Stanley Kubrick

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#351 Post by MichaelB » Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:49 am

I see he cut Ikarie XB-1 out of the final draft!

I'm convinced that Kubrick must have seen it (since he reputedly watched every SFX-heavy sci-fi film of any merit when developing 2001, Ikarie was around at just the right time, and there are distinct visual and thematic similarities), but I'm still searching for concrete evidence.

peerpee
not perpee
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:41 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#352 Post by peerpee » Fri Jul 26, 2013 8:33 am

Just being thorough! :) I mention it along with two others in the final paragraph just before the Master List.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#353 Post by MichaelB » Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:11 am

Oh yes, so you did!

I'll be doing some more digging into this, since I'm writing the booklet for Second Run's Ikarie XB-1. Obviously, I'll be mentioning Kubrick regardless (since this is essentially the Czech 2001 I could hardly not!), but it would be nice to turn up a concrete connection.

The Doogster
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Oz

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#354 Post by The Doogster » Fri Jul 26, 2013 10:20 am

I was surprised to not see Pale Flower on the list of Kubrick's favourite films. Kubrick based the visuals and sound of The Shining on the dream sequence from Pale Flower. That sequence also formed the basis for the sound of the last act from 2001.

See the first 2:30 of the following Youtube clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ2ycisa3tk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Close your eyes - you could be listening to The Shining or 2001.

peerpee
not perpee
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:41 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#355 Post by peerpee » Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:31 am

Thanks. Do you have a source, Doogster?

Iamhere
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 3:38 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#356 Post by Iamhere » Fri Jul 26, 2013 1:27 pm

Never seen Pale Flower, now I must. Thanks.


STANLEY KUBRICK AND THE ART OF ADAPTATION AS INTERPRETATION by Charles Bane : http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-0 ... ne_dis.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There isn't much said about the fact on how Kubrick picked every possible genre during its popularity and deconstructed it and mocked it, he was very influenced by the trends in contemporary cinema; film noir, melodrama, sci fi, war, epic, horror, and erotic thriller.

criterion10

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#357 Post by criterion10 » Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:34 pm

Nick, enjoyed the Kubrick piece you wrote very much.

This may be of interest to you, a possible finding of other films Kubrick admired:
IMDB wrote:[Kubrick] once called Ken Russell in the early 1970s but ended the conversation abruptly because, according to Russell, he had been frightened by a bee. He then called several days later to ask Russell where he had found the lovely English locations for his period films. Russell told him and Kubrick used the locations in his next film, Barry Lyndon (1975). Russell said, "I felt quite chuffed.".
I can confirm that story is accurate. I've listened to the commentary track on the R2 DVD for Tommy with Russell himself, where he tells this story.

Hope this helps.

User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#358 Post by matrixschmatrix » Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:42 pm

Haha, I had to google 'chuffed' to figure out if Russell was pleased or upset about that.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#359 Post by MichaelB » Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:46 pm

It wouldn't surprise me at all if Kubrick was a fan of Russell's 1960s BBC films - after all, he was living in the right country at the time. Pop Goes the Easel (1962) and Béla Bartók (1964) in particular seem to foreshadow Kubrick's later style, especially A Clockwork Orange and The Shining.

peerpee
not perpee
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:41 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#360 Post by peerpee » Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:58 pm

criterion10 wrote:Nick, enjoyed the Kubrick piece you wrote very much.

This may be of interest to you, a possible finding of other films Kubrick admired:
IMDB wrote:[Kubrick] once called Ken Russell in the early 1970s but ended the conversation abruptly because, according to Russell, he had been frightened by a bee. He then called several days later to ask Russell where he had found the lovely English locations for his period films. Russell told him and Kubrick used the locations in his next film, Barry Lyndon (1975). Russell said, "I felt quite chuffed.".
I can confirm that story is accurate. I've listened to the commentary track on the R2 DVD for Tommy with Russell himself, where he tells this story.

Hope this helps.
Thanks! I'd heard the great Ken Russell bee story. SK admiring Russell's locations is an interesting indicator, but not specific enough to add any particular film to the list, I think, based on the strict criteria I've used so far. I'll continue digging though, I also heard today that Russell and Kubrick were both fans and collectors of Lupino Lane films, so there's definitely something here.

criterion10

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#361 Post by criterion10 » Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:13 pm

peerpee wrote:Thanks! I'd heard the great Ken Russell bee story. SK admiring Russell's locations is an interesting indicator, but not specific enough to add any particular film to the list, I think, based on the strict criteria I've used so far. I'll continue digging though, I also heard today that Russell and Kubrick were both fans and collectors of Lupino Lane films, so there's definitely something here.
Yeah, the two directors were obviously familiar with each other's work (although a quote on Russell's IMDB page actually suggests that he was not a fan of Kubrick's films).

