[Gopher]

Why was The Shining on bluray a revelation?  Extra material or just the improved pq?  Easily the best horror movie ever...

Kubrick's works are great and his style is easily identified.  Which single malt led to last nights enthusiasm?

[Jon L]

I must admit, "Dr. Strangelove" is still one of my all-time favorite pieces of media ever created.  Simply hilarious 

[Delta Wave]

He was cornered into doing Eyes Wide Shut by the "suits", He was working on AI and it was supposed to his (last) film, he co-wrote it. Unfortunately for us, Steven Spielberg got hold of the script after Kubricks death and butchered it for one and all.

Aside from that, he was one of the greats.

[werd]

cuz guys get to ride nukes in his movies.

[Tyson]

Oh man, revisiting this post now, and that was WAY too much Talisker and Lagavulin

Actually, EWS was pretty much universally panned by audiences and by critics alike when it first came out.  Over time, some critics and film analysts have changed their mind, but the fact remains that it was eviscerated when it came out, by everyone.

And, Kubrick had been wanting to make this movie at least since the 70's, so the "suits" did not force him into this. 

One thing you have to realize is that in several movies, Kubrick has dream sequences, but he never puts in any transition shots to let you know that you're watching a dream.  For example, in The Shining, when Jack goes into the room with the woman in the bathtub, it's almost certainly a dream sequence of Danny's.  But, since there's no "transition" scene letting you know that, it's easy to see why most people see it as reality.  EWS is the same way.  There's lots of scenes which are likely to be either dreams or fantasy sequences, but since there's no transition shots, we all take it seriously.  Actually, in EWS, Kubrick mixes so much dream and reality throughout the movie, it's really difficult to tell what is and what is not "real". 

On another level, the movie isn't really about the Hartfords at all, it's more about how intermixed sex, power, and money are.  Having a study on these topics set during christmas (a religious holiday perverted into an orgy of consumerism), merely intensifies the irony. 

Following up on that idea, notice that none of the women in the story actually have a career.  The respectable ones are homemakers, another way to say "kept women", even if it's not consciously realized.  Then the fact that almost all of them have red hair, and several are straight out prostitutes, is Kubricks way of saying that all women are prostitutes at some level, that they have all "sold out" on some level.  I'm not sure if that's his actual personal opinion, but looking at the themes in the movie, it's inescapable. 

Then of course there's the confrontation between Victor and Bill around the red billiard table at the end, friggin brilliant!  And speaking of red, the use of color throughout the movie is amazing, as always, Kubrick is telling most of his story visually.  Ah, I could go on and on, but should probably stop here.

[JoshK]

I've seen the movie, EWS, exactly once, years ago and I think I was under the influence (beer) during the viewing.  I can't say I saw everything Tyson says, but on recollection, I do see what Tyson is saying. 

At the time, I thought the movie was good but weird in the standard Kubrick way.  I am more familiar with Clockwork Orange and Apocalypse Now than the others. (AN was Kubrick right?) 

I loved the visuals in EWS.  I like the red head theme too.  I've dated a couple in my day. 

This thread makes me want to rent it again... its going into my blockbuster online queue (like netflicks). 

[Tyson]

Kubrick also used "mirroring" in his movies quite a bit, very effectively, to draw parallels between characters or situations.  Again, its visual storytelling that he's interested in, not necessarily linear narrative.  For example, after Bill and his wife have the argument in their bedroom and she tells him that she would have left him to be with that "sailor", the next scene is with him at his patient Lou's home, who has just died after a long illness.  Notice that Lou's daughter and her fiance are visual doubles for Bill and his wife (one has red/blond hair, the other has dark hair).  In this scene, the daughter throws herself at him.  Basically Kubrick is showing that this is a dream/fantasy sequence, but Dr. Bill has re-cast himself in the role of the "sailor" from his wife's fantasy.  The fact that they are visual doubles (as a couple) is one clue.  The other clue is that the wall paper outside of Lou's place is the same as some of the wallpaper in the Hartford's house. 

And, speaking of doubling, Kubrick would also often visually mirror things symmetrically within a specific frame of film.  For example, if you look at when Dr. Bill arrives at Lou's, he comes through the front door and is greeted by the maid.  The tables/lamps/chairs are exactly the same on both sides of the frame.  Of course, Dr. Bill is wearing a white shirt with a black overcoat, and on the other side of the frame is the maid, wearing a black uniform with white collar/trim.  They are perfect visual mirrors.  Kubrick's message is clear - Dr. Bill is just as much of a "servant" to the super-rich as this menial housekeeper. 

[Construct]

Apocalypse Now than the others. (AN was Kubrick right?) 

AN was Francis Ford Coppela.

[Letitroll98]

No, Apocalypse Now was Francis Ford Coppola.  Based of Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness".  (darn, you beat me to it C)

Stanley Kubrick was a genius, but try his early work, Paths of Glory, Fear and Desire, Lolita, etc. to see the beginning of genius and to cast a brighter light on his later work.  You'll see the three act structure, themes of humanity and inhumanity, and Kubrick's take on Freudian psychology.

