Their luggage!




When Jack, Wendy, and little Danny arrived at the Overlook Hotel their luggage was piled up just inside by the main hotel door. What I want to know is, how the fuck did they fit all of that luggage into their tiny VW Beetle?!





I'm Deckard B26354, I retire Wokies, I'm filed and monitored.

reply

I don’t think that was the Torence’s luggage, it was probably the staffs, as they were leaving in mass that same day.

reply



I don't think so DancingintheDark, because Danny's little tricycle was parked up next to all that luggage, and also when the General Manager Mr Ullman asked Jack if his luggage had been seen to, Jack pointed to the pile of luggage that I'm on about and said yeah it's right there.




reply

Yea I rewatched the scene, and the tricycle is there. Good catch.
Maybe it was to emphasize their length of stay?

reply

There are those who would answer 'It's another example of the genius of Kubrick! Something else to make us feel something 'isn't right' with the place!' 😂

reply

Ha Ha, yeah usual Kubrick.

reply

Maybe someone followed them up with a truck or the hotel had a service. I'm sure it was just overlooked by the director and he wanted the shot of the luggage to be very particular without an explanation of how it was transported.

reply

Kubrick didn't make mistakes like that. They're must be a clue in that that I've never heard.

reply

They took a job which required them to live there for months, soooooo……

They packed, called a moving company (or it was set up and paid for by the employer) who delivered it all, before they arrived.

I love noticing little details in movies but this is about the least mysterious thing there is.
It’s just a normal part of life when people move or take a new job somewhere.

reply

Isn't there a documentary, I think it's called "Room 237", that goes into all the crazy things fans of the movie think they've discovered.

reply

Yup

I had to admit thee was a lot people saw, but we’ll never know how much was put in there purposely or is just coincidence

reply