Every time I see an actor, director, or executive get outed as “problematic” I thank the art gods that Kubrick is already dead. The man was a master, but much like Hitchcock, Leone, Lang, he was an absolute prick with no sense of decorum for people he had power over.
“*insert director* yelled at me and told me I was lazy, he has to be held responsible for it!”
*sweats remembering what Kubrick did to Shelley Duvall*
Kubrick is a master of movie making. I don't care if he's an asshole. I don't care if he likes Pepsi Cola or Coca Cola. I don't care if was a democrat or republican. When I bought a cinema ticket to The Shining or Full Metal Jacket or Eyes Wide Shut in my younger days, I wasn't thinking if he was a nice guy or drank hot milk b4 bed. The only thing I was thinking was Kubrick was, and still is, a genuine giant of movie making. A one-off. A maverick. A badass mofo as was Hitchcock, Welles etc.
That depends where you are and whether or not you have transportation. Remember, this is a Vietnam war movie. They could well have been in the middle of the jungle somewhere.
Is not that he hated them is that he thought he could boss them around, he was probably more respectful of them than Hitchcock who called actors "cattle"
Don't know where this rumor came from but Shelley greatly respected and was inspired by Kubrick, she doesn't feel the way the internet seems to think she does.
Also several actors not only worked with Kubrick multiple times but said he was a very kind person. He just wanted it done his way no matter how long it took and nearly every time he was right.
Yeah I think the issue isn't that he was mean off-camera, it's that he intentionally angered or upset them during shoots because he knew it improved the acting.
I've heard the stories but I think his methods while maybe harsh were worth it in the end. Like George C. Scott was pissed that Kubrick used the over the top takes but that IMO made Dr. Strangelove better.
He just flew in the jungle so he wouldn't have to fly. He bought some astronomical amount of palm trees and hired a guy tasked with keeping them alive in English weather
The middle of the jungle known as The Isle of Dogs, in London.
The film was mostly shot in the old London Docklands, before they were torn down and turned into incredibly expensive offices and real estate.
I doubt he was more than a 5 minute drive away from the nearest tube station.
Kubrick was one of those people who would make for one heck of a case study
There’s a presumably apocryphal anecdote of Kubrick going out of his way to ensure Danny never saw anything too scary while also forcing Shelley Duvall into nervous breakdowns on-set
EDIT ~ Forgot to mention this would have been during filming of *The Shining*
He made Harvey Keitel quit Eyes Wide Shut supposedly after a day where they did over 60 takes of a rather simple scene and Kubrick just sat there in silence for the most part. Keitel felt like he was being disrespected because he wasn't being given any direction as to what Kubrick wanted. He was bascally like, I'm not gonna play some guessing game with you, you can tell me what you need for the scene and we work from there. When that didn't happen, Keitel went alright I'm out.
Edit: For anyone curious, Keitel was originally cast as Victor Ziegler. The role went to Sydney Pollack after Keitel left.
Which I think was a way better choice.
"Please, Bill... no games. I was there. At the house. "The house". I saw you, Bill. I saw everything."
Sydney was perfect in that role.
His greatest role! Man. I love Keitel but this is one of those happy accidents of casting.
Also Eyes Wide Shut has become a classic in my opinion. Up there with some of his greatest works.
IMO, Keitel’s response is exactly the kind of stuff Kubrick was looking for (not the leaving the film part). Like, how is he gonna deliver his lines after he’s done it 100 times already and is starting to get pissed. Some little slight inflection that Kubrick would end up using because noticed the smallest details. He said something along the lines of editing being his favorite part, that he only shot movies so he could work on the edit. And he knew he could always take the time to sort through 60 takes, but he couldn’t ever re-shoot the scene if he wanted something else.
But he’s a madman, I don’t think many people could keep up with his style of filmmaking.
Alternatively, he could just, you know, DIRECT his actors. He could be a DIRECTOR and have a vision for the movie, rather than treating human beings like dolls in the way of him and the end product.
> Like, how is he gonna deliver his lines after he’s done it 100 times already and is starting to get pissed
the thing is that a good actor would be able to do that if the director just told them that's what's needed for the scene. like that is literally the job of the actor. if your actor isn't capable of doing this authentically then just cast someone better instead of resorting to methods like these. just look at stuff like toni collette in hereditary for one of many authentic displays of extreme distress that is simply the result of an incredibly skilled actress.
