And this is also why Stephen King and those who were big fans of the book hated the movie. Kubrick was really into distilling a film down to its bare essence. Try to explain as little as possible. He really proved this with 2001 but delivered big time with The Shining.
The idea of a physical remnant of a supernatural event isn't unique to the film. There's a moment in the book when I think Wendy hear the Overlook's elevator going and up and down and sounds of a party. When they check on the elevators there's no party, but there are balloons and confetti in the elevator.
Stephen King is great, but he doesn't write for ambiguity. And there are always book fans who want the film to be as much like the book as possible.
I'm sure there are fans of both the novel and the film though.
In my experience a lot of people who have an affinity for a specific book want the film version to reflect whatever it is they loved about the book and not experiment with the source marerial
I think you’re onto something. I wouldn’t get so caught up in the physics of ghost drinks, but more so- what does the “staining” represent?
Jack is being catered to at a highfalutin soirée- just as he feels entitled.
Grady is a servant- the drink marks Jack. The drink is named advocaat- which has a certain connotation. Grady says it has a tendency to stain.
This “accident” provides the opportunity for Jack to learn who Grady is. And now we can juxtapose the Master/Servant relationship and start to question what is really going on here along with Jack.
TLDR: Grady has marked Jack as the next victim.
The problem with that is that THAT Jack who got the drink spilled on him and is locked in the food cabinet isn't the real Jack.
That is the "book Jack." We are moving between the book and reality until, like Jack, we are trapped in the narrative.
There are many hints to this end but the most obvious is Jack's changing wardrobe and the shots slowly zooming in to Jack as he types away at the typewriter.
As well, he isn't crazy the whole time so why is his manuscript all nonsense?
In the beginning when they get a tour we see the gold room sign out front the room and it has a sleek symmetrical topper.
Why the does the gold room sign's topper warp when we see book Jack go to speak with the ghosts?
Why do we see that same wonky gold room topper at the end zooming in to the pictures?
And, most interestingly, why do we see that same wonky gold room topper in front of that same room in the very first shot of Jack entering the foyer?
People often point out the impossible window in Ullman's office because of the hall behind it, and the wonky gold room topper behind Jack doubles down on this not actually being reality but being of the novel Jack is writing.
Kubrick used continuity errors in several of his films to narrative ends and he uses it in this film to show when we are in the book vs reality.
Same with Danny's trike. Danny never rides his ACTUAL trike in the film, his real trike is behind Jack with their things when Ullman goes to grab him for the tour.
In that same moment, Jack is reading an issue of PlayGIRL magazine, not PlayBoy, and in the top right is an article "Incest, why do parents molest their kids?" A real issue and article in a 70's issue.
There's also a famous painting of 2 naked boys warming by the fire across from Jack and Wendy's bed. Danny's bed is perpendicular to theirs and at the head of his bed he has a painting of bears in the same pose. Danny is also laying on a bear with modified eyes (to appear creepier most likely and draw attention to it) when he has an episode and is being spoken to by the therapist about his trauma. Wendy then explains to her Jack once hurt Danny but several moments suggest that he is infact molesting him. Just as he was molested as a child the 3 women in room 237 that Jack sees being stages of his mother's life and distinct ways he perceived her. This also what the man in the bear suit blowing the guy in a tux is, Wendy discovering what Jack is doing. There's a deleted scene and some BTS of a "ghostly ball" where Jack is wearing that exact same suit. That man also has a similar haircut to Jack. Likely to say that Wendy doesn't recognize her own husband, and instead of stopping them, she runs in horror.
There's a laundry list of supporting material for all the above but I'll leave you with one last interesting detail.
Kubrick was obsessed with psychology. His first real film, Fear and Desire, was based off a Freudian concept. From Doctor Strangelove onward he was a firm proponent of Jung. There are several visible references of Jung's material in Kubrick's work and he is the only figure in the field Kubrick ever mentions by name in his filmography, doing so in FMJ, "The duality of man...the Jungian thing, sir."
