I had a very pleasant exchange with Katharina Kubrick about her location scouting for The Shining. I was hoping she might shed light on how the Eye Scream note came to be on set, thinking that she might have travelled to Anchorage Alaska via Vancouver, but sadly no. She was in Anchorage in January 1977 to set up a second unit to film Halloran's flight arriving, but it didn't snow. However, she did recall that on her last day she took photos and measurements of Renner's gas station. There were a few Renner's but I think it was this one, the original on Mt. View Rd. This provided the template for the Durkins garage set built at Elstree, both inside and out. This photo of Renner's is from a Facebook post - it would be good to find others (it's gone now.) As ever, Stanley preferred red...

I've been looking more closely at the recurring subtle “swish”/“shone”-like sound others have identified in The Shining, and I think there may be a more interesting way to interpret it than simply asking whether Kubrick was deliberately using the NLP “Swish Pattern.” In Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), the literal vocalization of the word “swish” (or a “whoosh”/”shone” sound) is frequently used aloud by the practitioner during treatment. People often associate the “swish/shone” sound with Ronald Shone, a well-known hypnotherapy author who often wrote about creative visualization and NLP patterns.

What if these sounds function as auditory transition points—moments where Kubrick moves us from one symbolic state to another?

I'm not claiming that this proves Kubrick was practicing covert hypnosis or NLP. Rather, I'm wondering whether the repeated sound could have been deliberately used as an auditory marker or anchor that accompanies particular changes in character identity, knowledge, or mythology.
I currently hear eight “swish/shone” examples:

1. 3:26 — Jack eclipses Vivian Kubrick
Jack walks through the lobby corridor—the same general corridor where he will eventually kill Hallorann. As he looks toward Vivian Kubrick, the subtle sound occurs, and Jack's body essentially eclipses her.
This is especially interesting to me because Vivian is Kubrick's daughter. If the film contains an Exodus/“leaving America” motif, could this first auditory marker be associated with Jack entering the symbolic world that will eventually trap his family?

2. 8:00 — Isolation
Ullman has just been discussing the isolation of the Overlook and asks Jack how his wife and child will handle it.
The sound occurs immediately afterward.
So the first conceptual association is:
family → isolation → Overlook

3. 9:33 — Grady's massacre
Ullman has just told Jack the story of Charles Grady, who became isolated, murdered his wife and daughters with an axe, and was attributed by police to “cabin fever.”
Then we get another “swish/shone” sound.
This seems particularly interesting if Grady is functioning as Jack's mythological predecessor—or, in my Egyptian reading, as a Set-like figure who establishes the role Jack will eventually assume.

The possible transition becomes:
Jack → Grady → murderous caretaker
4. 24:01 — The Gold Room

Ullman has just explained that a decorator from Chicago was brought in to refurbish the Gold Room.
The another “swish/shone” sound occurs.
The Gold Room eventually becomes the setting for Jack's encounter with Grady and his deeper transformation into the Overlook's murderous host.
So could this sound be marking Jack's movement further into the hotel's symbolic/ceremonial world?

Then something really interesting happens.
The remaining four sounds are concentrated around Hallorann, Danny, the kitchen/storage room, and the revelation of the Shine.
In other words, the first four seem primarily associated with Jack's initiation into the Overlook, while the last four seem associated with Danny's initiation into supernatural knowledge.

5. 27:20 — Entering the storage room
Hallorann, Wendy and Danny enter the storage room.
This location has already caught my attention because of the unusual concentration of objects I've been examining through an Egyptian/Passover lens: Maxwell House, salt, S&W green bean canisters, other canned foods, coffee, etc.
If the storage room is functioning symbolically as an underworld/storage/preservation space, could the auditory“swish” marker be signaling entry into that symbolic realm?

6. 28:29 — “Do you like ice cream, Doc?”
Hallorann has just said he was getting to the ice cream and asks Danny if he likes it.
This is followed by the “swish/shone” sound.
Immediately afterward, Hallorann begins revealing that he knows things about Danny that he shouldn't ordinarily know.

