hellgodsrus
Actual Real Game Dev!
- Location
- Behind You
- Pronouns
- She/Her
So I got myself into an argument on a totally unrelated thread with @VolantRedX about Kubrick's filmography - I think he's hugely overrated, Vol has the more normal viewpoint - and given that interest was expressed in seeing it play out, here it is. It mostly (so far) focuses around 2001: A Space Odyssey. Here are the relevant posts...
I'm going to make a post on The Shining in a moment, but I figured it was best to make the setup clear before continuing.
One of the definitive examples of the book being way way better than the movie (seriously, Kubrick's a hack. You want great cinematography - go watch a Powell and Pressburger film or Abel Gance's Napoleon. They at least can do tracking shots that keep the subject in shot and jump cuts that don't look like lazy garbage my cat could do).
Nope, he is. His vaunted style is, frankly, amateur, and reeks of the kind of faux-pretentiousness only someone who doesn't actually know what high culture is thinks high culture is.
Smart cinematography is Gance putting his camera on a pendulum during the chaos of the French Revolution, or cutting repeatedly with increasing speed between the wheels of the train, the slowly blinded train drivers eyes and the tracks themselves. It's Pressburger's quick shot of Ruth's mad, makeup streaked eyes at the climax of Black Narcissus (or that terrifying shot of her running up the stairs - god, that still gives me nightmares), or the brilliantly bombastic and reverse-thrust of the Life and Death of Colonel Blimp's opening.
It is not badly tracking a bone being thrown in the air, then cutting to a spaceship shaped sort-of like the bone if you squint in roughly the same area of the screen the bone might have been in, while playing 'epic' classical music.
EDIT: Or the scene with the pram from Battleship Potemkin, or most of Dadaist cinema. Dadaists are great on cinematography. Go watch them.
However it is use of lights to create a sterile inhuman effect to the ships. Having the actors stay near totally still to create a sense of unease as they talk about the discovery on the moon. It's about using effects to make space travel look like space travel. It comes in the unnatural calm used by the astronauts to provide a contrast to the heightened emotions of the killer computer. I don't even like 2001 and it's not Kubrick's best work but to say it's poorly shoot is just talking nonsense.
The reason it's so famous isn't because it's some great leap in film technique, but because the underlying message and it's impact on the movie.
So I'm going to put you down as totally crazy if you think The Shining is anything other than great.
Must be. Kubrick is one of the directors that either you understand what he was going for and understand the genius of it, or you just totally miss the artistic achievement. Which is fine. It wouldn't be art if everyone got it.
Well it's such an obviously dumb message, but on top of that almost every article I've read on cinema that mentions it describes it as 'one of the greatest cuts of all time' which, as I said, shakes my griddle because it's so poorly executed. But I think we're veering very very off topic here, like we did about Shakespeare in the base thread, and maybe should take this to PMs?
I'm going to make a post on The Shining in a moment, but I figured it was best to make the setup clear before continuing.