MovieChat Forums > Stanley Kubrick Discussion > A question for the Kubrick's haters.

A question for the Kubrick's haters.


I have no problem with the fact that people have different opinions, but hating on directors like Kubrick or Tarantino seems to be like a trend to look special and have a different opinion than most people rather than a legit criticism. I mean... I don't say that everyone must like Kubrick or Tarantino. But, I think people should still show some respect and consideration. Insulting revered filmmakers instead of respectfully giving your opinion simply look like an attempt to piss people off. It doesn't bring any civilized or constructive discussion.

I will take me for instance: I don't like Tim Burton. I enjoyed Beetlejuice and Ed Wood, but most of his movies just don't speak to me and it's simply not my style/cup of tea. However, I don't go on Internet to call him a "hack" or "awful director" because I know that he's objectively not a bad director. If so many people love his movies, there's obviously a good reason for it.

So... why can't Kubrick's haters do the same?

reply

I agree. There are some directors & some films that just don't connect with me, but I can still recognize their quality & understand why so many other people like them. I don't understand why the hater contingent takes everything so drastically, as if they're threatened by what they don't like, or feel personally insulted by it.

reply

Exactly. One example of something that REALLY annoys me with Kubrick's haters: it is a FACT that his movies have deeper meaning which require from viewer to think about them after they have seen it in order to understand everything better. It's not just some "Kubrick's fantardism" as some of them seem to say/think. It is the actual reason why Kubrick barely even talked about his movies, he wanted people to make their own interpretations.

Because of this, it is normal that people make theories, no matter how wrong or accurate they might be. So then come the condescending haters who decide to make vile comments about how "dumb", "far fetched" or any other unnecessarily unpleasant terms to shit on people discussing these theories. If you think that you don't need to thin further about his movies, so be it. No one forces you to discuss them. But can you let people enjoy talking and theorizing about whatever they want, please? I find these conversations interesting personally and I even took part in some of them.

And like you said, the movies, the actors and the directors who are vastly acclaimed have this reputation for a reason, no matter what you personal opinion is. I don't like Braveheart, Titanic or Forrest Gump, and wasn't so impressed with Citizen Kane (I'm talking strictly about the plot here, since on any other aspects it's a VERY innovative movie). I still don't go and call them "garbage" or say that they "suck" because it's not the case. It simply a matter of personal taste.

reply

The problem with Kubrick and Tarantino (as mentioned in OP) is that most people dislike the film the first time they see it. Why? It's because their films are carefully composed and intriguing. You won't find meaning the first time.. it may seem long and "boring".

The more you times you watch their movies the more you realize how fantastic the characters, plot, setting, atmosphere, and etcetera really are. Of course the mainstream dislikes anything that makes one "think".

I like Kubrick because a film like Barry Lyndon is expertly crafted and certain scenes are just embedded in my memory. Just like a Bunuel film.. who I adore.

reply

I agree. A lot of viewers today have grown up with rapidly-paced, rapidly-cut films that appeal to adrenalin & sensation, rather than to intellect & deep emotional feeling. The latter, like all art, requires a more contemplative, patient approach ... and a viewer who's well-versed in that approach.

reply

The problem with Kubrick and Tarantino (as mentioned in OP) is that most people dislike the film the first time they see it. Why? It's because their films are carefully composed and intriguing. You won't find meaning the first time.. it may seem long and "boring".

I really don't mean to argue with you here, since everything you said it's really on point. I would just nuance one little detail: this applies to pretty much every Kubrick's movies, but in Tarantino's case, in my opinion, it's case by case. I mean, for me at least, this was totally the case for Pulp Fiction, Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood! or The Hateful Eight, for instance. I really needed a second viewing with these before I was REALLY able to appreciate them and to "get" them. However, with Django Unchained or Inglorious Basterds, for examples, I was able to really appreciate them from the first viewing. Of course I understood them better on consecutive views, but they were still really "reachable" from the first go. I guess this is also personal.

reply