View Full Version : Billy Corgan on Stanley Kubrick


osamy
09-29-2007, 10:30 PM
In Lemon Magazine, some communication arts magazine, there are *******d some comments by Corgan regarding Stanley Kubrick (the whole issue, named "A Clockwork Lemon", is a Kubrick homage, perhaps in the wake of the upcoming DVD re-release of the director's films). There is no internet link, but for the interested, it's out there on the shelves.

At the very least, with his sparse comments regarding "Lolita", "Dr. Strangelove", and "Full Metal Jacket" (which has Corgan's favorite Kubrickian imagery), it indicates that Corgan is a perceptive film viewer.

smashapumpkin
09-29-2007, 10:41 PM
yes he must be

Ugly
09-29-2007, 11:49 PM
Full Metal Jacket is my favourite Kubrick flick. Then Shinning. Then Strangelove.

Not a huge fan of 2001. I hope Billy feels the same.

themadcaplaughs
09-29-2007, 11:53 PM
I have to say A Clockwork Orange is my personal favorite.

Gossamer
09-30-2007, 12:27 AM
A Clockwork Orange is my favorite film of all time.

Kubrick is my favorite director of all time.

waltermcphilp
09-30-2007, 12:29 AM
kubrick is a hack.

Gossamer
09-30-2007, 12:30 AM
you're a hack.

7shadesofblack
09-30-2007, 12:39 AM
I thought Kubrick's influence over the 2nd half of the movie A.I. was one of the most amazingly beautiful and depressing things I've EVER watched. I haven't seen most of his other movies, though.

Gossamer
09-30-2007, 12:43 AM
yeah Kubrick is pretty much the best of the best.

it's a shame he died before he could do AI himself.

7shadesofblack
09-30-2007, 12:45 AM
Indeed, but from how much of a division there is from the 1st and 2nd part of the movie, it would seem that it were done largely to his vision.

redbreegull
09-30-2007, 12:51 AM
Once Corgan said, "I don't give a shit about movies".

7shadesofblack
09-30-2007, 12:55 AM
And he probably doesn't give a shit about what he would term "movies", but someone as artsy and peculiar as he would really care for "films", especially since he's tried to make many of his videos into "films". He probably hasn't ordered Knocked Up from Netflix, although it's funnier to consider that he might have.

waltermcphilp
09-30-2007, 01:13 AM
kubrick is fine and all, but he tends to let scenes linger.

"let's zoom in on this guys face for 3 minutes and have him say nothing at all"

BRILLIANT! KUBRICK DOES IT AGAIN!

skipgo
09-30-2007, 01:43 AM
half of what bill says is bs. "i don't give a shit about movies", for instance.

half of what i say is also bs. like this post.

redbull
09-30-2007, 01:44 AM
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST ai was really bad

skipgo
09-30-2007, 01:45 AM
agreed, ai was kinda dumb. i fucking hated eyes wide shut too, first time i ever left the theatre in the middle of the film. Full Metal Jacket however, and a Clockwork Orange, I can get behind those.

redchandelier
09-30-2007, 01:48 AM
agreed, ai was kinda dumb. i fucking hated eyes wide shut too, first time i ever left the theatre in the middle of the film. Full Metal Jacket however, and a Clockwork Orange, I can get behind those.


A Clockwork Orange is awesome, love the book, love the film, but I never saw ai, it just looked fucking horrible

Mouths of Babes
09-30-2007, 02:07 AM
Um, Kubrick had no role in the making of AI... Kubrick's AI would have been a very very different film.

Edit: Nevermind, I missed the first post where it was mentioned and thought people brought up AI to say it was a Kubrick film.

exactlythesame
09-30-2007, 02:08 AM
Full Metal Jacket is my favourite Kubrick flick. Then Shinning. Then Strangelove.

Not a huge fan of 2001. I hope Billy feels the same.