Since Kubrick was looking for locations for Barry Lyndon, I would assume that it was probably either Women in Love or Mahler that caused him to converse with Russell. (Lyndon was 75, so the only other films Russell made before that were The Devils, Music Lovers, Boy Friend, and Savage Messiah, all of which don't contain nearly as many shots of the English countryside as the other two that I previously mentioned.) Though, as you put it best, the story is revealing, albeit not concrete.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#362 Post by knives » Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:35 pm

You're forgetting all of Russell's television work which has a few country side scenes.

User avatar
Cold Bishop
Joined: Tue May 30, 2006 9:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#363 Post by Cold Bishop » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:14 am

MichaelB wrote:I'm convinced that Kubrick must have seen it (since he reputedly watched every SFX-heavy sci-fi film of any merit when developing 2001, Ikarie was around at just the right time, and there are distinct visual and thematic similarities), but I'm still searching for concrete evidence.
Although there may be a question as to which version he saw...

User avatar
Lowry_Sam
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:35 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#364 Post by Lowry_Sam » Sat Jul 27, 2013 2:38 am

MichaelB wrote:Oh yes, so you did!

I'll be doing some more digging into this, since I'm writing the booklet for Second Run's Ikarie XB-1. Obviously, I'll be mentioning Kubrick regardless (since this is essentially the Czech 2001 I could hardly not!), but it would be nice to turn up a concrete connection.
I thought I saw a (Czech?) documentary mentioning as much & showing similarities in scenes, or perhaps it was a website online. Someone claiming to have helped with the film's animation sequences tweated as much..

User avatar
Emak-Bakia
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:48 am

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#365 Post by Emak-Bakia » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:11 pm

Nice work, Nick! I particularly loved reading this quote from Kubrick: "When you think of the greatest moments of film, I think you are almost always involved with images rather than scenes, and certainly never dialogue. The thing a film does best is to use pictures with music and I think these are the moments you remember. Another thing is the way an actor did something: the way Emil Jannings took out his handkerchief and blew his nose in The Blue Angel, or those marvellous slow turns that Nikolay Cherkasov did in Ivan the Terrible.”

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#366 Post by MichaelB » Sat Jul 27, 2013 12:40 pm

Lowry_Sam wrote:I thought I saw a (Czech?) documentary mentioning as much & showing similarities in scenes, or perhaps it was a website online. Someone claiming to have helped with the film's animation sequences tweated as much..
That's an allegation rather than evidence. I really need an interview with or statement from Kubrick (or a close associate) making it explicit.

peerpee
not perpee
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:41 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#367 Post by peerpee » Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:56 pm

MichaelB wrote:That's an allegation rather than evidence. I really need an interview with or statement from Kubrick (or a close associate) making it explicit.
I specifically asked Jan about IKARIE XB-1 and he couldn't think of anything, but he started working with SK in 1969, so the man who would know is Anthony Frewin...

The Doogster
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Oz

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#368 Post by The Doogster » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:14 am

peerpee wrote:Thanks. Do you have a source, Doogster?
Sorry, no source and no proof. The tone, style and composition of the dream sequence reminded me instantly of The Shining and 2001. Doors opening in slow-mo and the music of avant-garde composers like Penderecki is too much of a co-incidence. The looking-through-the-broken-window shot is compositionally close to the wandering-into-the-bedroom scene in 2001. I don't blame Kubrick - if I were a budding film-maker in 1963 and had seen Pale Flower it would have made a big impact on me too.

User avatar
med
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 5:58 pm

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#369 Post by med » Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:16 pm

The Doogster wrote: if I were a budding film-maker in 1963 and had seen Pale Flower it would have made a big impact on me too.
Budding? By the time of Pale Flower's release in Japan, Kubrick was a fully formed filmmaker. He had already made The Killing, Paths of Glory, Spartacus, Lolita, and Dr. Strangelove!

Also, there's the assumption that Kubrick saw the Shinoda film prior to shooting 2001. According to IMDB (I know, I know), the movie didn't see a US release until 1974. Kubrick moved to England in the 60's; when was Pale Flower first released there?

It's possible Kubrick had seen the film, but, given that international film distribution is an entirely different animal now than it was in the 60's, it seems a bit of a stretch that he had done so by the time production on 2001 was underway.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#370 Post by MichaelB » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:25 pm

I've just trawled through the Monthly Film Bulletin indexes from 1963 to 1977 and can't find any evidence of a commercial UK release of a Shinoda film prior to Double Suicide in 1970. It also doesn't appear to have ever been shown on British TV.

Which isn't to say that Kubrick couldn't have seen it via other means, at a festival or by booking a 35mm print himself (assuming there was one in the country in the first place), but he'd have had to have made a specific effort. Was he much of a festivalgoer?

