I remember correctly. There is a grain of something there for me, I'm not sure what it is. I mean, Godfather Part III didn't change Godfather II but it sure fucked up the trilogy, didn't it ? I dunno.

[Famous Mortimer]

Nothing remotely contrary about it, it's totally true and it's pathetic to decide out of hand that all extensions of all fictional creations instantly have no artistic merit.

That said, IN of hand, that list of other projects from the same people is extremely poor, so in this case, perhaps it is best to keep hopes low.

For every decent prequel you can name, I'll name you ten that sucked, and I bet you run out before I do. "Extensions of fictional creations"? We're talking, fairly specifically, about a prequel to The Shining.

Oh, I've been beaten to it. As you were.

[Blumf]

Unless The Caretaker does the soundtrack I'm not interested.

(As in this guy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL998ajnjN4 )

You might like this too:
http://datassette.net/?l=mixes&s=1213195825

[Cerys]

There's no "high ground" to take

It's the Overlook.  Of course there's high ground.  How else could it look over?

I'm quite interested in this.  Even though it could well turn out to be shit, it has the possibility of not being shit.

[Thomas]

Imagine if it turns out to be absolutely incredible. I know I called it stupid and condemned it to non-canonicity a few posts back, but it'd be interesting.

[Jemble Fred]

Certain people, lets call them nerds, have an attachment to the films of their childhood that they think are being trashed by sequels.

I know. Sad, isn't it? But it's an optional anger, really, because the original remains the same as ever. It's self-imposed misery – and I know, because I've done it myself at times. Sometimes people just enjoy showing how much of a fan they are by how loudly they can complain about something being done to 'their' film/book/TV show/morris dance.

That said, I think remakes can be worse, as they often carry an inherent suggestion of improvement on the original. But even the worst of them (Bedazzled) can eventually be discounted. Slightly annoying that you have to explain that you mean the original if you ever refer to the the film in conversation, but 'slight annoyance' is bearable.

[checkoutgirl]

I think remakes can be worse

I don't know what you mean.

[Garam]

I am so glad the Wicker Man remake exists, and the original is one of my all-time favourite films. If this Overlook Hotel thing can give me as many guffaws as that did, then I'll be happy. Remember how the internet melted down when they announced the Bad Lieutenant remake with Nic Cage? And remember how bloody brilliant it ended up being? Prefer it to the original.


It pisses me off slightly that i'm being accused of being contrary or 'taking the high ground' just for expressing my fucking opinion. I just can't understand the reason to get angry. It seems so illogical to me. It will guide new people to the original. If it's shit (which I admit, it probably will be) it will be forgotten, just as the 1997 tv series was. No harm done.