2001 the book is incredible, however

exactlythesame
09-30-2007, 02:16 AM
they didn't invent machine guns till the turn of the 20th century

the prescribed means of death was usually stoning

redbreegull
09-30-2007, 02:33 AM
they didn't invent machine guns till the turn of the 20th century

the prescribed means of death was usually stoning

Well they had Gatling guns as early as the Civil War, so your statement is slightly erroneous.

smashingpumpkin
09-30-2007, 02:42 AM
this is all too fucked. i just saw the shining today for the first time. amazing movie. I thought A.I. was pretty rad, and the only movie I enjoyed Jude law.

yoshinobu's revenge
09-30-2007, 03:45 AM
A Clockwork Orange is brilliant. Next on my list would be FMJ.
I also found the Shining pretty good, not outstanding. And the same with Eyes Wide Shut.
I need to see 2001 again, the last time I saw it I was less than 12 years old.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 03:49 AM
i recently watched eyes wide shut. i'd say if there is one film character in any movie that i can relate to its tom cruises character in that movie.

rich, hot chicks want to do me at parties, got a smoking hot wife, i go about on my sexual oddessys, try to uncover the truth about pervert sex rings, family man....at times it seemed a little to close for comfort

tcm
09-30-2007, 03:49 AM
A.I. is a masterpiece.

srt4b
09-30-2007, 03:51 AM
kubrick is fine and all, but he tends to let scenes linger.

"let's zoom in on this guys face for 3 minutes and have him say nothing at all"

BRILLIANT! KUBRICK DOES IT AGAIN!


fukkin word man..........I hate that shitzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

waltermcphilp
09-30-2007, 03:53 AM
clockwork orange and one flew over the cuckoos nest are good only because there were awesome books.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 04:01 AM
theres been lots of awesome books that weren't such great movies...i think clockwork orange was easily a better movie than book as the movie had a very weird nihilistic feel. lots of cool things with music too. it had a feel the book couldnt capture.

cuckoo's nest as a book had lots of development the movie lacked but the movie is one of the best moives ever. whereas the book was just a really good short novel

???
09-30-2007, 04:10 AM
A.I. is a masterpiece.

how do figure? there are elements of the story and imagery that i love, but on the whole i felt that it was really lacking something.

tcm
09-30-2007, 04:12 AM
figure? get out of here.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:17 AM
Clockwork is slow where it becomes annoying. Whoever said that Kubrick dwels upon a face until it becomes annoying is right because that ain't filmmaking, that's just wanking off. However, Shinning dwels upon the craziness of a character because that's what the story is about. Ie. "this person is a fuckin nutcase so therefore I shalt keep a steadcam closeup on them to show they are going crazy." In Shinning, it works. In any other Kubrick flick, aka 2001, not so much. It just gets boring.

Strangelove and Full Metal Jacket are awesome, though. If you're reading this right now and haven't seen Strangelove and FMJ, stop whatever the hell you're doing and go and watch them. Right now!!!

waltermcphilp
09-30-2007, 04:19 AM
full metal jacket rules until gomer pile blews his head off. the rest of the movie is dull.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:19 AM
A.I. is very cool, but if you're talking Speilberg sci-fi movies in the past 10 years or so, War Of the Worlds takes that title and just absolutely runs away with it. Its 9/11 - with aliens!!! How cool is that?!!

tcm
09-30-2007, 04:22 AM
War Of The Worlds can be a masterpiece too, man.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:36 AM
full metal jacket rules until gomer pile blews his head off. the rest of the movie is dull.

that's a fairly common assessment, and I can agree with that to a point. The earlier half of the film is the more audience pleasing section because its easier to relate to. However, I like the latter half of the film, when they get in Vietnam, is great because it becomes an existential meditation on How War Fucks With Your Head. Its not as grab-you-by-the-throat as the basic training section is, but it still does alot of shit about just how fucking fucked up being in a warzone would be.

Example:

Colonel: "You write "Born to Kill" on your helmet and you wear a peace button. What's that supposed to be, some kind of sick joke?!"

Joker: "I think I was trying to suggest something about the duality of man, Sir!"