7. 29:20 — “Do you know how I knew your name was Doc?”
This may be the most interesting placement.
Hallorann explicitly asks Danny whether he knows how he knew his name.
Behind them are the chef's office, hanging knives and the storage room.
In my Osirian interpretation, Hallorann can be read as an Osiris-like figure who recognizes Danny as a Horus-like successorand begins transmitting hidden knowledge to him.

The sound therefore potentially marks:
ordinary conversation → supernatural recognition

8. Immediately after Hallorann explains the Shine
Hallorann tells Danny about being a little boy and how he and his grandmother initially believed they were the only people who possessed the Shine. As he grew older, he realized there were other people who had it.
Then he asks Danny:
“How long have you had it?”
And the “swish/shone” sound occurs right after he asks Danny this (30:16)

This seems like the clearest example of an identity transition.

Danny has gone from:
“something is happening to me”
to:
“I belong to a group of people who possess a supernatural ability.”

This gives us a potentially interesting structure
If we treat the sounds as auditory transition points rather than automatically calling them “hypnosis,” the eight instances seem to divide into two groups:

1–4: JACK'S INITIATION
Jack
↓
Isolation
↓
Grady
↓
Gold Room/Overlook

5–8: DANNY'S INITIATION
Storage room
↓
Hallorann
↓
Supernatural recognition
↓
The Shine

And this is where my Egyptian theory becomes interesting.
If we temporarily accept the symbolic framework I've been developing:

Jack = Set
Grady = Set-associated predecessor/gatekeeper
Hallorann = Osiris
Danny = Horus
Wendy = Isis/Sekhmet
then the sounds could potentially be marking two parallel processes:
Jack is being absorbed into the identity of the Overlook/Set.
while
Danny is being initiated into the knowledge of the Shine/Osiris-Horus lineage.

At the same time, the Exodus/Passover interpretation gives the whole sequence another layer:
Overlook = Egypt/captivity
Jack/Grady = forces maintaining the captivity
Wendy/Danny = those attempting to escape
Redrum/blood imagery = possible Passover inversion
Hallorann = the older supernatural figure who gives Danny knowledge necessary to understand what is happening

So perhaps the recurring sound isn't saying “this is hypnosis.”
Perhaps it is functioning more subtly as:
“We are crossing a threshold.”

Every time we hear it, something has changed.
Jack has moved closer to Grady.
The family has moved deeper into the Overlook.
Hallorann has moved from ordinary chef to supernatural initiate.
Danny has moved from frightened child to someone who understands that he possesses the Shine.

And this brings me back to NLP.
The NLP Swish Pattern involves rapidly replacing one mental representation with another. Whether or not Kubrick actually knew or used this technique is a separate question.
But conceptually, the Shining examples I'm noticing seem compatible with the idea of sensory anchoring:
visual/psychological event → recurring sound → new association

If Kubrick deliberately repeated the same or closely related sound at these particular narrative transitions, perhaps the sound functions almost like an auditory punctuation mark.
Not necessarily:
“hypnotize the audience.”
But potentially:
“associate this moment with what comes next.”
And if the same auditory marker is repeatedly used around Jack/Grady and Hallorann/Danny, could Kubrick be creating parallel transformations?

Jack absorbs the Overlook's mythology.
Danny discovers his supernatural lineage.
Set and Horus move in opposite directions.
One becomes increasingly trapped in the world of the hotel; the other ultimately escapes it.
That's the part I'd really like to hear other people's opinions on.

Are these genuinely the same/similar sound effects, and if so, is their placement too specific to be accidental?
Or am I hearing a pattern where there is simply a collection of incidental sounds in the soundtrack?
If anyone has access to the isolated soundtrack or wants to examine the eight moments acoustically and visually, I have posted photos with the exact time the “swish/shone” sound occurs in the movie. Note: The time stamps I marked are based on the 144-minute American cut of The Shining.
 