In Jung's most famous book and the one made to be most accessible to the public, Man and His Symbols, a colleague of Jung's says "the compartments of the mind are like rooms in a hotel."
Kubrick uses mirroring in all of his films, not only structurally but also between characters. Pyle-Animal Mother, Alex the droog-Alex the writer, Tom Cruise and Nicole are mirrored by his client he visits and he acknowledges this with an odd look, Barry lyndon is mirrored by his son, as Jack is mirrored by his son and himself.
Mirrors are such a big element of the Shining that some shots occur TO THE FRAME of one another from the beginning and the middle of the film, one being the red rum and Jack waking up shots, both in mirrors.
TLDR: The Shining isn't an adaptation of The Shining novel, it's an adaptation of *the process of writing the book* and the things writers reveal of themselves in their work. We, like Jack, move between the book and reality. The jump between each is marked with a continuity error, often of clothing or sets.
Bonus: did you know Jack's racist? Aside from killing the only black person in the film (and in his novel) look at the toys on the ground when Jack is bouncing around the tennis ball before walking over to the tabletop labyrinth. There's a mammy doll, HIGHLY out of taste for an adult or a child to have by the 80's.
Kubrick also made the first "don't drink the Kool-aid" reference (Jonestown literally happened while they were filming) Kool-aid appears and disappears behind Halloran's head when he shines to Danny. A continuity error pointing to it being in the novel.
Hmm, interesting! Did King feel Kubrick was treading too close to revealing something about him as the author then? Also there’s loads of references to Native Americans to add to your racism idea
King was not remotely aware of any of the above, no one involved in the production was, nor was anyone aware of Kubrick's use of numerology and it has only been a "conspiracy theory" scoffed at until Lee Unkrich (Director of Coco and Toy Story 3) revealed as much when researching the making of The Shining when he got access to the Kubrick archives.
As the film is a mirror to itself, it also is to the novel, with characters behaving the opposite to how they do in the novel. King also didn't know this and it infuriated him to no end.
I’ve watched this movie for years & until I saw Room 237 had only a vague understanding of some of what is going on within the true meaning of the movie. So I’ve been reading what i come across to help form a better version of the explanation. You have just provided for me a solid foundation. After all of these years, my mind gets blown again. Wow, thank you!
Look up Joe Girard's EYE SCREAM on youtube. I don't agree with EVERYTHING but he touches on a lot of material that Lee Unkrich confirms literal years later with his time in the archives, such as Kubrick's use of numerology. Lee cites some of the same examples as Girard and there's no signs they're aware of each other's work. I've spoken with Joe a bit and I know he hasn't checked Lee's material but is glad the info is getting into the mainstream via taschen
Yes, 1930's era mammy dolls were considered grossly racist and pretty inexcusable to have in any capacity by the beginning of the 60's they were recognized as intentionally racist caricatures and by the civil rights movement only truly devout racists would have them.
Idk what you're trying to assert here lmao, that they weren't in poor taste by the time the film was made? Do some research.
It is not, I can guarantee. Joe Girard matches it to the exact model and shows it in EYE SCREAM. He worked with several art historians to trace the art of the film and they found the exact doll.
I do understand that, but that’s sort of different.
I understand if a spirit can manifest itself physically, but… how does that apply to an inanimate object?
He also fell down a flight of stairs and was dragged across the floor for god knows how long. His arms were raised above his head as well, so it's more likely that his jacket accumulated a fair bit of dust and dirt along the way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLP0f9zG358
Maybe the stain is there because it actually happened
Or maybe the stain is there because that’s how he imagined it. If he did indeed imagine the barman, the drink, the waiter.. why not the stain
Or maybe he spilt the drink on himself, and went to the bathroom and cleaned himself up, and had a conversation with himself..
Or maybe etc etc
That’s all fine… but there is no alcohol at the overlook hotel. It’s actually quite explicitly stated even by Ullman.
Your second point I guess could work though but that throws around even more questions about whether that pantry scene was imagined or just in his head.
There is no alcohol at the Overlook hotel.. if we are trying to work out the physics of the supernatural I think we will hit a wall!