Colonel: "The what?"

Joker: "The duality of man. The Jungian thing, Sir!"

Colonel: "Whose side are you on, son?"

Joker: "Our side, Sir!"

Colonel: "Don't you love your country?"

Joker: "Yes, Sir!"

Colonel: "Then how about getting with the program? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?"

Joker: "Yes, Sir!"

Colonel: "Son, all I've ever asked of my marines is that they obey my orders as they would the word of God. We are here to help the Vietnamese, because inside every gook there is an American trying to get out. It's a hardball world, son. We've gotta keep our heads until this peace craze blows over!"

Joker: "Aye-aye, Sir!"

Anyway, I dig FMJ alot, but if Billy thinks that FMJ has the best visual scenes of any Kubrick films ever, I think he's talking shit. I don't like 2001, however, even I realize that, visually speaking, its a much prettier movie than FMJ.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:39 AM
I wonder if Billy likes the 1st half of FMJ more than the 2nd half, or if he loves the whole thing. That would be a great insight into his character.

???
09-30-2007, 04:40 AM
why is it that i nearly always forget a whole fucking word in whatever sentence i'm writing.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:44 AM
^ because its probably the transitional word and your brain is going from Point A to Point B and its not bothering to write the in-between word. Transitions sucks. Thoughts rule.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 04:45 AM
Clockwork is slow where it becomes annoying. Whoever said that Kubrick dwels upon a face until it becomes annoying is right because that ain't filmmaking, that's just wanking off. However, Shinning dwels upon the craziness of a character because that's what the story is about. Ie. "this person is a fuckin nutcase so therefore I shalt keep a steadcam closeup on them to show they are going crazy." In Shinning, it works. In any other Kubrick flick, aka 2001, not so much. It just gets boring.




the comparison to wanking off shows the flaw in your thinking. when someone is jerking off they are seeing the world the way they want atit. jerking off is truth. it is art....i believe it was g.g. allin who said something to the alluded to the fact th jerking off is better than sex in his manifesto. so true.

movies are too quick nowadays...it's because of commericals and music videos. i like when directors can holds the frame. while i havent seen any barry lydon, all the other kubrick movies were shot masterfully. he was an expert photographer, and never did i think there was anything wrong with pacing. each of his movies were so original and had enough content that at now point did i think ouch he's sitting on a face agian with the shot....but then again i enjoyed brown bunny. it can seem refreshing when they do something different

tcm
09-30-2007, 04:47 AM
why is it that i nearly always forget a whole fucking word in whatever sentence i'm writing.
i didn't even notice, man.

???
09-30-2007, 04:48 AM
^ because its probably the transitional word and your brain is going from Point A to Point B and its not bothering to write the in-between word. Transitions sucks. Thoughts rule.

thanks. i will do as my brain tells me from now on. i am not ashamed!

???
09-30-2007, 04:49 AM
oh yeah, how recent was this article again? i'm sure i've heard of it before.

tcm
09-30-2007, 04:49 AM
and yeah, like MrPantyFAce i appreciate the face-sitting.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 04:50 AM
There's a point where it becomes "this long shot means something and you can dig it" to "this really long shot means something but the audience doesn't give a fuck by this point". Its a really fine line. Kubrick did it mostly well. Fuck, Rob Zombie does it well (see the overhead shot in "House Of A 1000 Corpses" when the dude gets his head blown off). Its a fine line and, really, it comes down to personal tase by that point.

Example:

2001 steady shots of the ships docking with each other - pretty garbage.

Star Wars steady shot of the Blockade Runner and the Star Destroyer going overhead - pretty awesome.

Alien shot of the Nostromo going by the frame - pretty garbage.

Its a fine line and its hard to tell when a long shot becomes "good" or becomes "bad" and, really, it boils down to what you like, personally.

tcm
09-30-2007, 04:51 AM
oh yeah, how recent was this article again? i'm sure i've heard of it before.
yeah, it's old (http://forums.netphoria.org/showthread.php?t=149137).

