I really enjoyed this analysis, but of course I NEVER get tired of The Shining analysis videos 😏 (for my fine arts requirement at Xavier Univ in 2002? I took "The Horror Film." As political science major, apparently XU thought that one artsy farsty class would prevent me from becoming a clipboard carrying robot (it didn't. As a legislative aide, that's precisely what I became 🤣.) Anyway, disappointingly, the course never gave the Shining so much as a courtesy mention. I'd be willing to bet that wouldn't be the case if I took that class today.) I wish Kubrick was around to see that thanks to the internet- and yourself- that his amazing work and attention to detail in The Shining is finally getting the attention and appreciation it was denied for decades. Thank you for your work. I know it's easier to stage a scene of being kind to a homeless person while a piano plays in the background, or to film yourself eating an entire buffalo or something, and rack up millions of views and alot of money. Channels like yours are what I come to YT looking for. I'm normally not so sentimental, but thinking about how unappreciated much of Kubrick's work was- I know it's not much, but I just wanted to tell you I think the work you do is amazing and that your content stands alone in this "genre," for lack of a better term. My one course in cinema hardly makes me an expert 🤣, but I do know hard work and dedication to doing something right when I see it, and I just want to say thank you, because I'm guessing if you were paid by the hour, you'd probably be better off in a sweatshop in Bangladesh 😏. Seriously though- thank you for all you do. I'm sure it comes at a considerable sacrifice.

@@poutinedream5066 Thanks, that's much appreciated. Fortunately, there isn't a great deal of sacrifice on my part. I put about the same amount of hours in as anyone with a day job does, and I get paid more than any day job ever paid me ... plus, I choose my work hours and really enjoy the work. And no boss to answer to !!! :)

Kubrick pointing to the lighting differences in the moon landing films. We should be able to see a mile in any direction UN those moon films, yet we can only see maybe a 100 yards. Not to mention, it would be 10-20x brighter on the moon during the day due to lack of atmosphere.

watt about numerollogis in shining. i mean ´you will ´learn büy the #$. : ? eg blogspöttce johnny 42.53 ^??^ 12x2 doors windows ^ ^ aka pöd bäy döörs -:-

I'm sick. It's not even his best film.

@@thursoberwick1948 ....ok thanks! I'll alert the Kubrick family

@@melsteffano6189 2001 is my fave of his, but ... so many masterpieces.

@@thursoberwick1948 why are you here?

@@pinehawk9600Ask a philosopher! Or because I watch some of his other videos, and thus it comes up on my recommendations.

Was about to write a similar comment. Been watching his videos(a lot of the Shining ones) since 2013 and it amazes me that I’m still learning and seeing new things in 2022 from this channel.

I started watching him in 2009 when I was 14 and he was doing video nasties analysis. It was so interesting and got me thinking critically about movies.

The genius of Rob and Kubrick are limitless

2011 for me!

no one cares.

More than that, Kubrick had to figure out how to mount the lenses on his camera. They were not made for movie cameras, they were made for satellites etc, so not only was using the lenses innovative, he had to innovate further to use them on his film.

@@davidlean1060 yes

@@davidlean1060 Stanley was a Wonderful perfectionist. No wonder his photography in his movies was so unforgettable. Did you hear that story when he was working on one of his early films ....He set up a complex dolly shot. With a specific lens. Then he gave the task to an assistant. But the assistant started to change the setup to cut corners. He put the dolly track at a greater distance & tried to use a different lens simply because it would save time & make things easier for him...But with Stanley's specialist knowledge he knew it would make a CHANGE to the shot that would make it inferior to what he originally wanted. And Stanley said - 'Do the set up like it was with the lens I wanted or leave the set please.' ....Stanley wasn't going to have corner cutters messing up his brilliant shots.

