A compilation of Louis CK's thoughts on Stanley Kubrick. Source: Joe & Raanan Talk Movies Apple podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast... Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/24fjQRv...
He's honestly extremely smart. Has excellent history takes too. There aren't many people I enjoy listening to as much as CK. Just about whatever topic he wants
Eyes Wide Shut feels so weird because all of the scenes that take place outdoors, on the streets of the city, are filmed on a soundstage. It gives it a dreamlike, artificial feel
What I have noticed in these montages of directors works, is that no matter how quickly you cut and edit between shots to give that impressive, all encompassing sweeping scope over an artist’s vision, the best director’s work, the Kubricks, the Kurosawas and so on, each and every shot is superbly composed. The effect is like running through an art gallery and glimpsing masterpieces for seconds at a time, before another work is rapidly unveiled.
Yep. Compare the recent oscars, killers of the flower moon compared to oppenheimer. Scorsese is masterful at shot composition and framing, it blows Nolan away. Yet Nolan got best director.
Yeah greatly appreciate this as well. The original is almost unbearable with that mouth breather constantly interrupting with his worthless opinions over and over.
Yes so many youtube interviewers still think it's about them. That and how to videos. Shut up and learn how to shoot the process better!! Sheeesh! So anyways, cheers cool comment.
i don't know if i've ever heard anyone else say that "the Shining" is told from the point of view of the hotel. i feel like i need to watch it again, with that in mind.
Kubricks shining is actually a story with several themes such as familial abuse, the genocide of Native Americans and the Federal Reserve bank. There are very good analysis videos on RU-vid that explain these theories , Collative Learning being one of the best , also check out Hammered Out for David lynch analysis
Eyes Wide Shut is the Kubrick movie I watch the most. A couple times a year. Lucky enough yo catch it in a theater. Its like a dream in a haze of delirium.
I watched it too for many years like that. Seen eyes wide shut like 40 times in that last 15 years. The blues and oranges are just so good. I watch it on Christmas Day every year, it's a Christmas movie. Barry Lyndon is great too.
Lous ck or whatever I think deliberately down played eyes wide shut and as if Kubrick was loosing it. No Kubrick was killed during the final production of that movie. He was revealing to much information and then they had the worm Spielberg come in and finish editing it.
@@airevolt1 Pipe down Judy! I'm virtually bumping uglies with Sandra Bullock, which obviously is quite the challenge with Stallone cock blocking me, with one Stallonism after another. "You drew first blood, not me, you!" "Cut me Mick, cut me!" Dangnammitt!
I looked up notes on the Leopard attack scene in "2001 A Space Odyssey". Found this response on reddit. "It certainly was a real leopard. And it was a semi-controlled environment…at best? From the fascinating book “ “Space Odyssey:Stanley Kubrick, Arthur C Clarke, And The Making Of A Masterpiece”, animal trainer Terry Dugan had nearly a year to work with the leopard as the “Dawn Of Man” shooting schedule kept getting delayed. However, when it came to the day of shooting that scene, the leopard had never encountered Dugan in the man-ape suit before…let alone the studio lights and constant set commotion. Plus, the central man-ape actor (“Moonwatcher”) participated in the scene - despite having no prior exposure to the leopard. (Other actors were added to the scene in post-production.) So in short, it was a little chaotic. And only a few takes with the leopard attack were attempted. But they got what they needed…plus a happy accident: when reviewing the footage, they noticed that the lighting produced an eerie effect on the leopard’s eyes, making it even more menacing. Kubrick was ecstatic."
The big cat eye shine is a normal cat's eye light reflection. The light came from the huge front projectors, which were showing the background landscapes. This is how these amazing scenes were shot, in a studio, with amazing sets, acting, costumes, camera direction, and director. Amazing!
@@emitindustries8304 Yup. behind the actors and the rocks was Scotchlite material that only reflected light directly back to the light source. So, a two way mirror was in front of the cameras at a... let say, a 45 degree angle, that the background was being projected onto. The camera was then in the path of reflection from the Scotchlite behind the mirror, which was still transparent enough on the back side to let the whole thing reached the film. I bought a piece of it back in the 80's. I thought Id make a tie with it and do some crazy scene with it.
How is that even possible. Granted this was more of a conversation with a free flowing stream of ideas than a structured list but still… you’d think he’d at least mention it. The liberties Kubrick took making the movie vs. what was written in the book… guy did a lot over there.
