Review of Room 237 (2012) by Christian C — 13 Oct 2013

It's obvious why the critics liked this film: it speaks about theories and criticism concerning a classic film. It's rooted in the simple assumption that a film can be interpreted by many factions with their own theories and biases against a film, and their opinions are valid, and even put above conventional opinions of certain films.

The film that is discussed in this documentary is "The Shining" based on the book by Stephen King, and directed by Stanley Kubrick. Kubrick was eccentric, multi-talented, and now is remembered as one of the most inventive directors of all time.

A film as multi-layered as "The Shining" was bound to create a fan base that was diverse and divided. "Room 237" is put together interestedly, and yet is a film that lacks any credibility.

Director Rodney Ascher found a vast group of people, who are never shown onscreen, and are never truly identified except for in the first several minutes of the film. We as the audience don't know if these people are critics, professors, or just people who have opinions.

There is constant voice-over narration over different scenes in the film where these people explain their theories based mostly on visual clues and their own inert intuition. Many of the theories have a strong basis for their hypothesis, but many others sound like gibberish made up by disillusioned people in the height of hysteria.

At one point Juli Kearns goes on and on about how bright the sunlight streaming through a window is, going on like it was a clear and suggestive sign. Another narrator takes a single frame and suggests the juxtaposition behind a man's crotch and a paper tray is metaphorical of a phallus.

These strange and oblique suggestions of Kubrick's inventive and complex canon feels more like a conspiracy YouTube video than it does a documentary. Besides the voice-overs being crackpots, they're longwinded and often are giving their recordings from their homes (obvious from one person's son crying in the background).

It's simply very amateurish, and for a film about Kubrick there better be some authenticity and care attributed to who you choose to represent your theorists, by not plucking people off the street.