Jack Did Strangle Danny; Here's the Proof

As it is always a work in process, I have noticed another implication about Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Now, I watch this film kind of often now; and believe I have an idea for a moment that occurs in the film.

Do you remember when Jack was throwing the tennis ball at the wall and down the hall? From that, we can certainly imply that it is Jack's ball and it belongs to no one else, right?

Now, later in the flick when Danny is playing with his toys on the rugs; the tennis ball comes rolling toward him and Danny gets up and walks down the hall to room 237, which is open.

Now, a few minutes later we find Jack screaming and Wendy finds that Danny has been strangled (not dead, though) and his sweater torn. She then accuses Jack of doing it following his dream of killing her and their son. Now, he goes and talks to Lloyd the bartender and Wendy shows up to tell him a woman in the hotel did it.

Even when he sees the woman in the room, he comes back and tells Wendy that Danny must've done it to himself.

Now, here's where my idea kicks in.

The marks on Danny's neck and his ripped sweater would be too much for a boy his age to do. He simply couldn't, you see? So, with that; Danny is not responsible for self-harm.

Secondly, the notion of ghosts being real are deliberately played down to being all the nature of cabin fever, right? I think even though Jack is going crazy, he is still sane enough to realise the ghosts aren't real and that's why he tells Wendy there was no woman in room 237 even though he saw one. We never see her again, because she wasn't real and Jack knew it.

Going back to the tennis ball, I believe that Jack was waiting in room 237 for Danny, and so he threw the ball toward him to get his attention and once in the room, he tried to strangle him. Waking up from a 'trance' he realised what he did, told Danny to tell Wendy it was a woman, and he went back to the Colorado Lounge to pretty he was asleep.

Just a very rough idea in process, but it seems plausible, right?

Answered Questions of 'The Shining'

For years, this has stumped so many people. However, on only my second-viewing; I feel confident that I have the meanings to the endless questions people have about this classic 1980 psychological horror film: The Shining.

Jack Torrance was Charles Grady.

In the beginning of the film when Jack is being interviewed for his job at The Overlook Hotel; Mr. Ullman tells him a grim and gruesome story about Charles Grady, a man who murdered his two daughters of ages eight and ten, as well as his wife and then he killed himself. Later in the film, however, when Jack talks to the ghost who is supposedly the man who killed them is now named Delbert. This has confused people for ages, but here's what I think:

Delbert and Charles Grady are not the same person; rather, they're brothers. I believe that Jack was Charles Grady in the past, and this would explain the final shot of the film being Jack in the 1921 photograph at The Gold Room. He was reincarnated from Charles Grady to recommit the same murders again. Delbert Grady would be Charles' brother. This explains why he is so kind to Jack and why he unlocks the freezer for him to go re-commit the crime. This takes care of what is often thought to be a gaping plot hole. This also shows that the final shot has a deeper meaning than anticipated. Remember just a month after they moved into the hotel that Jack tells Wendy: "I feel like I've been here before. That I knew what was going to be around every corner." Well, he has. Albeit in another lifetime.

Another plot "hole" it could explain is that when in the beginning Mr. Ullman gives the daughters ages as eight and ten, which would be impossible for twins to be two years apart. This would mean that Charles Grady (Jack) murdered his two daughters of different ages. While Delbert (His brother) describes his two daughters as 'running around somewhere'. They are running around trying to prevent Danny from the same ultimate fate. They could have shown themselves in a dead state to scare Danny into knowing what may happen to him.

I honestly feel this makes the best sense of any theory relating to The Shining, and that it was Stanley Kubrick's original intention.

Everyone Hates the Second Half of 'Full Metal Jacket' (But it's Actually Superior to the First)

Now, we've all at one point or another watched one of Stanley Kubrick's best films he ever made in his career: Full Metal Jacket. Well...the first half anyway...right?

Well, that's the consensus. Everyone praises the first half for being funny, dramatic and a staple in war films...despite not being in the war yet...However, as much as I enjoy the first half, (and trust me, I certainly do.) the second half is the better of the two.

Blasphemy! You shout incoherently at the computer scream, hoping I somehow manage to hear it. Well, no sir you are quite wrong. While the first half is very captivating, funny and has one hell of an ending; it's by no means a 'great piece of filmmaking'. Outside of its realism, (well, until Private Pyle goes apeshit and unloads on Sgt. Hartman...) it's just a regular film. Hell, it could pass as a comedy for all I care...again...until that ending, of course.

The second half, however, is a realistic, gritty and at-times unsettling look on war. The message, themes and tone of the second half; hell, even some of the humour, is superior to the first act.

From the opening shot of a Vietnamese prostitute hitting on Pvt. Joker and Rafter Man accompanied by These Boots Are Made for Walkin' by Nancy Sinatra to the final shot of the now-dehumanised soldiers marching to The Mickey Mouse Clubhouse March is a great piece of war cinema.

So, suck it FML first-halfers!