The scene with the monkeys shows the evolution of the use of tools and the fact that the monolith has been with us at all these important times in the human timeline.
@@nineofive.2573I completely disagree. I watched it on 70mm a few years ago and it was still amazing even knowing that they were contortionists wearing suits. Still superior, visually, in many ways to those new CGI Planet of the Apes flicks. You just can't uncanny a valley or add weight to a computer primate. I can tell the team put a lot of time into training to mimic animalistic movements to meet Stanley's quality level.
i like that movie because it seems to be a constant comparison between Tom Cruise and the environment/people around him. The whole movie is his series of choices and social interactions based on his sexual desires. It's great.
Louis C.K. had a lot to say about Kubrick. He interrupted everyone else. He didn’t dominate the conversation-He gave a speech. And I watched the whole thing and loved it.
Say what you want about his personal choices, Louis CK is also a great filmmaker. There are moments in his TV show that were as good as any of the best directing done today.
stuff like this makes me realize that a guy like louie really needed a podcast. theres so much more that i want to hear from him that isnt just opie and anthony highlights
Great insight here. I disagree about the three act structure opinion as Full Metal Jacket definitely has three acts. Glad to see a longer video on your channel. Keep it up.
he's definitely wrong about that. 2001 was written with Arthur C Clark and is following a very deliberate structure, very close to what is known as the three act structure.
I mean, you could probably argue barry lyndon has 3 or 4 acts but aswell as the film specifying act 1 and act 2, I think it's pretty clear there are two very clear and different sections for FMJ, hell, alot of people would specifically say after boot camp the film becomes a different and worse film altogether(not moi, but its pretty common) So tho I get your point, if someone said they liked the 2nd act for than the 1st or vice versa you'd know what they'd mean and if you were to say "what about the 3rd act?" They'd be pretty confused.
@@DiotraxSecondlives- sort of. You could separate 3 distinct acts in that it follows different characters and stories 3 times, then again there are more distinct acts within that.... then again a 3 act structure could just be beginning-middle-end if you wanna be reductive, so pretty much anything could fit the mold.
@@masterofallgoons anything can fit the mold is pretty much the idea of the 3 act structure. Altogether it's just a rather new way of talking about old stuff. It's also another way of saying beginning/middle/end, as you found out by yourself. I think Louis didn't really knew what he was talking about. He just really like 2001 because it's trippy. And i don't blame him at all.
I never knew much of Kubrick but me and my dad watched “The Killing” on one of those late night film noir tv channels and I loved it. It was so weird and exciting for its time, especially the scene filmed in first person view. I watched some of his later movies afterwards, it’s cool to see how he progressed. I wonder if there will be anyone even close to Kubricks ability to captivate people for half a century anytime soon
Great editing, sight and sound. For sight, the images match perfectly with what he's saying. For sound, I imagine Louis in a room full of 2001-style monkey-men who are bouncing up and down in front of microphones and trying to screech something but Louis keeps talking over them.
Kubrick’s ability to continuously place the camera in the right spot is a God given talent. There is a such thing as setting up a shot incorrectly and Kubrick seldom did, if at all.
I still think there's some hidden reveal in that movie... like how did the woman know who he was at the ball??? he had a mask on! Something majorly important got left on the cutting room floor. And we'll never know because he died right after making it.
just on face value alone his films are visually striking, but what i really enjoy about kubrick's films are the easter eggs. the hints of a deeper meaning, a story within the story that most of us are totally oblivious to and probably too dumb to even begin to understand.
The idea of the ape throwing the bone in the air is that the bone was the first tool or technology then cutting to the present demonstrates our evolution from bone to spaceship.
Kubrick was one of the few (if not the only one) who could do a film that would make sense narratively for the less educated and at the same time a trip for the more educated. True vertically integrated films, a master of the craft. The way he did it by adding dimensions to EVERY SINGLE THING that shows up in that rectangle is fascinating and inspiring, no wonder he took a decade to make a film. I say he was probably the only one, because he did it consistently in all his films after the studio "period". Also the way he directed actors was always a bit robotic in his own style not based on reality, or natural acting, but a way to enforce whatever idea he had for it. Truly original and missed.
I just love this channel. Every movie lover should come here watch. Fist time i saw 2001: A Space Odyssey a was on magic mushrooms. It was the best thing ever.
I missed the premiere of 2001 because I was in utero (dammit) but on my way to see Eyes Wide Shut someone offered me acid at random and so I did wind up tripping at a Kubrick premiere.
