LAWSON: 'The Shining' Prequel Is the Problem with Prequels

photo credit: www.reelizer.com

Strange things are happening with The Shining.  Thus the strange picture!  What do ya'all think of it?

Richard Lawson at the Atlantic summed up my own feelings toward the plans to make a Prequel to The Shining.

Responding to news that Glen Mazzara of The Walking Dead is set to write the script for The Overlook Hotel, Lawson writes:

What's worse: The unnecessary sequel? The unnecessary remake? May I submit that in fact the unnecessary prequel does the job of both, simultaneously adding to a story that didn't need adding to, just as a sequel does, and managing to oddly reinvent the world of the original, just like a bad remake would. Look no further for an example than the ultimate terrible prequels, Star Wars I-III, which were not only bad movies in their own right but, boy, did they do a number on the original trilogy. A bad prequel can wreak a lot of havoc. And so when we hear news that the whispered-about prequel to The Shining is chugging along, with Warner Bros. hiring a writer, it bears taking a moment to yell: No

YES!  That summed it up well.  I did not enjoy the Star Wars prequels at all.  I watched a documentary called "The People v. George Lucas" in which some fans said Lucas had ruined their lives.  Well, the prequels neither ruined my life nor made me love the originals any less. And, in my opinion -- they got better.  That is, until Darth Vader cried, "nooooooo!"  Really, Darth, really.

Lawson gives us an important reminder.  The prequel to The Shining will be a prequel to the Kubrick version of the film, not the King story.  Kinda sad, because as I pointed out earlier, King's own prequel in "Before the play" was quite good.  Kubrick's story was all together another story -- like something that happened in a parallel universe.

Lawson suggested, "So this prequel would exist more in Kubrick's world than in King's, though the prequel material would theoretically be based on a prologue written by King that was eventually cut from the book."  I'm not so sure of that.  The only reason to say it's based on the Kubrick film is to say that they are going in a whole new direction.  The only real back story that the Kubrick film offered was the idea that Jack had "always" been the caretaker.  Certainly not an idea King had worked with at all.

Of course The Shining had everyone scratching their heads at points -- but I wonder if we really want answers. Lawson again sums it up well, saying, "While something of an interesting thought experiment — why is Jack Torrance in that photo from 1921? — I'm not sure we really need a whole movie based on the idea of the pre-Shining hotel."  That's right!

The full story is at www.theatlanticwire.com

Cujo and The Shining Back To Hollywood

photo credit: www.liljas-library.com

Today the Hollywood Reporter posted that Glen Mazzara is "in negotiations to pen the screenplay" to a project called "Overlook Hotel."  The story will serve as a prequel to The Shining.  This was actually hard for me to imagine until I read Stephen King's original opening to The Shining called "Before The Play."  An edited version appeared in TV guide.  (talkstephenking.blogspot. before the play)

My favorite website, Lilja's Library, posted this news:

SUNN CLASSIC ANNOUNCES CUJO FOR 2013
Lang Elliott, President & CEO of Sunn Classic Pictures, Inc., announced that Sunn plans to produce the remake of “CUJO” this year representing the 30th Anniversary since Sunn produced and distributed the original “CUJO” motion picture in l983, based upon Stephen King’s novel. The l983 version was highly successful at the worldwide box-office and, compared with today’s inflation and higher ticket prices, the box-office would be well over $225 million even without ancillary sales (i.e., DVD, cable, free television, pay-per-view, etc.).

Of course, the big question is -- why?  Cujo was a good book, and a better movie.  Could a remake be better  than the original?  Carrie could justify a remake because the original deviated so far from the book -- though it was great.  But Cujo actually made the story better!  If Sunn wants to drop money on a Stephen King project, how about CELL, The Sun Dog, From a Buick 8. Or how about a remake of The Runningman.

King films that need a remake:

• The Runningman
• Langoliers
• Desperation
• Needful Things (mini-series please)
• IT
• Firestarter
• Dreamcatcher

Some projects you hope will just go away. . . like Children of the Corn.  

