Stanley Kubrick's Films
 

It does surprise me that the Academy even recognizes films like "A Clockwork Orange" in 1971, when the times seemed just a wee bit conservative - we weren't yet in the Sexual Revolution.

That being said, I didn't get to see "Clockwork" until I was 23 years old, so I must say that I really enjoyed the film (considering the circumstances - I was with about 12 guys, with the ring-leader this red-headed kid who kept coming up with tid-bits (it was the same week that Mike Tysen bit the ear)

I never bothered with "2001," and according to all the members of this board, I suppose I never will bother (even Howard Stern condemns it - and I'm too old to use acid to view the film).

I saw "Dr. Strangelove" at the ripe old age of 27 - my boss lended me this old, worn out vhs copy to take home to watch, and I didn't really want to, but he forced me to. I began watching it reluctantly, and was surprised by my outright laughter! A surprise pleasure on my first viewing (and I'll admit that, although I don't get the same amusement watching on subsequent viewings, I still chuckle with the scenes with George C Scott).

Ah, "The Shining." I've spoken on this before, and I will simply sum up that I've always enjoyed the film because I saw it before I even knew how to read. I'll always love this film, and always distain the Stephen King TV mini-series because of that damn ugly kid.

1987's "Full Metal Jacket" had the greatest boot camp experience ever put to film! I was a marine, so I know how it was, and I must say it captured all the negatively quite nicely. Just one thing, though, and I don't know how it would have worked on film, but in real life...
when "Gomer Pyle" was in the latrine with the loaded M-16, and "Joker" walks in on him, trying to talk sense to him. Okay, "Gomer Pyle" obviously has had enough, and his mind flipped. "Joker" tried kindness, but it wasn't kindness from "Joker" that "Gomer Pyle" needed. It was kindness from the devil himself - the drill sergeant.
So...the drill sergeant comes into the latrine, and what does he do? He continues to berate "Gomer," by insulting him, yelling, belittling him. The drill instructor knew he had a loaded weapon, did he think he wasn't going to get shot? Perhaps he thought "Gomer" was still too gilly-livered. Ah, but I say, why take a chance?
I say this...if the drill instructor had dropped his tyrancy and became Joe Normal, and talked to Lawrence in a sane and understanding way, the drill instructor may have lived, and Lawrence could have received the much-needed help.

Film. I just don't know.

That brings us to "Eyes Wide Shut." Tom Cruise cruisin' the city for sex, and never even getting to second base (did he get to even kiss a chick? I don't remember). The film could have been much more explicit in its design, but it seemed reigned in by somebody...I don't know if it was Kubrick himself, or the rating board, but there was not one scene of sex in this Sexual Drama. Hmm. But I did like the film - I think Nicole Kidman should have been honored with an Oscar-nomination for supporting actress for her pot-smoking scenes (very convincing, to me).

Kubrick is one of my favorite director's, even though he made one of the worst films ever in 2001.Eyes Wide Shut,The Shining,Spartacus and Full Metal Jacket,even though i didn't like the second half that much, are some of my favs.Strangelove is also a pretty good film.He's one of the biggest pioneers in film history in my opinion.It's just a shame the only oscar he got was for best visual effects in 2001.:( Oh, and yes Tom Cruise does kiss a chick in Eyes Wide Shut.:) However, .

I can’t imagine skipping a movie that is considered a classic by so many critics and film historians just because a bunch of anonymous posters on the internet didn’t like it. 2001 may not be to your taste or appeal to your sensibilities, but that in no way detracts from the film’s significance. No great work of art appeals to everyone; yet there is value in the experience even when the viewer/reader/listener fails to connect with the work.

I couldn't have said it better. No offense, but if you're turning to Howard Stern for advice on what movies to see, you probably won't like "2001."

Also, "Eyes Wide Shut" isn't about sex.

I can imagine it.:) And by the way i'm not anonymous.If you want to know my life history just ask.:)

everyone should see 2001 at some point. it is one of the most amazing film experiences one can have.

Don't forget Kubrick's early work, including Paths of Glory, Lolita, and The Killing. Even Barry Lyndon I feel is somewhat underrated eventhough it's one of my least favorite Kubrick movies.

And why all the hating on 2001? I believe it's a fantastic film.

I'm also a big Kubrick fan. The only movie I didn't like was Eyes Wide Shut, but it has been quite a while, and I might give it a second chance. Actually, I haven't seen a few of his older ones, such as Paths of Glory and Lolita.

Because it's :yack: :)

My Kubrick box set is my favourite dvd posession. No other director comes to mind that has handled this broad range of genres and done them all greatly as Kubrick has. Sci-Fi, drama, horror, comedy, period, love, etc. Most "great" directors stick to doing the one thing.

I love the look and style his films have and its a shame we wont be seeing anything else from this great man. Also his films have great replay value and stand the test of time extremely well.

And the fact that he himself has only won a single oscar for special effects in 2001 proves that the academy have no idea what they are going on about.

Kubrick has long been one of my favorite directors, at least since my early twenties. To anyone considering giving Eyes Wide Shut a second (or third) chance, I cannot recommend it strongly enough -- typical of my response to some of his works, it was not until subsequent viewings that I really began to understand what he was truly up to.

