If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

    At the rate he made films, he died just one or two films ago. One must wonder what film we'd be excited about...

  • #2
    Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

    Yes, Kubrick was a truly great filmmaker. Masterpiece after masterpiece after masterpiece ... The man was a genius.

    My favorite among his films, currently, is Full Metal Jacket.

    I think Stanley Kubrick will never be given enough credit as a filmmaker, no matter how much praise he gets.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

      The new TRANSFORMERS movie with Marky Mark.

      Bill
      Free Script Tips:
      http://www.scriptsecrets.net

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

        Originally posted by Dr. Vergerus View Post
        Yes, Kubrick was a truly great filmmaker. Masterpiece after masterpiece after masterpiece ... The man was a genius.

        My favorite among his films, currently, is Full Metal Jacket.

        I think Stanley Kubrick will never be given enough credit as a filmmaker, no matter how much praise he gets.
        When Full Metal Jacket comes on I have to stop and watch it. Incredible film.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

          Same here, and I'd also add to that list PATHS OF GLORY, THE SHINING, BARRY LYNDON, and DR. STRANGELOVE; 2001 and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, I need to be in the right mood. I like EYES WIDE SHUT too, but not as much as all these other films.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

            Kubrick himself said the true test of a movie was how long it endures, and if he was right about that then his films have truly passed the test. On the 50th anniversary of Dr Strangelove it was still highly regarded, incredibly clever and enjoyable. People still imitate his work and techniques. Full Metal Jacket is still regarded by many Vietnam veterans as the most accurate portrayal of boot camp and their experience in the war. The Shining is still a source of fascination. Nothing compares with A Clockwork Orange. The status and unique form of 2001 remains unchallenged. Barry Lyndon is a masterpiece. As the history of cinema progresses, Kubrick's reputation continues to grow. It was well earned.

            It would be wonderful if we were discussing his latest film about now. It's hard to imagine what it might have been, but we can be sure it would be clever, provocative, superbly executed, and memorable.
            "Friends make the worst enemies." Frank Underwood

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

              What's true but sad about this thread is thar few if any working directors today have the auteur mindset that Kubrick had. He had been rightfully given a carte blanche wth all of his projects. He worked within various genres and yet his style remained immovable and spellbinding.

              I can't think of any current director offhand whose style and sensibilities elicited such critical acclaim and study. Scorses excepted.

              Frankly I can think of very few recent films which pique my intellectual curiosity the way a Kubrick film would.

              There is a gap that will likely never be bridged. So when i think of Kubrick and his genius, a part of me mourns quite bereft of hope.
              Last edited by Ire; 06-30-2014, 03:41 PM.
              #writinginaStarbucks #re-thinkingmyexistence #notanotherweaklogline #thinkingwhatwouldWilldo

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                It was certainly a different time when Leone, Altman and Kubrick were doing their thing.

                People will howl, but I put Ken Russell on the list. How some people consider him a mere vulgarian I'll never know. The Devils is an absolute masterpiece in every aspect.

                Malick is about the last of the kind left still marching to his own tune. Scorsese and FFC (obviously) aren't the same as they were.

                Cinema's changed radically. You'd really have to be pretty insane or insanely rich and film-buffish to bankroll the modern-day Barry Lyndon. But as has been spoken about ad nauseum, TV is the latter-day auteur's stomping ground.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                  Originally posted by 60WordsPerHour View Post
                  It was certainly a different time when Leone, Altman and Kubrick were doing their thing.
                  Absolutely. Yet I find it fascinating that on the Sony Lot, you can still find posters, murals etc. from David Lean's LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, Stanley Kubrick's DR. STRANGELOVE and Elia Kazan's ON THE WATERFRONT.

                  The studio is obviously quite proud of these movies, but it's sad to question whether they would be made in the current system.

                  That being said, young voices are emerging and doing amazing work outside of the system -- JC Chandor, Morten Tyldum, Susanne Bier and David Michod all come to mind.
                  "Write every day. Don't quit. The rest is all bullshit." - Brian Koppelman

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                    Originally posted by mge457 View Post
                    That being said, young voices are emerging and doing amazing work outside of the system -- JC Chandor, Morten Tyldum, Susanne Bier and David Michod all come to mind.
                    There are some fantastic directors around, it's just that you don't get the combined sweeping singular vision AND budget in one hit. Tarantino, maybe? But not many others.

                    And for good business reasons, really. Going back to Barry Lyndon (which I have seen countless times), you'd have to be nuts to greenlight something similar today. It was too much even for its time. Doing something like it now? Crazytown.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                      Alfonso Cuaron and Christopher Nolan? (Miyazaki? Are his budgets big, by anime standards?)

