Doctor Sleep 3 hour Director's Cut heading to Blu-ray

Sure, I'd be up for that. I really like how the movie retained the feel of the novel, and how it was mostly faithful to it. The climax was quite different from that of the book, but I liked what they did with it, and hey, it was made a sequel to match with Kubrick's film anyway.

It's such a shame it didn't do well at the box office.

Sure, that was the problem with Doctor Sleep, it was too short.

They should pay some YouTuber to Deep Fake the original cast into it while they're at it.

0.0

Jeez relax dude. I'm having trouble understanding why you stating your opinion is valid and me stating mine is such and egregious attack on you.. but I guess fuck me right in the god damn face for ever having the indecency to do so.

I didn't especially like seeing Henry Thomas' face either, but trying I think trying to avoid the Kubrick iconography altogether would be a mistake too.

If they chop off the last half hour and do it to the book I'd be happy. The "please The Shining fans" ending ruined a very good film for me.

I'd say flippant sarcasm is more belittling, but if it wasn't meant that way then it's also all good.

Anyway, I'm pretty surprised by the response on this thread where people are speaking as highly of the book. Generally, I haven't seen that response to the book to be how most felt.

I liked the movie, I thought that Flanagan maybe dipped into the Kubrick well one or two too many times (not even so much the Henry Thomas McGregor conversation which I think I'd have liked better with his face obscured, but more that quick flash of him on the stairs doing his Jack Nicholson face imitation). But I think it would have been completely hollow and anticlimactic to build up to an empty camp ground and then (from my understanding) still have to cast an actor to play Jack Torrance.

I haven't read the book.. yet. But I think what I liked best about the movie was how he reconciled the Kubrick with the King. I think he did it almost perfectly. It told it's own story but then also set sequences within the Kubrick film, hearkened back to the tone of that film, but also was able to depict its narrative with more compassion and emotion than a Kubrick movie would. I thought it bridged that gap really well.

I also thought he tempered the worst of Stephen King. Some of the shit that I've heard is in that book, and some that has survived in the movie doesn't jive with a serious tone. Even just hearing the name of the bad guy cult started to get pretty silly... hearing the individuals names get very silly. My understanding is that those names are constantly repeated through the book. Also that sort of astral projection scene was really well visualized, and could have gone so wrong so easily. I was reminded of some shitty King movies, especially in the part where Rose is challenging the little girl inside her mind it was reminiscent of those awful scenes in Dreamcatcher.

I'll probably check out the book soon, but it was hard to imagine a movie working as either a sequel to the film or as a sequel to the book, and the fact that he honored both guy's creations and made it his own film was impressive to me. I thought it was about as good as it could have been.