I'd heard somewhere before that Stephen King's The Shining was different from Kubrick's film, but somehow I wasn't really expecting much of a difference. I pretty much just expected Wendy's hair color to be the only thing that would stray from the movie, but luckily that was not even close to the reality. I also honestly expected King's writing to be quite bad as most horror/popular fiction writing is, but I was pleasantly surprised in this arena as well.
Let's face it. No matter how much you love the cult film, a lot of shit in the movie doesn't make any sense. What the hell is Danny's power exactly, and what is the point of Tony besides to say "redrum" creepily for 3 seconds? Who are the random ghosts that pretty much do nothing but stand there looking at the family from time to time? Why is a caretaker even necessary? I mean, I know Kubrick was being artsy and making social commentary and whatever, but it kind of just feels like a jumble of half-baked "concept" that doesn't really come together. I'm not even trying to bash on Kubrick either, as I enjoy a lot of his films, but he really did create something completely different and lacking in comparison to the original story (but at least the opening credits scene was pretty magnificent).
The book focuses much more heavily on the characters and their back stories. There are supernatural aspects to it, yes, but the bulk of what's haunting these characters is mental and touches on their personal guilt and paranoia. There is a much more cohesive understanding of the characters and why they act the way they do, and it's never just a black and white situation of "hey, this guy goes crazy and just wants to kill his family". The ghosts even have a story, and there's a fine line between hallucination and supernatural activity that convinces you enough to buy that perhaps the story is not all about a haunted hotel. You guys, it all freakin' makes sense together, and it's better than I expected.