Barry Lyndon remains his most perfectly realized work in my estimation, with 2001, Paths of Glory, and Dr. Strangelove always hovering close behind.

<b><i>"I never bothered with "2001," and according to all the members of this board, I suppose I never will bother (even Howard Stern condemns it - and I'm too old to use acid to view the film)."</i></b>


Not <b>ALL</b> members of this board - not <b>this</b> member of the board - and saying that <i>even</i> Howard Stern condemns it goes a long way to helping us understand what standards you use in selecting movies.

Stanley Kubrick is my favorite director, no contest. I think his best films are 2001, Eyes Wide Shut, and Barry Lyndon....although if you ask me which one is my favorite, I'll probably give a different answer from those 3 depending on my mood. I cannot really choose between them. Anyone avoiding seeing these films because of some comments they read on the internet are doing themselves a disservice. For as many people who don't like them, there are just as many people who find them brilliant. If you're curious enough about the director to start or post in a thread about him, you might as well see them and decide for yourself.

Gazooks! It was a joke. I will refrain, and add that I never use Howard Stern, Siskel & Ebert, The Daily News or any other reviewer of entertainment because I generally tend to form my own opinions, and find that what I like is usually what they pan.

Good gravy, I just never got around to seeing it. If its that goddamned important to you, I'll go rent "2001" and give you my review on it.

Stanley Kubrick is my favorite director, and my favorite film of all time is 2001: ASO.

Kubrick has great range in genres and I think the fact that his films have so many naysayers just proves how good of a director he was. That might be contradictory, but once you realize he knew what he was doing, you understand.

<b>2001</b> and <b>The Shining</b> are the only two Kubrick films that I really like.

<b>Full Metal Jacket</b> has moments of greatness, and <b>Paths of Glory</b> is a solid effort.

But the rest I consider, for the most part, overrated P'sOS. Eyes Wide Shut, Spartacus, A Clockwork Orange (horrendous and appalling), Dr. Strangelove (painfully unfunny).

I think he's highly overrated (of course that just means I'm too stupid to see why they're brilliant), and even <b>2001</b>, which I enjoy quite a bit, is highly overpraised. Greatest movie ever? Maybe if it had a logical plot one could follow. (Yes, I did read the book, and thought it was okay.)

So, that's my little Kubrick summary. I know I'm probably in the minority.

Sorry, but I'm going to chime in on this again...

> <i>"I never bothered with "2001," and according to all the members of this board, I suppose I never will bother (even Howard Stern condemns it - and I'm too old to use acid to view the film)."</i>

You've obviously NOT read many of the threads concerning 2001... If you had, you would see that MANY of us consider it Kubrick's masterpiece and MANY more consider it the finest film ever made, this fan included. Do yourself a favor and check it out with an open mind and no pre-conceived notions. Also, you're never too old for acid. ;)

And while I'm here, as stated above... You've missed the point with Eyes Wide Shut completely. I suggest watching it a few more times. But hey, don't feel bad, most folks - MANY critics included - missed the point completely and panned the film without even knowing what it was about.

I don't.I consider it :yack:.Now i know you all are getting tired of me saying this between every post, but whatever.:) And please do yourself a favor and do not even rent this piece of junk.

So what was the point? Enlighten and entertain us.

Sex.:)

That's what I thought. About some guy who's lookin' to screw around, but just can't get it together.

:up: :hump:

2001 is my favorite movie of all time

I listen to Howard Stern everyday and love his show, but he has the single worst taste in movies of anyone I've ever heard discuss movies. (When Robin did the news the day after Kubrick died, Howard went on a rant about how he didn't like kubricks films and he roughly related the same story from Private Parts about how he went to see 2001 with his friend Dave and how Howard hated the movie, etc. Then someone called in and "explained" 2001. At that point Howard conceded that there must have been parts he missunderstood and that he at least needed to watch it again. Bottom line, Howard doesn't know s**t about movies.)

No he does not.But he's right about 2001.:)

If you've already made up your mind not to like 2001 or Eyes Wide Shut then I don't think anyone can convince you otherwise. Ultimately the film stands for itself, and it is pointless for someone else to interpret it for you.

I will say one thing though - EWS is not about sex and many people think of it as a dream/fantasy.

No it is not.It's about...Say what the hell is it about? :confused: Oh well it's a great film anyway.:D

I enjoyed "Eyes Wide Shut," but I was let down that there wasn't any sex going on (the orgy scenes were a joke since they're "Blocked"). It promised, but didn't deliver.

And...how in blue blazes did they know, out of all the masked people, who Tom Cruise was? Who was the Whisperer/Warner? And it couldn't have been a dream, cause he...he...well, he returned the cape/mask, but then didn't he find the mask on his pillow? Yeah, I would love someone to explain this to me. It will not fall on deaf ears, believe you me.

Amadeus - Um, yeah, I think we get your point... You know what they say about opinions and everyone has one... However wrong it may be. Your puke on 2001 is noted... Question > What is 2001 about? You've obviously no real understanding of the depth of Kubrick's films - judging from your opinion of EWS and your FMJ poll thread - so I would be interested in seeing exactly what you know about 2001, other than you did not like it. Why?

