Adaptations are funny things, and so is the process of casting them! Anyone who reads a novel peoples it with faces, so, every actor is going to prompt either a "Just the way I pictured it!" or "Not at all what I was expecting!" response. In theater, you get to see many actors play the same role. Some perennial characters, like Sherlock Holmes or Miss Marple or Dr. Who, get the same treatment in film/TV. While a particular actor may come to be generally recognized as having brought something special to a role, consensus on who was the "best" isn't always easy to find. I think Jack Nicholson brought great qualities to this part! I'm a huge fan of his entire body or work. Is he the only person for that part? I don't think so. I can picture other actors performing it. It wouldn't be the "same," but, the same as what? Nicholson's interpretation or the character on the prose page? Did Nicholson's performance linger with me? Absolutely. And with the majority of people who saw it! So, it worked. :)

I think the difference for me is that the other characters you mention, especially Dr Who (with regeneration) lend themselves to different actors playing them. The character is the same, but the stories change. With something like the Shining, you are limited with the changes you can make, and would not expect to see lots of other actors playing the same roles in slightly different situations. I have not see the Shining TV series, but maybe that was why it didn't do so well? So could another play the part....yes of course they could, but can I see anyone other than Jack doing it, no I can't....and I want it to stay that way. Dr Who, well I get excited about the regenerations and seeing what the new actor can do with him, but the Dr is always moving forward and progressing as a character, so is less static. All in my opinion of course! Thanks for raising the question NEGenge! Whatever your opinions, it still scared the crap out of me as a kid..... :-)