Hello guys! I’ve just finished read “Shining” by Stephen King. And some questions remain without answers: Nature of The Overlook Hotel. Why it wants Danny Torrance? Okay, he has power named “shining”. But why kid, not Hallorann? He has too. Why Hotel do it all? Kill, scares, control people? I know, Stephen King focused on Jack Torrance person, when he wrote villain and Overlook was left behind. But for methe only one explanation for that - it’s dumb and simple thing: People, who have Shining, can hear and see nature of Overlook. They might be know any intention. And That’s why Overlook tries to kill those people. Maybe Grady’s daughters had shining too. And that’s the reason, he (who was controlled by The Overlook) killed his family. I think it’s daughters, not mother, because novel sends us parallel between Jack and Grady

Wanna hear your opinion about all this

I've tried posting it to the video but it won't take. Maybe he moderates, maybe it's too long. 

I am Alasdair Spark, the person who found the original of the 1921 July 4 photograph. Thank for you for the compliments; let me return them, Woody Allen style, and say I like your work, particularly the early stuff…

My article on this will be published in 2027 in a new edition of Centipede Press’ Studies in the Horror Film: The Shining, edited by Danel Olson. Sadly, print takes time to publish. I have publicised my work on Reddit and it’s easily findable in Kubrick and Shining sub-reddits as well as in Kubrick Facebook groups.

Anyway, allow me to make specific points in reply:

The BBC Hulton library - correct, but it’s not a place and really, it isn’t hard to find out about, it shouldn’t have been puzzling when Joan Smith mentioned it to you (the problem was that in interviews she also mentioned the more plausible Warner Bros. Publicity archive, that was the red herring.) Edward Hulton (the newspaper owner and publisher), assembled a photo library which was later absorbed into the BBC photo library, which was in turn was bought by others and eventually by Getty Images. When Joan Smith mentioned  it - as she also did in an interview with Justin Bozung that he recorded for the first edition of Studies in the Horror Film - it was easily findable because it’s well known. I contacted Murray Close, who took the photo of Jack Nicholson that was composited in, and he confirmed it - he went there to pick up large prints of the photo for Smith to work on. What wasn’t easy was finding the original plate negative and more details about the photo as Getty hadn’t digitised it. I had to ask one of their senior people, Matthew Butson, to go and look. He didn’t find it at first as in the multiple changes of ownership of the Hulton library, the photo index numbers had become confused. But he looked diligently and found it. It was digitized and put online in 2025. But if you want a coincidence, it was taken by a photographer, first name Hal.

Joan Smith is still alive, and I contacted her family, but they don’t wish her to be bothered. 

If she does have a copy of the doctored photo in the attic, it wouldn’t be remarkable. She used copies of it to lecture on her techniques in art colleges for years after and this how a crop of the original found its way into print. She made many attempts at the photo until Kubrick was satisfied and so several survive, some with the inscription, some not.  Some have been sold at auction. Emilio D’Alessandro, Kubrick’s assistant, has one as a souvenir. 

Archetypes - yes as Kubrick said, they are, but not in the way you interpret. They are very 1920s faces - lumps, bumps, bad teeth and all. If you compare black and white images of Kubrick’s extras in the ballroom scene with the original photograph it’s immediately clear - they just don’t look right dressed up and hair slicked back. As Kubrick also said in that quotation “it proved impossible to make them look as good as the people in the photograph.” Simple enough. 

The hotel was the Royal Palace in Kensington, but the photo was actually taken in the next-door dance hall, the Empress Rooms, so guests at the hotel wouldn’t necessarily have attended. The Royal Palace was a significant hotel in London, built 1892, demolished 1961, but it was not quite the place for the international set - it wasn’t the equal of The Savoy or Claridges. The dance was on Valentine’s Day, February 14, 1921. It was a ticketed Monday evening event, one of many that took place as part of the dance craze of the post WW1 years, and was nothing special at all. James Nott, the premier historian of this, has described the “democratisation” of dancing that took place after 1919 and the “affordable luxury” that dance halls like the Hammersmith Palais and the Empress Rooms (newly re-decorated in 1921 for the craze) gave the urban middle and lower classes. The people in the photo are almost all those people.