Buttmunker - I would simply ask that you watch EWS again and draw your own conclusions <i>beyond</i> what you've been told that EWS is about... But, if you need someone to tell you, it's a film about faith and the importance of honesty, integrity and morality in this society - where these things mean little - that we live in. For starters. There's MUCH more there that will be revealed - as with ANY Kubrick film - with multiple viewings. Sexual obsession is merely the catalyst that propels the tale... Now, my basic interpretation is just that, basic, and is what <b>I</b> have taken from the film in my five viewings... The beauty of Kubrick's work is that it can have many meanings for many different people, and none of them can be the same... His films are about what resides in each of us... The comments that Stanley's films are cold and non-human could not be farther from the truth... They all require introspection to fully understand. So, I simply ask you to watch EWS again and look beyond the superficial.

So, you approached EWS as a sex film instead of with an open mind as to what Kubrick was trying to tell you... Same mistake most of the critics of this film have made.

To answer your questions, you weren't paying attention to the film.



One can not watch a Kubrick film once and "get it". It's been said a million times, they <b>require</b> multiple viewings... The man did not make movies with simple plots to entertain... Even his "less complicated" films like The Killing, Lolita, Full Metal Jacket and The Shining are about more than what resides on the surface.

I can't imagine why someone who likes Kubrick films wouldn't pay $2 to rent 2001, to find out for themselves if they like it or not. Whatever pops your clutch, I suppose.

For those in the Los Angeles area, the New Beverly theater is showing 2001 and A Clockwork Orange on Feb. 23, 24, 25. $6 for the double feature. I can't wait.

I didn't like 2001 because it was boring, had a crappy plot, not much dialogue, bad characters and a stupid little computer.It was just bad! And i still have no idea what the hell's it about?

So, in having no clue what-so-ever as to what 2001 is actually about, you just thought you would come in here and puke on it based on your opinions that the film was boring, had bad characters, not enough dialogue and a stupid little computer. Your analysis of the film will carry much weight on this thread, I'm sure... Might I suggest a little effort on your part next time before you proceed to enter a discussion on a film that is regarded as one of the true classics of cinema. Like I said, you're certainly entitled to your opinons, but have a leg to stand on if you wish to be taken seriously.

Sadly i'm not a gifted film reviewer like our fellow reviewers here at dvd talk.:) And please, don't insult me again.

Ladies, please.

Punk.;)

Not meant to insult, merely to defend my position on the film. Nothing personal, just an observation that you're not prepared to discuss the film. You're welcome to your opinions, I simply ask that you be prepared to defend them. A "this film sucks" with no explanation as to why means little.

And to switch gears... Buttmunker, you make no mention of The Killing, Paths Of Glory, Spartacus, Lolita or Barry Lyndon... Since this is your thread, I would ask if you have seen them and, if you have, your opinions on those films... A films of Kubrick discussion could not be complete without his "lesser known" work.

I would be glad to share my thoughts on those and highly recommend several viewings of all... ;)

Sparticus usually isn't considered a Kubrick film by the Kubrick followers, though BL is often polled as his best film by his hardcore fans.

and this <b>Even his "less complicated" films like...Full Metal Jacket and The Shining </b> isn't true.

I'm so glad someone started a thread on Kubrick films. He's my favorite director, and the only one whose entire body of work I've seen. And I agree with pagos-no one else has done such a broad range of genres so greatly. My opinions are as follows:

Fear and Desire-Kinda cheesy, but nicely photographed and shows his potential.

Killer's Kiss-Predictable, but again nicely photographed and again not a bad way to spend an hour.

The Killing-Really good crime drama.

Paths of Glory-I LOVE this movie. So tragic, and so captivating. Anyone who says Kubrick's movies are "cold" will be silenced by a glimpse of this.

Spartacus-Dosen't feel like a Kubrick movie, since he didn't direct the first half and was only a director for hire on the second, but still one of the all-time great epics.

Lolita-OK this is one I didn't like. I just thought it was strange without much of a point. The tagline says "How did they ever make a movie out of Lolita?" By dancing around the main subject.

Dr. Strangelove-Hilarious. One of my favorite movies.

2001-The most hypnotic, majestic movie ever. One of my favorite movies.

Clockwork Orange-Terrifying, shocking, moving and biting. One of my favorite movies.

Barry Lyndon-Really underrated. Long and slow and depressing-and a masterpiece.

Shining-Very very scary and stylish.

Full Metal Jacket-I thought the boot camp part was excellent, but the part in Vietnam forgettable. I didn't care about any of the characters except Pyle.

Eyes Wide Shut-Could have been a classic, but tied things up much too neatly. I still enjoy watching it a lot.

That's (unfortunately) true. However, I'm a follower and I love it. It has many, many of Stan's touches. Much of the visual splendor is owed to his vision (for lack of a better term.)

If you see Stanley Kubrick: A Life in Pictures, (which everyone should, it's a brilliant documentary), it becomes clear just how much he was involved with the greeatness of that film.