Latest News

Commenting Rules: Keep the conversation civil and on topic. If your comment does not add to the conversation, it will be removed. Debate intelligently. Insulting the author, /Film, or other commenters will result in comment removal and possible ban. If you want to point out a typo, correction, suggestion or criticism for /Film, please email us instead. Please use your name or nickname and not your business name (ie Discount Car Parts) as we might confuse and mark it as spam. If you would like to have your own Avatar show up with your comment, sign-up for a free Disqus account. Any Links will go into moderation before being approved. Anything we deem as spam will not be approved.

WTF: Stephen King Is Planning a Sequel to The Shining?!

Posted on Tuesday, November 24th, 2009 by Peter Sciretta

The Shining

Stephen King has been letting a lot of juicy news tidbits slip while making book tour appearances. His latest admission is almost unbelievable. While appearing at Toronto’s Canon Theatre, King dropped the bombshell during his on stage interview with director David Cronenberg that he began working on a sequel to The Shining last summer.

That’s right… a SEQUEL to THE SHINING.

According to the report from Torontoist, King wanted to revisit Danny Torrance, who was last seen on the page (spoilers coming up for the book and moie The Shining) recovering from his ordeal at the Overlook Hotel at a resort in Maine with fellow survivors Wendy Torrance and chef Dick Halloran (who had a much different fate in the Kubrick film adaptation), who has become the head chef.

King breifly laid out his tenative plan for the novel, which would see the emotionally scarred kid, now a 40-year-old orderly at a hospice for the terminally ill in upstate New York. But Danny’s real job is to “visit with patients who are just about to pass on to the other side, and to help them make that journey with the aid of his mysterious powers.” And on the side, Danny bets on the horse races, a trick he learned from his old friend Dick. The proposed title for the book is “Doctor Sleep.”

Of course, King has yet to start writing the book, and right now the whole thing only exists as an idea — an idea that King admits that if he keeps talking about it too much he’s might talk himself out of writing it all together. We can only hope.

Some stories don’t need a next chapter, and are best left alone. I think King’s idea for a “sleep doctor” might be worth exploring, but why must it involve characters from The Shining? Why couldn’t King use the the concept as inspiration to create some new characters? I don’t really think we need to see where Danny Torance has been all these years. I hope that I will never have to watch a big screen adaptation of The Shining 2: Doctor Sleep directed by Brett Ratner, or even Frank Darabont, for that matter.

Discuss: Do you want to read a sequel to The Shining?

via: cinematical

Comments

Joshio

It's his property, c'est la vie. I don't see the point in revisiting the Torrances myself, but whatever.

nindie

Someone just shoot me in the face if this film ever gets made.

Captain_Howdy

The original book is great and all, but let's face it-- The Shining is what it is because of Stanley Kubrick. Nothing can take that away.

Jennifer

Have you read the book? Because as much as I love the film, it's a different thing, like apples and oranges, and the book satisfies just as much. Indeed, the book actually scared me more and goes into way more depth with the characters and ideas, being as, it is, the original and the book. The movie has Kubrick's genius and the visual power of film behind it, but it's nothing without the book. Indeed, I'm not sure if I can recall a Kubrick film that doesn't lean heavily or rely entirely on a literary source for its inspiration, (Full Metal Jacket aside? I don't know if that had another source?) so don't downplay King here. "The Shining", "The Stand", "It" are all great works that will live way past his time. I haven't read his whole output, but I've heard that many of his other books are also great and many that I've read are near-great.

Anyway, if King wants to do it, I trust him. I'm reading his latest "Duma Key" right now, and it's very well-written with interesting characters and an intriguing plot. If King does Torrance again, it won't be the same Danny, it'll be a new character.

And I realize now that I'm replying to several other commenters in your comment. Please forgive that. And perhaps you can forgive my King zealotry while you're at it. I'm just a literature nerd that started reading King a bit later in life and can't believe she ever thought reading King was beneath her.

Captain_Howdy

Yes, I have read the book.
I didn't think I was 'downplaying King'... but we're only discussing this now, here on this site, because of Kubrick's genius film interpretation.

Mel~Lifluent

I love the both the book and the movie, but I agree the book was so much more layered & complex.

Don't get me wrong, Kubrick's vision of King's story was freaking brilliant, but King is kind of a genius in his own right.

It takes a certain level of brilliance for a man to write over fifty different novels, plus numerous short short stories, and be able have nearly all of them carry the common threads of a continuous story line of an entire universe that he's created.

At the same time, each work is a stand alone piece which is well written; Each has its own individual story and tone, while still subtly intertwining pieces of King's magnum opus - the Dark Tower.

This isn't to say that I'm a fangirl, or any such nonsense; there are certainly novels & stories of King's that I'm not at all fond of, such as 'Thinner' or 'Cell', just to name a few...

I'm simply stating that you should give credit where credit is due.

