I had no idea how to vote. However, turning to my movie collection, I see 5 Coppola films and not a single Kubrick film (odd since I really like quite a few of his films). So I guess my vote by default goes to Coppola.
If Coppola would have retired after Apocalypse it would be a lot closer in my mind, but since he didn't this is an easy one...Kubrick
kd5
08-02-10, 09:48 AM
Coppola has some damn fine films out but with the exception of Eyes Wide Shut, Kubrick's films appeal to me considerably moreso than Coppola's. -kd5-
Hokeyboy
08-02-10, 10:15 AM
Kubrick by a wide country mile. However, if you took Coppola's Top 4 (Godfather, Godfather II, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now) and compared it to Kubrick's Top 4 (2001, Dr. Strangelove, A Clockwork Orange, Paths of Glory), it'd be a *LOT* closer. Kubrick would still win, though, but by a hair.
Blu Man
08-02-10, 11:10 AM
Kubrick. I'm not a big fan of The Godfather, it's good but highly overrated in my opinion. It's been awhile since I've seen Apocalypse Now, but I don't remember being initially impressed, but I'd have to see it again to form a valid opinion, as my memory of it is a little hazy. I need to see The Godfather again also, it's been awhile. Kubrick's films on the other hand stick with me. 2001 is a masterpiece, but The Shining is by far my favorite Kubrick film and one of my favorite films of all time.
starseed1981
08-02-10, 11:16 AM
Kubrick. The gap between these two is as wide as the grand canyon. Every Kubrick has ever made can arguably be classified as the finest in its genre.
Solid Snake PAC
08-02-10, 11:36 AM
If Coppola would have retired after Apocalypse it would be a lot closer in my mind, but since he didn't this is an easy one...Kubrick
This is how I feel. Coppola never lived up to his greatness ever again. Kubrick on the other hand (still iffy on EWS) was great consistently.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 12:40 PM
Even if Coppola's work only consisted of his 70's output, this still wouldn't be a contest. Kubrick is film. Put any director in place of Coppola and Kubrick will still win every single time.
jmu878
08-02-10, 12:53 PM
Even if Coppola's work only consisted of his 70's output, this still wouldn't be a contest. Kubrick is film. Put any director in place of Coppola and Kubrick will still win every single time.
eh...I think Scorsese takes him. Maybe this should be a tourney type deal?
Supermallet
08-02-10, 01:07 PM
Scorsese is great, but he's said in interviews that he (and every filmmaker he knows, which is quite a few) looked up to Kubrick, and would rush to the theater every time a new Kubrick film came out.
Blu Man
08-02-10, 01:15 PM
Scorsese is great, but he's said in interviews that he (and every filmmaker he knows, which is quite a few) looked up to Kubrick, and would rush to the theater every time a new Kubrick film came out.
And I'm sure thousands of young filmmakers rush out to see the latest Scorsese picture today. In the 90's and early 2000's the same could be said about Spielberg.
nando820
08-02-10, 01:15 PM
If Coppola would have retired after Apocalypse it would be a lot closer in my mind, but since he didn't this is an easy one...Kubrick
:thumbsup:
Kubrick by a wide country mile. However, if you took Coppola's Top 4 (Godfather, Godfather II, The Conversation, Apocalypse Now) and compared it to Kubrick's Top 4 (2001, Dr. Strangelove, A Clockwork Orange, Paths of Glory), it'd be a *LOT* closer. Kubrick would still win, though, but by a hair.
very true. So is Kubrick fro me too :D
jmu878
08-02-10, 01:18 PM
Scorsese is great, but he's said in interviews that he (and every filmmaker he knows, which is quite a few) looked up to Kubrick, and would rush to the theater every time a new Kubrick film came out.
So just because he came before he's better? I think this is a case of the student becoming the master.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 01:21 PM
No, it's not because he came before. Scorsese was not referring to when he was a kid, but now, as a master filmmaker, and he still looks up to Kubrick.
If you changed the question to, "Whose films would you want to wipe off the face of the planet?" and the choices are Kubrick or any other filmmaker, I would always choose the other filmmaker.
Quake1028
08-02-10, 03:12 PM
Even if Coppola's work only consisted of his 70's output, this still wouldn't be a contest. Kubrick is film. Put any director in place of Coppola and Kubrick will still win every single time.
