Kubrick-Genius or over rated?
#51
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alfred Hitchcock is the greatest director in my opinion, but Stanley even tho i don't like his style u can see talent. I vote Ed wood as the worst lmao
#54
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by AndyA
Kubrick Is a man who has made films in the top 10 of all time in at least six different Genres (IMHO)
2001: Arguably best Sci Fi ever
2001: Arguably best Sci Fi ever
Shining: One of the scariest ever
Dr. Strangelove: one of the funniest ever
Full Metal Jacket: Again A top pick in War Genre
Paths of Glory: One of the best Anti-War Movies ever!
Not to mention Spartacus as a great Epic film
Killers Kiss
The Killing
The Killing
Eyes Wide Shut - all masterpieces.
Kubrick was clearly a great filmmaker, but he would occsionally lapse into long winded pretentiousness. Ponderous is another good word to describe SOME of his movies. Then again, some people LOVE those films, so it's all a matter of taste.
For me, Kubrick IS a great filmmaker with a great visual style, but I find that some of his films are overrated and too damned slow for me. Others (The Killing, The Shining, Paths of Glory) are perfect the way they are, and I wouldn't change a thing about them.
I guess the best way to put it is that Kubrick's films weren't for everyone, and many people who liked some of his films disliked just as many of his films as they liked.
He was an artist. Instead of a canvas or a musical instrument his art was made with camera and film.
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guntersville, AL
Posts: 803
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I don't really get why he's such a big deal. I can appreciate his art, but I have a feeling that a lot of people just say he's their favorite director just because its the intellectual and elitist thing to do. If you genuinely like his work, awesome, but if you don't, that's your opinion! People have different taste. Heck, I enjoy The Hot Chick, one of the worst movies of all time, but everyone has their horrible movies they like.
Personally, the only two movies I've really enjoyed of Kubrick's are Dr. Strangelove and A Clockwork Orange, and those took some time to get used to. I've probably seen them three different times in my life and the last time (a few months ago) was the first time I've actually appreciated them.
I do plan on buying the boxset of his movies because oddly, the movies I don't really like are the ones I watch the most to figure out why everyone thinks they're so special.
But anywho.
Personally, the only two movies I've really enjoyed of Kubrick's are Dr. Strangelove and A Clockwork Orange, and those took some time to get used to. I've probably seen them three different times in my life and the last time (a few months ago) was the first time I've actually appreciated them.
I do plan on buying the boxset of his movies because oddly, the movies I don't really like are the ones I watch the most to figure out why everyone thinks they're so special.
But anywho.
#57
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arizona
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of the 3 movies of his that I have tried to watch and have liked was the 1st half of Full Metal Jacket. After they got out of boot camp, it all went downhill from there. But that may just be me as im not into the war movie genera.
The Shining I found too dull and slow to even make it through the first half
A Clockwork Orange - random ultraviolence followed with rehab by classical music just didnt do anything for me. Though when he was jumping up and down hitting the porcelian(sp?) penis with the lady gasping with great fear that he might break it with each hit was funny.
I have no interest in his older movies, but I would be willing to give Eyes Wide Shut a fair chance.
The Shining I found too dull and slow to even make it through the first half
A Clockwork Orange - random ultraviolence followed with rehab by classical music just didnt do anything for me. Though when he was jumping up and down hitting the porcelian(sp?) penis with the lady gasping with great fear that he might break it with each hit was funny.
I have no interest in his older movies, but I would be willing to give Eyes Wide Shut a fair chance.
#58
DVD Talk Legend
OK, I think it's time to take a little heat off of my boy, Sigill. I am not going to deny that Kubrick was a great director, and I'll admit a genius in certain ways. I have to agree though that I think he was overrated.
Overrated in the sense that I think he was NOT the greatest director ever. Of course this all comes down to opinion. Like AndyA's opinion bellow:
The only statement I agree with (other than Spartacus being a great-not greatest epic film) is perhaps A Clockwork Orange. A Clockwork Orange is in my top 5 favorite movies of all time (and has been since I first saw it in 1984) but I may even go out on a limb and say that is more due to the source material that the quality of the actual film.
