Stanley Kubrick: How Do You Rank His Films

Tools    





A Clockwork Orange: there's your prime example of 'style over substance' in a film. Is there anything really meaningful about the movie? Is there really a message? Because let's face it, the movie glorifies the filthiness of its 'hero', that is Alex. That is what it does, in a nutshell. That being said, I quite liked it, but not because of its depiction of the violence. I liked it because of how it was made. Some films do not need to be overanalyzed, and I feel that A Clockwork Orange is one of them. It's a movie and it doesn't even seem real, and for me it's one of those 'movie universe' films.
Yes, I don't get what everyone seems to miss with this film, a lot of it to me at least, especially the middle Ludovico part poses a lot of questions about morality and man's choice/freedom.

Here's a post I made about the humanity of Kubrick's films a while back:

Just because he deals with them not always in a conventional human way, and often through violent images, doesn't mean he is any less understanding of such issues, and watching his films multiple times I have found myself appreciating the human issues and moral themes he deals with much more.

Full Metal Jacket the first time I didn't like too much, now I think it is really great: Towards the ends where we see the soldier's in action we deal with human beings as killing machines, now in the face of their enemies, the duality of men, the end scene with the girl is bizarre and haunting, very powerful.

A Clockwork Orange although I very much appreciated and liked the first time I also found kind of boring in parts and only really enjoyed the more shocking, violent scenes from an artistic perspective. Multiple viewings have lead me to think more about the human mind, the choices we make, freedom and the desires of men. Like Fight Club I think this is a film that too many people enjoy for the wrong reason, because it's violent and brutal in a 'cool' way for people who are just looking for that, but look deeper and it deals extremely well with much more than that.

And then, in my opinion, I don't think Paths of Glory needs much explaining, he doesn't look at humans as puny beings in any way, and the characters that we see are fantastically displayed as we deal with greed, heroism, principles etc. The final scene is absolutely brilliant, and I couldn't help be moved by the powerful voice of Kubrick's future wife, if you watch the faces of the men who are listening to her performance it's fantastic how Kubrick manages to capture such a deep human realisation in these characters who are deeply affected by the song.
__________________



Clockwork Orange

Dr Strangelove

Paths of Glory

The Shining

Full Metal Jacket

The Killing

2001
(Need a rewatch)
__________________
I do not speak english perfectly so expect some mistakes here and there in my messages



A Clockwork Orange although I very much appreciated and liked the first time I also found kind of boring in parts and only really enjoyed the more shocking, violent scenes from an artistic perspective. Multiple viewings have lead me to think more about the human mind, the choices we make, freedom and the desires of men. Like Fight Club I think this is a film that too many people enjoy for the wrong reason, because it's violent and brutal in a 'cool' way for people who are just looking for that, but look deeper and it deals extremely well with much more than that.
You mentioned Fight Club, which is a totally different film in my book, because it is more like a psychological thriller and it contains a lot of messages too. A Clockwork Orange, on the other hand, I simply consider to be a highly stylized, darkly funny thriller, with very nice music and colors, and great writing. But without any serious deep messages, it's as simple as that. And it's only my opinion, I could be wrong. And who knows, my opinion could change in the future. For now though, I feel that the people who have seen it are trying to look smarter than the movie and its creators, and thus claiming that it is what it is not.



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
I don't know. Maybe Kubrick did completely misrepresent Anthony Burgess' novel or maybe, as Burgess later said, his most famous work was facile to begin with. Then again, maybe both opinions are wrong. It's in the eye of the beholder.
__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



You mentioned Fight Club, which is a totally different film in my book, because it is more like a psychological thriller and it contains a lot of messages too. A Clockwork Orange, on the other hand, I simply consider to be a highly stylized, darkly funny thriller, with very nice music and colors, and great writing. But without any serious deep messages, it's as simple as that. And it's only my opinion, I could be wrong. And who knows, my opinion could change in the future. For now though, I feel that the people who have seen it are trying to look smarter than the movie and its creators, and thus claiming that it is what it is not.
Kubrick always puts deeper meanings in his films (I believe).

Sure, his films are very stylized (especially Clockwork), but come on, there is WAY MORE to it than just that. It's a story about freedom, politics, the future and most of all, ethics! It actually makes the viewers think of what they see on the screen. It's a film that doesn't give any clear statements. It just lets the viewer judge.
That is something I truly love in films. I'm not a big fan of movies that feed a certain message to the audience without any further opportunities of own thoughts. Unfortunately that's how most pictures are today, if there is a message at all...



