So Why The Hell Was Nicholson In The Hotel Picture In 1921?

Not sure if I've ever asked this here but for the 10 years I worked at Blockbuster I would have a little thing on Friday nights that I worked where I would ask people to explain to me why he was there IN 1921 exactly and what that had to do with anything at all. If they could give me an explanation besides a "he's always been part of the hotel" which makes no sense at all, they would get 10 free rentals.

I never gave those rentals out.

I've read peoples thoughts online (none of which really sound like anything more than the "he's just part of the hotel") and I even wrote letters to Stanley Kubrick, Jack Nicholson and Shelley Duvall (none of who could take the time to get back to me) asking the question.

So c'mon film buffs - Tell me why he was in that hotel IN 1921.

Well, this has been debated and discussed for over 30 yrs. I have my own ideas, and of course, Kubrick being Kubrick, there are hundreds of symbolic interpretations of this final scene. Which is WHY it's a great movie. I don't believe there's one "correct" interpretation.

For a better (clearer) answer, re-watch the scenes that take place in the bar, where Jack talks to the other ghosts (the bartender and waiter), and they all know him by name and know who he is already.

That's where the answer is. I do remember when I saw him in that photo on the wall at the end, it made sense, based on what they had said to him in those scenes.

(But I haven't watched it lately, so I can't remember exactly what they said now.)


EDIT: Also, the bartender and waiter ghosts and other party guests (wearing the masks in the rooms, etc.) are all dressed ala early 1920s. At the end, in the photo, so is Jack.

---

Updated On: 8/17/12 at 05:56 AM

None of the evil ghosts in the hotel existed at the same time when they were alive.

But they all end up back at that same New Year's Eve party in Hell, I guess. A consolidation of evil.

I think there's some hotel history about the '20s mentioned by Barry Nelson's character at the beginning of the film when he's interviewing Jack for the job.

EDIT: They also don't do the same jobs they did while they were alive, otherwise they would all be the caretaker when they become ghosts. In this New Year's Eve scenario, one is a waiter, one is a bartender, some are guests at the party, in the rooms, etc. Even though the waiter who spills the drink on him confesses that he was also the caretaker (Grady or something--the one who axes his daughters), after denying it at first.

---

Updated On: 8/17/12 at 06:48 AM

I always thought a similar thing, besty. Once the hotel possesses someone and they die, their likeness ends up in that picture. Sort of like a ever growing list of victims whose souls end up trapped in the hotel for eternity.

The picture is actually timeless. At one point the bartender says something like "all the hotel's eras are as one now, and the 'Torrance Era' will be with us soon".

---

Nicholson looked like he was about to blow from the very beginning. Having Duvall as his wife would have drove anybody over the side. Liked the remake better.

---

The picture is actually timeless. At one point the bartender says something like "all the hotel's eras are as one now, and the 'Torrance Era' will be with us soon".

There is some line like that, Taz. I think that's the confusion (which i actually love). You don't get one concise explanation about it. It's a line here, a short story there. Then you can piece together how it all works (for the most part). I don't think all questions are answered, but that's fine.

I get that the hotel is evil and timeless. That "damned souls" from all different time periods end up there ... yet they have always been there.

That's enough of an explanation for me.

---

For what it's worth, the photo is not a New Year's Eve ball -- it is a 4th Of July party. The Overlook is closed during the Winter Months. Independence Day?

I always took it to mean, in addition to the idea that He's Always Been The Caretaker, that Jack is now part of the Overlook cast of characters. Future visitors to the Hedge Maze are guaranteed a hot time, I'd say.

Also, should we assume that Charles Grady, the waiter, is the same Grady who murdered his daughters with an axe? As noted, their first names are different. When Jack tells Grady "you chopped your wife and daughters into little pieces" there's that glorious long pause before Grady replies, "That's strange, sir. I don't have any recollection of that at all." Maybe this Grady is another Grady with a wife and daughters who needed, as Grady puts it so memorably, "correcting."

Of course, Jack does claim to recognize him from his pictures in the papers, but it could just be another bit of strange doubling -- would someone from 1921 recognize Jack from his picture on the wall?

"At one point the bartender says something like "all the hotel's eras are as one now, and the 'Torrance Era' will be with us soon"."

This is not in the Kubrick film.

---

Updated On: 8/17/12 at 10:17 AM

I prefer the remake as well, since it stays truer to the book.

Some interesting thoughts

I thought the TV version was really dreadful, despite some fine scary moments from Steven Weber. Where did they find that little troll who played Danny? I really shouldn't be rooting for Jack to chop the kid to pieces.

Yeah, the girls are definitely Grady daughters. But they're not necessarily the daughters of the Grady that Jack chats with in the men's room. Double double toil and trouble and all that.

---

Updated On: 8/17/12 at 10:38 AM

The year 1921 is never mentioned in either film or the novel.

Reginald, yes, the Butler Grady is a bit more polished than Caretaker Grady would probably be. And why is our Jack Torrance, a mere staff member of the Overlook (he's always been the caretaker, after all) wearing a tux and in such a prominent place at the 1921 4th of July Ball?

Best-- no, he doesn't confess to having been the caretaker. He very conspicuously corrects Jack on that point -- "I'm sorry to contradict you, sir, but YOU are the caretaker. You've always been the caretaker."

Love Phillip Stone's performance as Grady. His sinister subservience is one of the funniest and most disturbing performances I know of.

---

Updated On: 8/17/12 at 10:43 AM