The Bathrobe Foreshadows Violence in ACO
Thrawn
great mans' films?!
I was working on my list of 'doubles' in Clockwork Orange and then
something jumped out at me. The first time we see Alex after Mr.
Alexander realizes who he is - he is wearing a bathrobe, but not just
any bathrobe.
I posted a scan today on my site if you need to see what I mean:
www.malcolmmcdowell.net
I think that by SK having Alex appear in the exact same bathrobe that
Mr. Alexander wore when he was attacked by Alex foreshadows the attack
of Mr. Alexander on Alex. The last time we saw it there was violence
and we should expect it again.
This is so subtle, but so brillaint. Now that you know, you can't
watch the scene without thinking about it.
Thanks again Mr. K - I am still learning because of you!
Alex Thrawn
Malcolm McDowell Tribute
TansalQ
> Isn't it amazing how after decades one can still learn things from the
> great mans' films?!
>
> I was working on my list of 'doubles' in Clockwork Orange and then
> something jumped out at me. The first time we see Alex after Mr.
> Alexander realizes who he is - he is wearing a bathrobe, but not just
> any bathrobe.
>
> I posted a scan today on my site if you need to see what I mean:
> www.malcolmmcdowell.net
>
> I think that by SK having Alex appear in the exact same bathrobe that
> Mr. Alexander wore when he was attacked by Alex foreshadows the attack
> of Mr. Alexander on Alex. The last time we saw it there was violence
> and we should expect it again.
>
> This is so subtle, but so brillaint. Now that you know, you can't
> watch the scene without thinking about it.
You're right about that! Thanks for the pointer, I'd never noticed this
either.
Tansal
Greg Simmons
until now.
pitch audio
after watching the film dozens of times). Awesome... very perceptive
of you. I've noticed other dualities before, but that's very cool.
GS George
thra...@yahoo.com (Thrawn) wrote in message news:<afa43390.03051...@posting.google.com>...
Wordsmith
> It's such a spanking bathrobe too, can't believe I overlooked (ha, ha) it
> until now.
When Halloran and Danny's conversation in the kitchen gets heavy, we
see knives on the wall, a portentous premonition of future frights.
Poetsmith :)
M4RV1N
writes:
>Isn't it amazing how after decades one can still learn things from the
>great mans' films?!
Yes.
>I was working on my list of 'doubles' in Clockwork Orange and then
>something jumped out at me. The first time we see Alex after Mr.
>Alexander realizes who he is - he is wearing a bathrobe, but not just
>any bathrobe.
>
>I posted a scan today on my site if you need to see what I mean:
>www.malcolmmcdowell.net
>
>I think that by SK having Alex appear in the exact same bathrobe that
>Mr. Alexander wore when he was attacked by Alex foreshadows the attack
>of Mr. Alexander on Alex. The last time we saw it there was violence
>and we should expect it again.
I think it's a reflective doubling; one might call it the robe of the victim
(Mr. A calls him the "victim of this new technique." The colors are red and
white, a combination Kubrick has used prominently in various films (it's also
reinforced in this scene by the spagetti--which I think is rather amusing).
Two other prominent examples of the combination in other films: when Bowman
murders HAL he is in the red "brain room" and disconnects white (monolith
shaped) memory circuits, and the red and white restroom where Grady advises
Jack about "correcting" his family.
Exactly what Kubrick had in mind with his use of this color combination is
still an open question with me, but it certainly seems related both to death
and a kind of "point of no return." Generic symbolic interpretation would be
blood/death and purity, but that's the tip of the iceberg.
>This is so subtle, but so brillaint. Now that you know, you can't
>watch the scene without thinking about it.
I think one can watch the films and simply become immersed in the story, or one
can notice the items of film content everywhere, and then finally after seeing
them several times I found I could actually see the forest and the trees at the
same time. One thing I seem to always think of when seeing ACO is how
Beethoven is used twice to try to kill Alex.
Mark Ervin
TansalQ
> I think it's a reflective doubling; one might call it the robe of the victim
> (Mr. A calls him the "victim of this new technique." The colors are red and
> white, a combination Kubrick has used prominently in various films (it's also
> reinforced in this scene by the spagetti--which I think is rather amusing).
This points to another idea in SK films for me - slapstick. It seems most
evident in ACO than in any of his other films. Can anything think of more
examples of SK's "low" humor, present in his films? Alex's correctional
officer (forget his name at the moment) drinks out of a bedside glass
holding his mummy's teeth. Lots of knees and tolchocks to the groin.
Of course, Strangelove is full of 'em.
Tansal
Bryce Utting
>>Alex Thrawn
>>I was working on my list of 'doubles' in Clockwork Orange and then
>>something jumped out at me. The first time we see Alex after Mr.
