🎦 The Shining full movie HD download (Stanley Kubrick) - Drama, Thriller, Mystery, Horror. 🎬
The Shining
Year:
1980
Country:
USA, UK
Genre:
Drama, Thriller, Mystery, Horror
IMDB rating:
8.4
Director:
Stanley Kubrick
Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance
Shelley Duvall as Wendy Torrance
Danny Lloyd as Danny Torrance
Scatman Crothers as Dick Hallorann
Barry Nelson as Stuart Ullman
Philip Stone as Delbert Grady
Joe Turkel as Lloyd the Bartender
Anne Jackson as Doctor
Tony Burton as Larry Durkin
Lia Beldam as Old Woman in Bath
Billie Gibson as Old Woman in Bath
Barry Dennen as Bill Watson
David Baxt as Forest Ranger #1
Manning Redwood as Forest Ranger #2
Storyline: Signing a contract, Jack Torrance, a normal writer and former teacher agrees to take care of a hotel which has a long, violent past that puts everyone in the hotel in a nervous situation. While Jack slowly gets more violent and angry of his life, his son, Danny, tries to use a special talent, the "Shining", to inform the people outside about whatever that is going on in the hotel.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x1072 px 12796 Mb h264 1536 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x400 px 2147 Mb mpeg4 263 Kbps avi Download
Reviews
What was Kubrick trying to tell us?
At first sight, The Shining may seem just like a horror movie. However, Stanley Kubrick makes it more interesting and compelling. The Shining is not just about a crazy man who kills his family, there is a lot more than that. There are different theories about this movie. What was Kubrick trying to say? Was he even trying to say something? Someone thinks the movie is about incest. Someone else says that the whole film is about the native American genocide, which I think is a more interesting theory. Starting with the initial theme song, which recalls of native music, there are many features in the film to support this theory. There are Native American decorative motifs abound, and Wendy is often dressed as a native. In the fridge scene, the portrait of a native can be seen on a can. The blood river can symbolize the blood of Native Americans killed in the genocide. These are just some of the scenes that can be interpreted as symbols. I think that The Shining is not a simple movie, but it needs to be unpacked. It needs to be watched several times before you can fully understand it. I've seen it just twice, so I can't really say that I got it all. The only thing I know is that I will never get bored watching it again and again. This movie never gets old, and that is why I believe it can be called a classic.
2017-11-09
One of the Scariest Movies Of All Time!!!
This is the classic horror! Stanley Kubrick's Finest! The scariest of the "Kubrick Stares" has to be Jack Nicholson looking through the door in the classic horror scene. The camera, music, acting, and scares are top notch! I highly recommend this movie to: Horror fans, Kubrick fans, psychological thriller fans, and even Nicholson fans. You will love this movie to death! Four out of four stars. A definative classic! SEE IT!
1999-07-16
Whoever said horror only happens when it's dark?
I saw this film in 1981 and, just recently, decided to see it again before I wrote a review.

Time hasn't diminished the effect: this is still a scary movie from one of the industry's greatest directors.

After seeing it for the first time, I sourced Stephen King's novel and sat down to have good read. Boy, was that a mistake? I gave up trying to read King's dense narrative that seemed to be all over the place, leaving it aside so that I could remember the effectiveness of Kubrick's screenplay. Only much later, did I learn that Kubrick's script deviated markedly from King's novel. Well, I guess that's art...

There are many striking features about the film. First, who would expect to see a true horror movie shot mostly in bright daylight and at such an idyllic setting? Quite the opposite to all the Dracula type schlock that had been so common and that graced cinema screens up till then. Recall Psycho from 1960... The effect for me was to make the narrative all the more horrifying.

Did I say idyllic setting? More like modern Gothic, in a way. Or maybe Kubrick was subtlety poking fun at prior so-called horror flicks that had the inevitable dark castle sitting on hill, with lightning crashing around most of the time?

