|
kubrick is good it's too bad hollywood sucks now
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
Nooner posted:good movies are good and fun and cool to watch. I can say this with authority because I have a film degree from a very prestigious film school in Los Angeles who's name happens to include the letters U, S, and C........ good bc USC is for dildos imo had me worried there for a moment
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:he made TWO movies based on books that were better than the books which is insane, The Shining (some people might disagree) and A Clockwork Orange (anyone who disagrees is a goddamn moron) The Shining was great but imo the book and movie are sufficiently different that it's difficult to say which one is really better. They're seriously almost 2 different stories entirely - in King's Jack Torrance is an everyman who has done bad things and is struggling with alcoholism but we still relate and we see him slowly broken down to a monster by the hotel whereas in Kubrick's dude is clearly nuts from the start and very little is made of the alcoholism. (they're both great obv) Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
I think it's great that he knew what he wanted and would just make those poo poo show actors do the take over and over and over until it was loving right.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
notZaar posted:Wow, it's crazy how a long hallway has converging perspective lines. That's nuts, I can't believe it. Yeah but he picked that specific angle on that specific hallway for a specific reason, it wasn't just cuz to get a shot of the twins. Dude probably intentionally did that for the optical effect. quote:he sent staff to Manhattan, where Eyes Wide Shut was set, in order to get the exact measurements of streets and locations for set pieces like newspaper racks. It's like when you're reading a piece of literature; the author/poet specifically picks one word versus another nothing is just coincidental (unless they are lovely authors).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
The General posted:All Steven King is better on film than in print. Ehhhhhh..... dunno bout that haha
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
I like the second half... but it drags on a bit. The first half is excellent.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
idk I don't think most people mean they like what is happening I think they mean wow that's certainly a really good piece of art right there
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
Revenant was cool, kinda long though.drguildo posted:Yeah I'm sure they're totally intentional as opposed to poo poo from the Goofs section of IMDb. when it's some random fuckoff director, yeah they're goofs. when it's goddamn Stanley Kubrick who makes you do 100+ takes to get a scene exactly goddamn right, it's intentional this is like when people roll their eyes at literary analysis going 'that word there is just coincidence' as if the poet/author didn't deliberately pick it over others the dude is famous for using cinematography (camera angles, lighting, etc) to enhance the theme of his movies why would you think cinematographic effects and techniques employed are just coincidental?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
drguildo posted:Not really. Words are always chosen, it's just a question of why. Goofs by definition are unintentional. Nah. I'm telling you a 'professional' poet is sitting there thinking about all the imagery and symbolism (among other things) called to mind by one word versus another and they think about it way harder that someone just writing a news article is thinking about their word choice. Of course words are always chosen but again dude lol these people are considered geniuses in their craft for a reason and it's not because they happened to make a series of goofs more coincidental than anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Sp1r0_Agn3W posted:the famous example of this is the newer jewish criticism of shylock in the merchant of venice. i can say with some serious certainty that shakespeare did not give one poo poo about jewish causes. i dont put a lot of stock in death of the author but thats a solid example of it Okay but no one can even say with serious certainty Shakespeare was a real person and not a conglomerate of a few different authors so that's kind of a special case imo. Sp1r0_Agn3W posted:this doesnt have much to do with kubrick but as an english degree haver (lol) i can say with certainty that most words in novels or other long-form works are not that specific. Sure, long form isn't that specific but again dude kinda lol if you think authors aren't doing a few drafts of their work and changing details all the time. It's not like they just poo poo something out and go 'looks good' and coincidentally it happens to be an amazing literary work. Sitting there going 'Kubrick is lauded for his technical genius and the way it affects the narrative/content of the work, I bet it was all just coincidence haha' is kinda silly that's all I'm saying. Dude had people using tape measures on the streets of NYC; I'm pretty sure he was aware of the camera angles when filming. Obv he's only human and I'm sure there are some unintentional goofs but the root of this conversation was the inner geometry of the Overlook not making sense and I'm pretty sure that was intentional. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Aug 8, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
in what ways?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:37 |
|
|
hemophilia posted:King was initially pretty upset over kubrick's changes yeah, and he's probably never gotten over the fact that Kubrick took his story, made it better, and told the version of the shining everyone knows and cares about if they don't read stephen king books. I think the movie is v good but honestly I like the plot and characters in the book a lot more. Stephen King's thing is basically: 'typical of Hollywood, the woman's role got turned into a shrill bitch. Also, the alcoholism was not really a thing in the movie (which was largely the point of the book) and we didn't get to see Torrance slowly go nuts bc he was pretty nuts from the very start.' I feel like that's a fair critique to make? Idk they're just different and I like em both a lot. e: i also have a soft spot for King I guess, full disclosure Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Aug 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2016 20:32
|
|