>>Alexander realizes who he is - he is wearing a bathrobe, but not just
>>any bathrobe.
great catch.
> I think it's a reflective doubling; one might call it the robe of the victim
> (Mr. A calls him the "victim of this new technique." The colors are red and
> white, a combination Kubrick has used prominently in various films (it's also
> reinforced in this scene by the spagetti--which I think is rather amusing).
> Two other prominent examples of the combination in other films: when Bowman
> murders HAL he is in the red "brain room" and disconnects white (monolith
> shaped) memory circuits, and the red and white restroom where Grady advises
> Jack about "correcting" his family.
I watched The Shining again a couple of weeks back, and skimmed
through ACO over the weekend just to refresh the dialogue in my
memory. something that jumped out was the elaborate rolled R's, all
*over* ACO: Grrrrrrady was to torrrrrment Jack with them a few years
later.
> One thing I seem to always think of when seeing ACO is how
> Beethoven is used twice to try to kill Alex.
-very- nice touch. I guess the moloko and the milk bottle serve a
similar purpose.
butting
PoshGirl850
some kind of evil? I was finishing up my project concerning Kubrick, and as I
was watching The Shining, I couldn't help but notice that whenever there is a
shot in a symmetrical area, something bad happens right after. In ACO, the
opening shot in the Korova Milkbar is followed by Alex and his droogs beating
the homeless guy. In The Shining, Danny is riding his tricycle through the
halls of the Overlook in, he runs into the twins.
JSpringer0953
>From: poshg...@aol.com (PoshGirl850)
>Date: 5/12/2003 2:29 PM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <20030512152904...@mb-m20.aol.com>
It may be more a matter of Kubrick's visual sensibility than anything. But
there is no doubt that he used symmetry (or at least a juxtaposition of
symmetry with asymmetry) to great advantage, punctuating certain moments in his
films.
The HOME intrusion and rape in ACO is a good example. The symmetry established
in the foyer when Mrs. Alexander answers the door quickly disintegrates into
handheld chaos as the scene progresses. The visual disruption works
subconsciously to amplify the violence.
Another example of this technique can be seen in the piano/beating scene in BL.
The head of the scene is anchored with a static, symmetrical shot that
emphasizes the order, however tenuous, of the proceedings. The order is quickly
broken by Bullington when he bursts in the room and castigates Barry and Lady
Lyndon. The scene then descends into absolute visual chaos as Barry beats Lord
Bullington. Rewatch that scene; the technique is really quite striking.
A fascinating area of discussion could be Kubrick's visual style as it related
to his view of the universe itself: He sees a definite order to things in the
nature world, and in the built world, as man in his designs reflects the
patterns found in the natural order. This theme abounds especially in 2001.
JOn
Thrawn
> still an open question with me, but it certainly seems related both to death
> and a kind of "point of no return." Generic symbolic interpretation would be
> blood/death and purity, but that's the tip of the iceberg.
>
say. I remember reading a quote from SK, I think it was in a 2001
interview, something like "The only real cinema is the Silent Film." I
THINK he meant scenes with no dialogue and a score like how an
orchestra played the score in the theater. Like in 2001 - The Blue
Danube, or ACO - The Thieving Magpie, BL - Sarabande. This creates
some of the most memorable + powerful scenes.
Maybe the red + white was an indication of the pivotal scene in the
film?
2001 - "I'm scared, Dave."
ACO - "I feel that any second something terrible is going to happen to
me."
TS - "You've always been the caretaker."
EWS - "What is the password for the House?" (Red Cloak)
> One thing I seem to always think of when seeing ACO is how
> Beethoven is used twice to try to kill Alex.
>
Yes, I have that on my list. The weapons used in the Cat Lady fight
are both heavily ironic. Both are attacked by the things they love the
most. By the artwork in the room it indicates the Cat Lady has an
obsession with sex.
I also now believe that having Mr. Alexander in a wheelchair is a nod
to Dr. Strangelove. In the ACO novel Mr. Alexander carries Alex in, he
is not a cariiple and their is no bodyguard/assistant.
Maybe Kubrick is saying by crippling a mans' body it cripples the good
in his mind and pushes him towards evil - lashing out at those who are
not crippled as well?
Viddy Well!
Alex Thrawn
www.malcolmmcdowell.net
M4RV1N
writes:
>Does anyone else think that scenes set in symmetrical areas also foreshadow
>some kind of evil?
It's not always evil, though it can be. The symmetrical shot is Kubrick's most
prominent visual signature after the tracking shot (and of the two it's what's
really unique in his work alone). We've discussed this a great deal, and what
I think it's safest to say is that a symmetrical shot in his films does not
carry a specific meaning that applies in all instances. If you think about the
psychological impact of such an image, it's clear that any such viewpoint is
>carefully chosen<. It can also involve the arrangement of objects to create
balance, or high order.
