How did he escape?

File: 100a6a7c2fafbc9e79699fcf584c8e1b.jpg (56KB, 720x479px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 720x479px

>>86385240

>>86385240

Stanley Kubrick let him out so the movie could continue.

>>86385240
Stanley Kubrick was a big time hack who thought there was no literal paranormal presence at the Overlook Hotel.

Having profoundly misunderstood the source material, he invents other hacky contrivances such as having Dick Hallorann die like a punk, and cutting out a badass topiary fight.

>>86385240

The bloodthirsty ghosts had gained sufficient strength to influence the physical realm. Satisfied with the resolve of the deranged man who they'd recently bewitched, they were both able, and saw fit, to reach into this world and simply undo the latch.

>>86385240
This was the movie's only flaw. Had he had the convo with the ghost only to have the ghost point out, say, an emergency key on the shelf, it would have been more open to interpretation, spirits vs mere psychosis.

>Stanley Kubrick: I've always been interested in ESP and the paranormal. In addition to the scientific experiments which have been conducted suggesting that we are just short of conclusive proof of its existence, I'm sure we've all had the experience of opening a book at the exact page we're looking for, or thinking of a friend a moment before they ring on the telephone. But The Shining didn't originate from any particular desire to do a film about this. The manuscript of the novel was sent to me by John Calley, of Warner Bros. I thought it was one of the most ingenious and exciting stories of the genre I had read. It seemed to strike an extraordinary balance between the psychological and the supernatural in such a way as to lead you to think that the supernatural would eventually be explained by the psychological: "Jack must be imagining these things because he's crazy". This allowed you to suspend your doubt of the supernatural until you were so thoroughly into the story that you could accept it almost without noticing.

>Do you think this was an important factor in the success of the novel?

>Yes, I do. It's what I found so particularly clever about the way the novel was written. As the supernatural events occurred you searched for an explanation, and the most likely one seemed to be that the strange things that were happening would finally be explained as the products of Jack's imagination. It's not until Grady, the ghost of the former caretaker who axed to death his family, slides open the bolt of the larder door, allowing Jack to escape, that you are left with no other explanation but the supernatural. The novel is by no means a serious literary work, but the plot is for the most part extremely well worked out, and for a film that is often all that really matters.

http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/interview.ts.html

This movie Kubrick's worst

>>86385959

You were better on drugs, Stephen.

>>86385240

>Heinz used to sell gherkins

Man I really hate pickles but I could eat a few sweet gherkins for some reason.

>>86388243

>gherkin

Are those the same as "baby pickles"? Burgerlard here

>>86385517
this

>>86386054

A N I G G E R C O O K

N
I
G
G
E
R

C
O
O
K

>>86386228

King haters BTFO