2001 is certainly not the best sci-fi movie I’ve seen, but considering the crapfest that infects normal sci-fi I’d put it in the top 5.
Shining wouldn’t even make it in the top 10. I can name at least a dozen other scarier and more effective.
Dr. Strangelove wouldn’t crack the top 20 comedies for me.
Full Metal Jacket is great but certainly doesn’t rate in the top 5 war movies (if I thought about it might get bumped out of the top 10).
Paths of Glory is good (not great) and there are certainly better “anti-war movies” in my opinion.
I may even go for the ultimate blasphemy and state (again in my opinion) that Spielberg is the better director.
Overrated in the sense that I think he was NOT the greatest director ever. Of course this all comes down to opinion. Like AndyA's opinion bellow:
Originally Posted by AndyA
Kubrick Is a man who has made films in the top 10 of all time in at least six different Genres (IMHO)
2001: Arguably best Sci Fi ever
Shining: One of the scariest ever
Dr. Strangelove: one of the funniest ever
Full Metal Jacket: Again A top pick in War Genre
A Clockwork Orange: hard to pick an exact Genre but one of the best mind f@ck movies ever.
Paths of Glory: One of the best Anti-War Movies ever!
Not to mention Spartacus as a great Epic film
Lolita
Barry Lyndon
Killers Kiss
The Killing
Eyes Wide Shut & More all masterpieces.
Name me one other director who has done all that!
I read or heard somewhere that Spielberg always new no matter what he did, Kubrick could & would do it better. Every single films of his is a gem.
2001: Arguably best Sci Fi ever
Shining: One of the scariest ever
Dr. Strangelove: one of the funniest ever
Full Metal Jacket: Again A top pick in War Genre
A Clockwork Orange: hard to pick an exact Genre but one of the best mind f@ck movies ever.
Paths of Glory: One of the best Anti-War Movies ever!
Not to mention Spartacus as a great Epic film
Lolita
Barry Lyndon
Killers Kiss
The Killing
Eyes Wide Shut & More all masterpieces.
Name me one other director who has done all that!
I read or heard somewhere that Spielberg always new no matter what he did, Kubrick could & would do it better. Every single films of his is a gem.
2001 is certainly not the best sci-fi movie I’ve seen, but considering the crapfest that infects normal sci-fi I’d put it in the top 5.
Shining wouldn’t even make it in the top 10. I can name at least a dozen other scarier and more effective.
Dr. Strangelove wouldn’t crack the top 20 comedies for me.
Full Metal Jacket is great but certainly doesn’t rate in the top 5 war movies (if I thought about it might get bumped out of the top 10).
Paths of Glory is good (not great) and there are certainly better “anti-war movies” in my opinion.
I may even go for the ultimate blasphemy and state (again in my opinion) that Spielberg is the better director.
#59
DVD Talk Reviewer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Blu-ray.com
Posts: 10,380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by sigill
Thanks for that. For a minute there i thought there was only me who felt like that about kubricks films.
Second, I don't exactly think that anyone could tag Kubrick over-rated. Perhaps misunderstood by many and most definitely worshiped by important people with a serious clout in the industry whose writings hardly reveal any thorough understanding of the director's style. This being said there is also plenty of controversy in Kubrick's legacy to begin with, and I don't mean explicitness, but work whose integrity is difficult to place next to greatness.
An important director, absolutely, yet great, I am not convinced. There are only a few truly great filmmakers (Fellini, Tarkovsky, etc) and Kubrick most certainly, in my opinion, isn't one of them.
Ciao,
Pro-B
Last edited by pro-bassoonist; 04-22-08 at 03:28 AM.
#60
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANDY A,
Ridley Scott is the master as well of doing different genres.