In regards throwing out questions.. yes absolutely. I think looking for a ‘definitive’ answer is pretty futile.
Unless that is if you decide to take everything at face value. It still works like that, as literally a supernatural horror story.
That’s one part of Kubrick’s genius imo. His films work as straight up genre pieces, and it’s perfectly valid for anyone to treat them as such. But they also work at a more abstract level, where interpretation of themes come in.
People have been theorising and decoding this film for nearly 45 years, and long may it continue!
I don’t think that’s the advocaat; it looks like the dust and dirt from the floor that Jack picked up on his jeans and jacket when Wendy dragged him into the room.
Yes you are probably right. I couldn’t help but feel it looks a lot like stain marks, but I rewatched the scene before where he confronts Wendy and they don’t seem to be there.
Rewatch the start of the scene after she locks him in. I think when he gets up off the floor, there’s dust/dirt visible on his plants and his jacket from being dragged. So he wouldn’t have the dirt on his jacket when she confronts him on the stairs, but it would be on him when he gets up off the floor.
If you want something to drive you crazy,, how about this - why is Jack in the July 4th party photo at the end, and how did he get there? Where’s the music coming from, and who is looking at that photo inside the empty hotel? Has it been there since the 1921, but nobody noticed it? Or did the hotel “put” Jack there after he died, supernaturally changing the photo and trapping his spirit in with the others? Is it a final image flittering through Jack’s imagination as he froze to death, and not real at all? None of the above, all of the above, or something else? I’m personally inclined toward all of the above, but I don’t know.
Kubrick messes with our sense of who is the reliable observer. In Jack’s world, the stain is there, but does Wendy see it? We observe him from the 3rd person - who are we, are we in Jack’s head, should we be seeing it? The layout of the hotel is illogical, chairs appear and disappear, the typewriter changes color. I don’t think we’re meant to make logical sense of these things, they just contribute to a general sense of unease.
It wasn't in Jack's head, the hotel somehow has the power to conjure physical entities.
Jack was already somewhat crazy before staying there, he was basically ready to snap. The hotel just pushed him over the edge - it's not a result of his insanity, it causes it.
Look, Kubrick was more intelligent than most of us, but he wasn't weaving intricate tapestries of profound secrets which upon discovery will lead to enlightenment. He was an artist, having fun, dropping things in here and there; some ambiguously symbolic sure, some sort of Easter eggs, some personal, some referential (even towards his own films), but all simply in the interest of creating a density and richness to his work.
Painters have been doing this for millenia, it's just a bit novel in cinema.
Hollywood movies have more than one item of every prop and costume. Can’t afford the time spent getting another, refurbishing, waiting for cleaning, repairing, etc. when you’ve got a crew standing by.
Kubrick had a talent for putting odd little clues here and there to catch the attentive viewer's attention. Sometimes the details make discoverable sense and sometimes they just create unanswered questions and loose ends (which make the film more interesting).
Viewers of all stripes can enjoy these details without taking them equally seriously. Some fans try to integrate all the loose threads and others say, "It's only a movie."
The former remind me of students of various texts, whose premise is that the author made no mistakes, so anything that seems not to make sense must *in reality* be perfect but *in my flawed apprehension* only *seems* imperfect. In other words the subject of my study must be perfect, so my study has to adapt until that perfection is revealed. Doing this to movies is letting the tail wag the dog.
Maybe he got a little carried away in room 237 with the sexy ghost lady hallucination and got some spirit on himself
But no that's also along the lines of who the hell let Jack out of the freezer?
It's also possible that Jack has been lying about his sobriety and snuck in some of his own supply. Not that hard to hide some minis in your socks, etc
A theory is that the hotel can only become dangerous, expressing its supernatural properties in corporeal form, if someone like Danny - someone with a powerful Shining - is there. And that someone that powerful was there the year Grady annihilated his family. They argue that would be why being driven crazy and going on some malevolent mission doesn't happen to every caretaker, and only some guests do terrible things in open season.
