Woke film criticism. The Shining makes coming after your wife with an axe "permissible"

[Andrew Reid]

The school lesson for today kids, is:

1. Jack by all means MUST apologise in a lengthy monologue at the end, brush the ice from his hair and making clear that in no way is he morally right to come after his wife with an axe.

2. The "problematic and triggering" child abuse must be balanced by an extra 30 minute scene inserted into the middle of the director's cut, where Danny has counselling.

3. Rather than Shelly brushing all this off as a bad day at the office for Jack, she should immediately leave the hotel at the beginning of the movie and bring Danny with her.

I think the film would be improved immeasurably for contemporary audiences with just 3 simple changes.

[Video Hummus]

Let’s not forget in Barry Lyndon where Kubrick did not address the plight of the rural communities in his movie that live daily without electricity or proper internet access.

[Andrew Reid]

A waste of NASA's lenses really wasn't it.

[leslie]

Well if the shining isn't so deserving of merit, i'd have to argue neither is basic instinct. People like to go on about how film can push the boundaries and explore all sorts or crap and be justified in what they do. But maybe a few boundaries are a good thing.

[Anaconda_]

9 hours ago, leslie said:

Well if the shining isn't so deserving of merit, i'd have to argue neither is basic instinct.

There were plenty of protests before Basic Instinct was even finished. If I remember right, activists even crashed the set on a daily basis to disrupt the filming.

The difference here is discrediting a highly regarded film decades after it was made, by holding it to today's standards and ideals. Of course, Shelly's roll in the movie may well have been cut down and to an extent underplayed in the final cut, because she and Kubrick famously hated their time working together.

EDIT: I stand corrected and this whole topic is nothing new, not 'Woke film criticism' at all. Sure the film is a great masterpeice, but the man who wrote The Shining, a guy called Stephen King also thought along the same lines as the reviewer... 

"Duvall’s role was mostly criticized by Stephen King who declared that he hated The Shining very much mainly because of the misogynistic portrait of Wendy Torrance who, in King’s words “was basically there just to scream and be stupid and that’s not the woman I wrote about”."

https://www.thevintagenews.com/2019/02/22/shelley-duvall-kubrick/

[MrSMW]

Snow White and the 7 what? 🙄

They are not called dwarfs alright? It's unacceptable terminology.

They are midgets.

The Wizard of Oz? Ban it.

Time Bandits? Ban it.

The Hobbit? Disgraceful.

Willow? Shouldn't have been allowed in the first place.

[Andrew Reid]

There should be absolute freedom when it comes to fiction.

People that think fiction should be about messaging and impact on society usually can't tell the difference between fiction and reality.

[Anaconda_]

I agree, and condemning a film 40 years after release is pretty whack, especially when the writer made similar comments 40 years ago. Nobody watches The Shining and expects to see any form of the real world. 

Perhaps this is for a different discussion, I know this is about fiction, but what about movies that revolve around or are based on real people / events. Is there a line that needs to be drawn? 

For example, in the Jimi Hendrix movie 'Jimi: All Is by My Side' there's a scene where he hits his girlfriend over the head with a payphone in public. It shocked me when I saw it, I paused the film and read up on how true it really was. Of course, that event never happened. How many other viewers wouldn't do that and would take for granted that it really did happen?

The director / writer obviously thought it was necessary for the story, but where is the line between fiction and reality? What about war movies? What about Black Adder?

Then it comes to funding and actually producing a project. For example, the based on true events 'Deepwater Horizon' weren't allowed to film on any oil rigs because it, of course, painted the industry in a bad light. Therefore there must be an element of fiction. Naturally, they tried to make it as close to a true story as they could, with added drama, but telling the difference between fiction and reality in cinema is tougher than it seems. Especially with so many films being based on and inspired by true events.

I think ultimately it's down to audience interpretation and standards.

 

[fuzzynormal]

On 6/28/2020 at 3:39 AM, Andrew Reid said:

child abuse must be balanced ...where Danny has counseling.

Just watched "Doctor Sleep" and this literally happens in the sequel.  So, at least there's that I guess.