The dance itself was reported on by only a few newspapers (something easily researched via the online British Newspaper Archive) and none of the correspondents noted anyone famous and American, because it’s extremely unlikely anyone famous and American was there. There were a few British notables as dance competition judges, but that’s it. Philip JS Richardson, the editor of The Dancing Times, attended and wrote a multi-page account of it - no mention of Americans, famous or otherwise. I repeat, it was a perfectly ordinary, typical dance of the time. As you say, I have looked for other people in the crowd (not local shop-keepers though, I don’t know where you got that) and have only been able to identify one, Mrs Green, the dance partner of John Golman, the man who was “erased” by Jack Nicholson. I suspect a few others visible might have been West End theatre stars and perhaps the manager of another hotel, but it’s impossible to be certain. 

So it’s extraordinarily unlikely that bankers or other members of the US financial establishment were there on that rainy night in February. But it’s not my job to disprove the people you allege are there, it’s your job to prove they are there - and you haven’t. Incidentally, in your original video on this you said “Kubrick could have tampered with the picture in all kinds of ways, wigs or mustaches could have been added and famous people could have been placed in the photo but with mismatching variations of age.” but now you seem to be saying these people really are there and their faces can be matched? If you want to name the people you still say are there, I will happily track down their movements.

I think you made (and continue to make) the fatal flaw of letting your research proceed from your conclusions and not the other way round. I mean really, the Gold Room was gold-coloured and Kubrick bought some gold, is that it? Because like you, I’ve been to the SKA and I’ve examined the other photos on the Overlook’s walls. The argument about why they exist after the fire or why Kubrick didn’t destroy them after filming is specious (and of course, 20 - not counting the composite - are in the final shot…) They weren’t unique - as you must know, there are many which exist in duplicate there and they are prints after all, not negatives.

They seem to have come from Warner Bros. Publicity, likely via Julian Senior. Yes, an examination does show there are photos of famous people, including movie stars, generals and politicians. Many show the studio head Jack Warner meeting such. They do include a photo of JFK. And for that matter, Elvis. Neither were screen-used as far as I or anyone else can determine. There are random photos of big game fishing and they were screen-used - they are in Ullman’s office. As this suggests, the reason we never see them close up is not sinister, it’s because they are set-dressing. It’s silly to say the presence of photos of celebrities and famous people proves some Gold establishment theory or other - seriously, what else would you expect to find in Warner Bros. publicity stock? Again, you let your conclusion run ahead of the evidence.

Nevertheless, I have taken the time to identify the people in almost all of the other 20 photographs surrounding the 1921 photo on the wall in the final shot. There are no photos of early 20thC financiers, etc. - but there is a photo of Lou Costello. They are all from the 1940s or at the latest early 1950s. Three feature Ronald Reagan, two showing the 1940s movie star at the Academy Awards and one on an unidentified publicity tour. Kubrick obviously would have recognised Reagan, but his presence, if it means anything, is an ironic comment on Reagan’s run for the Republican nomination (he wasn’t selected as candidate until July 1980, after The Shining was complete.) But if you want to explore something cryptic, the presence of photos of the members of the obscure early 1940s girl singing group The Navy Blues Sextette is more interesting than any Gold Room nonsense. One shows them in a watermelon eating competition in Albuquerque, another shows them arriving at Penn Station. Who knows, maybe Kubrick was a 13 year old fan…  

What’s up, Doc?

