On paper, making a movie out of Stephen King’s sequel to The Shining probably sounded like an excellent idea.  Both the original novel and the sequel were best-sellers.  The movie (released in 1980) remains one of the most iconic adaptations of his books, alongside Carrie, The Dead Zone, Salem’s Lot, Cujo, Christine.  King has long been on record as hating Stanley Kubrick’s interpretation of his novel, to the point where he approved a mini-series adaptation that was broadcast in 1997.  While much more faithful to the novel, most people still tend to point to Kubrick’s version as the definitive version.

Back when mother! was released, critics had a seemingly impossible task of classifying the movie.  Was it a drama? (maybe)  A comedy? (certainly no)  A mystery (yes, but not in a good way)  Horror? (yes)  Romance? (yes, but not in the traditional sense)  Art-house? (certainly yes)

I believe that it’s easy to explain why a great movie is great.  Explaining why a bad movie is bad or doesn’t work requires much more effort.  

“The most controversial movie of the year!”

The “controversy” surrounding this movie was manufactured by the president himself, who dissed the movie in an angry tweet.  I doubt he watched this movie himself, and instead relied on his handlers to confirm how awfully it treats his beloved red-staters.  Those evil Hollywood liberal elites!  Damn them!  Damn them all to hell!