"The Shining" Explained, Part 2: Chasing Ghosts.

Thanks for the shout out, friend! I love the rabbit hole known as Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Sure, it takes you back where you started but the journey is fun.

Very Nice

I really enjoyed all this Shinning stuff. Does sound logical. Interesting

There is a Freudian subtext to the Shining. That under the suppression of conscious awareness, there's an eternal battle of wills between father and son.

A theme Kubrick returned to again and again. Albeit less literally.

Barry Lyndon starts out as the son figure coming into contact with various father figures, until he himself becomes the father figure.

Private Pyle kills the father figure drill instructor.

And there seems to be Freudian tensions in Eyes Wide Shut between Bill and Ziegler

Freud saw the Oedipus complex lying behind much male violence. The sons having to overthrow their father figures in an eternal battle for dominance.

Kubrick did put Apollo themes all through The Shining. It just might be his amusement with the rumors. And, you are wrong that we could not return to the gold standard. It is fiat money that has ruined the world economy.

Kubrick is not infallible. But you are not giving him enough credit to him due to his mind in a chess playing fashion.

Jay Weidner also talked about pedophilia in the Shining.

Again, you are not giving Kubrick credit. As Jay Weidner put it, Kubrick had a mind like Bobby Fisher.

I was into the Rob Ager stuff but, oh yeah, he goes overboard and continues to inject meaning to Kubrick stuff. Your analysis of analyses was spot on 😂….especially the last minute. I’m yours and Danny’s age too but don’t remember Calumet. 😂

wonderfully done. great job.

Why couldn't Kubrick trust that the ACTORS he hired could ACT in a way that he wanted? That's what they're good at and trained for. Danny excepted, but he was 5.

yeah "Kubrick cared more about showing the best take in terms of actor's performance than making sure the crap in the background was consistent" is an excellent explanation for many things. i suspect it holds true for other directors.

VHS was around at the time of the Shinings release. I remember hiring it when it was first released in 1980

With 127 takes the opportunities for continuity errors are endless.

With all due respect, Jan Harlan (Kubrick's brother in law and producer) confirmed that Kubrick had the intention of making the sets incongruous and the lighting unrealistic.

Whilst I don't agree with many of The Shining fan theories and I'm sure that some mistakes are indeed simple continuity errors, there are several which cannot be attributed to an incompetent props master/lazy director. For example, how do you account for Jack's typewriter changing colour mid-way through the movie? If Kubrick required a new typewriter at some point whilst shooting, it is completely illogical to think he would switch it with one of an entirely different colour, that is beyond sloppy and whether or not you believe the man was a genius, he certainly wasn't an idiot. If you don't buy the notion that the Playgirl magazine was used as a prop because of its headline regarding incest, surely the headline which reads "The Selling of...David Soul" can't be completely "overlooked" when we consider the words Jack utters in The Gold Room: "I'd give MY GODDAMN SOUL for just a glass of beer"? As far as the Calumet Baking Powder is concerned, the image of the Native American on the can is one of MANY Native American images seen right throughout the movie so, at the very least, this was clearly an intentional thematic choice. It has been documented that Kubrick moved the cans around between scenes and made sure the labels faced towards the camera...we later see that the Calumet cans have moved locations and are now directly behind Jack when he is talking to Grady through the locked storage room door. This is indicative that, for whatever reason, these were not incidental background props - Kubrick wanted the audience to pay attention by having these items appear in full view at various, moving locations during the scenes that take place in the storage room which suggests they tell part of a larger story (Halloran does call it the "story room" after all!). The three cans of Kool-Aid are right next to the Tang - exactly as they were in the Torrance's kitchen in Boulder which indicates this is deliberate and meaningful to Kubrick. I have my own theories, none of which include the Moon landing, the Holocaust, the Gold Standard etc. and I have a lot of questions, but it's very late so I'll just ask you one more - what is your explanation regarding the massive driftwood sculpture that disappears from the centre of the Colorado Lounge during act 2? This is just too conspicuous/large a prop for Kubrick to either A: not have noticed was missing or B: not have cared was missing so continued shooting without it. This disappearing prop, like the substitute typewriter, can't be chalked up to a simple continuity error. You have to give the guy some credit...a genius he may not have been, but meticulous and attentive to detail he certainly was.

People who think Jack was sexually abusing Danny are projecting hard wether as victims or abusers themselves is only for them to know I suppose.

While I don't agree with all your points, I do agree with what I think is hugely Overlooked (see what I just did there?)- If Kubrick was so aware of abuse, domestic, child, etc waaay before it was 'cool' and intended to bring more attention to these issues, he certainly didn't demonstrate much awareness of the abuse that a powerful film director could inflict upon an actress (Shelley Duvall) in the pursuit of of 'art.' I think his treatment of her goes a long way to undermine the arguments for his use of subtle tricks of discontinuity to demonstrate his social awareness in this consistently intriguing movie.

Very interesting and engaging content. Thank you for your work.

Of course Moon landing was staged, why would they risk lives of brave astronauts, when they can land Stanley and his film crew on the Moon instead, duh!