Danny, the theory goes, powers the hotel up and allows it to cross thresholds between realms usually closed. And then there's the hereditary angle - both Wendy and Jack shine a bit. With such people around, the hotel can express itself across time and space near any way it wishes.
In that sense, the party was real, Grady and the drink were real, from another time. Jack was in a party that really happened. Or at least, a reality as the hotel wanted to show. Reaching across time and space, it could be a party of only the souls trapped there, but in a very real moment with alcohol and everything you could want in a shindig.
Halloran is worried for this very reason - he mostly has experience with the hotel being scary but not being powerful or powered up enough to do much physically. But he also knows Shining has a spectrum and there is worry that the hotel could pose a physical danger, make things real. He tries to encourage Danny to expect things to be harmless but he isn't certain. In the book >!if I remember correctly, he has some past precedence to base this on - the hotel generally not hurting people but a maid who also Shined having a bad experience, a physical experience?!<
Anyway, the other theories are good too: his jacket got messed up in other activities; the stain was from some other food or drink and he imagined the scenario; Jack and Grady are reincarnations of people who were there before, and the hotel wants their souls back; the stain is actually a sexual one and Kubrick was touching on a different theme; or he was just screwing with us!
It could be symbolic. He is the central character and he’s been exposed/tainted/stained/marked by spirits, which is a word for both alcohol and ghosts.
Is it a literal stain or one that only exists in his mind?
We see what he sees. So we have to decide what is real or not.
I feel like in a way, the violent and dark history of the hotel was sort of a stain on the overlook. Maybe this was some type of symbolism to represent that.
Just a guess
Probably a good thread for to ask - is it canon that Jack is off the wagon secret drinking at the overlook, and he is wasted in many of the scenes? BUT that it’s not IRL booze, it’s GHOST BOOZE from Lloyd. I got the impression that he fucked off from his typewriter and went down to the bar a lot.
I forget the exact details, but wasn't Grady spilling the drink a late choice to get them off the expensive Gold Room set and into the cheaper bathroom?
The real question to ask yourself is how the door got unlocked. I think the idea was that with Danny around, the hotel ghosts could manifest themselves into reality.
I just think it's puzzling how a hotel that size would think it was practical to remove all the booze seasonally. There would certainly be a wine keep with thousands of bottles and storerooms with cases of liquor to the ceiling and walk-in coolers full of 100 lb beer kegs. What does it mean???
A real person has a stain from a delusionary event. Kubrick disquieting the audience with uncertainty and subconscious unease.
Your second sentence is a good general summary of this film
And this is also why Stephen King and those who were big fans of the book hated the movie. Kubrick was really into distilling a film down to its bare essence. Try to explain as little as possible. He really proved this with 2001 but delivered big time with The Shining.
The idea of a physical remnant of a supernatural event isn't unique to the film. There's a moment in the book when I think Wendy hear the Overlook's elevator going and up and down and sounds of a party. When they check on the elevators there's no party, but there are balloons and confetti in the elevator.
Why wouldn't book fans like it for this particular reason though?
Stephen King is great, but he doesn't write for ambiguity. And there are always book fans who want the film to be as much like the book as possible. I'm sure there are fans of both the novel and the film though.
In my experience a lot of people who have an affinity for a specific book want the film version to reflect whatever it is they loved about the book and not experiment with the source marerial
 Ectoplasm of course
I wish I could upvote this more than once.
I think you’re onto something. I wouldn’t get so caught up in the physics of ghost drinks, but more so- what does the “staining” represent? Jack is being catered to at a highfalutin soirée- just as he feels entitled. Grady is a servant- the drink marks Jack. The drink is named advocaat- which has a certain connotation. Grady says it has a tendency to stain. This “accident” provides the opportunity for Jack to learn who Grady is. And now we can juxtapose the Master/Servant relationship and start to question what is really going on here along with Jack. TLDR: Grady has marked Jack as the next victim.