I don't think he would win over Kurosawa or Hitchcock here. But it would be interesting to see.
gmanca
08-02-10, 04:15 PM
If you changed the question to, "Whose films would you want to wipe off the face of the planet?" and the choices are Kubrick or any other filmmaker, I would always choose the other filmmaker.
As Quake1028 alluded to, even against Hitchcock?
Supermallet
08-02-10, 04:20 PM
Yes. If someone asked me to keep only one filmmaker's work while everything else was destroyed, I'd keep Kubrick's. And I wouldn't hesitate in that decision, either.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 04:24 PM
I am again reminded just how many of the "greats" I've yet to get around to seeing. For me, it comes down to The Godfather vs. Eyes Wide Shut. I enjoyed the former, but aside from the quotable dialog and a few iconic scenes, it didn't really stand out to me the way it has to others. Eyes Wide Shut I thought was an over-hyped excuse to dabble in soft porn when I saw it during its theatrical release. What I discovered, though, is that it got under my skin and each time I've revisited it, it's revealed new things to me about itself, as well as myself. That, for my money, is the most any kind of art can ever offer. Kubrick gets the nod, and has my eternal gratitude for that film.
Truffaut Fan
08-02-10, 04:43 PM
As Quake1028 alluded to, even against Hitchcock?
I would certainly take Kubrick over Hitchcock. Hitchcock pretty much stuck to the same genre, while Kubrick tried something new with each outing. Not to take anything away from Hitch, but he's not even in Kubrick's league IMHO.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 04:45 PM
Actually, the one filmmaker I might consider choosing over Kubrick, Godard, is one of the ones who helped secure Hitchcock's place as the poster child for the auteur theory.
Solid Snake PAC
08-02-10, 05:13 PM
No, it's not because he came before. Scorsese was not referring to when he was a kid, but now, as a master filmmaker, and he still looks up to Kubrick.
If you changed the question to, "Whose films would you want to wipe off the face of the planet?" and the choices are Kubrick or any other filmmaker, I would always choose the other filmmaker.
I just asked this in my class. While most of us thought about it. We agreed. Kubrick is something else. No offense to Scorsese (specifically but this also applies to other directors) but his films as good as they are always seem something that could've been made or attempted by someone else. Better than him? I'd like to think not but maybe as good. Kubrick? Only Kubrick could do what Kubrick did. No one else could've come up w/ that vision or design of that physical plane he controlled except him.
asianxcore
08-02-10, 05:18 PM
Coppola
My parents named me after him :lol:
Supermallet
08-02-10, 05:40 PM
Alright smarty pants, if you could save only one filmmaker's filmography, whose would it be?
TomOpus
08-02-10, 05:47 PM
I voted Kubrick based solely on the fact that he directed 2001: A Space Odyssey.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 06:00 PM
Actually, the one filmmaker I might consider choosing over Kubrick, Godard, is one of the ones who helped secure Hitchcock's place as the poster child for the auteur theory.
I despise the self-aggrandizing auteur theory. I recognize there are a handful of directors who actually did wear many hats on a production, but it's come to be that everywhere I look someone is trying to act like they're "in the know" by referring to a movie as "[Director's Name]'s [Title of Movie]." There are way too many screenwriters, directors of photography, composers, costume designers, set designers, etc. whose work is largely of their own design to give every damn director the kind of all-encompassing credit that the auteur theory would have you believe.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:18 PM
I think I might choose Jodorowsky just to spite you all. ;)
And I wasn't taking offense. I just didn't use a smiley to indicate I was joking.
Sessa17
08-02-10, 06:28 PM
Actually, the one filmmaker I might consider choosing over Kubrick, Godard, is one of the ones who helped secure Hitchcock's place as the poster child for the auteur theory.
:thumbsup: As I've posted numerous times, Godard is my all-time favorite filmmaker, I never knew there was another huge fan here. I do consider 2001 to be possibly the greatest piece of directing of all-time though.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:29 PM
I consider 2001: A Space Odyssey to be the greatest thing put on film (with Duck Amuck a close second), but the things that Godard did in the 60's still boggles my mind.
