MovieChat Forums > Stanley Kubrick Discussion > Why are Kubrick's dialogues so dull?

Why are Kubrick's dialogues so dull?

posted 8 years ago by HZ-FcB-97
21 replies | jump to latest

I don't understand this man. Some of his films, e.g. Paths Of Glory, Full Metal Jacket, Dr. Strangelove, are all brilliant and truly great cinema with brilliant dialogue and editing. But then he makes movies like e.g. A Clockwork Orange and 2001, where the concept and story are interesting and the message is great with some masterful scenes(e.g. the bone into the air, the torture scene), but many of the other scenes are just so dull with boring character displays and talky dialogue that eventually you loose interest in the film. I'm not interested in seeing a doctor signing papers, astronauts eating breakfast or a woman doing yoga in her living room. I don't understand why he makes these certain long and dull scenes, sometimes it's a like I'm watching a whole different director. What's the point really? If any of you Kubrick fans know then please tell me, and please spare the patronizing "you're stupid"-comments some Kubrick fans tend to throw at people. Thanks.

[–] bradhbbrd 8 years ago

I always felt it made a scene more real.
For instance most movies use quick cuts to jump from character to character and the scene may move quicker but the subconscious knows it's being manipulated.
Whereas Kubrick's long takes make me feel like I am sitting in the too watching real events unfold.
That's how I see it anyway.

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

In some of those scenes, he wants the viewer to feel the passage of time, the slowness & apparent dullness of it. I say "apparent" because he's in fact making a distinct point, presenting something he wants the viewers not just to watch impatiently, but experience for themselves, as part of the overall film.

[–] LiquidOcelot (2300) 4 years ago

In some of those scenes, he wants the viewer to feel the passage of time, the slowness & apparent dullness of it. I say "apparent" because he's in fact making a distinct point, presenting something he wants the viewers not just to watch impatiently, but experience for themselves, as part of the overall film.

My God, what a pretentious response. Kubrick fans come up with the most convoluted BS excuses for any negative aspects of his movies.

[–] Heisenberg (6424) 4 years ago

Well that's an honest answer.
I understand you find it pretentious but it's true, those are establishing shots or sequences and they are intented to give a sense of the space/world/characters so the viewer experiences it.

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

Thanks, Heisenberg. When I first saw 2001 in 1968, at the age of 14, I was enraptured by those long establishing shots, which didn't seem slow or dragging to me at all. My entire class felt the same way. Kubrick really does make the viewer feel that immensity of the Universe!

(Our 9th grade science teacher had really just wanted to see the movie in one of those glorious old-fashioned theaters in NYC, so he arranged a field trip for the class as justified by the movie's scientific content. We were forever grateful to him.)

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Except the whole 5 hours of psychedelic rainbow puke scene. I always, ALWAYS, fast forward that scene every time I re-watch 2001.

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

To each his own. For me, it's a stunning representation of the human mind confronted with something beyond its wildest imagining & being changed & remade utterly by it. It's an incredibly immersive experience … but best experienced in a movie theater, on the biggest screen possible. Home theater just can't do it justice.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

The scene was okay, and it must be mesmerizing back in the 60s. But today it's just way way too long... 10-15 seconds would suffice.

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

Again, for me it works all the better by going on for as long as it does. But I can understand how it might drag for some viewers, and that's just as valid an experience as mine.

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

LiquidOcelot, there's no pretense in my comment. That's exactly how the film made me feel. And how it made many other viewers feel, too. It's not as if we're merely pretending to love it because we "must" in order to satisfy the gods of High Art. Nor are we dutifully worshipping at the altar of Kubrick. It's simply that for us, 2001 was a powerful & moving experience. Obviously, it's not that for everyone. And that's fine. You're certainly under no obligation to like it if it didn't do anything positive for you, and I'd never insist that you should. Different tastes, different experiences.

[–] einstein (2414) 4 years ago

I prefer baby yoda's dialogues in mongolorian. Much better. Agreed.

[–] Rocky15 (499) 4 years ago

Pull your tongue out of his arse, it’s because of dull dialogue not this “passage of time” bollocks you just spouted 🤦🏻‍♂️

[–] Owlwise (1511) 4 years ago

Why such vehemence? For many viewers, that passage of time is precisely what we felt, and the deliberate blandness of the dialogue was part of that. For you, it obviously doesn't work. I'm not saying that you're wrong, or stupid, or that you "don't get it" or anything of the sort. Different experience, different opinion, that's all.

[–] Rocky15 (499) 21 days ago

Well I’m saying you’re wrong, and stupid.

Fcuk you and fcuk Kubrick

[–] ak47wong (483) 21 days ago

You waited 4 years to come up with that response?

[–] Rocky15 (499) 21 days ago

You can count, good for you

[–] bobbydallas (8157) 4 years ago

I agree with the "passage of time" display. For instance the woman doing yoga is about to be raped/murdered and the viewer knows Alex is creeping around. But she doesn't.. and that adds to the suspense.

The slow pan around Dr. Harford's office in Eyes Wide Shut showed him as the #1 doctor and also that he works late, etc.
VS the cuts when he's in the cab on the way to the mansion.

I think Kubrick just played with tempo to emphasize different aspects of his story?

[–] BourbonKing (5674) 4 years ago

I've never experience a dull dialogue in any of Kubrick's movies, and I've seen all of them.

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

I didn't really understand 2001, to be honest.

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

Yeah, I agree pretty much. Though I could take of leave Full Metal Jacket, The Shining ... he made a lot of mediocre movies. This is what comes with the worshipping of movie people. He is just a human being doing a job to make money. I thought 2001 was amazing as a kid, then a few years later as an adult I was disgusted by Clockwork Orange, and also its positive reception. That is about the time I noticed a change in the media from stories that were uplifting, visionary, inspiring, moral or positive to just dark exploitative BS that mostly turned my stomach.

Your comments about the yoga lady, or astronauts eating breakfast, are borderline trollish. If you want people to reply sensibly to you don't provoke people needlessly.

[–] HAL9000 (935) 3 years ago

its called art