With that established, we can easily say that Kubrick intends these shots to
convey the sense that, "this matters a great deal," (meaning what happens in
such a shot). The specificity of the point of view also says, "this is what
matters to Stanley Kubrick, and >not just< the story or its characters." So in
the most elementary terms I think it's Kubrick's cinematic signature that says,
"if you're looking for what is critical to this narrative, and my focus, here
it is."
So that low angle shot of the monolith in "2001," the same symmetry that occurs
in the African dessert and in the pit on the moon, gives those events great
significance. When Mandy gives her, "I will redeem him" speech she is the
center of perfect symmetry, and this event is the crisis of Bill's dream story.
Of course there are other more specific meanings involved in the various
instances. The final shot of "The Killing," which the most notable first
example of Kubrickean symmetry, suggests fateful entrapment--no way out and no
alternatives, and that (more than evil, really) is quite often related to his
uses of symmetry. When Jack gets mad at Wendy ("why don't you start right now
and get the fuck out of here.") she is trapped between two blocks of blackness;
it signals that she is trapped by his hatred. But on the other hand, the first
interior shot in "Barry Lyndon" has Barry and Nora in a symmetrical shot with
the indoor fountain behind them as they play cards. Barry's hopeless and blind
love for Nora on display in the scene is critical to the sequence of events of
his life.
The use of symmetry is also deeply related to mise en scene, space and context.
Mark Ervin
M4RV1N
writes:
>> Exactly what Kubrick had in mind with his use of this color combination is
>> still an open question with me, but it certainly seems related both to
>death
>> and a kind of "point of no return." Generic symbolic interpretation would
>be
>> blood/death and purity, but that's the tip of the iceberg.
>>
>You may be right, but since half of his films are in B/W...hard to
>say. I remember reading a quote from SK, I think it was in a 2001
>interview, something like "The only real cinema is the Silent Film." I
>THINK he meant scenes with no dialogue and a score like how an
>orchestra played the score in the theater. Like in 2001 - The Blue
>Danube, or ACO - The Thieving Magpie, BL - Sarabande. This creates
>some of the most memorable + powerful scenes.
I think this is why dialogue is secondary and sometimes inadequate to
understand his narratives.
>Maybe the red + white was an indication of the pivotal scene in the
>film?
>2001 - "I'm scared, Dave."
>ACO - "I feel that any second something terrible is going to happen to
>me."
>TS - "You've always been the caretaker."
>EWS - "What is the password for the House?" (Red Cloak)
It's also used in the subtle tension scene of Floyd talking with the Russian in
"2001." The surroundings are white and the chairs are red. As striking as the
restroom, in its own way.
>> One thing I seem to always think of when seeing ACO is how
>> Beethoven is used twice to try to kill Alex.
>>
>Yes, I have that on my list. The weapons used in the Cat Lady fight
>are both heavily ironic. Both are attacked by the things they love the
>most. By the artwork in the room it indicates the Cat Lady has an
>obsession with sex.
>
>I also now believe that having Mr. Alexander in a wheelchair is a nod
>to Dr. Strangelove. In the ACO novel Mr. Alexander carries Alex in, he
>is not a criple and their is no bodyguard/assistant.
>
>Maybe Kubrick is saying by crippling a mans' body it cripples the good
>in his mind and pushes him towards evil - lashing out at those who are
>not crippled as well?
I do not know. Maybe it has to do with "incompleteness" in some sense. To be
crackpot Freudian, it's a flag for impotence.
The strangest repeating motif in SK film to me is all the men with damaged
and/or ineffectual legs. The list: sniper from "The Killing"; Pvt Arnaud
(paralyzed); Quilty shot in the leg; Mandrake's got a gammy leg; Dr.
Strangelove--wheelchair; Mr. Alexander--wheelchair; Sir Charles
Lyndon--wheelchair; Barry shot in the leg; Jack sprains his ankle; Eighball
shot in the leg and foot; one of Dr. Bill's patients has a leg problem.
Weird. Maybe it was just a running joke; something Kubrick noticed early on
and just continued with it.
Mark Ervin
Matthew Ryder
>The strangest repeating motif in SK film to me is all the men with damaged
>and/or ineffectual legs. The list: sniper from "The Killing"; Pvt Arnaud
>(paralyzed); Quilty shot in the leg; Mandrake's got a gammy leg; Dr.
>Strangelove--wheelchair; Mr. Alexander--wheelchair; Sir Charles
>Lyndon--wheelchair; Barry shot in the leg; Jack sprains his ankle; Eighball
>shot in the leg and foot; one of Dr. Bill's patients has a leg problem.
>
>Weird. Maybe it was just a running joke; something Kubrick noticed early on
>and just continued with it.
>
>Mark Ervin
Fascinating observation.