And then there's Jack Nicholson, one of Tinsel Town's eccentrics, if not crazy, playing a role tailor made for him. How could it not be, after seeing how well he did in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)? Some might argue he was over the top, a caricature almost, of a man who truly goes insane. Watching him for the second time, however, I think his performance reminded me all too well of insane people I've met in real life.

As a study in abnormal psychology, I think it works very well – in fact, it's a tour de force. And that's why I'm still also a mite disappointed by the way the narrative turns to use supernatural elements to explain the reasons for Jack's descent into his private Hell. (I suppose I'll have to read King's novel to sort this out.) I'm prepared to accept the idea of telepathy between young Danny (Danny Lloyd) and Dick (Scatman Crothers) because I've come across situations that strongly suggest its probability. I see no need, however, to introduce the supernatural, except to appeal to the gullible.

Shelley Duval is well cast as the already nervous wife, Wendy; and, I read that Kubrick made her even more nervous with his need for perfection. Scatman was suitably impressive and mysterious; a fine actor and composer. And, hats off to young Danny Lloyd.

If this is a movie you've missed, I recommend it thoroughly.
2007-11-15
Fact: Kubrick is better than King
It's well know that Stephen King doesn't like Stanley Kubrick's version of The Shining (so much so that he scripted an abysmal TV movie version). According to him, Kubrick didn't understand the horror genre. Well, I think Kubrick did. I think he understood it only too well. He knew that it was a genre full of conventions, cheap tricks and tired clichés. Therefore Kubrick decided to throw all that nonsense out of the window and make a film based on atmosphere rather than predictable thrills. You don't get people here jumping out of the dark time after time. You don't get worthless shocks. Kubrick's version of The Shining is an insidious film. It gets under your skin. In other words, it isn't for Pavlovian dogs that have spent a lifetime being conditioned by cretinous nonsense.

What runs deepest through The Shining is a frustration with family. Right from the beginning it's obvious that Jack isn't happy with his lot – as he's being shown around the hotel he can't help but take a sneaky look at the backsides of a couple of women. Well, can you blame him? The poor man is married to a bug-eyed, bucktoothed Olive Oil look-a-like.

Then there's Jack's quiet frustration with his son Danny. As he's driving to the hotel, he's bothered by requests for food. And then his son makes out that he's knowledgeable because he saw a programme on TV. Already he's slightly irked - he's got to spend months alone with these people; one who resembles Popeye's missus and one who talks to his finger.

So really the hotel brings out nothing that isn't already there. It merely brings everything to the surface – Jack's resentment as regards his wife, his frustration as regards his lack of writing talent and his annoyance at having a troubled son. It's kind of like he's testing his family. Are they strong enough as a unit to survive being cooped up together?

One of the underlying themes in the film seems to be television. What happens in The Shining is what happens when someone stops watching the idiot box. With it, a person can find solace in mindless programming and retreat from the strictures of family life. Without it they're faced with all their problems and all the failings of their loved ones. Even the strongest family can be brought to its knees when there's no escape from each other's company. Therefore it's quite telling, when Jack loses the plot completely, that he spouts lines from TV: "Honey, I'm home" and "Here's Johnny." Just watch some television, Jack.

But it's also the pain of writing that contributes to Jack's insanity. There's nothing quite as harrowing as an empty page. Plus there's nothing more annoying than being interrupted mid-flow. One of the best scenes in the film is when Jack tells his wife to get lost when she interrupts him. It's extremely violent in how cold Jack is towards Wendy. And because it's grounded in a reality, it's all the more effective.

Also rather unsettling is the scene where Jack talks to his son. He makes Danny sit on his lap and he proceeds to tell him how much he loves him and how he'd never hurt him. It works so well because it's so cold and because there's such an obvious lack of affection. The words are just empty platitudes. They mean absolutely nothing.

