Guest imported_Tesseract Posted August 16, 2001 Share Posted August 16, 2001 I believe you all heard that story about A.I. -Spielbergs new film.It is suposed that kubric and spielberg had some sort of coorperation and now,after Kubrics death spielberg decided to take kubric notes on A.I.and go on wIth the movie. One constant presence throughout filming was the artistic vision of Stanley Kubrick, whom Steven Spielberg kept at the forefront of each day’s work. "Steven really tried to do this film with Stanley as a guide," says Bonnie Curtis. "Steven would constantly say on set ‘Stanley would have liked that.’ Or ‘I feel him, I feel him here.’ His presence was very prevalent through the whole production, and very wanted as well." Anyway,i havent seen the film yet and i am not trying to be the conspiracy man around here.But i really thing that this is all shit.There are lots of reasons that Kubric would never trust Spielberg.And the most important, there is no way that spielberg could make a good film out of Kubrics notes Cause he is in everyway different oriented on what is a film. Anyway, its all part of taking the heroism out of things its like Guggenheim galeries place a rothko next to a warhol.Fuck... P.S.Anyone agrees that the last 10 minutes(maybe more)of Eyes wide shut wherent shot by Kubric? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest --zeSto-- Posted August 17, 2001 Share Posted August 17, 2001 I'm gonna have to watch Eyes.. again an check that out. The only problem is that Speilberg and Kubrick are totally different, and the comparison is just unfair. Kurick hits you in the head, where as Speilberg is all about making the eyes water. I doubt AI would have been anything like it is if Kubrick had made it. It's just a hollow comparison. It's like saying Frankenheimer left his last script for Guy Ritchie to direct. Could still be a fine film, but it wouldn't be the same at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown twinkie Posted August 17, 2001 Share Posted August 17, 2001 i kind of disagree.... if you go and see AI, there are kubrickisms throughout.... obviously it would have been different if kubrick directed it(!!).. don't forget that these guys were really good pals... if anyone could understand kubricks vision and style, it would most definitely be spielberg, even though historically they've made drastically different films. ...um.............thats my take on it anyhow...go see AI, then bitch about it. even though i've never been a big fan, i think spielberg did an incredible job considering the circumstances. also....the two of them had discussed the film for years, so again, spielberg had a unique situation......... and kubrick's siblings gave the go ahead to spielberg, its not like spielberg just barged in and took over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPIUM3 Posted August 17, 2001 Share Posted August 17, 2001 I can't believe that this movie was even made. All it was, was a 3 hour movie about Pinochio. There were some off color cool parts, like that flesh fest thing, but other than that, it was ridiculous in my opinon. Kubricks classics are the shit. I think i'll stick to those... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted August 17, 2001 Share Posted August 17, 2001 TWINKIE,i said i had not seen the film yet,and i wrote what i wrote because i dont really care what the film will be like.It might be good but thats irellevant at the moment.I focus on the fact that the whole thing smells hollywood marketing to me. if you go and see AI, there are kubrickisms throughout.... Is that suposed to be a good thing? I mean...Kubric and Spielberg made their films on the same period.That makes them dirctors of the same generation in a way(Kubric was older but you understand what i mean)So A.I. is not in any way a tribute to Kubric for the simple reason that Kubric doesnt need one.If Spielberg was a good pal i would expect him to be influenced by Kubric and try to make better films instead of using his relation with K to promote his movie. Notice that 90% of the things that had been written to promote A.I. concern Spielbergs relationship with Kubric. Anyway, i say:leave Kubric alone he has his work alive and kicking so anyone can see what he was doing.And i am really pissed off when Spielberg,a man that tries in everyway to impress claims that he continues Kubrics work,Fuck that, its just soooo cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown twinkie Posted August 17, 2001 Share Posted August 17, 2001 ??? well, i don't know, i just don' t get why you feel like elaborating on what ifs..i mean you don't know that kubrick would not trust steven...and obviously he's made the movie, so saying its impossible from the notes is.. whatever..... when and where has spielberg 'impressed claims to continue kubricks work'...????? it sounds more to me like you've got a chip on your shoulder... look man, i'm not spielberg, i can't comment on why it was made, and what he hoped to achieve...my understanding is it was a project that kubrick was really interested in, and one that he confided in spielberg about on a regular basis and even thought it was more of a spielberg film anyhow......................all the other crap your talking about.......whatever...dwell on the work, spielberg made the movie, period..done deal...as far as i'm concerned its a respectable and respectful piece of work. and opium3, sounds like you went and saw it and forgot to use your brain... ...i think alot of people that saw it didn't get it and didn't grasp the film as a whole. which is fine i suppose. blahg.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.