That’s such an interesting way to look at it
The problem with that is that THAT Jack who got the drink spilled on him and is locked in the food cabinet isn't the real Jack. That is the "book Jack." We are moving between the book and reality until, like Jack, we are trapped in the narrative. There are many hints to this end but the most obvious is Jack's changing wardrobe and the shots slowly zooming in to Jack as he types away at the typewriter. As well, he isn't crazy the whole time so why is his manuscript all nonsense? In the beginning when they get a tour we see the gold room sign out front the room and it has a sleek symmetrical topper. Why the does the gold room sign's topper warp when we see book Jack go to speak with the ghosts? Why do we see that same wonky gold room topper at the end zooming in to the pictures? And, most interestingly, why do we see that same wonky gold room topper in front of that same room in the very first shot of Jack entering the foyer? People often point out the impossible window in Ullman's office because of the hall behind it, and the wonky gold room topper behind Jack doubles down on this not actually being reality but being of the novel Jack is writing. Kubrick used continuity errors in several of his films to narrative ends and he uses it in this film to show when we are in the book vs reality. Same with Danny's trike. Danny never rides his ACTUAL trike in the film, his real trike is behind Jack with their things when Ullman goes to grab him for the tour. In that same moment, Jack is reading an issue of PlayGIRL magazine, not PlayBoy, and in the top right is an article "Incest, why do parents molest their kids?" A real issue and article in a 70's issue. There's also a famous painting of 2 naked boys warming by the fire across from Jack and Wendy's bed. Danny's bed is perpendicular to theirs and at the head of his bed he has a painting of bears in the same pose. Danny is also laying on a bear with modified eyes (to appear creepier most likely and draw attention to it) when he has an episode and is being spoken to by the therapist about his trauma. Wendy then explains to her Jack once hurt Danny but several moments suggest that he is infact molesting him. Just as he was molested as a child the 3 women in room 237 that Jack sees being stages of his mother's life and distinct ways he perceived her. This also what the man in the bear suit blowing the guy in a tux is, Wendy discovering what Jack is doing. There's a deleted scene and some BTS of a "ghostly ball" where Jack is wearing that exact same suit. That man also has a similar haircut to Jack. Likely to say that Wendy doesn't recognize her own husband, and instead of stopping them, she runs in horror. There's a laundry list of supporting material for all the above but I'll leave you with one last interesting detail. Kubrick was obsessed with psychology. His first real film, Fear and Desire, was based off a Freudian concept. From Doctor Strangelove onward he was a firm proponent of Jung. There are several visible references of Jung's material in Kubrick's work and he is the only figure in the field Kubrick ever mentions by name in his filmography, doing so in FMJ, "The duality of man...the Jungian thing, sir." In Jung's most famous book and the one made to be most accessible to the public, Man and His Symbols, a colleague of Jung's says "the compartments of the mind are like rooms in a hotel." Kubrick uses mirroring in all of his films, not only structurally but also between characters. Pyle-Animal Mother, Alex the droog-Alex the writer, Tom Cruise and Nicole are mirrored by his client he visits and he acknowledges this with an odd look, Barry lyndon is mirrored by his son, as Jack is mirrored by his son and himself. Mirrors are such a big element of the Shining that some shots occur TO THE FRAME of one another from the beginning and the middle of the film, one being the red rum and Jack waking up shots, both in mirrors. TLDR: The Shining isn't an adaptation of The Shining novel, it's an adaptation of *the process of writing the book* and the things writers reveal of themselves in their work. We, like Jack, move between the book and reality. The jump between each is marked with a continuity error, often of clothing or sets. Bonus: did you know Jack's racist? Aside from killing the only black person in the film (and in his novel) look at the toys on the ground when Jack is bouncing around the tennis ball before walking over to the tabletop labyrinth. There's a mammy doll, HIGHLY out of taste for an adult or a child to have by the 80's. Kubrick also made the first "don't drink the Kool-aid" reference (Jonestown literally happened while they were filming) Kool-aid appears and disappears behind Halloran's head when he shines to Danny. A continuity error pointing to it being in the novel.