Jack's true feelings are only revealed when he gets to talk to Lloyd. It's in this scene that you realise the marriage isn't all it's cracked up to be – Wendy has never forgiven him for accidentally hurting his son. And it's also in this scene that you realise (as if you hadn't noticed earlier) that Jack is absolutely crackers. He's talking to ghosts. But they could also be figments of his imagination, for there are mirrors behind most of the ghosts he talks to. Effectively he's talking to himself. And I love this matter of fact way of dealing with the supernatural. There are no fancy tricks. Everything just seems unnaturally natural.

In fact, everything to do with the ghosts is superbly handled. The twins are spooky, Lloyd is amiable and Grady is out of his mind. And it's Grady who's probably the most chilling presence in the film. He starts off as a bumbling waiter but then quickly becomes a stone cold killer. Just the way he says 'corrected' conveys more terror than a million slasher films. And Philip Stone's performance is a million times more subtle than Nicholson's. I mean, as much as I like Jack in the film, he does chew the scenery. But Kubrick likes his over the top performances, so that's the way he wanted it.

And undoubtedly it's Kubrick's movie. He's the real star. And I love everything he brings to the film. I love his command of lighting – just look at The Gold Room scenes. I love his use of music. I love the way that he turns the Room 237 scene, one that could have been a standard 'jump' scene, into a comment on Jack's marriage – his willingness to be unfaithful. I love the way that he leaves lots of unanswered questions. I love the shots of the blood coming out of the lift. I love the helicopter shots at the start. I love the way that pages and pages of typed words are the most frightening visual in the film. I love the maze. I love the fact that you see a ghost getting a blow-job from a ghost in a bear suit… Man, I love absolutely everything about this film. It's horror for people who know that true horror isn't being stalked by a man in a mask, but being trapped alone with your family.
2005-10-16
The Shining
I am not a person that gets concerned with book-to-screen adaptations. It's not that I am not a reader, I enjoy literature and read a great deal in my free time. I recognize, however, that books and films are two different mediums, therefore, have storytelling devices unique to the manner in which they work with a narrative. Stephen King's vocal and vehement opposition to the 1980 film by Stanley Kubrick means quite little to me. He may be right, the work originated with him, obviously, but films are different than books and should be appreciated as a separate entity rather than an extension of one another. I also wouldn't classify myself as a fan of Stanley Kubrick. That's not to say I don't think he's made some wonderful films---he has, I just don't list him among my favorites which make me an ideal candidate to speak evenly about his film and King's book. Kubrick's film starring Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall tell the tale of a writer and his family who become caretakers of a hotel with a dark history on a secluded mountain in Colorado. The Torrence family is in for a lot more than a quiet winter once they finally settle in. Kubrick really outdoes himself with his visually stunning version of The Shining. The staggering cinematography creates the immense isolation the leads succumb to, keeping audiences glued to the screen until the final minute.

Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) signs a contract to be the caretaker for the Overlook Hotel. Since the hotel will be empty while in Jack's care, he sees this as a perfect opportunity to work on his next novel. Just as he is signing the paperwork, he is warned that through the hotel's long history, there was a former caretaker that killed his family with an ax before shooting himself to death. Jack is unfazed by the news still focused on the opportunity to get a great deal of writing done during his time there. When he brings his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall) and son Danny (Danny Lloyd) to settle in, things are alright for awhile, until Danny's gift of being able to see things from the past and the future, referred to as "the shining" begins to warn him about the hotel, and hints at something sinister taking place in room 237. When Danny meets the head chef who also has "the shining", who is preparing to leave the hotel for the winter, they speak about the sinister history surrounding the events that took place in room 237. The longer the Torrence family stays at the hotel, the more visions Danny has, and the deeper Jack surrenders to the insanity of such extreme isolation. When Jack starts becoming aggressive, Wendy and Danny begin to fear for their lives, thinking they may become the next victims of the Overlook Hotel.

