There’s just so much mystery behind Stanley Kubrick’s “The Shining,” that you have to ponder on the mystery behind “Room 237.” The Rodney Ascher directed documentary is a film that explores the dimensions of “The Shining” but also garners its own curiosities in the mean time. I mean there’s no denying that “The Shining” was never meant to be anything more than a puzzle from Stanley Kubrick, but what is the puzzle? Did Kubrick really pay so much attention to the film to include a yet to be deciphered message within the film cells? Or is it just a pastiche of random imagery left for the laymen to tinker with for decades to come? Did Kubrick find cinematic immortality by simply giving his audience a movie to think about that ultimately just meant nothing? You have to wonder, why would Kubrick be so meticulous about scenery, props, and symbolism, but forget to hide the shadow of his chopper during the opening scenes of the film?
“Room 237” really is a mystery wrapped in an enigma as audiences will not only wonder why certain moments have been called upon, but why some scenes are considered mysteries at all. The group of movie analysts use most of the footage in the film to lend credence to their own theories about the film, and while all explorations are entertaining, many viewers will be quick to pick and choose which ones they think is most plausible. Or maybe some viewers will just decide the movie is a hodge podge of random imagery and nothing more. “Room 237” isn’t so much about debating as it is about provoking conversation about one of the most wildly mystifying movies ever made, and what it could possibly mean. Perhaps Kubrick just threw a lot of elements together and hoped it could become a cohesive film. Or maybe Kubrick was just too intelligent to haphazardly throw in so many elements for it to not mean anything. Some scenes of the film are so awe inspiring and mind bending, Kubrick surely has a method to his madness. And oddly enough he never quite shared what his intent toward Stephen King’s film was. Why this particular novel from this particular author? Why didn’t Kubrick just create his own original film? “Room 237” offers various theories not just about the meaning of the story, but character actions, and motives in general.
Often times there are more logical conclusions and ideas on story twists including the notion that Danny is causing the conflict between Jack and Wendy to play out the ultimate fate of the hotel. Or perhaps that Jack is the sacrifice needed to placate the hotel’s appetite for evil. There are also startling looks at the endless corridors of the hotel that make no narrative sense illustrating the life of the hotel, as well as subtle plot points that will be awe inducing to many new viewers including the focus on the mysterious almost ethereal window in the hotel manager’s office that simply should not be there. There’s also the common theory that the film is one big metaphor for the slaughter of the Native Americans, as well as the slaughter of the Jews during the Holocaust.
But there are also very creative and somewhat controversial theories that will spark many a conversations including the strong theory that “The Shining” is one big metaphor for repressed sexuality, and the very passionate claim that the film was made as a means of Kubrick cryptically revealing to the world that he was behind the moon landing hoax. To help support the theory is the prominent Apollo 11 shirt worn by Danny, and the change of room numbers to coincide with specific sets Kubrick filmed the moon landing on. Whatever theory you choose to believe, if any, “Room 237” is a remarkable documentary for film buffs that will feed the never ending appetites of Kubrick fans who still find subtext in the 1980 horror masterpiece. For Kubrick aficionados or fans of “The Shining,” Rodney Ascher’s fine toothed combing of the 1980 horror film is intelligent, clever, and incredibly engrossing with enough theories and ideas to spark hours of conversations with the respective movie buff. It’s one of the finest movie documentaries in years.