What was the point of this?

What was the point of this?

Attached: images-117.jpg (739x415, 21K)

In Stephen King's version: gay furry porn
In Kubrick's version: to show sexual perversion amongst the evils of the hotel

In Stephen King's version: to show sexual perversion amongst the evils of the hotel
In Kubrick's version: gay furry porn

The bear is supposed to symbolically represent Danny, he was being molested by Jack.

In Stephen King's version: gay furry porn
In Kubrick's version: gay furry porn

Attached: ammit.png (1200x1333, 263K)

Ejaculation.

In the book the man who restored the hotel was a rich pervert named Durwent who used to fuck a guy who dressed in animal costumes.

In the movie bears represent victims. Kubrick is hinting that Danny was sexually abused by Jack. You can also see in the lobby a black bear laying in the same spot Halloran dies after jack axes him, complete with red (bloody) clothes.

Attached: 2019-06-01-06-57-49.jpg (1000x750, 159K)

Kubrick was equeting homosexuality with horror

It wasn't just that Durwent was fucking him, he got off on humiliating a guy who was completely enamored with him. He liked toying with him like the hotel does to its caretakers.

bravo kubrick

The film is garbage compared to the book. All the details are missing, there's no nuanced slide into insanity. It's just "Jack Nicholson kill family because reasons lmao". One film that is truly overrated.

If the film was made during the early to mid '90s when there seemed to be a focus on plot, and less ambiguity in the name of artistic expression, it would have likely been on the same level as something like silence of the lambs, or that one where Sharon Stones crosses her legs.

Imagine being this much of a pleb

Why the bear got a predator mouth tho

Let' see a proper rebuttal from you, instead of that lazy copy-paste bullshit.

No, I shan't

Lol okay I think someone is reading a little too much into that.

Wow you’re new.

blow it out your ass

Attached: 7CFF543D-8D8F-47E9-A78B-334C94934454.jpg (780x492, 61K)

Evil is a kinky thing.

It's nice to watch a Kubrick film and think that every little thing is deliberate. It's not too much to think really

The film is very detailed, and the slide into insanity is so nuanced it's almost unnoticeable on first watch. We never know when Jack starts writing, nor when he stops, and we know is that he's typed "All work..." the whole time. The title cards that pop up also become increasingly vague as the film goes on from the straightforward "closing day" to shit like "Wednesday" by the end.
Despite his films having memorable dialogue Kubrick, especially since 2001, made his films as visual as possible. The tiniest of objects may very well have been strategically placed - he didn't mess around with details.
>less ambiguity in the name of artistic expression
The ambiguity of the film is where the horror lies. At around the half way point it is impossible to tell what is real or what is in one of the characters heads anymore. Or if someone is lying or telling the truth.
I'd give it another watch and pick up on the details of what you see not what you hear.

I doubt he is. I don't think that bear toy prop is used twice and it seems far too coincidental to the plot to be a happy accident.

Nah, try again.

the bear represents soviet union/russia and the man represents england

Attached: anglichanka.jpg (180x240, 6K)

The movie is better than the book. Fire hose snakes and hedge animals=gay.

I hate plotfags so fucking much