I'm a total cinephile, but I have few "film traditions". I enjoy seeing new-to-me films as often as possible, so I partake in very few re-watches. The Shining, however, is a film I watch every year on Halloween as a double bill with Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. I've always been one of those people far more afraid of the darkest sides of human beings than an unhinged slasher. Despite watching The Shining every year, there hasn't been a viewing yet where I haven't sat in complete awe while watching it. I am completely immersed in the world Kubrick creates in The Shining, and that's solely due to his genius in portraying the subject matter. The sound design is extraordinary and creeps into the heads of those in the audience as subtly yet profoundly as Jack's isolation creeps into his head. I practically have to clean up the drool from the floor over the tracking shots Kubrick utilizes in the film. One of the best tracking shot in cinema history takes place in The Shining. Of course, I'm talking about the shot of Danny on his big wheel riding through the hallways of the hotel until being confronted by the horrors tucked away in the hotel's history. The brilliance and exquisite beauty of the tracking shots and long takes Kubrick uses to tell the story are fascinating, and never lose their luster no matter how many times you see The Shining. I've heard the criticisms of Nicholson, but I personally think that he was perfect for the role, and can't imagine anyone else playing the part of Jack Torrence. He was over the top at times, but the role calls for it the further he descends into madness. I also found Shelly Duvall's monotone agreeable attitude perfectly suited for her role of Wendy, as well. The camera work, direction, sound design, and performances come together in a magnificent sweeping package to create a piece of cinema that cements Kubrick's notion that film is an artwork, and should be repeatedly appreciated as such.
2017-04-13
Highly Recommended
'THE SHINING' - 1980

Directed by Stanley Kubrick

Starring Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall and Danny Lloyd

Plot Overview: ​Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) becomes winter caretaker at the isolated Overlook Hotel in Colorado, hoping to cure his writer's block. He settles in along with his wife, Wendy (Shelley Duvall), and his son, Danny (Danny Lloyd), who is plagued by psychic premonitions. As Jack's writing goes nowhere and Danny's visions become more disturbing, Jack discovers the hotel's dark secrets and begins to unravel into a homicidal maniac hell-bent on terrorising his family.

When the author of the work that your movie is based on says the film is bad, it obviously is, right? Wrong. I love Stephen King but I cannot comprehend how he despises THIS film, off all his adaptations. Is it faithful? Probably not. Is it any good? Absolutely. This is one of Kurbicks(many) masterpieces of cinema and I cannot comprehend King's dislike of the movie. I guess it's each to their own but I think he was being overly critical in his review of this movie. It's a chilling horror movie and I HIGHLY recommend that you check it out.

But what about it, makes it great? Well Jack Nicholson's Oscar Worthy performance comes to mind. And while it may not be entirely authentic to King's novel, the performance Nicholson provides is eerie, chilling and horrifying, and is one of the primary strengths of the movie. What else can you say about it other than all work and no play make Jack a dull boy?

Another performance in this movie that is also sensational is Danny Lloyd as Jack Torrance's son, coincidentally also called Danny. Pretty weird that Nicholson plays a character called Jack and Lloyd plays a character called Danny. Coincidence? I think not! But anyhow, for a child actor, Lloyds provides a genuinely unsettling and bone chilling performance that just seeing him puts me on EDGE. That is a credit to the excellent script(more on that later), Kubrick's direction(more on that later) and Lloyd's sensational performance(more on tha- oh wait). I cannot commend Lloyd enough for giving such a great role, especially considering he was working for a madman. What. Even geniuses can be deluded, uncompromising and insane.

Remember that script I mentioned? Yeah? Well it is excellent. Whether or not it's a faithful adaption I couldn't care less. The bleak setting is chilling. The slow descent into madness and brief hints of insanity that arise to the surface as the movie bubbles along. The slow, compelling arcs for each of the characters. Even the absolutely genius dialogue and writing. Anything that is related to the script(so everything) is perfect and incredible, and I absolutely loved it.

And remember that man with the funny name? Kubrick? Yes that's the one. That psychopath? Yep him. But that psychopath is also a genius and wizard of camera-work. This movie looks stunning. The stark contrast and repetition of the colour red. Tracking shots. Impeccable editing. Marvellous camera angles. Every single frame of this movie comes together to make one of arguably the greatest looking movies ever made. Anyone who denies that Kubrick is a God of cinematography is kidding themselves because the man is a genius in that department. And a total lunatic in others.