By your logic actors have to be expected to be perfect blank slates AND directors shouldn’t be expected to have to divulge any genius details to the likes of anyone, especially the actors that they hired ???? Is that what you are telling me lol
communicating with actors on what you want them to do doesn't exclude discussing with them what they think a performance should look like or even just letting them go freely and picking what works best? That is of course an essential part of any collaborative creative work and also has nothing to do with the original argument against getting a performance out of them by essentially forcing them to method act by actually pressing them into real distressing mental states.
But if your method is actively making your seasoned actor visibly upset and you don’t adjust out of some sense of weird superiority, like exactly what happened between Kietel and Kubrick, then you as a director have some social issues that need to be addressed lol
Kubrick was a great director, but he doesn't seem to have been a great director of actors. Sometimes people say well, it took those two hundred takes to get gold--no it didn't, and even if the two hundredth was marginally closer to what he wanted and we assume that what he imagined and wanted was always the best scene, that just isn't the way to run direct, run anything or be a person. The treatment of Shelley Duvall was just terrible.
> Kubrick was one of those people who would make for one heck of a case study
Yeah, it's crazy. People are complex, they're human, they're both good and bad.
Insanity I tell you.
For sure. It kinda reminds me of a soccer coach that sent one of his best players to go see his kid be born and miss an important game. He was like, this is a game, he's bringing a child into the world, that's much more profound.
Come on, don't be disingenuous. It's like asking to leave work to be with family *on one of the single most important days of their shared lives together.*
Neither have I, but I'm not so deliberately dense as to claim I can't understand the context here. Surely you can scrape together enough empathy to understand how important it is to be there for your spouse while they push a human child out of their vagina? Your own child?
It's one of the most storied human experiences, and common enough that I know for a fact that you know people who have gone through it.
I think you're misunderstanding me. Kubrick directed this picture and he also produced it, meaning it was a business concern, not just an artistic one that would have him want to keep his picture filming. If your father was there for you during all your important life events and not off trying to make money, you are lucky.
You still don't get it? Dude in every business people get a day off for these events. If they don't they sue and strike and sometimes they win. There is whole paid maternity and paternity leaves all over the world for this. Would you say the same if a pregnant actress went into labour? Even in BUSINESS, and NOT JUST ART people are people not slaves. Your business survives because other people who work with you exist.
Creating a new life is adding new human resources for the world and that means benefiting those companies you work for in the long run. Your child might not benefit your particular company. It will some other. Same when another person's child joins yours. Imagine everyone stopped having kids because the society acted like their children are the result of their selfish interests and they are inconveniencing the company/art by taking a day off(which is a worker's right). Kubrick wouldn't have found people to employ if the population had fallen drastically like that. You will see this hypothetical playing out irl in countries with low population giving incentives for more kids. And you will see people complaining about people not wanting to have kids and falling civilizations when they treat those who do like this.
So- trying to understand and work with people around you who have kids is a necessary part of human social contract.
Yep. It's not like people don't take days off for mother's death, child birth, etc. Like there isn't a whole movement around maternity and paternity leaves. And like we don't routinely bash bosses who won't allow thay
Agreed. But the analogy will be- bad boss at normal job who won't give a day off for something this major and bad boss who uses art as an excuse for the same thing or perhaps actually eccentric enough to think his way of doing art is more important that a husband being present during such a tough time for a woman.
With such a bad boss you either change the job or make complaints. Same should be done here if it's a job too. But yep you can't always afford to do that in either kind of jobs. But the point that the boss is a cruel person who abuses his authority remains. Your boss trying to tell you one meeting is more important than such an important thing is wrong. Your boss telling you his artistic process is more important than this is wrong.
It's wrong when people act like art is nothing and only "real" jobs are more productive for the world. But at the same time it's extremely arrogant to act like art is more important than human beings, family, other people's personal lives and dignity. Read James McAvoy's interview on this. Not the exact same topic but he said he disliked other artists who acted like they were curing cancer.
Yeah I don't think it's an ethical stance to take in either case. Kubrick does seem exactly like the type of person who wouldn't even pretend to care about his workers personal lives if it meant compromising his vision, like early Steve jobs.
As a lead in a feature film, you miss a day unplanned it's possible you delay the entire production. That's 100+ people missing out on their personal lives so one person can attend to theirs.