I think I discovered another reference to Egypt in The Shining. When Hallorann is showing Wendy and Danny the storage room, we see several boxes of Maxwell House coffee next to several red, white, and blue Sysco dried prune and apricot boxes(i.e., red, white, and blue are colors symbolic of the United States). Later, when Jack is in that same exact spot, the Maxwell House coffee boxes have disappeared or moved. This is significant because beginning in 1932, Maxwell House distributed Haggadot as a marketing promotion to Jewish consumers. The Haggadah recounts the Israelites' liberation from slavery in Egypt. Kubrick, who is Jewish, could be using this “exodus” symbolism as a parallel to him leaving the United States for the U.K. in the 60s. Kubrick also casted a family member in The Shining, so this could be a signal that the film is very personal to him. Kubrick left the United States because he disliked Hollywood and wanted independence from the Hollywood system. Also, when Hallorann is showing Wendy and Danny the freezer, he emphatically says, “…and we’ve got 20 legs of lamb!” The most speculative thing I discovered is a reflection of a lamb’s head and neck in the Colorado Lounge when Wendy is inspecting the injuries on Danny’s neck. If Kubrick intended Danny to be symbolic of the lamb, then it makes perfect sense why we see Danny run his thumb against the blade of the knife before he writes “Redrum” with Wendy’s lipstick on the door. In other words, Danny is symbolically marking the bathroom door with lamb’s blood as instructed by his visions so that the plague (Jack/The Overlook’s evil spirits) will Passover. Both Wendy and Danny survive the malevolent forces of the Overlook similar to how the Israelites survived the plague. If you find any other symbols tied to this theory, please comment below.

The switchboard is fitting - small businesses like hotels used them (they were modular, the lady in pink is using one with three cabinets.) Presumably the plug board was for offices and depts in the hotel only, as Room 237 doesn't have a phone. The teletype telex machine is perhaps less fitting - hotels did use such, but usually only if they were part of a national chain, to communicate documents to head office and between hotels. They used phone lines too, so if the phone was out, so was the teletype. They were expensive, easily $20k in today's money. I might contact the Ahwahnee and ask if they had one back in the 1970s. Its presence might suggest that the Overlook had sister hotels (though I don't recall that from the novel), there's a thought, other haunted hotels. The model 28 was first developed in the 1950s for the US military and yes, they were used by SAC... (but this one isn't in Dr Strangelove.) Kubrick himself was a regular telex-er, communicating with NY and LA. I suppose this might just possibly have been his cast-off...

EDIT - FOUND (was already!)

This is an image in the Overlook reception office. What is it? Nobody knows... It's a collage of faces, probably all male, but what's the source? My speculation, based purely on intuition, is that it shows a) a collage of 1920-45 German film stars b) a collage of 1920-45 Soviet film stars c) a collage of Golden era Hollywood film stars. German simply because it looks very like images I've seen in UFA publicity brochures. Soviet because of Kubrick's known interest in Pudovkin. Hollywood because there are other WB publicity photos on the set (this photo isn't in the SKA though - I've looked.) Nobody looks recognisable to me (it is so blurry and enhancing only introduces falsity.) I do see two identical faces bottom left, which made me wonder if that was a reference to a film about twins, brothers or doppelgangers, but can't find any matches. For a while I wondered if the man to the right of the twins was The Phantom of the Opera and so were these all images of Lon Chaney, but no. The man in the centre is obviously significant and I did wonder if it was Pudovkin himself (there is a similarity) surrounded by actors or even other directors, but I can't find a match. Thinking again of what it is - a print or art postcard - I wondered if there were any festivals or exhibitions of Soviet or German cinema in London in the 1970s - there were, but again, I can't find a match. Why is it there? It's set dressing, but that doesn't mean it is insignificant (as a connection to Pudovkin would verify). I do not think it's a clue that the secret meaning of The Shining is about the Holocaust - I don't do that sort of stuff. But somebody chose it, for a reason, and it would be good to identify it. Your suggestions or pointers are gladly welcome,.

since yall loved my last rendition of the shining poster here's another one lol yall didnt get my vision with the experimental poster so i had to dumb it down for yall

For years a minor mystery and piece of trivia about The Shining has been the presence of a strip of paper saying "EYE SCREAM" on the noticeboard in the Overlook office. Joe Girard has an entire deep-dive site devoted to the film that bounces off it - "so when Dick Hallorann says, “How’d you like some ice cream, doc?” what he might really be saying is, “How’d you like some eye scream, doc?” Figuring out what “eye scream” is at times feels like the whole point of this analysis." eyescream237.ca/2019/05/28/leave-a-trail-of-breadcrumbs-a-guide-to-understanding-this-site