Kubrick's films are preoccupied by the notion of free-will subverted
by political, biological, economic, technological, socio-sexual or
military forces. So these leg injuries and the corresponding loss of
mobility represent for me the tragic failure of 'free-will' to
overcome deterministic inevitability.
(In DS, of course, the surprising 'mein fuhrer, I can walk!' reversal
represents a catastrophic return to liberty of a dormant nazi evil in
a post-apocalyptic world. The jackboot finds liebensraum once again.)
The afflicted individuals always soldier on through their adversity,
and Kubrick makes much of their struggle and newfound lack of
symmetry. Kubrick's 'heroes' are so forceful, have such a
will-to-power, that there is something extra poignant about these
injuries which ultimately overcome them (esp. in Barry Lyndon) --
triumph of a blind mechanistic world over human frailty.
Matt.
drakes
>>and/or ineffectual legs. The list: sniper from "The Killing"; Pvt Arnaud
>>(paralyzed); Quilty shot in the leg; Mandrake's got a gammy leg; Dr.
>>Strangelove--wheelchair; Mr. Alexander--wheelchair; Sir Charles
>>Lyndon--wheelchair; Barry shot in the leg; Jack sprains his ankle; Eighball
>>shot in the leg and foot; one of Dr. Bill's patients has a leg problem.
>>
>>Weird. Maybe it was just a running joke; something Kubrick noticed early on
>>and just continued with it.
Hadn't Kubrick once broken his ankle while playing badminton? I
wonder if he was recalling this traumatizing experience?
******
drakes
Padraig L Henry
Yes, and there's also one more "leg injuries" character that further
illustrates this "return to liberty" of sorts: Alex after legging it
out the window in ACO to avoid the aural pain of his beloved
Beethoven.
The POV shot of bandaged Alex lying in his hospital bed while the
pragmatic Minister of the Interior approaches both us and Alex in some
ways foreshadows - given Kubrick's many other seemingly consistent
uses of the walking-disabled motif, as Mark points out above -
something else too: Alex's final - and innocently - compromised pact
with power, an institutionalised sublimation of his former
unrestrained mayhem ("free will") into the more constrained variety
imposed by that same "blind mechanistic" world order of formal,
hierarchical authority. And the first inkling we get of this change is
during the earlier scene with the hospital psychologist, when
now-Ludovico-cured Alex gradually becomes more delirius once again as
he imagines increasingly violent balloon captions for the cartoon
characters in the sequence of drawings presented to him by the
morning-sunshine-happy psychologist, until his euphoria is quickly
brought back down to earth again as he excitedly punches his broken
leg, writhing in pain. And the film's last scene, the
Beethoven-induced Alex sex fantasy, seems to tentatively suggest that
a more non-violent world lies in store for a tamed Alex under the
direct approving gaze and applause of formal authority, a theme once
again explored much more tragically in Eyes Wide Shut (the minister's
nervous "understanding" with Alex being later darkly mirrored by
Ziegler's pat-on-the-shoulder pep talk with Bill Harford near the
conclusion of EWS).
And a further note on sutured POV shots: just to say that significant
ones seem to be very rare in Kubrick's work - Danny seeing the twin
girls in TS, Bowman in the Pod, and two that particularly stand out:
HAL's fish-eye POV in the Discovery spaceship and the sniper's POV in
FMJ. Less crucial ones might include Alex jumping out the window,
Redmond Barry preparing to shoot through a picture-frame window at the
enemy just before he rescues Captain Potzdorf, the cop in The Killing
driving off indifferent to a woman's pleas for assistance, etc.
Theorists such as Kaja Silverman argue that we are made so anxious by
point of view shots, which interrupt our sense of identity as one who
looks, that we will accept >any< point of identification, so we are
even re-assured to be HAL or Alex, or Norman Bates or any one of
cinemas' stalkers and slashers, just so long as we know who is doing
the looking. The unsutered shot, however, is especially unsettling,
and the remaining POVs in Kubrick's films are mainly unsutured shots
- eg. entering Room 237 in TS, behind Danny on his trike in TS, moving
forward behind the soldiers in FMJ, etc.
Padraig
David Kirkpatrick
Really? Perhaps this serves to suggest a new interpretation of his use
of "Surfin' Bird". :-)
David
TansalQ
>> Maybe the red + white was an indication of the pivotal scene in the
>> film?
>> 2001 - "I'm scared, Dave."
>> ACO - "I feel that any second something terrible is going to happen to
>> me."
>> TS - "You've always been the caretaker."
>> EWS - "What is the password for the House?" (Red Cloak)
>
> It's also used in the subtle tension scene of Floyd talking with the Russian
> in
> "2001." The surroundings are white and the chairs are red. As striking as
> the
> restroom, in its own way.