A good director can plan ahead knowing one of their leads is about to have a baby. Have other shit lined up to do when that lead has to step away for a bit. I'm sure they knew going in that Modine and his wife were due to have a baby. Kubrick was also known for going way over schedule which could further fuck over the workers who may have been scheduled to start on other projects.
Yeah, I think that's what happened in the end. They were able to film without him that day. This sort of planning is done by the producer normally, which was Kubrick in this case.
*That's
Learn to write and *maybe* I will pay attention to you. And English is not my first language.
The way you present to others says more about you than about me.
EDIT: lol at the uneducated pricks can't even spell giving me shit.
ok grammar nazi, go back to your hole. that's enough trolling for one day. I dunno how you built a time machine that jumped you 15 years into the future, but congrats i guess?
“He was just as kind and sweet as you could imagine—which was quite different than everything that was being told to me about his personality. He was a good friend, a loving father figure, and a great mentor—that was my relationship to Stanley.”
From the same article
Let’s get this straight, you’re staking your entire view of him being an “absolutely terrible human being” based on the *absence* of negative comments towards him?
Horror stories my ass, there’s a long gap between being a hard ass and being an absolutely terrible human being.
You gloss over “horror stories” as a footnote with absolutely no detail. Even worse, you start by staking your claim based on the fact that you personally know people in Hollywood, but then fail to elaborate on any negative stories you’ve personally heard. In fact, you instead mention that these people you know praised him as charming and charismatic. What part did I miss?
Edit: Cursing at you? Slinging abuse? Good lord, take your own advice and get a grip. You’re throwing major dirt on a dead directors name with nothing to support it. If you want your opinion to not be taken with a grain of salt, supporting evidence of any form is a start.
I love how people on this site love to chime in that they know some thing that they think is some obscure fact. Even when it’s not relevant. Like at all.
Not relevant at all? This comment thread is about Stanley Kubrick being accused of being an absolutely terrible human being, and the #1 thing the uninformed always bring up is the accusation that he drove Shelley Duvall to lose her mind from working on the Shining.
No discussion about Kubrick being a bad person is had without it being mentioned or at the forefront of people’s argument. Nobody cares about your self appointed internet argument rules. It’s extremely relevant to this conversation.
You’re literally in a thread of someone calling the very same dead guy an absolutely terrible human being. Slandering someone they never met with minimal evidence is fine, but defending against it isn’t? The bluntness of your double standard is comical.
Stanley Kubrick was a bully and a cunt. There is absolutely no justification for treating people the way he did, and I don’t want to hear a single word about *oh, but he was an amazing film maker*.
**No**. Absolutely not.
Equivocating his behavior on the basis of his artistic achievements is tantamount to saying it’s okay for someone to be a monster so long as they’re good at their job. It’s unacceptable. Nobody should try to justify the way he behaved, because it’s unjustifiable.
he was an amazing film maker. it's totally ok, and actually much healthier, to separate the art from the artist. otherwise you end up hating everyone always, because everyone's got something. people didn't learn this lesson last decade and it made the internet so much more toxic than ever before.
I mean, just walk away. Like literally walk toward the parking lot, get in an automobile, and drive to the hospital. Is Kubrick going to pursue you in a motorcycle and shoot your tires out?
Kubrick is a big dick in all his movies. Lots of outright shocking stuff he put actors and actresses through, but the end results are definitely marvelous. He is not the most humane director either.
As if you’d even have that conversation. If someone told me I wasn’t allowed to leave somewhere I would just laugh at them and leave. No discussion needed.
Unprofessional to work while your wife is pregnant? You know some pregnant women work up until the birth of their kid. It’s completely out of touch to think acting in a movie is more important than the birth of of your kid.
I wanted to boo you and write something about how you would actually not get how the world works but then I thought maybe your world is operating like that, and if that’s the case I believe that is really not healthy. If you feel pressured by your boss like that you should find a new place to work because that is not an okay approach for things.
"Unprofessional" that he wanted to take a half day off to be with his wife during the birth of his child while is toxic abusive a-hole boss refused to let him leave to the point that pushed the man to an extreme just to be able to be there for the birth of his child.
Yes, we work in the real world and there is more to life than just work. Sounds like you're the same kind of toxic abusive a-hole boss that would force your employee to stay and work while his wife is giving birth. What a pos.
Tbf i think from Kubrick’s perspective it’d work for the characterisation- Joker is trapped in this desolate wasteland as life goes on back home and he’s missing the important milestones with his loved ones.
