Kubrick

Started by James, July 30, 2013, 03:37:19 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Your favorite Kubrick flick?

Day of the Flight
0 (0%)
Flying Padre
0 (0%)
Fear and Desire
0 (0%)
The Seafarers
0 (0%)
Killer's Kiss
0 (0%)
The Killing
0 (0%)
Paths of Glory
0 (0%)
Spartacus
1 (3.3%)
Lolita
0 (0%)
Dr. Strangelove
7 (23.3%)
2001: A Space Odyssey
8 (26.7%)
A Clockwork Orange
3 (10%)
Barry Lyndon
5 (16.7%)
The Shining
1 (3.3%)
Full Metal Jacket
3 (10%)
Eyes Wide Shut
2 (6.7%)

Total Members Voted: 28

vandermolen

As a sixth former at school I skived sport one afternoon to go and see Clockwork Orange in the cinema just before it was banned.
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm" (Churchill).

'The test of a work of art is, in the end, our affection for it, not our ability to explain why it is good' (Stanley Kubrick).

Karl Henning

Well done!  It's not my favorite, but, certainly worth seeing.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Jaakko Keskinen

How did I miss this topic?  ??? It's a very difficult choice between Strangelove and 2001, but probably Strangelove. Satire doesn't get much funnier than that scene of president calling people out on on fighting in the War Room, nor does black comedy with terrifying threat of Bat Guano under the lurking horror of nuclear war: having to answer to the Coca Cola Company. Black comedy in general was typical to Kubrick: just watch Full metal jacket and Clockwork Orange.

I have seen six of his films, mostly his most well known ones: Strangelove, 2001, Clockwork Orange, The Shining, Full metal jacket and Eyes wide shut. Of those, The Shining was the only one I didn't like that much. Eyes wide shut is a small wonder in how it constantly changes with at times severely depressing feeling and at times a lighter, kind of entertaining, tone. And, as noted, Kubrick's skill of using just the right classical pieces in just the right scenes is impeccable.
"Javert, though frightful, had nothing ignoble about him. Probity, sincerity, candor, conviction, the sense of duty, are things which may become hideous when wrongly directed; but which, even when hideous, remain grand."

- Victor Hugo

Jaakko Keskinen

#63
Fine thing with Kubrick is his understanding towards his "bad guys": in fact, often there really isn't one. In dr strangelove there is not a real villain: Ripper could be seen as the villain but I don't see him so much as evil as a stupid paranoia lunatic. I mean come on, precious bodily fluids, try to find some sense in that. The stupidity of mankind is the real "villain" of this movie. Hal in 2001 is a victim of programming error made by humans with their paradoxical orders. Alex is probably closest to straight-up villain in Kubrick's work but even he is humanized as the movie goes on. Isolation causes Jack Nicholson's character to go mad. In Full metal jacket Hartman may be a jerkass but his vices are more exaggerated virtues in his commitment to training class soldiers out of recruits. On the other hand, Private "Pyle" gets lots of unfair treatment which finally makes him snap. The female sniper's death at the end of the movie is played for tears. The main threats in Eyes wide shut are caused by weaknesses of the main character, but he is far from being a bad guy. In fact, he is probably one of the most sane main characters in any Kubrick film and at heart he is a nice guy.
"Javert, though frightful, had nothing ignoble about him. Probity, sincerity, candor, conviction, the sense of duty, are things which may become hideous when wrongly directed; but which, even when hideous, remain grand."

- Victor Hugo

Karl Henning

Quote from: Alberich on June 22, 2015, 08:37:54 AM
How did I miss this topic?  ??? It's a very difficult choice between Strangelove and 2001, but probably Strangelove.

Agreed  8)
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Archaic Torso of Apollo

Quote from: Todd on July 31, 2013, 06:39:06 AM

To the point of the post, it's hard to pick between Dr Strangelove, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, and Barry Lyndon.  Possibly Barry Lyndon.  All are essentially perfect.  I can think of no other filmmaker with a similar streak, and expanding it out to all his great films - basically from Paths of Glory through Eyes Wide Shut - that's a 40 year career of great films with few equals. 

I wish to endorse this statement. To be specific, the 5-movie run from Dr. Strangelove through The Shining is pure gold. The only comparable run I can think of is Tarkovsky's starting from Andrei Rublev. There are major similarities between these two directors (extreme perfectionism, need for total artistic control, long time between productions, major demands on the audience due to slow pace and visual meticulousness).
formerly VELIMIR (before that, Spitvalve)

"Who knows not strict counterpoint, lives and dies an ignoramus" - CPE Bach

snyprrr

Anyone know anything about his ideas for Napoleon?