Thank you for your thoughts. I am interested to know your thoughts on the analysis of Malmrose Projects. I like his emphasis on connecting any analysis of a film to evidence from the film itself. He points out, for example, that an analysis of The Shining that Kubrick faked the moon landing is incoherent because there is no evidence from the film. Danny's sweater was commonly worn by kids in the 1970's because of the popularity of the space program.. The other point Malmrose made that makes sense is that this analysis is not connected with themes Kubrick explored throughout his filmography. Abuse, abusive men, and looking at the historical analysis of what causes abuse worldwide throughout time are themes that seem to run through Kubrick's films. Although there is evidence that The Overlook represents America, it seems to me that Kubrick is exploring the evil present inside all of us, throughout history and he is not confining his ideas to America. Thank you so much. Most Sincerely, Chris Howley, Wollaston, MA

It makes sense Kubrick was keen enough to scoff at the continuity errors saying “it’s a horror movie”, appearing and disappearing objects can add a sense of unease like you can’t trust your surroundings or your eyes.

So it's settled.......You ARE a government plant!!!

We need more of these types videos. I'm tired 😴 f all the bs theories

I'm also glad you shined a light on the Q Anon wackos

Aww man. So dismissive of so many right from the get go. Boo.

This is the best "bitch please" essay 😂

i have been commenting under rob ager videos for years :D making fun of alot of his points without being too mean, have you seen the one with the baseball bat?! :D with this "subliminal" stuff its often so far fetched and a total reach. everybody loves it tho, he is considered an expert now.

I like some of your arguments, but it's a shame you have to drag other creators down in order to make your point. While I agree with you that probably not everything Rob Ager argues is correct, he has some very good videos as well. The same goes for other theories. Also, it's confirmed that Kubrick definitely used the sets to make the movie feel more uncomfortable. Again, I do agree with some of your points, but I don't think you should undermine other theories without some legitimate arguments.

Well made video. Do you have a source for White Man's burden referring to alcoholism in the 70s?

Nah, you're reaching here. Apply Occam's Razor - the theory with the fewest number of presuppositions is most likely the correct one: 1. Furniture was moved (including chairs, lightswitches, fridge handles, the colour of the typewriter etc), whole floors of carpets were rearranged, internal architecture was just "a mistake" - all throughout the entire movie (not to mention the TV with not plugged in)...and one of the greatest film makers in history just shrugged and went "meh" because of changes to the script which you speculate include those scenes. Or 2. all of the above is intentional. Number 2 has the fewest presuppositions. Why is it intentional is open for speculation - maybe a commentary on the moon landing or gold standard blah blah, or perhaps just to create a subconscious feeling of dread. Either way, number 2 is the most parsimonious explanation and therefore number 1 is not, as you claim, the "most plausible".

Kubrick was a perfectionist to the point of disgust. HE MAKE NO MISTAKES.

The bipolarity of this analysis is incredible - hitting the nail on the head in the 'context is king' section square on, then completely missing the point in the last segment...

"Rob Ager probably believes the moon landing was fake because he said both sides have arguments."
"The sexual abuse theory sounds like QAnon because both of them talk about pedophilia."

Most of all, you are assuming Kubricks vision and intent matters more than anyone else's. Or that historical context matters. Our subjective interpretation in the present matters in the present.

I think the pedo theories are legit. Because child abuse is in so many of Kubrick’s films. Lolita, Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, the Shining, Full Metal Jacket (figuratively) and Eyes Wide Shut.

might be partially due to jack nicholson just being a creepy looking dude but there are certain scenes like the "fatherly love" conversation with danny before he goes in room 237 that you cannot convince me aren't at least supposed to imply "that" to make the audience uncomfortable

Ah, yes, gotta love the 'blame' those dang right-wingers for all the conspiracies!' and 'Jan 6th was an insurrection!' I see your hollyweird to the core... I'm out 👋

FYI, I remember when it was liberals that believed in conspiracies. I know because I used to be one.

That guy didn't assault Buzz Aldrin, unless you think calling a guy a liar to his face is assault.

You made the best videos about The Shining I've seen yet.
Totally subscribing!

People like you are so willfully obtuse, always circlejerking on reddit and shit like you're view is 100% how it is. That this and other Kubrick works are just straightforward movies with no subtext or deeper meanings. How do you manage to be such a bottom feeder when your views are so surface level? Just labeling people you disagree with as Qanon conspiracy nuts lmao.

I'm going to ask you nicely to please stop talking like you have any authority in the world. The things you're criticizing are THEORIES and the people that came up with them know that much, you however seem to think you know everything so much so that you might as well be the man himself.

I don't claim to know anything, but I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Shining, 2001 a Space Odyssey, and Eyes Wide Shut are deeper movies than you're puny little plebian mind could even begin to comprehend.

Yeah, the argument that Kubrick makes no mistakes is ridiculous. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a couple things he did on purpose (Ullman’s window is suspect), but he’s also human and make mistakes. He’s still an incredible director.

Final point which I almost forgot

You probably know that the exterior shots of "The Overlook" are actually a place called The Timberline Lodge

It's located about halfway (6K feet) up Mt Hood about 50 miles from Portland OR

The significance to me is that in the years I've lived in PDX, I've been to The Timberline easily 50X

It's one of my favorite destinations for bicycle rides, both day rides and overnight (nearby "wilderness" camping)

One of my favorite aspects is that it's 6000 feet of climbing to get there, and maybe 600-700 feet downhill

Yet on the way back, it's 6K down and only 600-700 up

That makes it an excellent "century" (that is, a ride of at least 100 miles)

Great work

Jack is clearly portrayed as an abuser. Danny sucks his thumb to self -soothe. The movie is a case study in male violence, not a metaphor for the US.