Solid Snake PAC
08-02-10, 06:36 PM
I like Godard...but....Kubrick...Kubrick is Kubrick. FMJ, 2001, Barry Lyndon (we still need a damn fine SE on BD for this film! ASAP!), The Shining, Eyes Wide Shut (which I'm still trying to get a grasp on), Paths of Glory (I love you, Criterion, for finally being the ones to give a damn about!), Clockwork Orange etc...He just was awesome. I'm still in awe of what he did in 2001. Just...amazing work. A lot (if not all) of the effects still hold VERY strongly today.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 06:43 PM
I like Godard...but....Kubrick...Kubrick is Kubrick. FMJ, 2001, Barry Lyndon (we still need a damn fine SE on BD for this film! ASAP!), The Shining, Eyes Wide Shut (which I'm still trying to get a grasp on), Paths of Glory (I love you, Criterion, for finally being the ones to give a damn about!), Clockwork Orange etc...He just was awesome. I'm still in awe of what he did in 2001. Just...amazing work. A lot (if not all) of the effects still hold VERY strongly today.
I highly suggest tracking down the source material, Arthur Schnitzler's Traumnovelle (Dream Story). Warner Books published a translation of it in a volume that also includes Kubrick's screenplay. I found it easier to get to the heart of the characters in the print medium. When I re-watched the film after doing my reading homework, I found myself absorbing all new things.
As a starting point for someone who might not be interested in doing that kind of reading, I would at least suggest that you re-watch the film and pay close attention to the use of color throughout (especially reds and blues). There is quite a lot going on from start to finish in that film. I'm excited to see it on Blu-ray at some point; I treated myself to it from Amazon last December and have been waiting for the time to feel right to return to the film.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:45 PM
Eyes Wide Shut is an example of a film about dreams that is both technically stunning and emotionally relevant, unlike Inception. ;)
Kubrick solely for that^, Spartacus, Strangelove and 2001 which is better than Coppola's 70s quartet.
However i like Leone even more than Kubrick. ;)
FRwL
08-02-10, 06:48 PM
I consider 2001: A Space Odyssey to be the greatest thing put on film (with Duck Amuck a close second), but the things that Godard did in the 60's still boggles my mind.
Dammit i need to see Godard.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:49 PM
Check out Band of Outsiders and Pierrot Le Fou.
Solid Snake PAC
08-02-10, 06:50 PM
That book is on my list of things to get. I've yet to reach that point. But trust me...Visually speaking...EWS is very interesting. As contextual piece...I've no fucking idea what to make of it. I think I get it but out of all the films that I never had issues on "getting" it's fucking EWS that leaves me visually entranced by contextually confused.
rexinnih
08-02-10, 06:51 PM
Coppola. Apocalypse Now. My favorite movie, thus my choice.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:52 PM
Solid Snake, EWS is so much more than just a visual spectacle. Definitely read Traumnovelle and check out some critical essays on the film.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 06:56 PM
Eyes Wide Shut is an example of a film about dreams that is both technically stunning and emotionally relevant, unlike Inception. ;)
I haven't seen [that other movie], so any comparison is beyond me at the moment. I will say, though, that Eyes Wide Shut invites more reflection and exploration than anything I've seen since. It's a very personal film, I think. You have to have the kind of fear of loss that drives Bill Hartford to begin to connect with him, and that level of fear only comes from having a certain kind of mature relationship. In turn, it's a film then that requires on a certain maturity from its audience.
I've said before; I was 21 when it was released and it was quite simply beyond me at the time. I had to grow into it. And yet, even as familiar with it as I am now, I love that it teaches me new things each time I return to it. I know the temptation is to want to feel that you've reached a point of true understanding, and I actually find it reassuring to know I'll never get to that point with this film.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 06:58 PM
I first saw it when I was 15, and I could only appreciate its surface pleasures (the visuals, the ominous dread). Having lived more, I now think it may be the most layered of all of Kubrick's films.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 07:05 PM
That book is on my list of things to get. I've yet to reach that point. But trust me...Visually speaking...EWS is very interesting. As contextual piece...I've no fucking idea what to make of it. I think I get it but out of all the films that I never had issues on "getting" it's fucking EWS that leaves me visually entranced by contextually confused.
Here's the thing: Eyes Wide Shut is, at its heart, an exploration of how the perception of things can be just as real as the reality of things. Is lust the same thing as actual cheating? Our instinct is to say, "No," but what this story explores is how damaging the admission of lust can be just as devastating as a confession of cheating. Trust, revenge, love, lust, fear...these are all abstract concepts and, as such, are susceptible to the kind of manipulation that perception can have on them.