SIGILL, And no, Kubrick is not overrated. There is no way that he is overrated. If he is overrated, then who's a good director that's not overrated? Being overrated has to do with comparing and contrasting one to another. Just because Eyes Wide Shut sucked, it doesn't mean that Kubrick is overrated. Most famous good directors have done a couple bad films, it doesn't make them overrated then.
PRO-BASS,
What? haha. You are funny. Why is Kubrick not part of your great director list? I would take Tarkoffsky off your list and replace it with Kubrick!
But either way, there is only one director, considered great, whom is not only overrated, but just an awful director - and that's Wong Kar Wai....worst director in movie history - right up there with Uwe Boll.
Ridley Scott is the master as well of doing different genres.
SIGILL, And no, Kubrick is not overrated. There is no way that he is overrated. If he is overrated, then who's a good director that's not overrated? Being overrated has to do with comparing and contrasting one to another. Just because Eyes Wide Shut sucked, it doesn't mean that Kubrick is overrated. Most famous good directors have done a couple bad films, it doesn't make them overrated then.
PRO-BASS,
What? haha. You are funny. Why is Kubrick not part of your great director list? I would take Tarkoffsky off your list and replace it with Kubrick!
But either way, there is only one director, considered great, whom is not only overrated, but just an awful director - and that's Wong Kar Wai....worst director in movie history - right up there with Uwe Boll.
Last edited by toddly6666; 04-22-08 at 07:59 AM.
#62
Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=toddly6666]ANDY A,
Ridley Scott is the master as well of doing different genres.
With all due respect. I like Ridley Scott. But what other movie besides Blade Runner maybe Aliens (Sci-Fi), I might even give you Gladiator (Epic) but what other movies has he done what would qualify for the top ten of there genre? Some might say Black Hawk Down (War) but even that makes only 3 genres. Martin Scorsese may come close I loved After Hours, (Comedy) Goodfellas, (My favorite Gangster) Raging Bull, (Bio Pic?) Last Waltz, (concert) Age of Innocence (period drama) Frankly I have loved about everything he does.
Spielberg is right up there as well.
But IMHO All of the above directors have made some bad films a time or two while Kubrick has not made one bad film. (I have not seen Fear & Desire)
Ridley Scott is the master as well of doing different genres.
With all due respect. I like Ridley Scott. But what other movie besides Blade Runner maybe Aliens (Sci-Fi), I might even give you Gladiator (Epic) but what other movies has he done what would qualify for the top ten of there genre? Some might say Black Hawk Down (War) but even that makes only 3 genres. Martin Scorsese may come close I loved After Hours, (Comedy) Goodfellas, (My favorite Gangster) Raging Bull, (Bio Pic?) Last Waltz, (concert) Age of Innocence (period drama) Frankly I have loved about everything he does.
Spielberg is right up there as well.
But IMHO All of the above directors have made some bad films a time or two while Kubrick has not made one bad film. (I have not seen Fear & Desire)
#63
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 20,084
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
Genius.
He's responsible for some of the greatest films spanning different genres. 2001 is considered one of the finest sci-fi films ever made. The Shining is one of the greatest horror films. Spartacus is a masterpiece. Full Metal Jacket is one of the top war films I've ever seen. A Clockwork Orange is fucking amazing. The man made phenomenal films, and very few people of his caliber come around in a lifetime. There's a reason so many directors emulate his style and ape from his pictures, because he was that good.
He's responsible for some of the greatest films spanning different genres. 2001 is considered one of the finest sci-fi films ever made. The Shining is one of the greatest horror films. Spartacus is a masterpiece. Full Metal Jacket is one of the top war films I've ever seen. A Clockwork Orange is fucking amazing. The man made phenomenal films, and very few people of his caliber come around in a lifetime. There's a reason so many directors emulate his style and ape from his pictures, because he was that good.
#64
DVD Talk Limited Edition
You didn't have to remove your signature. You might have taken some flack for it, including from me, but if Tarantino's a favorite, who cares what anyone else thinks? I like some of Tarantino's stuff, particularly Jackie Brown.
But I think Tarantino makes movies that tell you what other movies he's watched.