If I could say I have one flaw with this movie. It's Shelley Duvall. And she is what drags this movie down to a 9. Her performance and direction boiled down to wimper and look sad. There is nothing groundbreaking or compelling in her performance. Not one second of her being on screen grabbed me or made me care for her. She was just a bland, boring, character with a overly dramatised, silly performance. Kubrick may have pushed Duvall a little TOO hard on this one.

Aside from that one little indiscretion, this movie is fantastic. The acting(for the most part), the story, the cinematography; it all blends together to create one of the most incredible and haunting horror movies ever made. Not a single frame is wasted and not a single line of dialogue to be ignored. It is a masterpiece on all accounts except one and I can highly recommend this movie to anyone. I'll rate it a close to perfect 9 'Heeeere's Johnny's' out of 10!
2017-10-07
Incoherent, lifeless, hack film-making. Horrible storytelling.
How this film gained such high praise and notoriety completely escapes me. I have seen hundreds of films, and this is easily the most incoherent, bland, and lifeless piece of work I can recall seeing (especailly by such a renowned filmmaker). And yes, I hated "2001: A Space Odyssey" as well. Long, drawn-out, boring, lifeless film packed full of irrelevant imagery and symbolism that amounts to a filmmaker who doesn't know how to tell an intelligent story with solid characters and emotions. That is the same exact problem here.

First off, Shelley DuVall added nothing of value to the film. She was blah from beginning to end. No endearing qualities whatsoever. The whole film was a failed experiment thinking that random creepy, irrelevant images coupled with an incoherent story progression devoid of any character arcs would be successful. Kubrick had no sense of scene transitions. He shows no ability to allow one scene to flow into another, to give it fluidity or convey that he has an overall, consistent vision. The inconsistency over what aspect ratio he intended for it is further proof that he had no concrete vision, in my honest opinion. A solid, competent, talented director knows what they want, and are very confident in their visions. They have a very clear idea of how they want things viewed by every audience, everywhere. That's why directors and DPs hate it when their films are put into the pan-and-scan format. Kubrick also fails to have his DP shoot or light 98% of the scenes intriguingly. Watching this, it was like watching an old TV-movie - dull, uninspired, and lifeless. Yeah, the steadi-cams and dolly shots are all impressive, but sometimes, scenes seem to exist just to show off the cool camera moves they can do. Scenes which contribute absolutely nothing to the overall film, in any aspect. Being a filmmaker myself, I am of the belief that every scene should have a purpose to either the plot or characters of the film. Anything else is a waste. And beyond those steadi-cam and dolly shots, it's essentially bland for nearly the entire film. Almost zero interesting angles, and amateurish editing skills. Yawn inducing cinema.

Good story progression would show Jack Torrance starting out as a well adjusted, happy family man that gradually descends into complete psychosis and homicidal mania. Instead, Kubrick shows him as already a man dissatisfied with his life, marriage, son, and career. Then, Kubrick just flashes a title card on the screen saying 'One Month Later,' and Jack is already deteriorated towards the verge of madness. That's shoddy storytelling, and a hack's idea of executing a character arc. No cause is given to why he becomes a homicidal maniac. There's also no correlation between all the surreal, nightmarish imagery. It's completely random, and doesn't evolve into revealing a story behind its origins. All this surrealism is just an excuse for it to be labeled 'horror' as it doesn't serve an underlying purpose as to why anything is happening amongst the characters. They don't confront, deal, or resolve the reasons or purpose behind it all. It's just there to make the film bizarre.

Now, I don't mind methodically paced films as long as there's a purpose to it all. Any talented editor could make this a much more effective film by chopping a good 35 minutes or more out of it. Horror films require momentum to equal good pacing, and good pacing is necessary for solid tension. Still, even if there was tension and good pacing, fact is, really, there are no endearing characters in this film for me to build any sympathy for. I don't care what happens to them because they're one dimensional, emotionless, weak-willed people. How this family could even co-exist for five minutes is beyond me, let alone how they survived a more than three hour drive up to the hotel in the first place.