A lot of great takes, except for everything said about Eyes Wide Shut. Kubrick: “The idea that a movie should be seen only once is an extension of our traditional conception of film as entertainment rather than art.” - this applies the most to his last film, where the film works by itself but is significantly enhanced by A) repeated viewings, and B) and understanding of the circumstances of how the film came about and everything that happened behind the scenes. That film is so broad - about a bourgeoise marriage and its vapidity, yes, but also about the nature of fantasy vs reality, the blurring of the two, the unimaginative male fantasy, the fragility of the male ego. The fact that it's set in New York but it doesn't look like New York at all I believe is completely intentional. Same with that scene where Cruise is walking on a sidewalk - he's actually walking on a treadmill with a background projected behind him. They could have EASILY filmed that scene conventionally, one has to wonder why if not to enhance the feeling of illusion, which is felt in the relationship between Cruise and Kidman's on-screen relationship (interestingly paralleled with their 'real world' off screen relationship and subsequent collapse - one also has to wonder how real that ever was, a Hollywood power-couple). As I get older and older I think my appreciation and respect for that film only deepens.
CK calling Kubrick a weird man for Eyes Wide Shut is like the pot calling the kettle black. It's laughable knowing CK. Nothing weird about him. He was always a recluse who likes film and nothing else that comes with it. He would do whatever it took to make sure his film was perfect and according to his vision and if people thought he was weird for it, so be it. It was based on a 1926 German book called Traumnovelle. Lot of the elements of the film came directly from that book including all the secret society sex stuff. Lot of ignorant people try to correlate many aspects of the movie with current happenings, Kubrick's inner thoughts, Cruise/Kidman's personal lives and other mumbo jumbo. It has nothing to do with all that. Kubrick had it in mind to translate this book into film since the early 70's. He worked and obsessed with it so hard that he ended up dying from it and Cruise/Kidman subsequently divorced after the 15 months it took to make the film. It is a work of genius and like many of his films, it gets better with every viewing. There are lot of easter eggs he includes in all of his films and this one is no exception. People have their own interpretation of it and all of his other films and he does this deliberately. It's one of my favorite films of his and something I enjoy watching around Christmas.
He had a wife. Louie CK makes it sound like Kubrick died a recluse or a hermit. He lived in the country with his wife. He was a bit paranoid of people in general, the general public, because he got death threats, and the press blamed him for crime. when A clockwork orange came out. The British press blamed him for some specific crimes that may have been inspired by that movie. Kubrick pulled it from the theaters in Britain and bandit from being shown there ever. Kubrick was a genius and geniuses are supposed to go mad. He didn’t go mad, he died.
The wide shots of Africa in 2001 where aquired by a young man directly at Kubricks request, none where taken in U.S.A. everything else in the Dawn of man Sequence was shot on a sound stage in England.
It kills me how many people misunderstand the cut. The bone cut. That isn’t just any space ship. It’s a satellite carrying nuclear missiles. The cut is going from Weapon to Weapon.
Any blunt object can be a weapon. It's about the birth of the idea of using said weapon to dominate another group and advance your own agenda, aka power. The shot is simply a display of how elegant that power has become over time, and yet so much more deadly and ruthless. But it's still based on that old fundamental, power...
@@benelton10 That’s what the SCENE is about. The CUT is something different. The CUT is most people thinking “Look how far humans have come” and it is that but it’s also a much darker more sinister cut. This movie…man. Kubrick really was like no other. It kills me when people mention Nolan & Kubrick in the same breath as if they are equals. Kubrick was singular. A master.
Louis speaks with an authority I imagine you can only do from writing a stupid amount. He doesn't just break down what is presented he appreciates what was created like a fellow craftsman. He knows people constantly try to take others work and attempt to make it more consumable which sucks. Rise to the material don't try to lower it to some made up acceptable standard.
I don't think the naked woman painting was a "bent" idea; it effectively communicates Scatman's full character including informing his position within the symbolic narrative of the film. Until that shot, all we knew is this mysterious man knows about this mysterious power that Danny has, but with that one shot we find out Scatman's heritage and that he represents the slain natives in the hotel's past.
I like to think of that first monolith scene in reflection to the cell phone. The shape on obvious parallel, but the sound as the proliferation of information. And, of course, the leap in evolution it represents... The whole world in our pocket.
They use tablet like devices for news as well eh? They say the military has tech far beyond what’s available to the public. Hard not to consider that for me.
You can hear the passion in Louie’s voice. He was really contributing to film and tv but he got in trouble for playing with himself. Now we’re not allowed to enjoy him. Awesome…..
Referring to audiences, at the start he says they “are sophisticated” and “enjoy being confused” but later says today “audiences have demands and say ‘I want it to be clear and I want to know what’s happening’”. Those statements contradict one another. 🤔
Audiences most prefer it when you let them discover things for themselves. They love being confused, as long as it's something that they can cohesively piece together.
I always thought the scene with the apes and a bone is the moment early man discovered tools and at that moment the engine of technology and advancement begins, culminating in space travel. Any thoughts?
It's so nice that celebrities are finally realizing that we don't mind them yapping, just make it about YOUR art, and leave the politics yapping to the yapping mainstream media presstitutes.
Kubrick saw the world from a peep-hole or a Camera lens. He was observing things not living them from a distance and that's the signature in all his movies.
I've watched a couple of these videos now, and I had no idea Louis could've had another career as a film critic, his analysis of film is fuckin great, like better than anyone else I know(which is kind of mind blowing), but I have to ask, does the other guy ever get a fuckin word in? You might as well edit out all his "but", "yeah", "and", "well", etc
I'm such a big fan of Louis, especially his later TV work like "Louie" and most of all "Horace & Pete". And I was so happy to learn today that he also appreciate Kubrick, one of my favorite directors of all times. Btw, regarding the leopard scene. It looked so real because it was! They actually let a leopard attack a guy in a freakin' ape costume and let it maul him for a couple of minutes! Working with Kubrick must have been insane at times! ^^
I'll always remember in sophomore year of high school there was a talent show and whatever kid made the poster used that image from the movie poster of Alex inside the letter "A" as their logo. I had no idea who Kubrick was, I'd never heard about the movie, but something about that image just struck me. I'd catch myself staring at it every time I walked by a poster. Looking back I wonder what message that kid was trying to pass to the rest of us about the talent show hahahaha.
They were not pigs, they were peccaries. I'm glad you like Kubrick as much as I do. BY the way, both of my parents were from Hungary, just to give you some idea of how bad it can get. You are attentive, which makes you such a wonderful comedienne. The concept of Kubrick not offering easy answers, makes his films far more realistic, even my 8-year-old son loved 2001, as it isn't a solution to anything, and he lays no claim to any solutions. What he makes clear is that life in uncertain, and we must meet new challenges, Kubrick is not an instructor, merely am attentive creative guy who I miss.
Almost like an echo of the cinema of Kubrick's youth? The use of artifice, of the sound stage, as art & artifice to foreground reality, to make the real more real, tyransumted? And yet ... Eyes Wide Shut, like the films of Tarkovsky, like La Strada, feels as though filmed at the speed of one's feet. It takes that slow film-making to act as a palliative to the quick glimpses we miss from faster travel (an image emerges within me, the cover of Night of the Wolverine). It's a mode of being that changes our perspective on everything just as Stoic practices & the POV of deep time change how we perceive & realise what really is of importance after all. It's a process of both maturation & reflection, and that's what Eyes Wide Shut feels to me from the hindsight of knowing this is Kubrick's final film....
Louis C K ' s perspective on these magnificent " " F I L M S " " is Sooooooooooo Subjective ! ! ! - - And . . . ❤️ ❤ I ❤️ Love ❤️ I t ❤️ ! ! ! ! ❤️ ❤ God Help Me . I Love It All . Stay You Louie ! ! !
I don’t think Louis gets EWS. I mean the title of the movie Eyes Wide Shut, is Kubricks final summary judgement against us. We are not only blind but, that’s exactly what we want to be. Much more could be said about this. For example what the good Doctor is not a doctor at all but type, an Everyman if you will powerless, clueless and naive.
So I think it's clear Louis didn't understand Eyes Wide Shut when he recorded this. Definitely an opus film. Kubrick saw filmmaking as on par with classical painting and wanted to raise the bar of the entire medium in general. Many of his movies work on multiple levels beyond just themes.
Agreed, if anyone tells me that they think Eyes Wide Shut is Kubrick's single best film I wouldn't argue with them. It's his most obtuse, layered film by far, his most open to interpretation. The more you think about that film that more it both makes and doesn't make sense. It's a work of art, that's for sure.
Gotta love that some passable monkey man costumes and the most basic movie prop design ever are enough to blow louie's mind. It is a surreal scene due to framing and context, but not so much I can't fathom how they filmed it.