I find it can be a tad dangerous ascribing "obvious" influences without hard evidence. For years if not decades, I was convinced that Monty Python and the Holy Grail was a conscious parody of Robert Bresson's Lancelot du Lac, a thesis that I believed was amply supported by the films themselves and the fact that the Bresson was dated 1974 and the Python film 1975. In actual fact, the Python film was already in production when the Bresson film had its world premiere and it didn't open in Britain until late 1975, several months after Holy Grail, so it's very unlikely that anyone involved with the film would have seen it.

And I found out a few weeks ago courtesy of a friend who's been working with Terry Gilliam on the restoration of Time Bandits that in fact one of his primary influences was Walerian Borowczyk's Blanche, which I'd never even considered. (Not least because Blanche is a rare example of a medieval film that doesn't remind me of Monty Python and the Holy Grail!) Although in retrospect it's not hugely surprising, since I already knew that Gilliam was a Borowczyk fan - it's just that I'd only previously made the connection between their animation (for instance, the decidedly Pythonesque-but-made-in-1959 Les Astronautes), not their live-action work.

Calvin
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:12 am

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#371 Post by Calvin » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:32 pm

This Ken Russell site draws a parallel between Song of Summer and 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, I'm not sure if there's any evidence for the claim and it seems quite contrived to me.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#372 Post by MichaelB » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:35 pm

Calvin wrote:This Ken Russell site draws a parallel between Song of Summer and 2001: A Space Odyssey. However, I'm not sure if there's any evidence for the claim and it seems quite contrived to me.
It's absolute twaddle. Song of Summer was broadcast on 15 September 1968, more than seven months after 2001 premiered, and very likely years after the scene was shot. If there was any influencing going on at all (and the "evidence" is decidedly superficial), it could only be Kubrick on Russell.

On the other hand, I'd say there was a pretty strong connection between 2001 and Russell's later Dance of the Seven Veils - especially the opening scene that combines Richard Strauss's 'Also sprach Zarathustra' with caveman imagery. But, again, it's firmly in a Kubrick-to-Russell direction, as Russell's film wasn't shown until 1970.

The Doogster
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 10:07 pm
Location: Oz

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#373 Post by The Doogster » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:10 am

med wrote:Budding? By the time of Pale Flower's release in Japan, Kubrick was a fully formed filmmaker. He had already made The Killing, Paths of Glory, Spartacus, Lolita, and Dr. Strangelove!
Kubrick was not a "fully formed" filmmaker in 1963. His movies up until that point were very conventional in composition and style. It's true he had by then developed his penchant for wide-angle lenses and intricate tracking shots, however, the artistic gulf between Dr Strangelove (1964) and 2001 (1968) is vast. The entire world of filmmaking during those years underwent a radical transformation, and Kubrick was no doubt part of that revolution. Being part of a revolution does not mean one started a revolution.

I stand by my assertion that Kubrick was influenced by Pale Flower. There is no way a filmmaker could have independently radically altered his style and adopted an appreciation for Penderecki compositions by chance.

Kubrick was also influenced by the 1967 movie Herostratus by Don Levy (sorry, no proof). Levy's highly original scenes of human heads shaking and being captured on film was used by Kubrick in the last act of 2001 - specifically the static shots of Bowman's face in a contorted state. Again, there is no way that new technique could have been independently developed by Kubrick. Herostratus was released as Kubrick was doing the special effects work on 2001. I can't find a Youtube clip of this movie. You'll have to buy the BFI Flipside Blu-Ray.

These are not mere co-incidences. Kubrick clearly had a bowerbird-like appreciation of unusual compositions, and used them whenever he needed to. I don't think that diminishes Kubrick's genius. It's just that sometimes his genius had a precedent. I'm happy to continue this debate. Spotting the stylistic influences of great filmmakers is a hobby of mine.

User avatar
FerdinandGriffon
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:16 am

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#374 Post by FerdinandGriffon » Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:24 am

The Doogster wrote:There is no way a filmmaker could have independently radically altered his style and adopted an appreciation for Penderecki compositions by chance.
Well, Shinoda did! But it does seem like a striking coincidence for two filmmakers to have made such similar stylistic shifts so shortly after one another. I'm not absolutely convinced there's a connection, but I hope you're right; anything that brings more people to Pale Flower (and the delights of Shinoda in general) is alright by me!

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

Re: Stanley Kubrick

#375 Post by MichaelB » Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:02 am

The Doogster wrote:I stand by my assertion that Kubrick was influenced by Pale Flower. There is no way a filmmaker could have independently radically altered his style and adopted an appreciation for Penderecki compositions by chance.
Why not? Krzysztof Penderecki was one of the biggest names in the musical avant-garde of the 1960s, and plenty of filmmakers have made use of his work - William Friedkin in The Exorcist being a particularly good example. In fact, I'm not sure what relevance this has towards 2001, since that film doesn't use Penderecki compositions - have you got him mixed up with György Ligeti, or 2001 mixed up with The Shining?

Post Reply