Originally Posted by demonrail666
That's a great interview but you're definitely right. I tend to go for quite simple, actor-oriented stuff, which clearly isn't Kubrick's forte. I don't mind extravagance, I love Fellini, but what separates him from Kubrick is his human/emotional side. As I like to say (ad nauseum) the most 'human' character in any of the Kubrick films I've seen was HAL. As a technician he's beyond criticism but my preference will always be with those movies more atuned to the human element, be it a Ford western or a Laurel and Hardy comedy. Give me Renoir over Godard all day long. It's the same with literature. As unfashionable as they now are, I'll still take a Dickens or a Steinbeck over pretty much anything else. And I much prefer dogs to cats.
Although I don't want to paint myself too much into a corner. I'm not just a sentimentalist. Some filmmakers I like a lot are a little on the 'cold' side (Antonioni, Hawks, etc) but they're definitely an exception to the rule.
Edit: I don't like Koyana-whatsitsface at all and Solaris isn't my favourite Tarkovsky movie, but I love Mirror, so it's never straightforward. It's about where you draw the line, for El Symbols it's Inland Empire, for me it's anything that might potentially remind me of a Peter Greenaway film - but then I like The Cook, the Thief so, again, it's never straightforward.
Yer mad?! There's been Dickens bumming overload the last few months, what with it being the 150th anniversary of his death or the like.
But yeah, I too have not seen Barry Lyndon. Admitting that automatically wipes all praise and "I LOVE KUBRICK ME!" comments I've made on here.