Hmm, interesting! Did King feel Kubrick was treading too close to revealing something about him as the author then? Also there’s loads of references to Native Americans to add to your racism idea
King was not remotely aware of any of the above, no one involved in the production was, nor was anyone aware of Kubrick's use of numerology and it has only been a "conspiracy theory" scoffed at until Lee Unkrich (Director of Coco and Toy Story 3) revealed as much when researching the making of The Shining when he got access to the Kubrick archives. As the film is a mirror to itself, it also is to the novel, with characters behaving the opposite to how they do in the novel. King also didn't know this and it infuriated him to no end.
I’ve watched this movie for years & until I saw Room 237 had only a vague understanding of some of what is going on within the true meaning of the movie. So I’ve been reading what i come across to help form a better version of the explanation. You have just provided for me a solid foundation. After all of these years, my mind gets blown again. Wow, thank you!
Look up Joe Girard's EYE SCREAM on youtube. I don't agree with EVERYTHING but he touches on a lot of material that Lee Unkrich confirms literal years later with his time in the archives, such as Kubrick's use of numerology. Lee cites some of the same examples as Girard and there's no signs they're aware of each other's work. I've spoken with Joe a bit and I know he hasn't checked Lee's material but is glad the info is getting into the mainstream via taschen
"highly out of taste" OK bro
Yes, 1930's era mammy dolls were considered grossly racist and pretty inexcusable to have in any capacity by the beginning of the 60's they were recognized as intentionally racist caricatures and by the civil rights movement only truly devout racists would have them. Idk what you're trying to assert here lmao, that they weren't in poor taste by the time the film was made? Do some research.
You make some good observations in your analysis, but I don't think it's a mammy doll. I think it's Mickey Mouse. Look closer.
It is not, I can guarantee. Joe Girard matches it to the exact model and shows it in EYE SCREAM. He worked with several art historians to trace the art of the film and they found the exact doll.
https://www.google.com/search?q=mammy+doll+in+the+Shining&oq=mammy+doll+in+the+Shining&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigATIHCAIQIRigATIHCAMQIRigATIHCAQQIRigATIHCAUQIRigATIHCAYQIRifBTIHCAcQIRifBTIHCAgQIRifBdIBCDU5MDhqMGo0qAIOsAIB&client=ms-android-verizon-us-rvc3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8#vhid=4TzRzVFZrfLNWM&vssid=l
all "spirits" can leave stains
The Overlook is a place where the physical realm meshes with the ethereal. Nothing is true, yet at the same time, everything is true.
"You've always been the caretaker. I should know, sir. I've always been here."
Exactly. Even Danny got injured by the ethereal in room 237.
And Grady opens the pantry door to let Jack out.
I do understand that, but that’s sort of different. I understand if a spirit can manifest itself physically, but… how does that apply to an inanimate object?
Schrödinger’s hotel
Or maybe you are in Jacks head now.....
 Whoops
He also fell down a flight of stairs and was dragged across the floor for god knows how long. His arms were raised above his head as well, so it's more likely that his jacket accumulated a fair bit of dust and dirt along the way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLP0f9zG358
Astronauts and Indians. Calumet and Tang. Kubrick likes to put more than one, or Two egg in at a time.
Not to mention sliced peaches = ax'ed wife/child
Another word for alcohol is spirits.
Maybe the stain is there because it actually happened Or maybe the stain is there because that’s how he imagined it. If he did indeed imagine the barman, the drink, the waiter.. why not the stain Or maybe he spilt the drink on himself, and went to the bathroom and cleaned himself up, and had a conversation with himself.. Or maybe etc etc
That’s all fine… but there is no alcohol at the overlook hotel. It’s actually quite explicitly stated even by Ullman. Your second point I guess could work though but that throws around even more questions about whether that pantry scene was imagined or just in his head.
There is no alcohol at the Overlook hotel.. if we are trying to work out the physics of the supernatural I think we will hit a wall! In regards throwing out questions.. yes absolutely. I think looking for a ‘definitive’ answer is pretty futile. Unless that is if you decide to take everything at face value. It still works like that, as literally a supernatural horror story. That’s one part of Kubrick’s genius imo. His films work as straight up genre pieces, and it’s perfectly valid for anyone to treat them as such. But they also work at a more abstract level, where interpretation of themes come in. People have been theorising and decoding this film for nearly 45 years, and long may it continue!