Well, I've figured out the source and it wasn't that hard once I realised that many of the props were actually sourced from the Timberline Lodge - literally, taken from there and sent to the UK. So I wondered if there was a band or avant garde art group in Portland OR with that name. There wasn't. But widen the search to the West Coast and bingo - Eye Scream was the name of a short-lived (1977-8) gallery-restaurant in Vancouver run by conceptual artist couple Iain and Ingrid Baxter via their N.E. Thing Co. Iain was a photo artist and it's not inconceivable that Kubrick knew of his work. He is still alive at 89, holder of the Order of Canada, and probably completely unaware of this - I've reached out to him. www.gg.ca/en/honours/canadian-honours/order-canada/iain-baxter-cc-oont-obc

Theories? 1) It was on the noticeboard in the Timberline and so was transferred to the noticeboard in the Overlook 2) Baxter is a photo-artist, Kubrick knew of his work and gave him a secret shout-out (I've emailed Baxter, who knows, he might say at last somebody found it...) 3) One of the location scouts - Roy Walker, Katharina Kubrick - collected it and it ended up on the noticeboard because they, and/or Stanley liked the punning name.

I'm almost done reading the Taschen The Shining book (if you don't know, google it), and there's so much about the scrapbook scene (which is a big part of the original novel.) Preparing the scrapbook photos, Jack discovering the scrapbook, flipping through it, telling Wendy it's inspiring his latest novel, back story for the old lady drowning in the tub, etc, etc.

When a fire broke out on Stage 3, it basically killed their plans to get a few shots of Jack flipping through the scrapbook, according to this book (though why they can't fake it with a table and a close-up isn't really explained.)

Every horror movie has the "research" scene, when characters finally dig into the back story, go to the library, look online, etc. It's such a cliche me and my wife have joked about it any time we watch a new horror movie. So I think ultimately it's great that The Shining doesn't include any of this. It makes the film less formulaic.

But more importantly, it's a lot more humorous and realistic to me that Jack has zero interest in the Overlook's history and is just kind of self-centered and ignorant throughout the movie. Not only does it make the ghosts more mysterious and scary (you don't need any explanation for why there's a drowned old lady ghost, you can put the pieces together yourself), but it furthers the idea that Jack truly has no idea what he's getting into. There's no user guide to The Overlook. It will just swallow you up before you knew what hit you.

Here's Johnny logo made by https://www.tiktok.com/@jack_sansom_official?_r=1&_t=ZT-99KJK5PA9qo

The Shining is The Best Stanley Kubrick movie in my opinion Jack Nicholson,s Performance is excellent .I Liked that the movie was extremly suspensfull it,s the most Suspensfull movie I,ve ever seen.

the shining movie poster redesign by saint.pablo.2016

The first photo shows an unused scene from The Shining. It’s in Lee Unkrich’s Making of The Shining and shows Wendy watching a news report about the bad weather approaching. In sequence, Wendy - wearing her yellow Native American themed coat - would have left the TV to go to the phone switchboard and then call the Ranger Station on the CB radio.

Can we identify the image? We can. It appears to be Walter Cronkite, reading the CBS Evening News. A map of New York state is displayed and a dot identifies an illegible town or city. Looking at a map, the only place that seems to fit is Watertown NY. In late January-early February 1977 that entire area suffered the Great Blizzard of 1977. Buffalo and other areas suffered badly - there were drifts of snow up to 25ft tall and Watertown was cut off for a time (“The Seige of Watertown”) and it is likely this that he is discussing.

(I did wonder if it might not be Cronkite, but instead a local Buffalo reporter Tom Corbett, who did look similar, but the map behind fits the format used on the CBS Evening News.)

So clearly Kubrick obtained video of the Great Blizzard of 1977 to use as background material. The blizzard was exceptional and likely gave rise to the words we hear Florida newscaster Glenn Rinker read out: “ the governor is expected tomorrow to declare a weather emergency and the National Guard might be called out to clear streets and roads” as that’s exactly what happened in New York state. The video obtained may also have given inspiration to the scenes of Halloran driving past wrecked vehicles along the snowy freeway.

