Read King's book; a non-pretentious review; I will not critique Kubrick....

Rating: 9/10 (28 September 2006)

Having read King's book right after I saw the film, (at a still impressionable age, twenty years ago) I will not presume to critique Kubrick (the man obviously knew what he was doing). Even "Eyes Wide Shut", while being a bit too deliberately abstruse, was an interesting film, and as I am a writer and not a film student, I will defer to Kubrick's camera angles and color schemes.
That aside, this film DOES hold up. It is not dated. I disagree with a previous review critiquing camera angles and colors. The film creates a sense of alienation and solitude, and Jack Nicholson (character Jack Torrance) is feeling all of these things as he descends back into alcoholism, psychosis and homicidal rage.
I must make a few comments about the book; Anyone interested in this story MUST read Stephen King's book. I will grant you, his more recent novels are too over the top; this one, however, was a stand-out.
Everyone probably knows the story at this point, but I cannot emphasize enough how reading the book will enhance your impressions of this film. Yes, many details of the book were left out in the film (But the remake, with Rebecca De Mornay, kept the details, and it doesn't translate well to the screen).
Therein is Kubrick's genius. What translates to the screen?... hedge animals?.... a homicidal father?... a child prone to trances?; these are difficult subjects, and while much of the logic (included in King's novel) is omitted in this film, one may piece together Jack's decomposition through the visuals.
All in all, if anyone has not read the novel, they should. It is a bit different, but the psychodrama is the same and this film has done an accurate job of depicting these issues visually. 9/10.