What King movies would you like to see remade?

THE SHINING PREQUEL still a possibility

What's worse than a sequel?  A prequel!  Movies like -- Dumb and Dumber-er, Star Wars Episode 1,2,3, Hannibal Rising, Exorcist: The Beginning and The Flintstones in Viva Rock Vegas.  I don't usually like prequels.  Do you?  Star Wars episode 2-3 was okay.  But I don't watch them because  they don't really feel like Star Wars.

Stephen King gave us something of a prequel in Wizard  and Glass, since he jumped out of the present narrative to discuss in detail events that preceded his chasing the man in black.

Matt Mueller at onmilwaukee.com has an article I enjoyed  titled, "Five terrible movie prequels that could actually exist."

Muller's list includes:

• "Raging Bull"
• "The Godfather"
• "Blade Runner"
• "Pulp Fiction"

AND. . . The Shining. I  had almost forgotten that was on the table. King is ready to release  the sequel  to The Shining, which already has some fans griping. 

My three reasons why The Shining prequel is a DUMB and DUMBER-ER idea if it focuses on the Torrance family:

1. No Overlook.  It's the Overlook that brought the spooks out.  King starts the story where the intereting stuff happens!  Why go back before the interesting part?  Like, "Hey, let's do a prequel to -- Under The Dome."  Or The Stand.  Problem is -- nothing worth noting happens!

2. We already know the back story to The Shining -- we don't need a movie to tell us that particular part of the tale.  It becomes nothing more than a story of drinking and abuse.   Hurt without conclusion.   

3. Danny would be really little, and unaware of his power.  

Actually, the prequel  would probably focus on the hotel itself.  Now, having read King's original introduction  to The Shining, which were several short stories from the hotel -- I have to say, that's scary stuff!  I might actually be interested in that.  (talkstephenking Before The Play)

Muller writes:

 I love "The Shining." When people ask me what I believe is the scariest movie in film history, I say Stanley Kubrick's haunting, mesmerizing 1980 Stephen King adaptation every time. Kubrick was such a unique director, and he possessed such an understanding for what compositions, images, ideas and sounds would rattle his viewers to their core. "The Shining" also has mysteries stacked on top of mysteries – both in its story and from its creation – that make it live on like very few other horror films (a new documentary, "Room 237," has even attempted to unravel the multiple theories and conspiracies embedded in the project). 

Of course, Warner Bros. didn't feel like leaving greatness alone. Last summer, the Los Angeles Times revealed that the studio was "quietly exploring" the prospects of a prequel to "The Shining" that would likely answer all of the film's fascinating mysteries and weird moments in a complete misunderstanding of what makes "The Shining" brilliant. Hint: It's not explaining things. Hopefully, this particularly inane prequel idea will make like Jack Torrance and die before it can mindlessly take a bloody axe to something unique and special.

I can't agree with Muller more -- hopefully this idea will die!  Almost like: "Shhh -- Nobody even talk about it, maybe Warner Brothers will forget."

The Overlook's Past Matters

With many of us -- most of us -- rolling our eyes in disgust at the idea of a prequel to The Shining, I thought it was worth noting King's comments on the Hotel's past.

I was reading through Stephen King goes to Hollywood, when this quote got my attention:

“My screenplay, which Kubrick chose not to use, was considerably different from the script that came out at his end.  For one, my screen play was pegged even more heavily than the book on something Kubrick never touch on: the past of the hotel.  It says in ‘Salems Lot, ‘An evil house calls evil men.’  That was the idea in THE SHINING.  The hotel was not evil because those had been there, but thsoe people went there because the place was evil.”

–Speaking of The Shining with Christopher Evans

King is saying that  the Hotel's past matters to the texture of the story.  Of course, I think King's version of The Shining (the ABC mini-series) gave a lot of history and back story. I enjoyed that Mini-series a lot!  I wonder how much of King's original script, the one given to Kubrick, was used to create the mini-series.  I  wonder what happened to that script.