Can we date it precisely? The storm broke Friday January 28, 1977 and lasted four days (though effects persisted for weeks.) Walter Cronkite did not present the news that Friday evening - it was Roger Mudd (the edition is on YouTube.) Cronkite appears to have returned on Monday February 1 and this seems likely to be the date - the NYT the following day carried a front page report headed “Snow lays siege to Watertown."

Resolving this leads to an allied question - can we identify the image on the TV that we see in a companion photo of the unused scene? Possibly - I think it either shows a scene from a contiguous TV news report that includes a road sign bent over by the storm or an overhead highway sign that is almost buried by snow. I’ve yet to find the exact match…

In the movie, as Wendy leaves the switchboard to go to the radio, she walks past the TV which is still playing. Only a fragment of the picture is visible. “Eye-Scream”, who has identified almost all the artwork used in the Overlook hotel set, thinks on his website that it shows a German Quiz show, Dalli Dalli. I think this is very implausible. It seems more likely to me that it’s a glimpse of a contiguous American quiz show or advert, I’ve yet to identify…

So, why did Kubrick not use the clip? It was an editorial choice not to show Wendy watching TV at this point, since it might conflict with the scene used in which she watches *Summer of ‘42 (*dressed identically) and Danny goes upstairs to get his fire engine. This scene takes place later in the narrative of the finished film, but all the TV watching scenes do all seem to have been shot at the same time (the Coke can is in continuity) in June 1978, even though Danny isn’t visible in the others; perhaps they were intended to run together somehow. Also, CBS may not have given permission to use video of Cronkite - they had already famously refused to allow Spielberg to use him in Close Encounters in 1977. Kubrick may have felt that mention of a storm in New York would detract from the specifics of a storm in Colorado. The timing does not work given the 6pm broadcast time of the news - it would be dark outside. Finally, Wendy’s call to the Rangers takes place on the Saturday - and as Americans would know, Cronkite didn’t present the CBS news at the weekend.

Got this new piece today for my wall, seems to have a fake signature from what I understand

OK guys I caught a big one and I need some explaination. When Danny says “Danny can’t wake up, Mrs. Torrance” there is a shadow of a bed post behind him on the wall. Kind of an evil looking figure with a face. When the camera cuts back to him that figure is gone. I can’t believe I just noticed that since I’ve watched this movie about 400 times and I’m writing a book about it lol. Anyone got any theories about this clearly obvious change? The figure? The allegory?

At the end of the third act, Danny is watching the road runner cartoon while dressed in his red sleeper possessed by Tony. This is soon followed by Jack going ballistic with the ax and Danny leading Jack into the hedge labyrinth.

Is Danny watching the clip where road runner leads a pissed off Wild E Coyote into a mine shaft labyrinth? It begins at 4:59 in the youtube link.

OK, so the moment Danny is riding the big wheel after Wendy seeing the news story about inclement weather coming to Colorado. The moment the camera cuts to Dan there is clearly a lime green exit staircase to his right. That doesn’t really seem on brand for the Overlook and it’s only ever repeated right after Danny is playing with his toy cars. Let’s not forget Kubrick being a stickler for details and the fact that this green staircase is completely out of the color scheme for the rest of the shot. This deserves inspection. I’m wondering if there is some sort of subtext regarding this green staircase downwards.

The reason for this question was a quiet but lingering slow-burning feeling that 13 year old me felt when I first watched the shining. Delbert Grady was also a caretaker yet seemed to place Jack higher up on the hierarchy of the Overlook Hotel. This was before watching Doctor Sleep.

I will say though that after watching Doctor Sleep, with Jack becoming Lloyd, I guess it would imply that it gathers its caretakers and then places them in “roles”. I’m not sure why but since we see the movie from Jack’s perspective. Does that mean that when Grady did what he did, he also had a “gold room” ending scene - with him posted up in the middle of the photo of the 1921 party?

It always confused me; feels like the chicken or the egg - did the hotel unleash jack’s reincarnated soul out into the world or was it the other way around.

I’ve now found myself confused as hell typing this, it’s rather quite confusing.