                      Maybe Kubrick would have done A.I., for a fall 2014 release. He revisited war, several times; perhaps he'd revisit science fiction...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                        Originally posted by ctp View Post
                        Christopher Nolan?
                        Call me curmudgeonly, but I just don't put Nolan in the same league as Leone, Altman, Kubrick, Malick et al. To be frank, I don't even like his stuff that much. That's just me, but I think even some of the devotees would agree.

                        Once Upon A Time In The West is a thing apart. Nashville is a thing apart. Barry Lyndon is a thing apart. Days of Heaven is a thing apart. I can't explain exactly why, but that's probably part of their greatness.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                          How much you like a Nolan film seems to be partly a matter of how you interpret it. In any case, he has a unique vision and is given the means to put it on screen.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                            Originally posted by ctp View Post
                            In any case, he has a unique vision and is given the means to put it on screen.
                            Fair point. True.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: If Kubrick were still alive, we'd probably be discussing his next film, now...

                              "What's true but sad about this thread is thar few if any working directors today have the auteur mindset that Kubrick had. He had been rightfully given a carte blanche wth all of his projects. He worked within various genres and yet his style remained immovable and spellbinding.

                              I can't think of any current director offhand whose style and sensibilities elicited such critical acclaim and study. Scorses excepted.

                              Frankly I can think of very few recent films which pique my intellectual curiosity the way a Kubrick film would.

                              There is a gap that will likely never be bridged. So when i think of Kubrick and his genius, a part of me mourns quite bereft of hope."

                              Never posting an "intelligent" reply from my smartphone after midnight again.

                              Originally posted by 60WordsPerHour View Post
                              It was certainly a different time when Leone, Altman and Kubrick were doing their thing.

                              People will howl, but I put Ken Russell on the list. How some people consider him a mere vulgarian I'll never know. The Devils is an absolute masterpiece in every aspect.

                              Malick is about the last of the kind left still marching to his own tune. Scorsese and FFC (obviously) aren't the same as they were.

                              Cinema's changed radically. You'd really have to be pretty insane or insanely rich and film-buffish to bankroll the modern-day Barry Lyndon. But as has been spoken about ad nauseum, TV is the latter-day auteur's stomping ground.
                              Originally posted by 60WordsPerHour View Post
                              There are some fantastic directors around, it's just that you don't get the combined sweeping singular vision AND budget in one hit. Tarantino, maybe? But not many others.

                              And for good business reasons, really. Going back to Barry Lyndon (which I have seen countless times), you'd have to be nuts to greenlight something similar today. It was too much even for its time. Doing something like it now? Crazytown.
                              Yes.
                              1. The corporate-owned studios, and film financing today, to me, precludes a director from having the kind of career that Kubrick had. It might happen, but by a miraculous chain of miracles.

                              I hate to compare directors and set some Kubrick standard out there, per se, but Kubrick had liberal access to financing and the filmmaking sensibility as you and others have noted.


                              Originally posted by ctp View Post
                              How much you like a Nolan film seems to be partly a matter of how you interpret it. In any case, he has a unique vision and is given the means to put it on screen.
                              I think Nolan in some way has his eye on Kubrick's oeuvre . (I heard it was in an armoir in Chadwickbury.), meaning he would love to have an oeuvre like that. I checked out an interview and he himself does not have the confidence to do what Kubrick did. That I buy.

                              My point is that the world of film is different than when Kubrick reigned. The sensibilities have changed. I rarely see anything approaching the elegance that informed Kubrick's work. It's not that films were better from this period or that period, but I suggest that no one can match Kubrick for intellect, beauty and power on such a grand scale and the world is partly to blame. There is no real demand for it.

                              For those who haven't seen Paths of Glory, check it out. The beginning of the Kubrick's signature style. The Killing is great, but to witness Kubrick becoming Kubrick, watch that movie.

                              I did forget about Fincher. Fincher might be up to the task of approaching the beauty and intellect and power of Kubrick.

                              One last word from me about Kubrick in this thread.

                              It seems to me one of Kubrick's "charms" was being God-like in his films with an unceasing fanatical attention to detail and beauty and having the unflinching camera lens seeing humanity for all of its flaws. And through his austere, all knowing, all seeing God-like presence he was having an ongoing "discussion" with God, albeit an intellectualized, unknowable notion of God. With no answers, except for beauty and tragedy and death.

                              Got that off my chest.


                              And I won't howl about Russell although he didn't have the oeuvre like Kubrick by any stretch of the imagination.

                              And thanks to ctp for giving me the chance to use the word oeuvre a few times. It's been years...
                              Last edited by Ire; 07-02-2014, 06:33 PM.
                              #writinginaStarbucks #re-thinkingmyexistence #notanotherweaklogline #thinkingwhatwouldWilldo

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X