That must be the first instance of that juxtaposition of colors. I'm also
reminded of the pool table scene at the end of EWS, and that of the visits
to the writer's home in ACO - the first one where his wife is wearing a red
jumpsuit, the second where the body builder is wearing red shorts, IIRC.
I just marvel at Patrick Magee's performances, and the range he exhibits in
ACO and BL. He seems to have had a good working relationship with Kubrick.
Tansal
TansalQ
>> PoshGirl850 writes:
>
>> Does anyone else think that scenes set in symmetrical areas also foreshadow
>> some kind of evil?
>
> It's not always evil, though it can be.
My first thought was the final section of 2001, where Dave finds himself in
this symmetrical room, with no shadows, lighting from the ground up only,
and bizarre 19th Century furniture. (Seems like the aliens mixed up a few
things, like the lights going on the ceiling, for one.) The combination of
Ligeti's Aventures and the lighting and arrangement makes for a very creepy
bathroom - probably Kubrick's first creepy bathroom scene.
As far as the symmetry goes, so far a lot of horrible things have happened
in the film, and we have no idea what more to expect at this stage, but a
lot of signs seem to point to something horrible or at least momentous.
(The stillness of these scenes really accentuates the sense of
anticipation.)
So in this case, the symmetry prefigures Bowman's rebirth as a starchild, a
fantastic occurrence in the evolutionary line of humanity. Something just
occurred to me: Bowman, as extremely old as he appears to be in the bed,
still has that explorer's fire in his belly as the "hot head" character that
someone else in this group recently suggested him to be. That final reach
for the monolith when it makes its appearance all those years later, carries
with it a lot of emotion and desire for knowledge and experience.
Tansal
Thrawn
>I watched The Shining again a couple of weeks back, and skimmed
>through ACO over the weekend just to refresh the dialogue in my
>memory. something that jumped out was the elaborate rolled R's, all
>*over* ACO: Grrrrrrady was to torrrrrment Jack with them a few years
later.
I'm not sure what you mean here...are you referring to Deltoid and his
yessssses? I was surprised at how big a laugh those got in the
theater. It is pretty funny when heard at theater volume though.
> The strangest repeating motif in SK film to me is all the men with damaged
> and/or ineffectual legs. The list: sniper from "The Killing"; Pvt Arnaud
> (paralyzed); Quilty shot in the leg; Mandrake's got a gammy leg; Dr.
> Strangelove--wheelchair; Mr. Alexander--wheelchair; Sir Charles
> Lyndon--wheelchair; Barry shot in the leg; Jack sprains his ankle; Eighball
> shot in the leg and foot; one of Dr. Bill's patients has a leg problem.
>
> Weird. Maybe it was just a running joke; something Kubrick noticed early on
> and just continued with it.
>
You took what I was saying and ran with it. Mr. Alexander wasn't
wacked out until he got into the chair it seems.
Since Barry gets shot by 'family' it is even worse. Knocks him right
out of the story basically.
Here's my FMJ red + white scene. When Joker tells Hartmann Pyle's gun
is "packeding Full Metal Jacket." There isn't any red until Pyle's
suicide - then it is red + white. I think his suicide is the scene -
instead of dialogue - back to SK's flirting with the 'silent film'.
Your Pal Brian
> Of course there are other more specific meanings involved in the various
> instances. The final shot of "The Killing," which the most notable first
> example of Kubrickean symmetry, suggests fateful entrapment--no way out and no
> alternatives, and that (more than evil, really) is quite often related to his
> uses of symmetry.
I think this is the general rule, if there is one: symmetry = fate. He usually
uses it when a process has been set in motion that can't be stopped, and that will
proceed according to its own laws rather than the will of the characters - the
execution in PoG, the various supernatural stuff in TS or 2001 - and the visual
rigidity reinforces the rigid fatalism of what's going on.
Sorta reminds me of Keaton.
Brian
M4RV1N
writes:
>Yes, and there's also one more "leg injuries" character that further
>illustrates this "return to liberty" of sorts: Alex after legging it
>out the window in ACO to avoid the aural pain of his beloved
>Beethoven.
>
> The POV shot of bandaged Alex lying in his hospital bed while the
>pragmatic Minister of the Interior approaches both us and Alex in some
>ways foreshadows - given Kubrick's many other seemingly consistent
>uses of the walking-disabled motif, as Mark points out above -
>something else too: Alex's final - and innocently - compromised pact
>with power, an institutionalised sublimation of his former
>unrestrained mayhem ("free will") into the more constrained variety
>imposed by that same "blind mechanistic" world order of formal,
>hierarchical authority. And the first inkling we get of this change is
>during the earlier scene with the hospital psychologist, when
>now-Ludovico-cured Alex gradually becomes more delirius once again as
>he imagines increasingly violent balloon captions for the cartoon
>characters in the sequence of drawings presented to him by the
>morning-sunshine-happy psychologist, until his euphoria is quickly
>brought back down to earth again as he excitedly punches his broken
>leg, writhing in pain.
