Totally agreed. That's my entire point.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks Right. But "theories" propagate like lice. Then people start "scratching that itch" and join the Torrance family in their madness. Your takes are always grounded and justified in and by the text. It's appreciated. Edit: it's also entertaining af. So entertaining! Thanks man.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks Hello! Is it possible to DM you?

He really said "quietly insane" and "together"? I realize he did not want to spoil his movie, but that is not a conventional description either. A conventional description would have been "A story about a family isolated from the world with insanity creeping in."

@@wrathofatlantis2316 I believe he worded it like that, but I can't find the interview or source to support my recollection. It stuck with me when I read it, for whatever that's worth.

My overall point is that you probably shouldn't....

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks Yeah I got that right off the bat, but I'm still always curious what people come up with. Doesn't mean it all sways me.

Come and play with us, Andy... (or not, maybe not?)

Just do what the rich people in Barry Lyndon does, the opposite of the Law of Jante, so instead of living by "Don't think YOU'RE better than others", rather go by "I'M not gonna be worse than others."

The best thing about Kubrick is that EVERY theory is right. He thought about em all! "The truth of a thing is the feel of it, and not the think of it." - Stanley Kubrick

Many straw men died to make this video.

Well, this is why people bet on things, and go further than that. The point of any 2nd (or 3rd) theory is, presumably, to _make more and better sense than the 1st theory did._ People seem to forget this quite often, however.

Joe GIRARD

Ahahaha.

@@owennelson7081EYE SCREAM

Then by the time Dick Hallorann (Billy Preston) shows up right at the end it's more or less already all over?

That's also what's implied by Doctor Sleep, essentially, especially with Danny's presence "waking up" the hotel, along with the fact that he and Abra were actually related in the novel, indicating it's passed through families.

It's not the first time I've heard that.

ahahaha. How do you know Wendy didn't write the book, after she escaped?

Nonsense...I don't have a single video rated below 94% last I looked. Those are very good ratings.

It's only been up a few months...by my general standards, it's doing incredibly well. It's basically everything else on this channel that has no views.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks I don’t think that’ll be the case much longer. Keep up the good work dude!

@@flynn6854 As I've discovered, KZfaq traffic is much like music sales in the 1980s...just because people loved the single doesn't mean they go out and buy the album. They just buy the single and then move to the next single by someone else. This platform wants people to just churn out content on the same topic over and over, and I'm just not doing that. My real job is boring enough without my hobby being boring, too. But glad you enjoyed it.

Definitely, and Doctor Sleep only made that more obvious.

Jack T. and Mandy C. in EWS have a similar problem.

Beat me to this exact sentiment.

I'd agree, but for the fact that the hotel manager specifically says there's no alcohol on site, so he wouldn't have had the chance in the intervening month.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks "Think more fourth dimensionally." Jack tells Wendy that he has stopped drinking ....June Jack takes a beer on July 4th from best bud, Enabler. Does not tell Wendy of the sobriety restart.