You mentioned Fight Club, which is a totally different film in my book, because it is more like a psychological thriller and it contains a lot of messages too. A Clockwork Orange, on the other hand, I simply consider to be a highly stylized, darkly funny thriller, with very nice music and colors, and great writing. But without any serious deep messages, it's as simple as that. And it's only my opinion, I could be wrong. And who knows, my opinion could change in the future. For now though, I feel that the people who have seen it are trying to look smarter than the movie and its creators, and thus claiming that it is what it is not.
Many people consider Fight Club to be just that though, even Ebert did, although I don't think he liked either film.

I'll copy something in here.

The film's central moral question (as in many of Burgess' books) is the definition of "goodness" and whether it makes sense to use aversion therapy to stop immoral behaviour. Stanley Kubrick, writing in Saturday Review, described the film as:
"...A social satire dealing with the question of whether behavioural psychology and psychological conditioning are dangerous new weapons for a totalitarian government to use to impose vast controls on its citizens and turn them into little more than robots."
Similarly, on the film production's call sheet (cited at greater length above), Kubrick wrote:
"It is a story of the dubious redemption of a teenage delinquent by condition-reflex therapy. It is, at the same time, a running lecture on free-will."
Sounds like the creator knew what he was doing to me



A Clockwork Orange: there's your prime example of 'style over substance' in a film. Is there anything really meaningful about the movie? Is there really a message? Because let's face it, the movie glorifies the filthiness of its 'hero', that is Alex. That is what it does, in a nutshell. That being said, I quite liked it, but not because of its depiction of the violence. I liked it because of how it was made. Some films do not need to be overanalyzed, and I feel that A Clockwork Orange is one of them. It's a movie and it doesn't even seem real, and for me it's one of those 'movie universe' films.
I like CO for the same reasons - it is very stylish maybe a bit too disturbing for me.But I think it's visible that the film deals with social issues yet it's not very easy to grasp what the director really wanted to say or if he wanted to say anything at all.That's what confuses me. But CO is a pretty accessible movie.I had in mind more tough films like Space Odyssey which,for me,goes too far at times and starts looking pretentious.
__________________
"Anything less than immortality is a complete waste of time."



You mentioned Fight Club, which is a totally different film in my book, because it is more like a psychological thriller and it contains a lot of messages too. A Clockwork Orange, on the other hand, I simply consider to be a highly stylized, darkly funny thriller, with very nice music and colors, and great writing. But without any serious deep messages, it's as simple as that. And it's only my opinion, I could be wrong. And who knows, my opinion could change in the future. For now though, I feel that the people who have seen it are trying to look smarter than the movie and its creators, and thus claiming that it is what it is not.
For me the message of a film is not very relevant. Movies are art like music and the message of both is not very relevant.

I liked Clockwork Orange because I felt great watching it.



For me the message of a film is not very relevant.
Yeah, for me that is also the case, more often than not. Some movies don't really need to have a clear message. Like Ebert once said, "it's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it".

I watched Eyes Wide Shut last night, and just like two other Kubrick films I really liked, 2001: A Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange, I knew I watched a film that I really enjoyed, but I couldn't quite give an explanation to.

Personally I feel that Eyes Wide Shut is quite underrated. I liked a lot of things about the movie - the use of lightning was almost perfect, the scenes at the secret mansion were great, and Cruise did a very good job. I was interested the whole time, and there was never a dull moment. The only thing that annoyed me a little was Kidman's acting at times, especially in the scenes when she argues with Cruise. But other than that, a great movie.



1. Dr. Strangelove
2. Eyes Wide Shut
3. Full Metal Jacket
4. 2001: A Space Odyseey
5. The Shining
6. A Clockwork Orange


Nobody comes close to Kubrick these days



Finished here. It's been fun.
I have yet to see Eyes Wide Shut and Dr. Strangelove but If I had to rank the ones i have seen it'd be.
1.2001
2.clockwork orange
3.The shining
4.Full Metal jacket.

I think 2001 is just a masterpiece in every way. It moves you through sound and visuals rather than spoon-feeding you with exposition and narration. It is a slow film, but incredibly prophetic. shows how we as a race have so much to see. Just my thoughts on it,but i can definitely see why alot of people don't like it.



A Clockwork Orange: there's your prime example of 'style over substance' in a film. Is there anything really meaningful about the movie? Is there really a message? Because let's face it, the movie glorifies the filthiness of its 'hero', that is Alex. That is what it does, in a nutshell. That being said, I quite liked it, but not because of its depiction of the violence. I liked it because of how it was made. Some films do not need to be overanalyzed, and I feel that A Clockwork Orange is one of them. It's a movie and it doesn't even seem real, and for me it's one of those 'movie universe' films.
The meat of the film is in questioning conditioning as a sociopolitical tool by juxtaposing a terrible person against a mentally invasive method of indoctrination that may pave a way for technocratic totalitarianism, asking which is truly the lesser of two evils. It's easy to see he's bad, that's obvious. What's not obvious is whether ends always justify means.
__________________
#31 on SC's Top 100 Mofos list!!