Absolutely right! Of course.
Both his legs have almost comically huge casts on them when the Minister
visits. Thanks for pointing that out. This then reminds me that Bowman in his
final elderly stage in the room at the end can't walk--is bedridden and can
only move his arm. And that of course makes me think of the "third stage"
woman in 237, who can do no more than raise out of the tub slightly!
Merkwuerdichliebe!!! Physical incapacity rules.
And the film's last scene, the
>Beethoven-induced Alex sex fantasy, seems to tentatively suggest that
>a more non-violent world lies in store for a tamed Alex under the
>direct approving gaze and applause of formal authority, a theme once
>again explored much more tragically in Eyes Wide Shut (the minister's
>nervous "understanding" with Alex being later darkly mirrored by
>Ziegler's pat-on-the-shoulder pep talk with Bill Harford near the
>conclusion of EWS).
Wow. A second I'd-Never-thought-of-that-but-should've in one post. Ziegler is
exactly like the Minister in their trying to "give and show generous to their
underlings," and manipulate them. Both Alex and Bill think they've regained
control after a discussion carefully manipulated by their mentors. You've made
me see the ending of EWS in a new comparitive context.
You were always the best of 'em, Padraig. Best damn Kubrick interpreter from
Timbucktoo to Portland Maine (or Portland Oregon, for a little doubling
effect).
>And a further note on sutured POV shots: just to say that significant
>ones seem to be very rare in Kubrick's work - Danny seeing the twin
>girls in TS, Bowman in the Pod, and two that particularly stand out:
>HAL's fish-eye POV in the Discovery spaceship and the sniper's POV in
>FMJ. Less crucial ones might include Alex jumping out the window,
>Redmond Barry preparing to shoot through a picture-frame window at the
>enemy just before he rescues Captain Potzdorf, the cop in The Killing
>driving off indifferent to a woman's pleas for assistance, etc.
>Theorists such as Kaja Silverman argue that we are made so anxious by
>point of view shots, which interrupt our sense of identity as one who
>looks, that we will accept >any< point of identification, so we are
>even re-assured to be HAL or Alex, or Norman Bates or any one of
>cinemas' stalkers and slashers, just so long as we know who is doing
>the looking. The unsutered shot, however, is especially unsettling,
>and the remaining POVs in Kubrick's films are mainly unsutured shots
>- eg. entering Room 237 in TS, behind Danny on his trike in TS, moving
>forward behind the soldiers in FMJ, etc.
I think you mix what I'd call "close to POV" with actual POV in some of these
examples, but your point about the impact is correct. With a real POV shot
suddenly the audience is forced to be >in the film< and not watching it. If
one character speaks to another, and at that instant is looking at us--that's a
genuine POV. Like when Hallorann "shines," the words, "How'd you like some
ice cream, Doc?"--and he's looking into the camera. Another is when Dave
shows HAL his sketches and we see them with the fisheye worldview of HAL.
Kubrick makes us identify with Danny and HAL in this way.
I contend that, partly, the symmetrical shot is in a sense >Kubrick's POV<
shot. Objects and positioning both created with difficulty by the director
create such a shot.
Mark Ervin
Gordon Dahlquist
foreshdowing is very different from fatalism. what "rigid fatalism" are
you talking about? it seems to be kubrick goes to very great lengths to
explicate the manner in which human agency (with regard to pretty
consistently rapacious self-interest) is responsible for what ends up
happening in his films. the possible exception is 2001, but it's the
exception to everything.
Carl A. Lineberry
> I think it's a reflective doubling; one might call it the robe of the victim
> (Mr. A calls him the "victim of this new technique." The colors are red and
> white, a combination Kubrick has used prominently in various films (it's also
> reinforced in this scene by the spagetti--which I think is rather amusing).
> Two other prominent examples of the combination in other films: when Bowman
> murders HAL he is in the red "brain room" and disconnects white (monolith
> shaped) memory circuits, and the red and white restroom where Grady advises
> Jack about "correcting" his family.
While I'm reluctant to dash water on a fascinating thread (really) --
if memory serves me correctly, I believe Mr. Alexander's robe is white
with _orange_ curlicues, not red. (I agree it looks red and white as
posted on Thrawn's site, but I suspect the color may be off a smidge.)
I think the orange is chosen as Mr. Alexander's character is the
subversive author of "A Clockwork Orange" in the film "A Clockwork
Orange."
I'm referring to the new batch of restored DVDs. Of course, I could be
wrong -- someone please check me on this.
Not that this changes the (important) fact that the robe is passed
from one victim to another... This has been an enlightening thread --
do carry on!
