This is a classic film, and they're going to ruin it by trying to "explain the mystery". The book does a fine job of explaining the long term history of the Overlook, and has far more detail than what ended up in the movie. Some of Kubrick's "changes" from the book are simply for better flow onscreen, and because in 1980 we didn't have Avatarian technology to create moving evil hedge animals. Show and tell. In film, you show; in books, you tell. Stuff is always lost in translation, that's just how it works. What else is there to show, unless they explain how it came to be possessed?
I am dismayed that it won't be based on Stephen King's writing, the article only mentions the sequel he's been working on. Prequels released 30 years after the original film never align properly on film (I'm looking at you, Star Wars).