@@walterevans2118 There's a youtube channel called stanleyandus and it features short annecdotes like that from crew, a few actors and so on. I think it was his editor who said to a newbie on set (who argued with Kubrick over how many frames of silence there were between the rings of a telephone in the scene they were screening, of all things!) that you should never argue with Kubrick, because he only argued when he knew he was right. No one could do what he did, but he seemed to know everyone else's job as well, or better, than they did!

Yeah didn't know about the Bond set! If anyone could fake the moon landing, it was him!

I assume the external shoots in the maze were filmed in the UK . It could just be British weather

I noticed in Rosemary's Baby, 1968, she has a dream sequence which starts with her sitting on a boat with the sun shining on the water and switches to a gray sky and gray water as the dream gets more strange. Everyone would definitely notice the change and wonder why the director did that. Maybe just to make you wonder, "What's happening?"

@@johngriffiths118 The maze was shot at the MGM lot in England. As far as I know that’s the only exterior shot not filmed in Oregon.

@@johngriffiths118 Elstree Studios in Hertfordshire, England 🤗🌥

Meh. Maybe they were in the maze for 45 minutes before we see the second shot. Skies and shadows change.

BAAAAA

Jack goes outside to chase Danny ... and flips on all the lights!

He acts like we wouldn't sit through anything, even if we think maybe those lights don't make much difference except in the composition of the shot as a piece of art.

Rob's process is very well executed, and you can really see the amount of experience he has in film analysis when watching his videos.

@@xocomaox I have 30+ credits in film. Its my life. Robs content consistently re-inspires my eye. Robs intellectual, technical and emotional attention to details makes me look deeper in my work and revisit films in a new way

It's great that a decent portion of you folks feel that way. I have my haters too :)

@@collativelearning no you don't

@@collativelearning who would hate these videos? 😑

He mastered lighting for practical reasons is what is great about it. He probably treated it as a subtle nuisance that mastering would help him avoid bothering with.

Films are being shot digitally so much nowadays that I feel like the talent of properly lighting sets has become somewhat of a lost art. Errors are fixed in post and it just rings out as lazy IMO. I think to someone like David Cronenberg... If you watch his work like Videodrome, The Fly, Dead Ringers etc, those films are shot very traditionally. His films are loaded with great scares and effects but by doing it the way he does, it just feels more realistic. Kubrick did the same but was more cerebral with his lighting choices.

Houses without ceiling lights? Every house I ever saw had a ceiling light in the middle of every room, usually with a square bowl type glass covering below the light bulbs. And a light switch right inside the door. Except for the bathrooms, which had the light over the sink.

@@watermelonlalala Modern houses, absolutely. I live in an old single level ranch house, its almost entirely lit by lamps. The kitchen has the overhead though. Even my room has 2 lamps. I can say that i do think most houses i walk in nowadays have both though. Especially anything newer. My friend is a successful carpenter and has very big jobs. I actually asked him about this tonight and he was telling me about a recent job building an $8mil house and its all LED lights on the ceiling and walls and its obviously its very bright. But he said over his 20yrs of experience, anytime he's done a complete renovation of a house built in the 50s-70s(Where i live is loaded with California Style Ranches and Old Fashioned Ranches etc that were built for soldiers coming home from the Korean and Vietnam War, he said its not uncommon to see mostly lamps albeit every kitchen has the overhead and bathrooms usually have them too or have it from the mirrors. I'm not disagreeing with you but I do think there's some exceptions.

@@mk-ultramags1107 OK. To tell you the truth, I am not much of one to notice decor or light fixtures.

I have a new house here in Florida and it has both ceiling lights/fans and wall switches wired to a couple outlets in each room.

Those paintings also famously inspired the scene in "The Exorcist" when Father Lankester Merrin arrives at the McNeil house.

Kubricks odyssey by Jay Weidner, now THATS a kick in the teeth!

Ah, I don't go in for calculus interpretations of that kind generally. The girls on the gameshow Countdown can reach a target number with random numbers nearly every time.