Carl Lineberry
Padraig L Henry
This discussion of symmetry has provoked me into a reconsideration of
another director, one who has been much more obsessed with symmetry in
his films than Kubrick, and who - perhaps not coincidentally - is
often dismissed by audiences and critics alike as "cold" and "sexist"
and "aloof": Peter Greenaway, many of whose films - The Draughtman's
Contract, Drowning By Numbers, Zed and Two Noughts, The Cook, The
Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover, Prospero's Books, etc - bear certain
art-historic representational concerns - particularly classical
symmetry - with those of Kubrick in such films as ACO, BL
(especially), TS, and EWS.
Most film critics and art historians, in commenting on Greenaway's
work, have focused on his exploration of the potentiality of painting
for the cinematic, and on his pastiche renderings of paintings by
famous artists. Bridget Elliott and Anthony Purdy, for instance,
note how Greenaway manipulates historical structures and genres
and imitates the style of individual artists, often reproducing
their paintings in the mise-en-scène. Does this sound Barry-Lyndon
familiar, Mr Hogarth? Clockwork-Orange compositional, oh my brothers?
Angela Dalle Vacche, on the other hand, in her study of films that
redefine art history in their composition of the cinematic image,
does not discuss Greenaway's films at all, except to explain why she
does not: the particular brand of intertextuality and quotations
exhibited in Greenaway's films, she explains, "is more preoccupied
with defining itself than with redefining art history". In other
words, for Dalle Vacche, Greenaway's references - as with Kubrick's -
to the other arts are at the service of his own self reflections about
cinema. Amy Lawrence, in her recent study of Greenaway's feature
films, shares this view of the British artist as a self-conscious
"auteur" who makes art "out of ideas about art"..
I agree with Dalle Vacche's and Lawrence's assessments, but I
would also contend that what Greenaway redefines through his
"art-about-art" is, more broadly speaking, representationality
itself. Greenaway's references to art history are but particular
manifestations of his comprehensive investigation of what it means to
represent. Greenaway's films explore the means through which humanity
has sought to represent itself and the world--through images
(paintings, drawings, photography, films), objects (architecture,
sculpture), words (print, calligraphy), sounds (speech, music), and
bodies (dance, sex, death). An exploration also taken up by Kubrick in
Eyes Wide Shut.
And there's something else that the EWS Kubrick might also share with
Greenaway: in a conversation, Greenaway explained his attitude toward
his male protagonists as follows: "And film after film after film, my
distrust, I suppose, of the male hero, the macho behavior, the
vulgarity, the philistinism... I suppose you could take these
theories a lot further. Basically, I would support the notion of the
female over the male; I always find females far more exciting and
entertaining. Females are on the cusp now of the greatest
revolution that is happening in the world; it's not political, it's
not capitalistic, it has to do finally with some sense of
emancipation of the female which has never been present before in
our civilisation" (From an interview with the author, Indianapolis,
April 28, 1997).
Padraig
TansalQ
> Here's my FMJ red + white scene. When Joker tells Hartmann Pyle's gun
> is "packeding Full Metal Jacket." There isn't any red until Pyle's
> suicide - then it is red + white. I think his suicide is the scene -
> instead of dialogue - back to SK's flirting with the 'silent film'.
The most explosive use of that color combination, surely. And with very
impressive music by Vivian! Here and again with the sniper's execution.
Tansal
TansalQ
I have nothing to add except that I agree.
Tansal
Peter Tonguette
>Greenaway: in a conversation, Greenaway explained his attitude toward
>his male protagonists as follows: "And film after film after film, my
>distrust, I suppose, of the male hero, the macho behavior, the
>vulgarity, the philistinism... I suppose you could take these
>theories a lot further. Basically, I would support the notion of the
>female over the male; I always find females far more exciting and
>entertaining. Females are on the cusp now of the greatest
>revolution that is happening in the world; it's not political, it's
>not capitalistic, it has to do finally with some sense of
>emancipation of the female which has never been present before in
>our civilisation" (From an interview with the author, Indianapolis,
>April 28, 1997).
This calls to mind a comment by Orson Welles, circa 1968, about his belief that
women should be regarded only "slightly more reverentially than Robert Graves
does" (paraphrase). Welles was, of course, a great fan of Graves' "The White
Goddess."
M4RV1N
writes:
> I believe Mr. Alexander's robe is white
>with _orange_ curlicues, not red.
No, it's red. The spagetti sauce looks a tad orange, but it's probably a bad
recipe. The typewiter is orangish.
Mum's hair is purple, Mum and Dad's room is green and pink, the psychiatrist's
hair is blue. If these colors don't look right to you...
Mark Ervin
Wordsmith
Another avenue of ambiguity we can mosey down.