Jubal Slate

Years ago I would have gone Clockwork but now I'll say 2001. Still haven't seen some of these even though I have a box set. :P

drogulus

#68

    Kubrick was unusually intelligent for a great artist, most of whom chose well to make their art and not waste energy on, you know, thinking, even if a box was at hand for them to think in....2001 is his best film, and I don't say by far because many of his films are so very good, but I really should say it, and just did, so there.

    An interesting choice was to use Richard Strauss for his music and allow the Nietzschean ideas to percolate through, almost subliminally, as the story with its Eternal Return plays out. There's no accident here, the Strauss borrowed from a great artist/numbskull by a great artist with brains ennobles the (trite-ish, perhaps?) music as the music gives resonance to the images that Kubrick displayed. This a waaay beyond mere fimmaking genius while also being that. It stands by itself, and we know that now far better than ever before.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Jaakko Keskinen

2001 was released in '68 and those special effects look still awesome!
"Javert, though frightful, had nothing ignoble about him. Probity, sincerity, candor, conviction, the sense of duty, are things which may become hideous when wrongly directed; but which, even when hideous, remain grand."

- Victor Hugo

lisa needs braces

Regarding 2001, both Arthur C. Clarke and Kubrick developed the story for 2001 together partially based on material Clarke had written before (I believe a short story called "The Sentinel.") Arthur C. Clarke went on to write a full novel out of that joint-conceived material, and though it is certainly a fine science-fiction novel, it's not as outstanding a piece of art as the film. I read it as a teenager prior to seeing the movie and it was basically a huge spoiler that robbed me of the "what does it all mean?" response that people typically have to that film. Kubrick depicts events unfolding that seem to have a certain logic while withholding explanation whereas Clarke tells a clear and simple story. Again not a bad book by any means but it does spoil the film.


Karl Henning

Quote from: Alberich on June 22, 2015, 10:41:04 PM
2001 was released in '68 and those special effects look still awesome!

That they do.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot

Rinaldo

2001, hands down. So far the bravest attempt to reach at something that might never come into our grasp.

Of the other films, Barry Lyndon all the way. I love, love, love that movie so much. The candlelit cinematography, the language, THE MUSIC.. perfection. I also have a soft spot for the dream-like quality of Eyes Wide Shut – again, THE MUSIC. And the lighting. And the masks.

The only Kubrick movie I didn't enjoy was Shining. Seeing it when it was fresh would probably make a difference but when I watched it a few years ago, it just felt cheap.

drogulus


     Yes, Barry Lyndon is number 2, a ways back. I note that as was usual for Kubrick the critics were not impressed. Initially audiences weren't either.

     Headline:

     Kubrick Film Pans Audience, Critics
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Jaakko Keskinen

#74
Quote from: -abe- on June 23, 2015, 12:57:54 AM
robbed me of the "what does it all mean?" response that people typically have to that film.

Ironically, I've met many people who don't want that kind of response. For ex. this one guy at another forum ranted that "2001 is the worst movie ever made, nothing makes sense, huge waste of time and the freaking baby at the ending, wtf" etc.
"Javert, though frightful, had nothing ignoble about him. Probity, sincerity, candor, conviction, the sense of duty, are things which may become hideous when wrongly directed; but which, even when hideous, remain grand."

- Victor Hugo

Bogey

Having watched Clock Work Orange recently, I am with Gene Kelly.  8)
There will never be another era like the Golden Age of Hollywood.  We didn't know how to blow up buildings then so we had no choice but to tell great stories with great characters.-Ben Mankiewicz

drogulus

Quote from: Alberich on June 23, 2015, 06:33:08 AM
Ironically, I've met many people who don't want that kind of response. For ex. this one guy at another forum ranted that "2001 is the worst movie ever made, nothing makes sense, huge waste of time and the freaking baby at the ending, wtf" etc.

     For once I'll agree with art-cultists to the extent that a really great work inspires its own opposition, though not to the extent that great opposition make a work art. Maybe it just sucks.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

snyprrr

Quote from: MN Dave :) on June 22, 2015, 01:09:30 PM
Years ago I would have gone Clockwork but now I'll say 2001. Still haven't seen some of these even though I have a box set. :P

lolz Dave- you look like Chas Chandler