???
09-30-2007, 05:04 AM
pretty typical of ugly to fob off genuine art in favor of star wars

???
09-30-2007, 05:07 AM
which sw film is the scene you're describing from? if its one of the newer ones then i guess its a shot they had to pull off using cgi.

kubrick and scott didn't have that kind of thing at their disposal when they made alien/2001, and the old 60s/70s space shots always felt so much more compelling to me, however they actually shot them. the ship docking sequence of 2001 is breathtaking, how can you honestly call it garbage.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 05:11 AM
2001 steady shots of the ships docking with each other - pretty garbage.

Star Wars steady shot of the Blockade Runner and the Star Destroyer going overhead - pretty awesome.

Its a fine line and its hard to tell when a long shot becomes "good" or becomes "bad" and, really, it boils down to what you like, personally.


the star wars shot was pretty great. something lacking in the new star wars movies. it had a lot to do with the score playing as well showing this big evil whale thing going over head that just gets bigger and bigger with that menacing militant music.

its all taste, no doubt. as for 2001 space shots. at that time there was nothing like that before. to me its still amazing because it looks so real. what he and his team were able to pull of the 60's is amazing as, to me it looks very convincing whereas the models in the sequel 2010 were far less convincing and new cgi barely ever looks believable....the long shots in 2001 emphasis the lifeless environment of space. and it made it seem very real....its a strong alternative to all the quick shots of other space movies. with bright flashes of lasers and loud explosions which is all just action bullshit.

Ugly
09-30-2007, 05:48 AM
Yeah, but thats what makes the long shots better to me in Star Wars - because they're shooting at each other! Wizz! Bang! Boom!! Star Wars was definitely ripping off 2001 in that opening shot (and many of the other exterior shots of a ship going from one end of the frame to another while bombastic orchestral music plays over the scene - In Star Wars, its just alot faster), but it worked better for the audience because the reason the two ships were shooting at each other was for a genuine plot reason. The Princess has the Stolen Plans For the Death Star! Why are there long-ass shots in 2001? Because Kubrick wanted to show off what he could do and make some obtuse point about whatever.

As for modern Star Wars not having involving scenes- check out the opening shot of Episode III. That's just purely badass. Self conciously replicating the opening shot of Ep. 4, sure, but still badass. As I said above, lazers!! Boom!! Nee-haw!!!

tcm
09-30-2007, 05:50 AM
oh plot plotty butt fart.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 06:36 AM
i only watched the new star wars movies once. i enjoyed them more than the average action or comic book movie but they had nothing on the old ones... i could go more into this but talking about star wars has negative implications. however,

the scene where yoda meets r2-d2 in empire. wow. WOW! thats what movies are all about

teh b0lly!!1
09-30-2007, 10:58 AM
a clockwork orange is brilliant at times, and appears sub par here and there.
i tend to give kubrick the benefit of the doubt, because after all it is a very old film and filmmaking was different and more cumbersome then.
the shining is fucking amazing in my opinion, perhaps my favourite by kubrick.
i usually love the long shots on kubrick films; although when i come to think of it, they always make the same points, albeit its in different films - it always comes to show the dark side of the person and their dementia.
i.e jack nicholson on the shining, alex de large on clockwork

skipgo
09-30-2007, 11:05 AM
kubrick and scott didn't have that kind of thing at their disposal when they made alien/2001

thanks for mentioning alien, i think i'll rent that today. fucking awesome film. I guess I need to get FMJ and The Shining while I'm at it, haven't seen those two in a really long while.

so does anyone agree with me that eyes wide shut was horrible?? i think it was easily kubrick's worst film.

Gossamer
09-30-2007, 12:15 PM
Eyes Wide Shut is better then most people make it out to be.

I hate Tom Cruise though.

Only_Shallow
09-30-2007, 12:35 PM
kubrick is a hack.
You stole the words right out of my mouth. I like Full Metal Jacket and find A Clockwork Orange an uneven adaptation, rest of his stuff is overly pretentious, with maybe one more acception and that's Lollita--thanks to Nabakov.