Kubrick made movies that resonate.
Tarantino's movies seem wildly original to people who are younger than 30 and/or very likely don't have first-hand experience—via grindhouses, drive-ins or early VHS & Beta—with the mountains of exploitation movies he constantly references.
Kubrick made originals.
As does Wong Kar-wai (excluding My Blueberry Nights). Wong's best films often resonate the same way Kubrick's best films do.
Though I found this rather amusing!
Uwe Boll? Please . . .
But I think Tarantino makes movies that tell you what other movies he's watched.
Kubrick made movies that resonate.
Tarantino's movies seem wildly original to people who are younger than 30 and/or very likely don't have first-hand experience—via grindhouses, drive-ins or early VHS & Beta—with the mountains of exploitation movies he constantly references.
Kubrick made originals.
As does Wong Kar-wai (excluding My Blueberry Nights). Wong's best films often resonate the same way Kubrick's best films do.
Originally Posted by toddly6666
But either way, there is only one director, considered great, whom is not only overrated, but just an awful director - and that's Wong Kar Wai....worst director in movie history - right up there with Uwe Boll.
Uwe Boll? Please . . .
Last edited by Brian T; 04-22-08 at 12:05 PM.
#65
Cool New Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian T
You didn't have to remove your signature. You might have taken some flack for it, including from me, but if Tarantino's a favorite, who cares what anyone else thinks? I like some of Tarantino's stuff, particularly Jackie Brown.
But I think Tarantino makes movies that tell you what other movies he's watched.
Kubrick made movies that resonate.
Tarantino's movies seem wildly original to people who are younger than 30 and/or very likely don't have first-hand experience—via grindhouses, drive-ins or early VHS & Beta—with the mountains of exploitation movies he constantly references.
Kubrick made originals.
As does Wong Kar-wai (excluding My Blueberry Nights). Wong's best films often resonate the same way Kubrick's best films do.
Though I found this rather amusing!
Uwe Boll? Please . . .
But I think Tarantino makes movies that tell you what other movies he's watched.
Kubrick made movies that resonate.
Tarantino's movies seem wildly original to people who are younger than 30 and/or very likely don't have first-hand experience—via grindhouses, drive-ins or early VHS & Beta—with the mountains of exploitation movies he constantly references.
Kubrick made originals.
As does Wong Kar-wai (excluding My Blueberry Nights). Wong's best films often resonate the same way Kubrick's best films do.
Though I found this rather amusing!
Uwe Boll? Please . . .
But you are right, kubrick definatly made original films that were all his own vision.
#66
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally Posted by sigill
I have to agree with everything you have said there. I understand that Tarantino references other movies almost constantly. I may be slightly biased due to my age but i just feel that his films combine multiple genres so well. Kill Bill for example was essentially a martial arts film crossed with a multitude of other genre styles. I also think his use of music in movies is excellent. He just seems to be able to find the perfect scene with the perfect piece of music and that combination leaves a lasting mark in your memory.
But you are right, kubrick definatly made original films that were all his own vision.
But you are right, kubrick definatly made original films that were all his own vision.
Taratino most definitely has a knack for repackaging old material in a new wrapper. He clearly has the technical chops to make films, but I'm still waiting for him to make one that's more than just "cool" dialogue fronting a pastiche of things I've seen before, enjoyable though they often are.
I own more of his soundtracks than I do his films. Of course, I also own (or have owned, before switching everything to Itunes) a great many of the original soundtracks and pop albums he took his cues from, since they were worth getting the first time around. Of course, Tarantino's soundtracks are nice distillations for road trips.
Kubrick digs deeper, I think. And while his films are often slower, as you say, I find that when many of them are watched in the right frame of mind (perhaps less so his early studio pictures), and perhaps even at the right age, they are more psychologically rewarding. I find my appreciation for Kubrick's films has increased as I've gotten older, and I consciously avoided many of them in my teens and 20's, partly because his stories didn't appeal to me then, and partly because I knew I'd appreciate them better later on. Weird, I know.