Maybe, but I'm never willing to invent events not seen or described to explain discrepancies. Something tangible has to suggest it.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks Let's suppose that Jack's encounter with Lloyd happens "ONE MONTH LATER" plus, say, another WEEK -- so, maybe 5 weeks after CLOSING DAY. That would be a total of 6 months pus one week since Jack had had a drink, when he told Wendy he'd never touch another drop. Wendy presumably believes that Jack hadn't had a drop to drink for 5 months at the time she told the Doctor about the injury Danny suffered. But if Jack actually HAD snuck a drink during that 5-month period -- say, about 5 weeks into it, i.e. about 3 months and 3 weeks before he got the job as the Caretaker -- then Wendy would've been LIED TO by Jack, who had actually snuck at least one drink after having vowed NOT to, and Jack would've been telling Lloyd the truth about it being 5 miserable months rather than around 6 months plus a week or so (as Wendy thought). Also, keep in mind that we don't know how much time passes between THE INTERVIEW (and Danny's 'episode' in Denver) and CLOSING DAY. We know that CLOSING DAY is on October 30th -- the hotel's "season" being from May 15th until then -- meaning that the first day the Torrance family is alone there is Halloween. THE INTERVIEW could have been conducted a month or two before CLOSING DAY, for all we know. I'd presume that they would've had to pack up all their belongings, storing them into some Storage facility before the end of October, since they didn't bring all their furniture & books & whatnot up to the Overlook. If Jack was hired by Ullman -- after "the Denver people" recommended him -- say, in mid-September, that would mean that they had some 6 weeks to get ready for their CLOSING DAY tour of the hotel (etc.), with, say, another 6 weeks until Jack's encounter with Lloyd after that CLOSING DAY tour. Counting back "5 miserable months" from then (say, mid-December) would mean Jack secretly drank booze in mid-July or thereabouts. Hell, maybe he secretly tied one on on the 4th of July (some 57 years after the 1921 July 4th Ball (the PLAYGIRL magazine dating from 1978), and he chatted with Lloyd roughly 1 week into December -- say, ONE MONTH LATER + one week, i.e. from 31 October until the 4th or 5th of December. Jack could easily have gotten drunk in July -- two to three months before THE INTERVIEW -- all while keeping Wendy ignorant of it. Jack lies to Wendy more than once in the film, so it's not as if it's out-of-character for him to have lied to her about his drinking after vowing not to drink. It would be nice if there was a shot during the "INTERVIEW" sequence showing a Calendar with a specific MONTH depicted -- with all the past days having an 'X' drawn through their boxes -- to clue us in as to how much time passes between THE INTERVIEW and CLOSING DAY (30 October), but barring some sharp-eyed person noticing such a detail -- either at the Overlook's LOBBY or Ullman's office, or at their Denver apartment -- we just can't know how much time elapsed between those scenes.

@@patricktilton5377JESUS my brain hurts now.​

Thanks...I can never tell what will take off. The views on these videos are incredibly variable.

I included examples of other films both by Kubrick and others to illustrate this point, but it's conspicuous how dissenters don't bother to address those examples and just ask, with heaps of incredulity, if I really think this or that could be a mistake, yet seem perfectly okay with assuming the vanishing barrels in The Two Towers was a mistake, even though it's just as big an error. It's a weird form of worship, something I just don't relate to at all.

I compensate with wheelbarrows full of sarcasm.

Little details in movies might mean...something.

I very much enjoyed King's book and Kubrick's film, but that mini-series...my biggest beef with it is that the directing is terrible. It's utterly lacking in subtlety-Horace Derwent exploding into a shower of sand for no reason, CGI fire hoses with teeth, doors moving and lights flickering every single time the characters leave the room...honestly, Kubrick's directing feels more like the novel's approach to scares even when the actual events are different.

I should look that video up, if it's still here. I've read lots of books and the old CSICOP journals about UFOs, and I'd probably find it entertaining. My personal favorite piece of nonsense about UFO footage, which goes on to this day, is the constant attribution of movement to the blurry object at the end of a long zoom rather than that of the camera taking the footage. Do these people look through telescopes and wonder why the moon is bouncing around in the sky, too?

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks Exactly! My personal favorite of that Ancient Aliens debunked video is one of geographic simplicity. They highlighted a Stone Age society and mentioned this giant wall with perfectly carved boulders of such precision and size. Obviously this Stone Age settlement did not have the tools to make such precise cuts in the rocks…… cue the Aliens meme guy. The real answer was that although the settlement didn’t have the tools to make the wall, a Bronze Age settlement lie just over the hill a few kilometers away- and they sure did, and with the archaeological evidence of stones in both sites, it’s easy to put the pieces together. I’ll try to find a link for you. It’s a classic. Found it: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oJ-nYMxm1MDVkYU.htmlsi=AKpMGqUmx5Pvul8v

Thanks...my wife laughed at that bit, too.

Obviously a lady of taste. I look forward to watching you guys' back catalogue!

Basically I added some blur and some grain, desaturated it a bit and boosted the contrast. For tracking, I always make sure the points are on the TV frame and not the image on the TV, but yeah, drifting is almost inevitable, so I usually have to add some keyframes in the motion section to compensate.

Thanks...if only the sound wasn't so shitty. That will annoy me to my grave.

@@Corn_Pone_Flicks I assumed that was a subliminal message about you confessing to abducting Jimmy Hoffa. I'm making a 7-hour video on KZfaq about it right now ... (I didn't notice anything awry about the sound quality)