What the heck kind of ending shot was this?

I've watched the film several times and known that there's those black cards all along, but I never really kept score of them, so I was just curious about how many there are. So given current circumstances I sat down recently and kept score of them, that's the basic idea. So now I know and I'd like to talk about them a bit.

To your real point (why?), the "days" do indicate a two-day passage of time, where things and scenes change a bit. The audience takes this for granted, the cards are banalities that just pass by, marking time, but still giving useful information on timing. Going into the third act, things speed up. Hallorann hops a plane in real nigga hours and is en route by 8am.

Timing is also important, something I don't recall Ager took up very much. One thing that really stuck out to me this past screening was the repeated mention of the "five months" interval. And inconsistently, which goes with the well-developed schizo/autistic theory of the film up to this point.

The shinning is real

Imagine the cops' reaction when they recovered the body

ask the people that took the initial picture

The July ball picture was a real picture that Jack Nicholson's face was airbrushed into. The posture of the man he replaced is already a part of the original photograph. Kubrick said he chose that particular photo because the faces of everyone in the crowd were quintessentially 1920s, and obviously the composition of the photo is suitable for story's purposes, your eye is drawn to the man in front who has a similar build to Nicholson.

Another autistic theory disproven through 30 seconds of research

Attached: tumblr_mc3m2jbroF1r858p5o2_1280.jpg (1058x1499, 247.85K)

Post the one with Robert

lmao why baphomet making finger guns hahaha
"Ooo I'm gonna shoot you pew pew" hahahahaha

You just know evil shit happened there

Attached: BAPHOMET-As-Above-So-Below-V004-600x600.jpg (600x600, 72.51K)

>You can't come to your own conclusions about a film, you have to listen to what the director said he wanted, even if he speaks very vaguely and very rarely about what his films mean, and what certain things represent

It could go one of two ways. Either you come into a long straight where you can see the body and mentally prepare a bit, or you round a corner and whoops there he is.

I especially like to imagine Ullman. Does he stay and try to do his job, or just fuck off from the whole business? Who replaces him? Who was his predecessor? Does it matter? But it's fun to headcanon, at any rate. I further like to imagine an improved management which involves GM check-ins with the caretaker over the course of a winter.

>Reminder to Yas Forums that no optical media release has EVER used the CORRECT chapter stops, which must proceed EXACTLY as follows:
i don't understand. why must they go exactly in that order, why are they presented in other orders, and what other orders are they presented in?

When "your own conclusions about a film" amount to autistic pedanticism about innocuous and unintended continuity errors and things of that sort, or how some obscure element of the art design is the linchpin of the entire thematic structure of the film, or making a mountain out of some perceived random confluence ("This shadow looks like a thumb for exactly two frames" etc.) then you should be corrected

So many stupid Rob Ager types are totally illiterate when it comes to how to properly interpret dramatic storytelling and they reduce Kubrick to a kind of gag man who made the filmic equivalent of I Spy books. It's really quite pathetic.

Niggers. That is all.

While Rob Ager and most of his followers are autistic as fuck, the way that they perceive the film is the way that they perceive the film. Meaning within a film is subjective. I think that way of looking at movies is more interesting than only listening to how the director intended things to be

Didn't kubrick, maybe it was another director, say that a lot of the theories that have been made were largely unintentional?

a nigger?

Attached: N.jpg (640x480, 15.35K)

This movie is demonic. Why do jews always create visual filth.

...

Is Agerthe same guy who tries to suggest there was any question about "whether the ghosts were real" when Kubrick unambiguously said in an interview that the ghosts were real?

Some people just really like to hear themselves talk.

But they 100% weren't ghosts. They were just actors pretending to be ghosts in a movie

Kubrick was one of the good ones

Attached: 1449381232799.jpg (500x500, 55.23K)

This. How do you know for sure if a Jew is good? He's hated so much by the other Jews, that they kill him

user are you still in this thread? i'm genuinely curious to hear your answers to my questions: