Quote:
|
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.