[S Clark]

This thread reminds me- I'm out of Talisker!

[TONEPUB]

Step away from the scotch! 

Personally, I found Eyes Wide Shut to be one of the worst movies ever created, but then my taste in movies tends toward Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story than it does toward movies requiring me to think.

Agreed.  I've always put Kubrick at the top of my list, but that movie really blew chunks.  It still incorporated some of Kubrick's signature visuals, but the story did nothing for me, possibly because I think Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman are two of the worst actors I've ever witnessed.

Now, let's talk about David Lynch and Eraserhead....

[Construct]

The thing about EWS that ticked me off... Some critics just about soiling their underpants over the movie.  I remember one critic saying "You really need to see it 2 or 3 times to appreciate it's subtitles."  My expectations were set VERY high.  I was expecting at least some kind of challenge.  Instead what I got...bored me to tears and made me want my money back.  I hated it thoroughly.  It made things worse that they censored it down from it's original.

[Tyson]

I always felt that the fact that Bill and Alice were unlikeable, clueless, self-absorbed buffoons was kinda the point.  In that light, casting Cruise and Kidman was inspired.

[Tyson]

To follow up, the first few lines that Bill and Alice speak are "Honey, have you seen my wallet?", and "How do I look?"  That pretty much defines their characters, doesn't it?

[Tyson]

I should also note that Barry Lyndon was also universally panned when it first came out, but is now considered to be a masterpiece.  EWS is slowly following a similar path. 

But, I can see why, if someone goes into the movie expecting likable characters and a plot driven 2 hours of entertainment, then EWS would disappoint, since its mainly concerned with other things.

[S Clark]

Actually, this has piqued my interest in the movie.  I'll put it on the que and give it another view. 

[Construct]

Actually this piqued my interest in Barry Lyndon... I'll have to rent it.  I still vividly remember the $6.00 matinée money, popcorn and soda I wasted on EWS. 

[Tyson]

Anyway, to move off of EWS, my 2nd favorite Kubrick film is The Shining.  Again, a movie that Kubrick really, really intermixes dreams, fantasies, and hallucinations with reality.  Kubrick was a thorough going atheist, and pretty much said (very subtly) in interviews that The Shining was not a supernatural story. 

OK, so if there are no ghosts and no ESP, then WTF is going on during this movie?  A couple of clues are pertinent.  1st, at the end of the movie, Wendy is freaked out and seeing all kinds of ghosts.  In one scene, she sees a young man in a bear costume giving head to an older guy in a tuxedo.  Not especially scary, but it freaks her out completely.  Why?

It's even more interesting when you know that in Stephen King's book, the same scene is in there, but with a guy in a dog costume, not a bear costume.

So, why change it?  And why is it so bothersome to Wendy? 

Well, if you remember at the very beginning of the movie, her son Danny is being examined by a female doctor.  Wendy talks about how Jack broke Danny's arm for scattering some of Jack's school papers.  And we know that Jack is an alcoholic, so we know that there is physical abuse going on in this family. 

Pay attention to what is on Danny's bed, right next to his head, while he is being examined in his underwear and the abuse is being hinted at.  It's a stuffed bear, with a blood red mouth.  This visually links the boy with the scene at the end that Wendy sees. 

What this tells us is that not only was Danny sexually abused by his father, but that Wendy knew about it and has been in denial about it.  At some point (ie, her husband trying to murder her with an ax), the barriers in her mind come down and she starts to realize what has happened and how culpable she is.

On another note, look at Jack and his ghosts.  He's an alcoholic, so no small wonder that his ghosts almost all involve alcohol in some form.  But, even more interesting - notice that everytime he sees or interacts with a ghost, it's in the presence of a mirror, which he's usually looking into.

And this stuff just gets deeper.... Kubrick was a genius because he was able to tell stories on several levels at once.

[Construct]

I recently watched 2001 again.  The only part I find a bit dated:  The acid-trippy scene that kind of drags on too long.  I suppose if someone was actually stoned it might be better.  Other than that, and some screeching stinger notes, the movie is amazing.

[Tyson]

I have a rogue theory about 2001, I'll post it here to see what you think.  At the end of the movie, Dave Bowman transcends his humanity and becomes the star child.  We all assume that in that last scene, where he re-visits earth, that it occurs chronologically after all of the other events in the movie, right?  In other words, we assume that he went home to earth in order to be the harbinger of the higher level of being to the rest of the human race.  Seems logical.

But, if he transcended his humanity, he also likely transcended the boundaries of time (just like he transcended the boundaries of space).  My thought is this - what if his visit to earth actually occurred in the past?  What if the monoliths were created and put in place by Bowman?  What if Bowman set in motion all the events that resulted in his own transcendence? 

THAT would be a very Kubrickian idea, indeed!