@@collativelearning Agreed, but given Kubrick's attention to detail, you wouldn't put it past him. I bet there are exactly the same number of stones on top of his grave as hairs in his left eyebrow or something.

@@collativelearning how do you know it's calculus and not kabalistic gematria. Ironically many would dismiss your stuff under the same logic that it's just random stuff being over thought.

@@tonywords6713 Because I seek evidence first and build my interpretations on that, instead of picking a theory out of a hat and then trying to force the evidence to fit. I've seen no evidence of kabalistic gematria so have no reason to assume it's there. Others have tried to dismiss my stuff as being random and over-thought, as you say, but they've failed because they lack plausible explanations for all the details I point out .. and several of my interpretations have been later strongly supported by further production info or statements by the film makers.

Yeah, ironically, his answer is true.

12 years. That's dedication. thanks :)

I spent so much time looking at the objects and colors around the characters' heads in The Shining - but I never noticed the lamps.

Good one :)

@@collativelearning Dont cameras use light to capture pictures with flashes? It could add some light symbolism to the ending photos like that wallet metaphor too. That and they get developed away from light too and light factors into the quality of a picture like film

@@couchpotato3197 I like where youre going with that

Also, when he meets Lloyd again, he has 2 twenties and 2 tens. The money is mirrored as well. Going with the mirror themes

@@danscheckler5357 perfect. I darn well never thought of that....

pass the joint

Jack's noggin has a bleeding injury ... and so does the Great Party 'ghost'

My secret ;)

He has no life

@@vladislavno 😄

@@vladislavno I’d say a life analyzing art is a much more fulfilling life than one putting others down for their hobbies

@@Musicalto difference is my hobby takes 15 minutes a week. His takes 15 hours.

aside: didn't he state that no other benches are seen inside after the one just inside the entrance?

Cause the maze was a hallucination and never existed..you can see it obviously when the hotel was shown from Heli view or far distanced. There was no maze Infront of the hotel

Funny you bring up Orlock and Overlook, because I have thought for awhile that Overlook might be a reference to Morlock in the original Time Machine, where these monstrous humans live underground and prey on the normal humans who live above them. The Morlock Hotel. And Morlock is thought to be a reference to Moloch, the Canaanite god of child sacrifice.

@@watermelonlalala I think you may be on to something here!

Here's where I find out all my life I had too few lamps in my room ;)

and women tend to have too many pillows.

Just looked up that painting--terrifying!

“ Kubrick and assassination of Kennedy …on the Moon “

There is no hole for a penis in that bear mask, so he must be doing something else.. What do bears like? Honey! What is the color of honey? Gold! What could be a disgusting term for what he is doing? "Deuteronomy 6:3 Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as the Lord God of thy fathers hath promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey" The grail is under that bed!

I've seen hundreds of 70s movies and not got that impression. The film stocks got faster in the late 60s onward so filmmakers could use lighter equipment and less heavy lighting.

Really 😳 I saw that movie 1 time and it's very creepy and disturbing.No wonder if Kubrick did like it he made his scary movie even better.

You should tell Rob about it and see what he thinks.

Would make sense for Wendy 'the horror junkie' to get the most stereotypical horror scenario

@@cannibalbunnygirl exactly

Reality never changes, so what you said doesn't make sense.

@@Marco-717 Except it can. Colour blindness, for instance. Or rather, perception of reality, which amount to the same thing.

@@arturobandini4078 someone who is color blind is the same as someone who is schizophrenic? Lol so you don't believe in absolutes, like gravity, or reality? You're full of crap.

I have a personal take on that in my notes for the upcoming parts of this vid.

I assumed it was a personal hell scenario so I agree.

It's unpredictable. At that moment in the movie the audience had begun to expect well lit horror so Kubrick defies our expectations. I've read somewhere that the skeletons are real.

I have a strong suspicion he was involved in the conceptualization of Moonraker, which was the next Bond film after SWLM. MR is full of Kubrickian concepts and references to his movies. Very underrated.