MovieChat Forums > Room 237 (2012) Discussion > ANY other director but Kubrick, and I wo...

ANY other director but Kubrick, and I would agree with you.

posted 10 years ago by eweland
4 replies | jump to latest

But Kubrick was fully aware of making puzzle films for the masses, and knew how people were trying to read into "2001." So maybe he just decided to add some confusing elements to THE SHINING because he absolutely detoured from King's book, and even the actual physical hotel that he could have used, as King's miniseries did. I can believe he made a film that on one level is just a surreal horror film. But on another, hidden level, was much more. We are talking about someone who was supposedly more intelligent, than most of us are. Kubrick played chess to make money. Could you do that?

So you may think that these people are crazy with their theories. And I'm not convinced about all of them - but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. The Native American motifs/package labels/decorations/prints/rugs were all chosen by Kubrick. So either he was really into Native American imagery (not as prevalent in any of his other films, so I would say "no") or, he was using them for a reason.

The Kubrick film IS far superior, in every way.

[–] jnatch 10 years ago

To me, even though Kubrick is THE most likely director for something like this to be so it is still a major reach, to be kind. I'll agree with you on your "in the middle" conclusion but that middle is far closer to the poppycock side of the spectrum. Some of the stuff I heard was laughable; the picture with the boy with big eyes represents Danny's coming of age because his eyes were opened (laughable). They had too much luggage when they arrived (thats absurd and I dont even recall what it was supposed to represent). To me this is just Da Vinci Code nonsense. Look at basic cable, this stuff is so popular these days.

[–] Kurt-150 10 years ago

Thank you to the OP for bravery in going against the grain here. There seems to be this urge in film fans (perhaps a loud minority?) to completely put down and deride anyone who reads into hidden themes from a film. Incidentally a lot of them underrate the influence of drugs as "stoner wackoo" and so on, without realizing that without mind-altering chemicals a lot of these classic films would never have been made in the first place.

[–] SlickySlixta 10 years ago

So you may think that these people are crazy with their theories. And I'm not convinced about all of them - but I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. The Native American motifs/package labels/decorations/prints/rugs were all chosen by Kubrick.

The Native American theory is one that actually seems plausible considering the subject matter of the film and where it is set. And yes, I believe that the truth is somewhere in between, but we'll never know what that is. People can speculate as much as they like but it won't prove/disprove anything. I see it as a bit of fun personally, and I'm glad people analyze the film in such a way as there are some intriguing theories, but you have to take them with a grain of salt.

There's also alot of cringe worthy ones that make me laugh to high heavens.

[–] arorashadow_2003 9 years ago

The use of Native American decoration in the lodge can be attributed to two facts:

It's set in Colorado, the Western United States. Just as in the South West you see a lot of remnants of the Spanish culture from centuries back you still see plenty of remnants of Native American culture.

Also as the movie says the place was "built on an Indian burial ground" so to compliment the theme the set decorators used quite a bit of it.

If Kubrick wanted to make a movie about the plight of Natives he more likely would have done so rather than make an elaborate allegory out of a horror movie.