Need help understing a part in THE SHINING
Richard Rearden
I have been wondering and wondering about a part of the movie "THE
SHINING". And I would like to know what is the significant of the part
where Wendy is walking up the stands and sees a beaver or someone
in a beaver outfit kneeling on the floor doing something to a guy in a
room.
If you know the significant of it. Please e-mail me at:
gam...@postoffice.ptd.net
Thanks
Rich
Kubrick S
<<I think you're referring to the original Shining where she sees a
<<man in a DOG costume performing oral sex on someone.
How do you know there was a "man" in that dog costume? ;-)
bev vincent
Chris Lawrence (mus...@islandnet.com) wrote:
: Richard Rearden wrote:
: >
: > I have been wondering and wondering about a part of the movie "THE
: I think you're referring to the original Shining where she sees a
: man in a DOG costume performing oral sex on someone. No real
: signifigance, as far as I can gather, expect that the Dogman attacked
: Danny in the book. It was just used to show Wendy's realization of the
: horror in the Overlook, I believe.
I would guess that Kubrick had access to "Before the Play", the prologue
to "The Shining" which was editorially removed from the book before it
was published. The full prologue (part of which was recently published
in TV Guide) gave a lot of the history of some of the events in the
Overlook. This episode in the movie is an echo of something that happened
in the hotel's past.
--
Bev Vincent
Houston, TX
Peter Vesuwalla
> Richard Rearden <gam...@postoffice.ptd.net> writes:
> I have been wondering and wondering about a part of the movie "THE
> SHINING". And I would like to know what is the significant of the part
> where Wendy is walking up the stands and sees a beaver or someone
> in a beaver outfit kneeling on the floor doing something to a guy in a
> room.
One of the wonderful things about the Kubrick film is the amount of things
that are left to the veiwers imagination. I have my own ideas as to what
was going on, but I'm more interested in hearing what YOU think it was
all about.
It is a huge mistake on King's part, that in the TV version he is explaining
every little detail. This technique produces largely forgettable films. Kubrick
on the other hand, made a film that demands interpretation.
Peter Vesuwalla
Meagan Lawson
Peter Vesuwalla <umve...@cc.umanitoba.ca> wrote in article
<5kagvq$f4t$1...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca>...
I thought it was a mouse suit.
Puff_The_Magic_Dragon
bev vincent wrote:
> *SNIP SNIP* <
> I would guess that Kubrick had access to "Before the Play", the prologue
> to "The Shining" which was editorially removed from the book before it
> was published. The full prologue (part of which was recently published
> in TV Guide) gave a lot of the history of some of the events in the
> Overlook. This episode in the movie is an echo of something that happened
> in the hotel's past.
>
> --
> Bev Vincent
> Houston, TX
Point of fact, "Before The play" was written AFTER The Shining was
released, and the only existing copy can be found in Stuart Schiff's
"Whispers" Magazine, August 1982.
Here is how Stephen himself put it:
"The book proper ended with Danny, his mother, and Hallorann, the
cook, riding away from the burning Overlook on a snowmobile. It seemed a
dubious end at best; there were too many loose ends to suit me. So I
added an epilogue, most of which has now been lost, titled "After The
Play." At this point, I became unhappy (thereis no pleasing writers,
ever;..."
"... I decided I needed a prologue to balance of the rather lengthy
epilogue.. I liked the prologue so well that I could feel it wanting to
become a book in itself; enough energy was left from the novel I has
just written to make me feel as if I had just landed a powerful jet
which still had enough fuel to take off again and do a few loops,
power-turns, and barrel rolls. The feeling of my editor at Doubleday was
that both the prologue and most of the epilogue could be cut, with the
result that we could offer the book for a dollor less..."
-From "THE STEPHEN KING ENCYCLOPEDIA"
Stephen J. Spignesi (1991)
Nothing in either version of the film comes close to what was in the
missing sections of The Shining, except in short flashback. More, the
missing sections were written to explain gaps (like who that is in room
217, and why the Overlook is as it is).
From what I remember, there were two major incidences from the lost
sections. One included Jack (then called Jacky), and his parents,
(I feel this explains why, in the end of the story, Lloyd tells Jack
that he always belonged in the Overlook).
The other was the Grand Masquerade Ball, at which Lewis Toner (aka The
Dogman, Roger in THE SHINING), Horace Dermit (the ringmaster at the
ball, and one of the driving forces behind the demonic events occuring
in The Shining, and owner of the Overlook in the 1930's)
--
/ /
/' .,,,, ./ "Dragons Live Forever,
/';' ,/ Not So, Little Boys-"
/ / ,,//,`'`
( ,, '_, ,,,' ``
| /@ ,,, ;" ` Puff The Magic Dragon
/ . ,''/' `,`` =================
/ . ./, `,, ` ; Jodi...@worldnet.att.net
,./ . ,-,',` ,,/''\,'
| /; ./,,'`,,'' | |
| / ',' / |
\___/' ' | |
`,,' | / `\
/ | ~\
' (
: www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/3857/index.html
; . \--
: \ ;
bev vincent
Puff_The_Magic_Dragon (Jodi...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: bev vincent wrote:
: > *SNIP SNIP* <
: > I would guess that Kubrick had access to "Before the Play", the prologue
: > to "The Shining" which was editorially removed from the book before it
: > was published. The full prologue (part of which was recently published
: > in TV Guide) gave a lot of the history of some of the events in the
: > Overlook. This episode in the movie is an echo of something that happened
: > in the hotel's past.
: Point of fact, "Before The play" was written AFTER The Shining was
: released, and the only existing copy can be found in Stuart Schiff's
: "Whispers" Magazine, August 1982.
: Here is how Stephen himself put it:
: "The book proper ended with Danny, his mother, and Hallorann, the
: cook, riding away from the burning Overlook on a snowmobile. It seemed a
: dubious end at best; there were too many loose ends to suit me. So I
: added an epilogue, most of which has now been lost, titled "After The
: Play." At this point, I became unhappy (thereis no pleasing writers,
: ever;..."
: "... I decided I needed a prologue to balance of the rather lengthy
: epilogue.. I liked the prologue so well that I could feel it wanting to
: become a book in itself; enough energy was left from the novel I has
: just written to make me feel as if I had just landed a powerful jet
: which still had enough fuel to take off again and do a few loops,
: power-turns, and barrel rolls. The feeling of my editor at Doubleday was
: that both the prologue and most of the epilogue could be cut, with the
: result that we could offer the book for a dollor less..."
You contradict yourself. If "Before the Play" was written after "The Shining"
was released, then how could the editor at Doubleday have cut the prologue
from the book?
"Before the Play" was written after the text that we now know as "The
Shining" was written, but it was written before the book was released.
The prologue was chopped out and later saw light in Whispers. The
epilogue was edited down substantially, only a few scenes from it
survive in the novel. The rest, according to King, is irretrievably
lost.
Jon Skeet
bev vincent <b...@msc.com> wrote:
> You contradict yourself. If "Before the Play" was written after "The Shining"
> was released, then how could the editor at Doubleday have cut the prologue
> from the book?
ie, pretty much what I just posted. I even looked in the article
tree to see whether you'd replied... you only snipped the references
line to confuse me, didn't you?
Muttering darkly...
--
Jon Skeet
When 900 years old *you* reach, look as good *you* will not, hmm?
Yoda - http://yoda.trin.cam.ac.uk. Geek code:
d- s:- a-- C++ UL++ P+ L++ W+++ N++ w--- M-- t- 5 X+ tv b+++ D+ G h* r++
bev vincent
Jon Skeet (jl...@cam.ac.uk) wrote:
: bev vincent <b...@msc.com> wrote:
: > You contradict yourself. If "Before the Play" was written after "The Shining"
: > was released, then how could the editor at Doubleday have cut the prologue
: > from the book?
: ie, pretty much what I just posted. I even looked in the article
: tree to see whether you'd replied... you only snipped the references
: line to confuse me, didn't you?
Not intentionally, but a glorious side effect! Hehehe. Sometimes
multi-line References screw up some types of xterms or xwsh's, so
I snip 'em out while I cut and slash and add to posts. Sometimes
I forget to put 'em back!
Oops.
Jon Skeet
bev vincent <b...@msc.com> wrote:
> Sometimes multi-line References screw up some types of xterms or
> xwsh's, so I snip 'em out while I cut and slash and add to posts.
> Sometimes I forget to put 'em back!
Hmm... I suspect the dreaded vi myself... there's a reason the word
evil has the letters v and i at its centre...
bev vincent
Jon Skeet (jl...@cam.ac.uk) wrote:
: bev vincent <b...@msc.com> wrote:
: > Sometimes multi-line References screw up some types of xterms or
: > xwsh's, so I snip 'em out while I cut and slash and add to posts.
: > Sometimes I forget to put 'em back!
: Hmm... I suspect the dreaded vi myself... there's a reason the word
: evil has the letters v and i at its centre...
Y'know what "vi vi vi" is? The editor of the beast...