Besides that, 2001 is one of the worst films in history, and certainly the most overrated. And yes you fans, come at me, but it means nothing because I already know its "importance" I just find it tantamount to torture.

osamy
09-30-2007, 01:31 PM
Kubrick a hack?
Stanley Kubrick represents one of the most unachievable accomplishments in cinema - namely, an individual - singular individual - having absolute control (with impeccable talent concerning photography and rhythm) over a film project with a lot of money at his disposal, to say nothing of the obsessive-compulsive way in which the production process is handled.

Yet it is too bad that most films are not made in the same manner. Kubrick's command of a real space is unmatched (look at those tracking shots from "Paths of Glory" up to "Eyes Wide Shut"), to say nothing of his intelligence. They are slow, and demand patience, but they reap good rewards. I love "A Clockwork Orange", "Full Metal Jacket", and "Strangelove" - but my favorites are the slow three - "Barry Lyndon" (probably the most beautifully photographed costume drama in cinema's history, utilizing natural lighting with revolutionary long lenses that Kubrick developed personally), "2001", and the underrated "Eyes Wide Shut". Only David Lynch's work strikes a deeper subconscious hole in the viewer (it's interesting that the two directors were big fans of one another, though they never met; themes of "Lost Highway" and eerily parallel to "Eyes Wide Shut"). Scorsese noted its greatness and named it his 4th favorite film of the 1990s.

If anything, movies today are TOO fast.

"AI" is probably my favorite Spielberg film and represents a responsible use of CGI in filmmaking ("Minority Report" is another good example, and Kubrick's ghost hangs on that as well). It's not a "dumb" movie (incredibly rich in ideas with a fairy-tale framework - the Pinocchio allusion was not Spielberg's idea, as is commonly believed, but Kubrick's, who read Jung).

In regards to Billy Corgan, one obsessive-compulsive freak can truly appreciate and admire another. I recall a musician I know that was working as a roadie for the Beastie Boys at Lollapalooza 94, complaining how Corgan was a fucking nut. Every guitar had to be tuned to EXACT specifications, every technical apparatus, every measure of sound, and if they weren't, BC would lose it and fling out abuse. As my friend was complaining ("I can't believe that guy hasn't blown his head off yet," he said of Corgan), I noted the TV in the background, which was playing a DVD of "A Clockwork Orange". Kubrick could put his collaborators through just as much turmoil.

skipgo
09-30-2007, 01:56 PM
so what is it you guys like about Eyes Wide Shut? I went to the theater to see this one, thinking I'd like it as I'm generally a fan of Kubrick. My husband and I both looked at each other halfway through and said, "let's leave, this blows"

I'm all for experimental, weird, artsy films. You mention Lynch; I love him, haven't seen a David Lynch film that I didn't love. Mulholland Drive kept me entertained for days after seeing it, just trying to make better sense of it, talking about it, reading what people online made of it. But honestly, the story of Eyes Wide Shut just bored me to tears. It's the only time I've ever walked out of a movie before it ended.

Mouths of Babes
09-30-2007, 03:07 PM
Besides that, 2001 is one of the worst films in history

Wow. How many movies have you seen? 5? There's nothing I respect more than ignorant hyperbole. If you don't like the film - that's fine. Saying it's "one of the worst films in history" just makes you sound like an idiot though.

MrPantyFAce
09-30-2007, 05:18 PM
lolita is the only movie of his i didnt care for too much... i saw the 90's version first and was expecting to be blown away by kubricks version. which turned out to be quite mild compared to the later, but i guess was allowed to make back then. i believe some catholic association on entertainment had alot of influence back then and protested the film.

i agree movies are way too fast now. like the news, movies are dumbed down for people with a 9th grade education. in most mainstream movies everything has to be established as quickly as possible and your hit over the head with anything related to the story there is no subtlety. and there is no larger statement being made.

exactlythesame
09-30-2007, 05:27 PM
Well they had Gatling guns as early as the Civil War, so your statement is slightly erroneous.

whatever, my point was that they didn't have them back in 1500 B.C.E.

sans anatomy
09-30-2007, 10:33 PM
Barry Lyndon is really great, prepare a meal before you watch it though
The Shining is my personal favorite of kubricks. i havent seen lolita yet

dudehitscar
09-30-2007, 10:45 PM
A Clockwork Orange is my favorite film of all time.

