Stanley Kubrick’s horror classic The Shining is one of the most visually stunning and viscerally terrifying films in movie history and has been ripe for theories and analysis over the past forty years. Opening opposite The Empire Strikes Back in May 1980, the film had one of the highest-grossing opening weekends of all-time despite opening on fewer than 50 screens. The film received mixed reviews upon its initial release, but that opinion quickly began to change over the years following its release. Nowadays, it is considered a classic entry in cinema history, earning it the 29th spot on the American Film Institutes 100 Years…100 Thrills list.
Seventeen years after the release of Kubrick’s film, The Shining was given the 1990s Stephen King miniseries treatment, with King himself at the helm of writing the screen version of his hit novel. The three episode series debuted in April 1997 to a massive television audience and rave reviews from critics. As Kubrick’s film grew more popular and praised over the years, the miniseries unfortunately met the opposite fate as its popularity and acclaim has waned since 1997.
While Kubrick’s film may be the more popular screen version, it is the miniseries that have been and always will be the more faithful adaptation from the pages to the screen. Come along, watch out for the Grady twins, and let’s look at what makes The Shining (1997) a more faithful adaptation of the terrifying classic novel.
Story
Warner Bros. Television
The biggest difference between the film and the miniseries starts with the overall narrative of the novel. There are large chunks of the book that just simply are not in Kubrick’s film but are present in the miniseries. Perhaps the biggest thing missing is the exploration of Jack Torrance’s descent into madness. The film version of Jack Torrance, played by Jack Nicholson, comes off as distant from his wife Wendy and son Danny right from the jump. We get brief glimpses of him caring for them, but the whole relationship feels as cold as the winter months at The Overlook. The knife-sharp facial expressions that Jack Nicholson naturally possesses could lead the audience to assume that Torrance is crazy from the very beginning and everything that follows is predictable. The lack of a story arc for Torrance is the biggest issue that Stephen King has with the Kubrick film. But much to King’s chagrin, even this lack of faithfulness can’t keep The Shining from being the best Stephen King adaptation of the 1980s.
In the 1997 television adaptation, Jack Torrance is played by Steven Weber. This version of Jack is painted as much more of an everyday family man in the beginning, much as he is presented in the novel. We firmly believe Jack cares and loves his family because of the way he is written by King and portrayed by Weber. His descent into madness is much more believable because we see what the monumental difference between Torrance from the beginning of the series to the end.
Other story elements from the book that the miniseries adopts, but Kubrick does not, can be found throughout the series. We get a much broader backstory for The Overlook Hotel, which in the book and miniseries is presented as a living, breathing, evil character. We are treated to 90s CGI shrubbery animals, Jack Torrance actually doing caretaker work, and a different ending and fate for The Overlook’s head chef and fellow shiner, Dick Hallorann. With King at the helm writing the miniseries, it is expected that he would stay true to his own work as much as possible, and this leads to a faithful adaptation from a story point of view.
Why?
One novel, two completely different adaptations. Stanley Kubrick used the bones of The Shining novel as well as its characters to create a terrifying dramatic thriller that has stood the test of time. He did not necessarily set out to make a Stephen King movie; he set out to make a Stanley Kubrick movie using King’s concept. Scaring us with cinematography and tension, as opposed to the more ghoulish elements of King’s book. We see this all throughout cinema history and at times it has created classic but not entirely faithful to their source material films.
Clearly not willing to let Kubrick’s film be the only adaptation of his novel, King set out to make sure a true-to-book version existed. The 1997 miniseries is a great example of why faithfulness does not always lead to timeless. Stanley Kubrick made a timeless, classic film. Who knows though? Perhaps King will get another chance at a more faithful big screen adaptation in the future via the remake treatment… let’s hope not. As we have already discussed, the series was a hit when it debuted but has waned ever since, passing out of people’s memories like the ghosts at The Overlook… faithful or not.