But don't, as Levar Burton says, take my word for it. What I've gotten out of the film over the years may be entirely wrong. I will say this, though: until you really feel the film, any meaning it has will elude you. For my money, Tom Cruise has never done any work that comes close to the kind of nuance and depth that he showed in this role. Slamming his fists while walking on the sidewalk seemed a show of irritation on first viewing. But then, the more I related to Bill Hartford, the more symbolic I saw that gesture to be. It's a manifestation of self-doubt, anger, fear, rejection...all this is going on in a very visceral way that would normally be spoon-fed to us as the audience. Instead, Cruise doesn't say a word about Bill's internal thoughts or feelings; he just shows them, and it's up to us to decipher the signs.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 07:07 PM
I do have to give Cruise credit for his work in Magnolia, though. Not quite to the level of his work in EWS, but close. It's also the only good thing about that horrid film.
Mountain Biker
08-02-10, 07:48 PM
The Shining and Full Metal Jacket? No contest. Kubrick, easily
jmu878
08-02-10, 08:14 PM
I think the first two Godfather films top anything Kubrick ever did. However, he has a more versatile and wider range of films to his credit, so Kubrick.
The Ferret
08-02-10, 08:28 PM
As seems to be the consensus, Kubrick's body of work is overall more impressive. But I would take the two Godfather's and Apocalypse Now over any three Kubrick movies.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 08:32 PM
As seems to be the consensus, Kubrick's body of work is overall more impressive. But I would take the two Godfather's and Apocalypse Now over any three Kubrick movies.
If I were taking Movies 101, I'd expect to encounter the three Coppola films you cited. But Kubrick would be a higher level, specialized course all its own.
Supermallet
08-02-10, 08:33 PM
I would take 2001: A Space Odyssey over any 10 Coppola films. Throw in A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon and it's over.
Solid Snake PAC
08-02-10, 08:46 PM
I would take 2001: A Space Odyssey over any 10 Coppola films. Throw in A Clockwork Orange and Barry Lyndon and it's over.
Same here...and hell for a popcorn piece cuz it's so enjoyable..get FMJ. Which in itself is probably the easiest to get into for SK.
Joe Buck
08-02-10, 09:49 PM
Coppola for me. He's one of my absolute favorite directors. And The Godfather films are actually a little futher down my list of Coppola faves than one might assume. The Conversation is a fantastic little film. As is Peggy Sue Got Married. One From The Heart, while a mess, is a visual tour-de-force. Apocalypse Now is my fave of all, I reckon. Even Francis' more recent work like The Rainmaker I find very rewarding.
I have to be honest, and I hope you don't take my badge away from me for this, but I am not that big a fan of Kubrick. Sure, I dig The Shining and 2001 and Dr. Stangelove but I don't get much enjoyment out of many of his films. I respect the craftmanship behind them, but they seem to be speaking a different language than mine. My loss, I know.
FRwL
08-02-10, 09:56 PM
Well when i picked it is was basically on his 50s/60s output. Don't really care for what he did afterward (i utterly love the Vietnam part of FMJ though go figure).
Also i do like Coppola, Scorsese isn't even in his league.
MinLShaw
08-02-10, 10:03 PM
I have to be honest, and I hope you don't take my badge away from me for this, but I am not that big a fan of Kubrick.
Don't be so timid; you're entitled to express your opinion in an online forum. (Unless, of course, you live in China.) And I for one can definitely respect an opinion backed up as thoughtfully as yours:
Sure, I dig The Shining and 2001 and Dr. Stangelove but I don't get much enjoyment out of many of his films. I respect the craftmanship behind them, but they seem to be speaking a different language than mine. My loss, I know.
That's a more articulate reason for not picking a director than I've read in most of the other threads--for, or against someone. There's nothing wrong with an artist's work leaving you cold. I'll never understand the appeal of The Beatles or Monty Python.
All that said, of course, since you didn't pick the guy who directed Eyes Wide Shut, you're wrong.
GenPion
08-02-10, 10:20 PM
Kubrick. He's one of my all time favorite film-makers. I never lose interest in his work, and have watched almost all of his films several times over on various formats over the years. My Stanley Kubrick Archives book is a prized part of my collection.
Anyway, Coppola has made some great movies, but some ones I don't care for too much as well.
JumpCutz
08-02-10, 10:31 PM
OP here, although I too picked Kubrick (my favorite filmmaker) I'm quite surprised to see his utter domination here.
My thinking was that the strength of Coppola's Godfather films (well the first 2 anyway), The Conversation, Apocalypse Now and a few other quality films in his filmography would be enough to go toe to toe with the master.
Boy was I wrong.:lol:
This is the biggest landslide yet in the director face-offs.
Buy: