www.dead-donkey.com
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/

Help with The Shining
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6731		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Help with The Shining
OK...I supposedly have an uncut version of The Shining.
2 CD set, and a "Making of" thing.
It's definitely cut.

For instance, this scene is missing.

JACK
Do you mind if I ask why you do
that? It seems to me that the
skiing up here would be fantastic.

ULLMAN (OFF)
Oh, it sure would be
but the problem is the enormous
cost it would be to keep the road
to the Sidewinder open. It's a...
It's a 25 mile stretch of road -
gets an average of 20 feet of snow
during the winter, and there's just
no way to make it economically
feasible to keep it clear. When
the place was built in 1907, there
was very little interest in winter
sports, and this site was chosen
for its seclusion and scenic beauty.

And other little bits are missing too.
Does anyone know of a release on The Mule that is ACTUALLY Uncut?
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
You know there are two versions of the movie right?

The European superior version and a loosely edited American version. Neither version are cut.

The american version has more footage, but simply doesn't work as well, and the European version is a lot faster, tighter and well... better. Kubrick's prefered version is the European cut, which is shorter since a lot of material he (the perfectionist :lol:) demeed unnessacary and counter to the films inpact.

The us version is up on the frontpage, uncensored. If your an american, you'll probably have only seen the longer, crapper one.
http://www.dead-donkey.com/modules.php? ... ent&id=140

Quote:
This is the restored US cut which is longer than the PAL counterpart.


Also note this is very common, see Brazil to see how f*cked up the US version is of such a great film.
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 9:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
the European version is a lot faster, tighter and well... better.


So I have the European Version?
I mean, I would assume, since the European Version is the shorter one, that the one WITHOUT that scene is the European Version.
I am going to download whichever version I don't have, needless to say. I have 3 versions of The Exorcist.

Because I am deeply disturbed is why.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:02 pm ]
Post subject: 
yes, you'll have the european one, better version of the film imo. The us one has too many unnessacary scenes that count against it.

About The Shining, its because Kubrick preferred the European audience last I read. He was always upset how the studios treated americans.

Likewise, with Terry Gilliam's Brazil, the studio bosses thought the movie was too hard on the audience (the ending is kind of brutal), so they forced a kiddy version on the audience, forcing Gilliam off the project and then imposing a lacky to reedit the film (and its truely dreadful!)

Its often a case that the us versions are different from the european ones, mostly because the studios have no confidence in the american audience and totally undermine what they will like and not like.

The trends in success with european and american audiences is very different. Alien3 did exceptionally well in Europe, for example, since its by far the darkest movie in the franchise. But in the states it didn't do very well. So its not all totally unfounded about the differences in tastes in audiences. However, 90% iwhen there's different versions, the US will be dumbed down, less harsh or more 'explaination of what's happening as it happens'.
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
yes, you'll have the american one.


*Sigh*
Which is the cut that's missing the scene I quoted at the top of this topic? The European one, or the American one?

I CURRENTLY have a version that is MISSING that scene.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:06 pm ]
Post subject: 
typo, i meant european, you would have picked up if you read the post above it, since I said the american one was longer with more scenes, but neither are cut ;)
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:09 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Alien3 did exceptionally well in Europe


I really liked Alien3, but I don't think the extra scenes in the US cut of The Shining count against the movie. I think they draw it out and make it more torturous and psychological.
I mean, that's how all Kubrick movies are. You gotta chew on em for a while.

If you think Europeans have better taste, how come it was French people who made Jerry Lewis famous?

<img src="http://www.icp.org/weegee/images/wg4-60.jpg">
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:11 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
really liked Alien3, but I don't think the extra scenes in the US cut of The Shining count against the movie. I think they draw it out and make it more torturous and psychological.
I mean, that's how all Kubrick movies are. You gotta chew on em for a while.

Nope, that's not how Kubrick movies are, Kubrick has said he doesn't like the Us version and his Director's cut is the european one.

He says the us one lacks pace, and is slow and clumpy, and I agree totally. Its just an inferior version of a superior film.

Kubrick's films are tightly edited and well made, and the US cut lacks the former.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:13 pm ]
Post subject: 
oh and there's a web pages that lists all the changes between the two somewhere, the changes are all mostly to longer drawn out and unsuccessful scenes. I'd recommend both versions, but I never watch the US one. There's little point.

Kubrick's films are so notoriously, painstakingly made to the minute detail that there's huge debate over something as silly as a Helicopter shadow at the begining of the movie, and how such a perfectionist could have left it in. (turns out the editor f*cked up and cropped badly... *nuke* :mrgreen: )
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Kubrick has said he doesn't like the Us version and his Director's cut is the european one.


It doesn't matter what Kubrick said.
Kubrick doesn't have a monopoly on the meaning of his own work. Do you think Shakespeare thought up all the interpretations that have been offered up on Shakespeare's work? No. Does that mean they are wrong? No.

But I can respect your opinion that it's an inferior version of a superior film. I don't know. I'm watching the European version right now while I type and I have conflicting opinions.

Anyway, half of my brain agrees with you.
:beerchug:
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
that there's huge debate over something as silly as a Helicopter shadow at the begining of the movie


You know that Jack Nicholson is always walking AWAY from the exit signs?
It's cool. He's never going toward the exit signs in the shots.
Always away.
Cool stuff.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:27 pm ]
Post subject: 
That's not I was referring to:
Quote:
I mean, that's how all Kubrick movies are. You gotta chew on em for a while.


And kurbick, the movie maker, contradicts this. Well actually, he doesn't exactly since the point is I think your misusing length to equal psychological effect, when I think it isn't really true.

Infact, in my opinion superior films come about from effective film making, technically and artistically, and not simply increasing the length of the movie, with absolutely no effect from the 'waste' scenes. It is contrary to what I think Kubrick was all about as a film maker, and why he's one of my favourite director's.

Superior films through sheer weight of film construction, he has content, psychology, but more importantly he knew how to technically make a film, which includes including scenes that are necessary, but kicking out stuff that degrades the movie (which in my opinion, although the scenes removed aren't bad or anything, they just aren't necessary and do nothing but bulk up runtime).

Now that's my personal opinion. But I was using kubrick's opinion to contradict your:
Quote:
that's how all Kubrick movies ar

He never does that by simply bulking up runtime. All of his movies are cut so brilliantly, that every scene is pretty much needed.

They are made with such love that you only see from director's like Hitchcock, kurbick, etc.

The whole showing more is better is something that George Lucas and Stephen Speilberg do, and that's not Kurbick by such a long way. (ironically, Kubrick was jealous of George, since he never had a major hit like Star Wars... how silly is that. His films were simply of higher claibre that George's direction pieces (Iv, I-III).)

That is what I meant :)

Of course, I might need to stress this is what I think, people always say I'm saying how it is, but that's silly... (unless its maxpayne, then I like to piss him off :lol: ). I also think that the best version of Dawn of the Dead is the theatrical version too.

However, in that instances I do watch the director's cut (the rough cut) too, since the film simply isn't as painstakingly edited as Kubrick's work and the scenes don't really make the film worse. In this instance though, I don't think the US one really warrants watching after you see it once (like dvd extra deleted scenes, if you need an analogy), given that the European one does the same thing better :)
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
All of his movies are cut so brilliantly, that every scene is pretty much needed.


I agree with this, but I don't think that explaining WHY they close the Overlook hotel degrades the movie. I think it's fine.

I mean, maybe you could point me to another scene that was cut that does degrade the movie.

When I said that Kubrick makes you chew on his movies, I didn't mean he did so by increasing runtime. I meant that his movies aren't easy to handle, and that Kubrick is easily one of the most intense directors ever.

If you have that style preference though, how can you like the Theatre version of Dawn of the Dead over the Argento cut? Cuz the Argento cut, according to many, gets rid of the "American" humor that Romero put in and stresses the action and horror of it all. "Straight to the point", yes? And the unnecessary "american" humor is cut away.

I don't know which version of Dawn of the Dead I like best either, just as I'm not sure about which The Shining I like best.

I do know that I like the extended version of The Exorcist best though. That movie without "The Tarantula Walk" is just not the same.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 10:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
argento's cut cuts out lots that made the film really good. I think your confusing my like of cutting out unnessacary scenes with cutting out every scene.

I can't recall every change to the shining, which is my point, they aren't memorable, they aren't needed and they shouldn't really be there. As said if you do a bit of googling there's a huge site that lists every difference between the two versions, I can't remember them simply because they aren't really too good. I can remember every other scene, and some of the added ones of course.

Argento's cut does nothing but take out all the best scenes and content that should be there. I happen to like Romero's movie a lot, and the argento cut just shouldn't have been made. It was just stupid to take out the humour because that give the movie the sense of 'prison' it starts off like a joke, but it quickly becomes unfunny when they realise they're trapped. No you missed the point in suggesting that.

The Version You've Never Seen Before is better, but the scenes added are of significance (apart from the ending which was a bit crappy in this edit if I recall), it really does change the movie a lot since these scenes really shouldn't have been taken out originally (although at a guess, the director wanted to take out the scenes that aren't technically sound, and the spider walk is a bit cheesy :) ). With The Shining, the added scenes just aren't needed, they provide nothing, its wasted space in almost every instance, and ultimately degrades the movie by bullking up the runtime and degrading its effect on the audience in my opinion.
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Point taken.
We'll agree to disagree.

Here's my agreement.
:matrix:

YAAAAA!!

:D
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:41 pm ]
Post subject: 
lol, no bub... don't shoot!
Author:  drpoopypantz [ Tue Dec 14, 2004 2:16 am ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
lol, no bub... don't shoot!


We are not murderers, despite what this...undertaker thinks.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
What's blood for, if not for shedding?