As for The Shining, if someone could have melded Stanley Kubrick's dazzling visual sheen to the novel's aching human core, the resulting film would have been a masterpiece. Kubrick's film is expertly made, frequently eerie and has some iconic moments, but it's also one of those movies where, if you even DARE to admit you don't really care for it aside from being a superior technical exercise, the public at large will laugh and jeer at you.
Hell, I feel that way about Blade Runner...it's masterfully visualized, but it's the cinematic equivalent of one of John Barry's "romantic" scores...it hovers between "hypnotic" and "kinda boring" for me, never once making me care about the characters or even get involved in the gumshoe aspects of the narrative. I respect the hell out of the film, and it's one of the most visually influential sci-fi movies ever, but it's not something I sit down to watch for sheer pleasure all that often. The sequel coming out later this year will undoubtedly make me drag out the Blu-Ray again, but, again, I'm sure I'll be left wanting. The Shining miniseries is weak sauce in terms of production value, but I give it credit for getting the core of King's novel up there. Mick Garris is basically a journeyman hack, but both The Shining and The Stand were well-made for their day and medium (let's not mention Sleepwalkers, however. 
).