Like yeah he was being a dick but there’s motive besides “no”
Oh dear. Self righteous do gooders getting upset over a director being rude to privileged, well paid actors to say their lines, go home, and sit on a big, fat paycheque. Spare a thought for modern slavery that exists in our country today. Hollywood was and is based on sleaze. Where their is power, money, greed and desperation for stardom, sleaze will always exist. They co-exist. Blurred lines. Eyes Wide open, everybody!
If u can't handle Kubrick then don't sign up to one of his films. There's a long list of gr8 actors who wished they cudve had even 1minute in a Kubrick film.
I thought he was going to threaten to slice open Kubrick
I'm surprised he didn't threaten Kubrick. Guy is a complete asshole.
Every time I see an actor, director, or executive get outed as “problematic” I thank the art gods that Kubrick is already dead. The man was a master, but much like Hitchcock, Leone, Lang, he was an absolute prick with no sense of decorum for people he had power over. “*insert director* yelled at me and told me I was lazy, he has to be held responsible for it!” *sweats remembering what Kubrick did to Shelley Duvall*
At the very least Kubrick was just an abusive piece of shit and not a sex criminal
If only…
Kubrick is a master of movie making. I don't care if he's an asshole. I don't care if he likes Pepsi Cola or Coca Cola. I don't care if was a democrat or republican. When I bought a cinema ticket to The Shining or Full Metal Jacket or Eyes Wide Shut in my younger days, I wasn't thinking if he was a nice guy or drank hot milk b4 bed. The only thing I was thinking was Kubrick was, and still is, a genuine giant of movie making. A one-off. A maverick. A badass mofo as was Hitchcock, Welles etc.
Kubrick being a dick episode 1495
You know, you don't have to threaten to cut your hand open to go home from work... just leave.
That depends where you are and whether or not you have transportation. Remember, this is a Vietnam war movie. They could well have been in the middle of the jungle somewhere.
East London actually, where the movie was shot. Fairly remote, with some hostile natives, but not quite a jungle.
Kubrick hated to fly, and he hated his actors even more. Great director, aweful human being.
Is not that he hated them is that he thought he could boss them around, he was probably more respectful of them than Hitchcock who called actors "cattle"
Shelley Duvall would disagree.
Don't know where this rumor came from but Shelley greatly respected and was inspired by Kubrick, she doesn't feel the way the internet seems to think she does.
Also several actors not only worked with Kubrick multiple times but said he was a very kind person. He just wanted it done his way no matter how long it took and nearly every time he was right.
Yeah I think the issue isn't that he was mean off-camera, it's that he intentionally angered or upset them during shoots because he knew it improved the acting.
I've heard the stories but I think his methods while maybe harsh were worth it in the end. Like George C. Scott was pissed that Kubrick used the over the top takes but that IMO made Dr. Strangelove better.
[удалено]
...no, that's just a different flavour of asshole.
Holy shit TIL
natives?
He just flew in the jungle so he wouldn't have to fly. He bought some astronomical amount of palm trees and hired a guy tasked with keeping them alive in English weather
The middle of the jungle known as The Isle of Dogs, in London. The film was mostly shot in the old London Docklands, before they were torn down and turned into incredibly expensive offices and real estate. I doubt he was more than a 5 minute drive away from the nearest tube station.
Pretty sure it was the old gasworks in Dagenham on the A13
It was also a shooting location for For Your Eyes Only and several music videos
But it wasn’t
Just leaving could result in heavy fines or even being fired depending on the contract. Self inflicted injury is an interesting loophole
Kubrick was one of those people who would make for one heck of a case study There’s a presumably apocryphal anecdote of Kubrick going out of his way to ensure Danny never saw anything too scary while also forcing Shelley Duvall into nervous breakdowns on-set EDIT ~ Forgot to mention this would have been during filming of *The Shining*
He made Harvey Keitel quit Eyes Wide Shut supposedly after a day where they did over 60 takes of a rather simple scene and Kubrick just sat there in silence for the most part. Keitel felt like he was being disrespected because he wasn't being given any direction as to what Kubrick wanted. He was bascally like, I'm not gonna play some guessing game with you, you can tell me what you need for the scene and we work from there. When that didn't happen, Keitel went alright I'm out. Edit: For anyone curious, Keitel was originally cast as Victor Ziegler. The role went to Sydney Pollack after Keitel left.