#67
DVD Talk Legend
For all the adulation that Kubrick gets as an, "Artist," (and I agree that he was an artist - with film as his medium), I'd have to say that Kurosawa probably deserves more. From strong early works like Drunk Angel and Stray Dog to the mid period classics Rashomon, Seven Samurai, The Bad Sleep Well, Yojimbo, High and Low, etc, to his later epics like Kagemusha and Ran, Kurosawa combined many different elements in his films, and yet all of his films had his stamp all over them. He had an amazing visual flair, with an eye for detail, and a brilliant grasp of story and characters.
When it comes to directors there are lists of favorites. Some of those lists are diguised as "Best Directors" lists, but in the end most of them are just variations of the lists of favorites.
Kubrick tops many of those lists. He wouldn't top mine, or be in the top 10. Kurosawa tops my list - because I think he was the best at what he did (my opinion), and because I love his movies.
I respect Kubrick, but have mixed feelings about his films. I respect Kurosawa and LOVE his films.
Off the top of my head here are some of my favorite directors: Akira Kurosawa, Anthony Mann (talk about mastering different genres!), John Ford, John Huston, Howard Hawks, James Cameron, Ridley Scott, Don Siegel, Clint Eastwood, Edward Dmytryk, Steven Speilberg, Kinji Fukasaku... I could probably list another ten directors whose work I enjoy more than Kubrick's. But,as I said, I still have a lot of respect for Kubrick - and I do like SOME of his films a hell of a lot.
Kubrick, like Kurosawa, brought something new to the table. His visual flair, his sense of pacing, his overall style - he definitely knew what he was doing and had a lot of talent. His style and his films weren't for everyone, but something tells me that was by design.
When it comes to directors there are lists of favorites. Some of those lists are diguised as "Best Directors" lists, but in the end most of them are just variations of the lists of favorites.
Kubrick tops many of those lists. He wouldn't top mine, or be in the top 10. Kurosawa tops my list - because I think he was the best at what he did (my opinion), and because I love his movies.
I respect Kubrick, but have mixed feelings about his films. I respect Kurosawa and LOVE his films.
Off the top of my head here are some of my favorite directors: Akira Kurosawa, Anthony Mann (talk about mastering different genres!), John Ford, John Huston, Howard Hawks, James Cameron, Ridley Scott, Don Siegel, Clint Eastwood, Edward Dmytryk, Steven Speilberg, Kinji Fukasaku... I could probably list another ten directors whose work I enjoy more than Kubrick's. But,as I said, I still have a lot of respect for Kubrick - and I do like SOME of his films a hell of a lot.
Kubrick, like Kurosawa, brought something new to the table. His visual flair, his sense of pacing, his overall style - he definitely knew what he was doing and had a lot of talent. His style and his films weren't for everyone, but something tells me that was by design.
#68
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally Posted by B5Erik
Kubrick, like Kurosawa, brought something new to the table. His visual flair, his sense of pacing, his overall style - he definitely knew what he was doing and had a lot of talent. His style and his films weren't for everyone, but something tells me that was by design.
#69
DVD Talk Hero
I've said it in this forum before: Kubrick's films suffer terribly when reduced to home video.
A few months ago, I saw "Once Upon A Time in the West" and "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" in the theater, and the movies were certainly better in its original format. But they were pretty much the same movie.
When I saw "2001" in the theater, I was surprised to discover that it was a completely different movie. Maybe it was the better resolution and color, maybe it was the 45° of visual field, or maybe it was something else I didn't consciously notice. I was sucked into the movie from the first shot, and stayed inside it until the end.
A few months ago, I saw "Once Upon A Time in the West" and "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly" in the theater, and the movies were certainly better in its original format. But they were pretty much the same movie.
When I saw "2001" in the theater, I was surprised to discover that it was a completely different movie. Maybe it was the better resolution and color, maybe it was the 45° of visual field, or maybe it was something else I didn't consciously notice. I was sucked into the movie from the first shot, and stayed inside it until the end.