King is a massively talented writer, and should he choose to write a novel that's a sequel to the Shining, I'm all for it. As another person stated, it would be a totally different Danny, & therefor a whole new dynamic.

However, if they're thinking about making a sequel to the movie, I'll pass. The remake was bad enough. Some classics you just don't mess with.

BrendonConnelly

If Darabont decided to do it, then I'd be interested.

Marcus

Yeah do remember that it is his story and characters. Nothing to do with the film.

Zach

"stories", not "storys"

Sorry, that just bothered me. Everyone makes mistakes though.

MrCristal

I don't how can ppl say is a great horror movie.. it didn't scare me at all and i watched when i was like 10!!..

I don't care what u have to say about Kubrik but that movie is BO-RING..

skatalite

Ppl r dumb, u r right!!..

Goobity

What's scary is folks who are over 10 that using terms like 'ppl' 'i' and 'u' as actual words, and think that will convince others that they have anything relevant to say.

Justin

Haha. Ahh. I love these types of people.

Great horror movies require IMAGINATION in order to scare. That is a fact. The real horror lies in the unseen.

And, as Kubrick said, horror also is in the uncanny. Strange events that don't make a lot of sense. The bear suit blowjob, for instance. That shot scares the HELL out of me.

So anyway, if you were bored by The Shining, it's not because the movie is boring, or not scary, it's because you have a lack of imagination. You may need big CGI monsters jumping at the camera and loud audio cues to remind you to be scared. And hey, that's fine! We're not all alike. Some people have vivid imaginations and can scare themselves silly by graceful simplicity, and others are a bit dull and need to have their hands held.

It takes all types. God Bless America.

Krycek7o2

Thank you for this reply, you give me hope that some film-goers still have an imagination.

goobity

Well said, sir. The Shining remains unmatched (in my frazzled mind) as one of the few Horror films that is actually horrifying.

Then again, All Work and No Play Makes Jack A Dull Boy, so what do I know? :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb_Iult5k38

Krycek7o2

Sadly, most of the "modern" horror movies you like won't be as regarded as Kubriks film.

Despite the film and novel being drastically different, each medium provided a psychological scare that even I, who was 10 at the time, was frighten by. Yes, I read and watched each version.

To be blunt, you are "BO-RING.."

starscream9289

I can't believe how many people fell for this troll.

Justin

How did anybody 'fall' for anything? I replied to a comment that was posted.

Chris

Troll? Really? So anyone who doesn't like Kubrick, or his remake of "The Shining" is now a troll... Great. Way to misuse a term.

I HATED Kubrick's version. Not only do I have an imagination, but I use it regularly, to develop new props and acting techniques for a Haunted House. I also hate most new "Horror" movies, too, but for a different reason: They don't even attempt to be scary. For me, Kubrick attempted to make a movie that would scare me(and the rest of the population), which is to be commended, but he fell short.

There's nothing wrong with King wanting to make a sequel to his own books, and I've found that the sequels are usually quite good. As long as I can keep in mind that they are only sequels, I usually am not disappointed.

A side not to everyone who reads Stephen King- Supposedly, any book that has the little "Key hole" logo on the binding of the book is part of the "Dark Tower" mythos, connected in some way. I haven't read ALL of his works, but so far I've found this to be true.

JRM Raul

I love this idea. I really think there's more to this concept than what King is telling us. And I can't wait to read it.

marcomc2

Holy Fuck that sounds terrible. Halfway through the plot synopsis I hoped to find that it was April 1st whilst dashing to the calendar on my screen. It isn't, and I can't believe this story. The Shining is one of my favourite, if not, the number one horror film in my heart, and a sequel by David Cronenberg doesn't sound good to me. Dont get me wrong, I like Cronenberg, but how are you gonna follow Stanley Kubrick's epic directing of The Shining.

RussFischer

It's not a movie. It's a novel. Cronenberg has nothing to do with it. He was moderating the discussion, that's all.

marcomc2

Thanks Russ. Sorry, forgot to abide by my own rule of always R'ingTFA before commenting on things.

KingFan

Holy moly, you must've just read the title and "director David Cronenberg" and then come to your own conclusion.

It's a BOOK, not a MOVIE, sequel, and it would have nothing to do with Cronenberg. It'd be written by King...and I think the concept (as a sequel to The Shining OR an original idea) sounds pretty cool. I'd read it.

marcomc2

Aahh.. Thank God. Thanks for the help KingFan. I was a little buzzed whilst reading/writing. Anyway, just another reminder to follow the cardinal rule of the internet: RTFA.

skatalite

Ehh... I don't think I'd read it, but I'd sure as hell watch it!

Sam

Strange- I'm not as put-off by a sequel to a classic book as I am to a classic movie getting a sequel. Maybe its because its the same author responsible for both, as opposed to a studio just using it for brand recognition. But then again, George Lucas comes to mind...

goobity

You just bashed George Lucas on the internets!
Your check is in the mail.