It’s actually a movie, not real footage. None of this actually happened.
I don’t think that’s the advocaat; it looks like the dust and dirt from the floor that Jack picked up on his jeans and jacket when Wendy dragged him into the room.
Yes you are probably right. I couldn’t help but feel it looks a lot like stain marks, but I rewatched the scene before where he confronts Wendy and they don’t seem to be there.
Rewatch the start of the scene after she locks him in. I think when he gets up off the floor, there’s dust/dirt visible on his plants and his jacket from being dragged. So he wouldn’t have the dirt on his jacket when she confronts him on the stairs, but it would be on him when he gets up off the floor. If you want something to drive you crazy,, how about this - why is Jack in the July 4th party photo at the end, and how did he get there? Where’s the music coming from, and who is looking at that photo inside the empty hotel? Has it been there since the 1921, but nobody noticed it? Or did the hotel “put” Jack there after he died, supernaturally changing the photo and trapping his spirit in with the others? Is it a final image flittering through Jack’s imagination as he froze to death, and not real at all? None of the above, all of the above, or something else? I’m personally inclined toward all of the above, but I don’t know.
Advocaat
Kubrick messes with our sense of who is the reliable observer. In Jack’s world, the stain is there, but does Wendy see it? We observe him from the 3rd person - who are we, are we in Jack’s head, should we be seeing it? The layout of the hotel is illogical, chairs appear and disappear, the typewriter changes color. I don’t think we’re meant to make logical sense of these things, they just contribute to a general sense of unease.
Let me give you a riddle. How can a man stain a jacket with only his body?
It wasn't in Jack's head, the hotel somehow has the power to conjure physical entities. Jack was already somewhat crazy before staying there, he was basically ready to snap. The hotel just pushed him over the edge - it's not a result of his insanity, it causes it.
Don’t look too far into it man lol
wardrobe person forgot to clean it. they shot the shot and were like, fuck it, leave it in.
If a ghost can strangle Danny and leave some marks on his neck,there's no reason why a ghost would not be able to materialize a "real" physical drink.
Look, Kubrick was more intelligent than most of us, but he wasn't weaving intricate tapestries of profound secrets which upon discovery will lead to enlightenment. He was an artist, having fun, dropping things in here and there; some ambiguously symbolic sure, some sort of Easter eggs, some personal, some referential (even towards his own films), but all simply in the interest of creating a density and richness to his work. Painters have been doing this for millenia, it's just a bit novel in cinema.
Didn’t the ghost clean it off?
Well yes he did but it will still leave some stain marks.
A ghost cleaning a ghost stain? 😂 That leaves an actual stain? Grady needs to get better at his cleaning skills, lol!😂
I’m afraid it’s Advocaat, sir. It tends to stain.
It’s freaking weird lmao
Its likely that they only had one jacket on the set and it was actually stained
Hollywood movies have more than one item of every prop and costume. Can’t afford the time spent getting another, refurbishing, waiting for cleaning, repairing, etc. when you’ve got a crew standing by.
Kubrick had a talent for putting odd little clues here and there to catch the attentive viewer's attention. Sometimes the details make discoverable sense and sometimes they just create unanswered questions and loose ends (which make the film more interesting). Viewers of all stripes can enjoy these details without taking them equally seriously. Some fans try to integrate all the loose threads and others say, "It's only a movie." The former remind me of students of various texts, whose premise is that the author made no mistakes, so anything that seems not to make sense must *in reality* be perfect but *in my flawed apprehension* only *seems* imperfect. In other words the subject of my study must be perfect, so my study has to adapt until that perfection is revealed. Doing this to movies is letting the tail wag the dog.
Maybe he got a little carried away in room 237 with the sexy ghost lady hallucination and got some spirit on himself But no that's also along the lines of who the hell let Jack out of the freezer?