Wordsmith :)
Bryce Utting
>>I watched The Shining again a couple of weeks back, and skimmed
>>through ACO over the weekend just to refresh the dialogue in my
>>memory. something that jumped out was the elaborate rolled R's, all
>>*over* ACO: Grrrrrrady was to torrrrrment Jack with them a few years
> later.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here...are you referring to Deltoid and his
> yessssses? I was surprised at how big a laugh those got in the
> theater. It is pretty funny when heard at theater volume though.
make me watch it again, why don't you?
try:
: Well it's just a manner of speaking from your... post-corrrrective
: advisor... because next time it's not going to be the corrrrective
: school...
: One bunch of keys on white metal rrrrring.
: Two plarrrstic ball pens, one blue, one rrrred.
: One white metal wrrristlet watch.
: ... the thrrrrill of theft.
: A right brrrutal bastard... rrrreading the Bible.
: ... no rrreal choice... grrrotesque act of self-abasement.
(your other quoted text is Padraig's, I think.)
butting
Bryce Utting
> And the first inkling we get of this change is
> during the earlier scene with the hospital psychologist, when
> now-Ludovico-cured Alex gradually becomes more delirius once again as
> he imagines increasingly violent balloon captions for the cartoon
> characters in the sequence of drawings presented to him by the
> morning-sunshine-happy psychologist, until his euphoria is quickly
> brought back down to earth again as he excitedly punches his broken
> leg, writhing in pain.
hate to quibble[1], but after just skimming through again I think it's
his arm he's hit -- he smacks his hands together, and owwwwwwww. when
the psychiatrist moves his tray when she comes in you can see that his
casts have his elbows crooked, meaning he can't reach his legs anyway,
and when she asks him if he's all right you can just see him flexing
his fingers at the bottom of the frame.
otherwise the leg motif's an intriguing one.
butting
[1] well...
Thrawn
>
> : Well it's just a manner of speaking from your... post-corrrrective
> : advisor... because next time it's not going to be the corrrrective
> : school...
>
> : One bunch of keys on white metal rrrrring.
> : Two plarrrstic ball pens, one blue, one rrrred.
> : One white metal wrrristlet watch.
> : ... the thrrrrill of theft.
> : A right brrrutal bastard... rrrreading the Bible.
> : ... no rrreal choice... grrrotesque act of self-abasement.
>
style of speaking, but I grant you them except for the 'plastic'. I
don't give you the Deltoid of the Chaplain quotes - sounds normal to
me.
Now I am going to be notice red all the time! Look at what Alex has on
him:
Red pack of choclate
Red pen
Red address book
Sounds like a new SK trademark to me!
Thrawn
> recipe. The typewiter is orangish.
>
Upon further inspection you can find the bathrobe hanging on the door
as Alex takes a bath.
Now the question becomes, "Why would he clean and save the bathrobe he
was attacked in - serving as a reminder of the attack?"
And we have an answer now - except how would he have ever thought said
attacker would be in his house. Unless Kubrick saying, "What goes
around comes around."
TansalQ
> Upon further inspection you can find the bathrobe hanging on the door
> as Alex takes a bath.
> Now the question becomes, "Why would he clean and save the bathrobe he
> was attacked in - serving as a reminder of the attack?"
>
> And we have an answer now - except how would he have ever thought said
> attacker would be in his house. Unless Kubrick saying, "What goes
> around comes around."
That's seems to be one of the major themes running through the second half
of the film.
Tansal
Gordon Dahlquist
sure, except when was the last time he made a bearable film? it seems to
me that greenaway is a little bit like cronenberg, in that he's a smart
man who doesn't actually have the patience to make his films as good as
they can be. this isn't entirely true - and I'm a great admirer of many
of greenaway's films - but he seems to both be contemptuous of traditional
narrative while digging into it to jacobean excess. and I'm all for
jacobean excess, but it's actually a nuanced affair to get it to convey
anything other than viscera. greenaway depends a great deal upon his
actors to convey any human dimension (and when it's not there - like
vivian wu's lousy performance in the pillow book, the film suffers
immeasurably) - which again, is fine - but I don't think he really
understands what separates his better films from his worse, nor the way in
which those films fall short. to me it's merely a matter of him paying as
much attention to the story - where ever the "story" lies, I'm not wanting
him to be george cukor - as he does to its trappings. if he had given
just a moment's more effort to the end of prospero's books - when the
other voices appear and propero's primacy of vision vanishes, to the
>impact< of that development on prospero (and the audience) the impact of
that film would have been noticeably deepened. obviously, I find him a
really frustrating director, and even though I've seen everything he's
made in the last 15 years, the last few have given me little more than a
reason to drink cooking sherry.
but sure, again, all you say about him is true - and the parallels with
kubrick abound. but they veer in that greenaway is happy to cite a
reference, to merely make it present, while for kubrick it's only
worthwhile if it's dynamic.