Stanley Kubrick and Stephen King are undeniably two of the greatest to work in their respective mediums. They're such interesting and creative men who tell uncompromising stories that challenge their respective audiences.
We've covered Stephen King and Stanley Kubrick's work on The Shining. But it's worth repeating here that they had a bit of a fraught relationship, with Kubrick changing the novel for the movie and King not necessarily being a fan.
But there was something that Kubrick obviously originally admired and respected that drew him into the story and got him on board to make the movie.
In a 1980 interview with Cinephilia Beyond by Vicente Molina Foix, Kubrick talked about the book, the movie, and how he connected with the material.
Kubrick stated, "Well, the novel was sent to me by John Calley, an executive with Warner Bros., and it is the only thing which was ever sent to me that I found good, or that I liked. Most things I read with the feeling that after about [a certain number] pages I’m going to put it down and think that I’m not going to waste my time. The Shining I found very compulsive reading, and I thought the plot, ideas, and structure were much more imaginative than anything I’ve ever read in the genre. It seemed to me one could make a wonderful movie out of it.
When asked about King's other novels and their movie adaptations, Kubrick said he had not read others.
'The Shining' Credit: Warner Bros.
He elaborated, "I had seen Carrie, the film, but I hadn’t read any of his novels. I would say King’s great ability is in plot construction. He doesn’t seem to take great care in writing, I mean, the writing seems like if he writes it once, reads it, maybe writes it again, and sends it off to the publisher. He seems mostly concerned with invention, which I think he’s very clear about."
These words may seem cold, but I think this is almost like a surgeon talking about a body they're about to cut up.
Kubrick's passion was what he saw in the material, and how he thought he could work into it to find his own personal connection.
Later in the interview, Kubrick went into all the changes he made to the book and why. It was a pretty interesting discussion of what it takes to adapt something and why you have to make cuts to suit the best film version, which may always differ when it comes to the book.
Kubrick said, "I think in the novel, King tries to put in too much of what I would call pseudo-character and pseudo-psychological clues, but certainly the essence of the character such as it is, that he puts in the novel, was retained. The only change is we made Wendy perhaps more believable as a mother and a wife. I would say the psychological dynamics of the story, even in the novel, are not really changed. When you said the characters are simplified, well, obviously, they become more clear, less cluttered; that’s it, less cluttered better than simplified. When I said simplified, I meant exactly that: clarified. From Jack’s character, for instance, all the rather cumbersome references to his family life have disappeared in the film, and that’s for the better. I don’t think the audience is likely to miss the many and self-consciously “heavy” pages King devotes to things like Jack’s father’s drinking problem or Wendy’s mother. To me, all that is quite irrelevant. There’s the case of putting in too many psychological clues of trying to explain why Jack is the way he is, which is not really important."
When reading all of this, I think you can see Kubrick working to connect the dots he saw when reading the book for the first time. and finding something in it, he found to be personal and relatable.
The only way he was able to do that was to read a book that brought him there, a book written by King. I think, despite the cold words up top, that has to feel good if you're King, and would feel good for anyone. Your art brought another artist to one of their artistic peaks as well.
Let me know what you think of all this in the comments.