Kubrick is my favorite director of all time.
:D

Same here.... weird.

IWishIWasBlank
10-01-2007, 10:58 AM
i read a clockwork orange when i was in high school, and i jusrt loved it. i heard it was incredibly difficult to get through, but i thought the vocabulary was unbelievably engaging.

Ditto. Movie kicks ass. Still have to see full metal....

Eyes Wide Shut and 2001 definitely leave something to be desired. Like some sort of action.. somewhere in the movie.. when you invest three hours of your life into it.

aurel
10-01-2007, 11:45 AM
This thread hurts.

zsp77
10-01-2007, 12:27 PM
why is it that i nearly always forget a whole fucking word in whatever sentence i'm writing.

because you are thinking it so stongly that you assume you've written it

zsp77
10-01-2007, 12:28 PM
By the way, I'll go with ACOrange, then The Shining, then FMJ. Sorry Billy.

NarcisPrince
10-01-2007, 12:45 PM
Go Private Gomer Pyle.

wilch
10-01-2007, 01:08 PM
agreed, ai was kinda dumb. i fucking hated eyes wide shut too, first time i ever left the theatre in the middle of the film. Full Metal Jacket however, and a Clockwork Orange, I can get behind those.

agreed Eyes Wide Shut was just an excuse to show a bunch of titties. Part from that is was a snoozefest.

dudehitscar
10-01-2007, 01:31 PM
agreed Eyes Wide Shut was just an excuse to show a bunch of titties. Part from that is was a snoozefest.
:noway:

skipgo
10-01-2007, 02:23 PM
why won't anyone answer me about WHY you liked eyes wide shut. dudehitscar, you can put up the little "no" smilie, but you can't elaborate on WHY it wasn't a snoozefest? Come on, I honestly want to know what makes this movie worthwhile. :)

osamy
10-01-2007, 02:27 PM
so what is it you guys like about Eyes Wide Shut? I went to the theater to see this one, thinking I'd like it as I'm generally a fan of Kubrick. My husband and I both looked at each other halfway through and said, "let's leave, this blows"

I'm all for experimental, weird, artsy films. You mention Lynch; I love him, haven't seen a David Lynch film that I didn't love. Mulholland Drive kept me entertained for days after seeing it, just trying to make better sense of it, talking about it, reading what people online made of it. But honestly, the story of Eyes Wide Shut just bored me to tears. It's the only time I've ever walked out of a movie before it ended.

Getting into an argument about "Eyes Wide Shut" is tricky territory, because some of the elements that people detest are associated with elements that the film's admirers are in love with. Michael Herr (author of "Dispatches", co-writer of "Full Metal Jacket"'s screenplay, and writer of the narration for Coppola's "Apocalypse Now") wrote a strong defense of the film in 2000, which was later published as a small book. For my own part, working from the ground up, I love the use of color (the reds and the blues, deeply saturated). I love the set design. I love the delicate performances (Kubrick was the first director to ever exploit Tom Cruise's height, and teeth). I love the music (most people hate the Ligeti; I adore it) Really, it hits a strong nerve because of what it says - and doesn't say - about sex: the carnality of it all which, when unspoken, is even more disturbing than imaginable. It wasn't until I had a first "stable" relationship that I was able to understand Kubrick (and by association, Arthur Schnitzler) more. The film is seething with an unsteady chaos that's always threatening to bust through (read: sexual tension...and frustration). The audience, having expected a blue movie "with lots of titties," is in the same spot at Dr. Bill. Each erotic adventure is subterfuged by some alien element coming in the frame. This is really a simple story about a man who loves his wife, but the institutions and social constructs on which that love is carried upon are realized to be unsteady, even terrifying...and yet, these constructs may be necessary.