This film is almost complete trash because it shows the filmmakers have no intelligence or coherence for the movie they were attempting to make. There are enormously better conceived and executed films from this time that proved far more effective. If you want isolation and paranoia, check out "John Carpenter's The Thing." If you want surrealism, go rent Don Coscarelli's original "Phantasm."
2009-10-20
Number one on my most awful list!
All right, I've already written one review for this movie. But I've gotten lots of hate mail since then because I was told I did not explain enough. So here goes.

Lots of spoilers are coming.

Let's start with the actors. Jack Nicholson puts on a terrific performance in this movie. I will say that much. However, I hate to say that is the ONLY good thing about this movie. The woman (can't even remember her name) is one of the worst actors I have ever seen. She was just annoying and I was pleading with the movie for her death. The little boy, in his slobbering fits, made me just want to puke. No, the only good thing about this movie was Nicholson.

The plot is not too bad, but is, to be honest, very lame. He is a caretaker and must take care (duh) of the hotel during the winter, it's closed season. He takes his wife and child to live up there.

Nothing happens for the longest time. It is just such a boring movie. I was so sick of it by the time Nicholson started losing it. By the way, he loses it for no reason. The movie doesn't explain anything. I've never read the book, so I'm guessing you'd have to read the book to understand ANYTHING. The kid has a magical talent or something called the Shining, but this has nothing to do with the movie! I was at a total loss!

There's a rather grotesque scene involving a naked woman that really made me want to shut this off. But something drew me in... I guess I just wanted to see how bad it could really get.

Whoo, I wish I didn't do that.

It just gets worse and worse after that. The plot falls short with tons of holes, the storyline is absolutely boring and crooked, and the climax is TOTALLY predictable. I knew that the black guy would go up to the hotel, get killed, and the woman and child would take the vehicle and escape.

The music is so horribly screechy that I just wanted to clap my ears and cause deafness every five minutes. But I guess it fits the grotesque atmosphere of the movie.

I was utterly disgusted by this movie. If this is supposedly the best of horror, I will never want to watch the horror genre again for fear of seeing its worst.
2002-08-12
A Horror Classic
A family heads to an isolated hotel for the winter where an evil and spiritual presence influences the father (Jack Nicholson) into violence, while his psychic son (Danny Lloyd) sees horrific forebodings from the past and of the future.

What is most interesting is that this film has gone from bad to good. When it first came out, the reviews were not so positive, and there were even some Golden Raspberry nominations (but no wins). Today, this is not only considered a top horror film but one of the top 100 films of any genre... what a turnaround.

Then we have King's disappointment, and I think he raises serious concerns: he did not like the casting of Nicholson, and he did not think Kubrick made the film as horror-focused as it could have been. On the first point, it is true that the lead should have had a greater transition. Nicholson just looks crazy from the first scene. I would love to have seen Michael Moriarty...

As for the Kubrick criticism, it is true... he bent over backwards to make an artsy, stylish film, but maybe not a horror film. It is a great film, but maybe not a great horror film. If you want a good haunting film, for example, "The Changeling" has this one beat...
2013-09-30
What is Idiocy?
The fact that this movie is even in the top 1000 movies of all time, much less the top 250. That, in fact, crosses over the line from Idiocy to pure Lunacy, or worse. Someday, this disturbing race of mutated movie goers who have been dubbed "Kubrickites" by Pentagon scientists will die off, as their numbers are already dwindling. Until then, the rest of us simply must tolerate them, and correct them when necessary.
2003-05-05
📹 The Shining full movie HD download 1980 - Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, Scatman Crothers, Barry Nelson, Philip Stone, Joe Turkel, Anne Jackson, Tony Burton, Lia Beldam, Billie Gibson, Barry Dennen, David Baxt, Manning Redwood, Lisa Burns - USA, UK. 📀
×