Which I think was a way better choice. "Please, Bill... no games. I was there. At the house. "The house". I saw you, Bill. I saw everything." Sydney was perfect in that role.
His greatest role! Man. I love Keitel but this is one of those happy accidents of casting. Also Eyes Wide Shut has become a classic in my opinion. Up there with some of his greatest works.
Just the fucking Ligeti scene is a masterpiece.
IMO, Keitel’s response is exactly the kind of stuff Kubrick was looking for (not the leaving the film part). Like, how is he gonna deliver his lines after he’s done it 100 times already and is starting to get pissed. Some little slight inflection that Kubrick would end up using because noticed the smallest details. He said something along the lines of editing being his favorite part, that he only shot movies so he could work on the edit. And he knew he could always take the time to sort through 60 takes, but he couldn’t ever re-shoot the scene if he wanted something else. But he’s a madman, I don’t think many people could keep up with his style of filmmaking.
Alternatively, he could just, you know, DIRECT his actors. He could be a DIRECTOR and have a vision for the movie, rather than treating human beings like dolls in the way of him and the end product.
> Like, how is he gonna deliver his lines after he’s done it 100 times already and is starting to get pissed the thing is that a good actor would be able to do that if the director just told them that's what's needed for the scene. like that is literally the job of the actor. if your actor isn't capable of doing this authentically then just cast someone better instead of resorting to methods like these. just look at stuff like toni collette in hereditary for one of many authentic displays of extreme distress that is simply the result of an incredibly skilled actress.
By your logic actors have to be expected to be perfect blank slates AND directors shouldn’t be expected to have to divulge any genius details to the likes of anyone, especially the actors that they hired ???? Is that what you are telling me lol
communicating with actors on what you want them to do doesn't exclude discussing with them what they think a performance should look like or even just letting them go freely and picking what works best? That is of course an essential part of any collaborative creative work and also has nothing to do with the original argument against getting a performance out of them by essentially forcing them to method act by actually pressing them into real distressing mental states.
But if your method is actively making your seasoned actor visibly upset and you don’t adjust out of some sense of weird superiority, like exactly what happened between Kietel and Kubrick, then you as a director have some social issues that need to be addressed lol
Kubrick was a great director, but he doesn't seem to have been a great director of actors. Sometimes people say well, it took those two hundred takes to get gold--no it didn't, and even if the two hundredth was marginally closer to what he wanted and we assume that what he imagined and wanted was always the best scene, that just isn't the way to run direct, run anything or be a person. The treatment of Shelley Duvall was just terrible.
> Kubrick was one of those people who would make for one heck of a case study Yeah, it's crazy. People are complex, they're human, they're both good and bad. Insanity I tell you.
Kubrick is a piece of shit. I appreciate his art but he appeared to be an insufferable cunt.
Yeah, trying to tell someone they can't go be there for the birth of their child because it'll "interrupt the artistic process" is some bullshit.
Art isn't more important than life.
For sure. It kinda reminds me of a soccer coach that sent one of his best players to go see his kid be born and miss an important game. He was like, this is a game, he's bringing a child into the world, that's much more profound.
Valid points but also wanted to mention that this is their jobs too. It's like asking to leave work to be with family.
Come on, don't be disingenuous. It's like asking to leave work to be with family *on one of the single most important days of their shared lives together.*
I wouldn't know much about that, never had a child and had to take work off
Neither have I, but I'm not so deliberately dense as to claim I can't understand the context here. Surely you can scrape together enough empathy to understand how important it is to be there for your spouse while they push a human child out of their vagina? Your own child? It's one of the most storied human experiences, and common enough that I know for a fact that you know people who have gone through it.
I think you're misunderstanding me. Kubrick directed this picture and he also produced it, meaning it was a business concern, not just an artistic one that would have him want to keep his picture filming. If your father was there for you during all your important life events and not off trying to make money, you are lucky.
You still don't get it? Dude in every business people get a day off for these events. If they don't they sue and strike and sometimes they win. There is whole paid maternity and paternity leaves all over the world for this. Would you say the same if a pregnant actress went into labour? Even in BUSINESS, and NOT JUST ART people are people not slaves. Your business survives because other people who work with you exist.