The ideas regarding heteronormative relationships in "Eyes Wide Shut" are NOT the sort of thing that audiences, on a date, want to ponder. It's the cinematic equivalent to Ibsen. Mike Nichols' "Closer" went over the same territory a few years later, and effectively, though it stings less because Nichols and Patrick Marber are more overt, even didactic, concerning what one does and does not do in a relationship. Kubrick gives no answers, though there is a glimmer of hope. Alice's last word, "Fuck", means to carry the hidden carnality of erotic life into the respectability of the institution of marriage, which, let's face it, is rarely the case.

Given my love for the movie, I nontheless wonder what one of its earlier incarnations would have looked like. Kubrick had been planning the adaptation of Schnitzler since 1965, and in the 1980s he apparently wanted to make it as a comedy with Steve Martin.

russian iha
10-01-2007, 02:36 PM
AI is one of the most underrated movies of all time.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 02:37 PM
thanks for your reply osamy. Now I will agree with you that the film looks good. I'm very into cinematography and have a great appreciation for films that pay special attention to color, film quality, well framed shots, and so on. I didn't have a problem with the acting either. Overall, it was the story itself that didn't do anything for me. As IwishIwasBlank said earlier, my problem was that nothing really happens. I like films that make me think, I like to ponder and try and wrap my mind around complex meanings in them. That said, I don't want the ENTIRE experience to be more about me trying to understand what the artist is trying to convey, I want some sense that I was entertained as well. With EWS, this is all I got, and was bored stiff. But I take back my earlier statement that it's "worthless". I don't think any art is worthless entirely, but to me personally it was.

russian iha
10-01-2007, 02:43 PM
osamy, great post. EWS is not boring, and it is really adventerous in a subtle way.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 03:49 PM
whether or not EWS is boring is a matter of opinion.

tcm
10-01-2007, 03:57 PM
that's just your opinion.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 03:58 PM
why yes, it is

tcm
10-01-2007, 04:06 PM
no it isn't.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 04:07 PM
are you trying to short out my circuits here?
confused! can't...sss....aaahhh....ssss

tcm
10-01-2007, 04:09 PM
sorry, i was just being adventurous in a subtle way.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 04:10 PM
quite subtle.

osamy
10-01-2007, 05:05 PM
I love you guys.

skipgo
10-01-2007, 05:13 PM
:love:

gisher
10-01-2007, 05:15 PM
A Clockwork Orange is my favorite film of all time.

Kubrick is my favorite director of all time.

Same!

sans anatomy
10-01-2007, 05:21 PM
ive always been under the impression that eyes wide shut was butchered by the studio after kubrick passed... is this incorrect? seems like there was some obvious censoring in some of those orgy scenes. certainly it would be more appreciated if it had more penis and vagina.

dudehitscar
10-01-2007, 05:33 PM
ive always been under the impression that eyes wide shut was butchered by the studio after kubrick passed... is this incorrect? seems like there was some obvious censoring in some of those orgy scenes. certainly it would be more appreciated if it had more penis and vagina.

yes. Because Kubrick was supposedly obligated to create an R rated film under contract they went ahead and added in the fake looking hooded figures during the orgy scene to block out the more 'vulgar' displays of human sexual activity and nudity.

Eyes Wide Shut is the one kubrick movie I don't own and I won't buy it until they release the Kubrick's version. It's not that I really really want to see the nudity it's just that their solution to censor looks so fucking stupid and forced that it takes me out of the movie's dreamlike hold on me.

If people think it's boring that's fine.. Kubrick is known for slow. Like 99% of what Kubrick has done it's slow and deliberate but I don't want to blink because I will miss something.

tcm
10-01-2007, 05:48 PM
I love you guys.
you are my hero man.