Hank

I dislike your comment.

niiiiiick

I love the Shining. I first read it in middle school (i know right) and Kubrick's take is, to me at least, a masterpiece. I'd love to see this come into fruition because no sequel has ever altered it's predecessor in my heart.

immature

I'm more excited about 'The Wind Through the Keyhole,' the Dark Tower interquel he says he might do.

Kubrick>God

Nobody can touch Kubrick.

Slatters

What does Kubrick, or his film adaptation, have to do with this article?

AWhitman

I like the Danny Torrance character. I'd buy the book. To know this guy has been through something like that...

Bob

I'm sorry, but King went senile about ten years ago. His early books are masterpieces. Some of his later works are good but a bit bloated with an "I DON'T NEED AN EDITOR. I AM STEVEN-F'ING-KING!" attitude. But his latest books are all full of lame warmed-over half-ideas stolen from zombie movies and old twilight zone episodes. They sell because he's Stephen King, not because they're any good.

Slatters

I'd agree with you had I read this comment right after I finished "Cell", but I think "Under the Dome" is definitely a return to form. I don't think all of his earlier work are "masterpieces", there is some terrible writing from his earlier career and a lot of his stuff suffers from wandering structure.

I think his injury had a huge effect on him (its a theme that seems to keep popping up in his work over and over... and over) or at least more-so then people might be lead to believe. As well as quitting drugs, he's admitted that it had a pretty significant impact on his creativity.

Senile? I don't think so. Sober and successful? Definitely. He's missing the hunger, but like I said, I really enjoyed "Under the Dome".

Federico

...Nah, he's bashed Stephanie Meyer.

...He's still got good noggin.

J-Man

Okay. We all know The Shining is one of close to 50 Stephen King novels to be adapted to film or TV, but does that really mean this news needs to be on /film?

Stephen King writes sequels to a lot of his novels. If I want to know about his writing activities I'll read a web site about horror books, not about film.

Roland21

STFU

jasonb26

i'll hold off my negative backlash till i hear more.

blarp

When i scanned through the first paragraph because I was so dumbfounded and saw david cronenburg's name in there I thought for a moment that I was being told it was a movie and it was going to be directed by Cronenburg. I nearly wet myself out of excitement. But instead I was disappointed that King was going to waste his time on this.

sauce_1

I'm not surprised. King loves the little Universe(s) he's created over the years. I'd go as far as to say his Dark Tower series is there because he wanted all of his worlds to be tied together in someway.
So coming back to one of his most memorable characters after all these years? Shrug, it's his work, takes nothing away from the original, I've got no issues with it really.

President Plissken

I've read all King's books and all his short stories. Some are good, some are bad. Recently he has been rehashing a lot of his own earlier material. The book and movie are different but have the same core issues and of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If we all thought the same imagine how boring that would be. In my opinion Stevie should rename the characters and just leave the Shining alone. Lots of his characters have "powers" so it could still work. I'm 36 and the film scared the shit out of me as a kid. the two little girls...."come play with us Danny"....

max ketchum

almost got angry with your "we can only hope" line, but last paragraph made up for it. It could go either way and I think he should do it.

Weyland_Yutani

I wonder what people said when Thomas Harris decided to revisit characters from his book, Red Dragon?

Regardless, who cares if a character has the same name in something revisited 30 years later? It can hardly diminish the original story when nearly every single thing will have to be created from scratch for another episode from Danny's life. You can't even really call it a sequel in my opinion, so why worry? The man is going to sell a shit-ton of books. That's certain.

righteousplaid

Exactly, its not as if Danny is returning to a rebuilt hotel at the site of the Overlook for another dose of haunted fun, the premise sounds completely different.

Swarley

This just reminds me of Black House, the sequel to The Talisman, which was a completely different story with just the same character, older, using his talents in a different situation. And since that worked for King (though I don't think anyone would argue that The Talisman would have been fine without the sequel) I think this will definitely be worth it too.

Money_Talks

As a long time constant reader, I would welcome a catch up with the kid with the shine in book form. On the big screen? Nope. There is only one adaptation worth watching of the book and let's face it, Kubrick changed it to suit the screen and it worked. Remember Black House? The sequel to The Talisman? an extraordinary read and fantastic book in it's own right. Under The Dome has proved, without shadow of a doubt, that the King hasn't left the building. If he writes it, I'll read it.

Sarah James

bad bad...rewalli bad idea...think again...

Sarah
http://www.isopurewater.com/

Selunesmom

If it's done as well as Black House (sequel to The Talisman), I'm all for it. Granted, I'd be thrilled with a King written sequel to Firestarter as well.

/Film

Blogging the Reel World

WTF: Stephen King Is Planning a Sequel to The Shining?!

Related Posts

Tags

/Film