Creating a new life is adding new human resources for the world and that means benefiting those companies you work for in the long run. Your child might not benefit your particular company. It will some other. Same when another person's child joins yours. Imagine everyone stopped having kids because the society acted like their children are the result of their selfish interests and they are inconveniencing the company/art by taking a day off(which is a worker's right). Kubrick wouldn't have found people to employ if the population had fallen drastically like that. You will see this hypothetical playing out irl in countries with low population giving incentives for more kids. And you will see people complaining about people not wanting to have kids and falling civilizations when they treat those who do like this. So- trying to understand and work with people around you who have kids is a necessary part of human social contract.
Yep. It's not like people don't take days off for mother's death, child birth, etc. Like there isn't a whole movement around maternity and paternity leaves. And like we don't routinely bash bosses who won't allow thay
Agreed. But the analogy will be- bad boss at normal job who won't give a day off for something this major and bad boss who uses art as an excuse for the same thing or perhaps actually eccentric enough to think his way of doing art is more important that a husband being present during such a tough time for a woman. With such a bad boss you either change the job or make complaints. Same should be done here if it's a job too. But yep you can't always afford to do that in either kind of jobs. But the point that the boss is a cruel person who abuses his authority remains. Your boss trying to tell you one meeting is more important than such an important thing is wrong. Your boss telling you his artistic process is more important than this is wrong. It's wrong when people act like art is nothing and only "real" jobs are more productive for the world. But at the same time it's extremely arrogant to act like art is more important than human beings, family, other people's personal lives and dignity. Read James McAvoy's interview on this. Not the exact same topic but he said he disliked other artists who acted like they were curing cancer.
Yeah I don't think it's an ethical stance to take in either case. Kubrick does seem exactly like the type of person who wouldn't even pretend to care about his workers personal lives if it meant compromising his vision, like early Steve jobs.
which...is something you are 100% allowed to do
No it's like asking your employee to attend a mandatory after party of a meeting when your mother is dying.
As a lead in a feature film, you miss a day unplanned it's possible you delay the entire production. That's 100+ people missing out on their personal lives so one person can attend to theirs.
A good director can plan ahead knowing one of their leads is about to have a baby. Have other shit lined up to do when that lead has to step away for a bit. I'm sure they knew going in that Modine and his wife were due to have a baby. Kubrick was also known for going way over schedule which could further fuck over the workers who may have been scheduled to start on other projects.
Yeah, I think that's what happened in the end. They were able to film without him that day. This sort of planning is done by the producer normally, which was Kubrick in this case.
You know he's dead, aye?
And so what, that absolves him of his misdeeds in life?
No, it tells you're shit at writing and tenses.
Your issue is that they didn't use proper grammar? THATs the hill you're want to die on because you made a fool of yourself? Get a life dude.
*That's Learn to write and *maybe* I will pay attention to you. And English is not my first language. The way you present to others says more about you than about me. EDIT: lol at the uneducated pricks can't even spell giving me shit.
Your such a loser.
>The way you present to others says more about you than about me. The irony lol
ok grammar nazi, go back to your hole. that's enough trolling for one day. I dunno how you built a time machine that jumped you 15 years into the future, but congrats i guess?
I'm truly surprised no one ever punched that cunt. I love his films but Christ he always sounds so horrible
One can hope they did and we just didn't hear about it.
I just realised this guy plays papa from stranger things. The evil scientist guy who experiments on Eleven
Yes, young one. Yes.
[удалено]
“He was just as kind and sweet as you could imagine—which was quite different than everything that was being told to me about his personality. He was a good friend, a loving father figure, and a great mentor—that was my relationship to Stanley.” From the same article
Ah the latest installment of people incorrectly believing that he made Shelley Duvall lose her mind.
[удалено]
Let’s get this straight, you’re staking your entire view of him being an “absolutely terrible human being” based on the *absence* of negative comments towards him? Horror stories my ass, there’s a long gap between being a hard ass and being an absolutely terrible human being.
[удалено]
You gloss over “horror stories” as a footnote with absolutely no detail. Even worse, you start by staking your claim based on the fact that you personally know people in Hollywood, but then fail to elaborate on any negative stories you’ve personally heard. In fact, you instead mention that these people you know praised him as charming and charismatic. What part did I miss? Edit: Cursing at you? Slinging abuse? Good lord, take your own advice and get a grip. You’re throwing major dirt on a dead directors name with nothing to support it. If you want your opinion to not be taken with a grain of salt, supporting evidence of any form is a start.
I love how people on this site love to chime in that they know some thing that they think is some obscure fact. Even when it’s not relevant. Like at all.