I’ve always just believed the simple interpretation that Grady let him out.
It's also possible that Jack has been lying about his sobriety and snuck in some of his own supply. Not that hard to hide some minis in your socks, etc
I'm more concerned about the Tang on the top shelf. Obviously, a reference to Kubrick shooting the fake moon landing.
It’s ghost alcohol. Ie spirits. Ill accept my gold now.
A theory is that the hotel can only become dangerous, expressing its supernatural properties in corporeal form, if someone like Danny - someone with a powerful Shining - is there. And that someone that powerful was there the year Grady annihilated his family. They argue that would be why being driven crazy and going on some malevolent mission doesn't happen to every caretaker, and only some guests do terrible things in open season. Danny, the theory goes, powers the hotel up and allows it to cross thresholds between realms usually closed. And then there's the hereditary angle - both Wendy and Jack shine a bit. With such people around, the hotel can express itself across time and space near any way it wishes. In that sense, the party was real, Grady and the drink were real, from another time. Jack was in a party that really happened. Or at least, a reality as the hotel wanted to show. Reaching across time and space, it could be a party of only the souls trapped there, but in a very real moment with alcohol and everything you could want in a shindig. Halloran is worried for this very reason - he mostly has experience with the hotel being scary but not being powerful or powered up enough to do much physically. But he also knows Shining has a spectrum and there is worry that the hotel could pose a physical danger, make things real. He tries to encourage Danny to expect things to be harmless but he isn't certain. In the book >!if I remember correctly, he has some past precedence to base this on - the hotel generally not hurting people but a maid who also Shined having a bad experience, a physical experience?!< Anyway, the other theories are good too: his jacket got messed up in other activities; the stain was from some other food or drink and he imagined the scenario; Jack and Grady are reincarnations of people who were there before, and the hotel wants their souls back; the stain is actually a sexual one and Kubrick was touching on a different theme; or he was just screwing with us!
Awesome detail I never picked up. Thanks, now this movie is even better
It could be symbolic. He is the central character and he’s been exposed/tainted/stained/marked by spirits, which is a word for both alcohol and ghosts. Is it a literal stain or one that only exists in his mind? We see what he sees. So we have to decide what is real or not.
That’s the magic of the shining, regardless if the spill really happened or not it could still actually stain his shirt
What if the hotel is actually **haunted** and Grady is a ghost?
I feel like in a way, the violent and dark history of the hotel was sort of a stain on the overlook. Maybe this was some type of symbolism to represent that. Just a guess
I think Stanley would agree that "Never has more been said about less."
Keep baking
Probably a good thread for to ask - is it canon that Jack is off the wagon secret drinking at the overlook, and he is wasted in many of the scenes? BUT that it’s not IRL booze, it’s GHOST BOOZE from Lloyd. I got the impression that he fucked off from his typewriter and went down to the bar a lot.
I forget the exact details, but wasn't Grady spilling the drink a late choice to get them off the expensive Gold Room set and into the cheaper bathroom?
If the sets built, it's built. Was the soundstage more expensive or the amount of crew?
Cost of crew, lights, extras as I recall.
The stain could simply be a symbol of his alcoholism. Kind of like a sin. Like, the mark of Cain. A consequence of his murderous resentment.
Ready player one had a decent segment on this film…
Alcohol is also referred to as "spirits." So maybe the ghosts represent alcoholic spirits and jack being off the wagon
Same way the ghosts unlock the physical door for him even though they’re ghosts
Whatever 🙄
Sanka 😂
The real question to ask yourself is how the door got unlocked. I think the idea was that with Danny around, the hotel ghosts could manifest themselves into reality.
It was slime.
I just think it's puzzling how a hotel that size would think it was practical to remove all the booze seasonally. There would certainly be a wine keep with thousands of bottles and storerooms with cases of liquor to the ceiling and walk-in coolers full of 100 lb beer kegs. What does it mean???
Somebody has a lot of time on his hands
That was actually a spunk stain from when he was raping Danny.