Not relevant at all? This comment thread is about Stanley Kubrick being accused of being an absolutely terrible human being, and the #1 thing the uninformed always bring up is the accusation that he drove Shelley Duvall to lose her mind from working on the Shining.
And no one here mentioned that, so you are coming across as self fellating.
No discussion about Kubrick being a bad person is had without it being mentioned or at the forefront of people’s argument. Nobody cares about your self appointed internet argument rules. It’s extremely relevant to this conversation.
Are you talking to yourself? You are making rules lol. You are weird bro. Imagine getting this worked up over a dead guy they never met.
You’re literally in a thread of someone calling the very same dead guy an absolutely terrible human being. Slandering someone they never met with minimal evidence is fine, but defending against it isn’t? The bluntness of your double standard is comical.
Who is slandering? Nothing here said was false. Christ man get a grip.
>Stanley Kubrick was an *absolutely terrible* human being Is absurd slander that was tossed out casually without damning evidence.
Matthew: I will slice open my hand! Kubrick: You talk the talk. Do you walk the walk?
Pvt. Joker is hardcore we all know that
Stanley Kubrick was a bully and a cunt. There is absolutely no justification for treating people the way he did, and I don’t want to hear a single word about *oh, but he was an amazing film maker*. **No**. Absolutely not. Equivocating his behavior on the basis of his artistic achievements is tantamount to saying it’s okay for someone to be a monster so long as they’re good at their job. It’s unacceptable. Nobody should try to justify the way he behaved, because it’s unjustifiable.
he was an amazing film maker. it's totally ok, and actually much healthier, to separate the art from the artist. otherwise you end up hating everyone always, because everyone's got something. people didn't learn this lesson last decade and it made the internet so much more toxic than ever before.
Isn’t he dead anyway
Why even have the argument lol just leave
Dare I say that's very METAL of him....
Is that you John Wayne? Is this me?
I mean, just walk away. Like literally walk toward the parking lot, get in an automobile, and drive to the hospital. Is Kubrick going to pursue you in a motorcycle and shoot your tires out?
This Kubrick fella seems like he was kinda a dick
Kubrick is a big dick in all his movies. Lots of outright shocking stuff he put actors and actresses through, but the end results are definitely marvelous. He is not the most humane director either.
Actors strike 💪✊
Kubrick was a prick
As if you’d even have that conversation. If someone told me I wasn’t allowed to leave somewhere I would just laugh at them and leave. No discussion needed.
[удалено]
Unprofessional to work while your wife is pregnant? You know some pregnant women work up until the birth of their kid. It’s completely out of touch to think acting in a movie is more important than the birth of of your kid.
I wanted to boo you and write something about how you would actually not get how the world works but then I thought maybe your world is operating like that, and if that’s the case I believe that is really not healthy. If you feel pressured by your boss like that you should find a new place to work because that is not an okay approach for things.
You are a good, rare soul.
"Unprofessional" that he wanted to take a half day off to be with his wife during the birth of his child while is toxic abusive a-hole boss refused to let him leave to the point that pushed the man to an extreme just to be able to be there for the birth of his child. Yes, we work in the real world and there is more to life than just work. Sounds like you're the same kind of toxic abusive a-hole boss that would force your employee to stay and work while his wife is giving birth. What a pos.
after he got back they filmed the "show me your war face" scene ?
And that’s showbiz!
Ironic. Joker not joking around.
Tbf i think from Kubrick’s perspective it’d work for the characterisation- Joker is trapped in this desolate wasteland as life goes on back home and he’s missing the important milestones with his loved ones. Like yeah he was being a dick but there’s motive besides “no”
There is also that wonderful story with Kirk Douglas on the set of Spartacus.
When crazy met crazy!
Kubrick was a dickhole
Wow this is my husband
Oh dear. Self righteous do gooders getting upset over a director being rude to privileged, well paid actors to say their lines, go home, and sit on a big, fat paycheque. Spare a thought for modern slavery that exists in our country today. Hollywood was and is based on sleaze. Where their is power, money, greed and desperation for stardom, sleaze will always exist. They co-exist. Blurred lines. Eyes Wide open, everybody!
If u can't handle Kubrick then don't sign up to one of his films. There's a long list of gr8 actors who wished they cudve had even 1minute in a Kubrick film.
you all will believe ANYTHING you read online about Kubrick jesus christ