Kubrick vs Tarkovsky - who was better?

[Rimbaud82]

LOL. I'm just fucking with y'all.

I love Kubrick, but haven't gotten into Tarkovsky's stuff enough to have an opinion.

I know I'm just joking haha.

 

[ChucksGlassJaw]

Did you enjoy making stuff? If you enjoyed I'd say you could always just keep practicing until you've got it down.

I think everyone's stuff is shit, at least at first.

Not really. I was pretty directionless in life at that point and the stress involved wasn't worth it. The program was pretty competitive at the time and I was dragging behind. I don't think all the hard work in the world would have made up for a lack of talent. I'm okay with that. It was an experience. I learned a lot. I just wasn't good at putting the knowledge into practice.

 

[Guestx]

Not really. I was pretty directionless in life at that point and the stress involved wasn't worth it. The program was pretty competitive at the time and I was dragging behind. I don't think all the hard work in the world would have made up for a lack of talent. I'm okay with that. It was an experience. I learned a lot. I just wasn't good at putting the knowledge into practice.

My biggest issue is that I don't have enough opportunities to practice.

I don't have any filmmaking friends, so it's not like there are always just people around ready to make something. Too much time passes between one project and another.

I do enjoy it though, when I get to do it.

 

[ChucksGlassJaw]

My biggest issue is that I don't have enough opportunities to practice.

I don't have any filmmaking friends, so it's not like there are always just people around ready to make something. Too much time passes between one project and another.

I do enjoy it though, when I get to do it.

I would think living Utah would be challenging. It's kind of something that you have to go all in on and make a move to LA, NYC or Chicago.

*edit*
I'm not saying it's not possible, but only to be around like-minded people you can learn from.

 

[Guestx]

I would think living Utah would be challenging. It's kind of something that you have to go all in on and make a move to LA, NYC or Chicago.

*edit*
I'm not saying it's not possible, but only to be around like-minded people you can learn from.

Well the scenes are obviously bigger there. But we do have film stuff that goes on around here.

One of the biggest problems I've run into is that everyone already has their little groups that they're part of and those groups aren't flexible. When I first started in film school, I was like, "This is it! This is where I'm going to find my filmmaking buddies! This is where I'll find my collaborators!"

But even then, people were already in their cliques and when I approached people they just weren't interested in teaming up on shit.

It's definitely frustrating. My focus lately has shifted a bit more toward documentary filmmaking because it's easier to make docs as a solo artist than it is to make narrative films.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

Does anybody else think Spielberg ripped this off

with this shot from Close Encounters?

 

[ChucksGlassJaw]

Does anybody else think Spielberg ripped this off

with this shot from Close Encounters?

Probably an intentional homage. Spielberg knows his history.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

Probably an intentional homage. Spielberg knows his history.

It may have been. Spielberg used to be great so there's no reason to really rip anybody off. So yeah, probably an homage.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Probably an intentional homage. Spielberg knows his history.

Although did Close Encounters not only come out two years after The Mirror? It could just be coincidence, similar good eyes for framing shots, but you never know I suppose.

 

[Madmick]

Kubrick and it's not even close.

I love Tartovsky, but anybody who works that hard on being inaccessible isn't really competing.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

Well the scenes are obviously bigger there. But we do have film stuff that goes on around here.

One of the biggest problems I've run into is that everyone already has their little groups that they're part of and those groups aren't flexible. When I first started in film school, I was like, "This is it! This is where I'm going to find my filmmaking buddies! This is where I'll find my collaborators!"

But even then, people were already in their cliques and when I approached people they just weren't interested in teaming up on shit.

It's definitely frustrating. My focus lately has shifted a bit more toward documentary filmmaking because it's easier to make docs as a solo artist than it is to make narrative films.

I say keep at it, SP.

 

[ChucksGlassJaw]

I don't think one director was necessarily more "art house" or more accessible. We tend to apply our own cultural norms to other cultures. Russians, by nature, are more stoic, less flamboyant and colder. We have to remember that when we look at art. I read something about Russians once, "In Russia, a smile is seen as somewhere between disengenuous and mildly retarded." Hence, Fedor.

 

[Guestx]

I say keep at it, SP.

Thanks for the encouragement. I definitely intend to.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

I don't think one director was necessarily more "art house" or more accessible. We tend to apply our own cultural norms to other cultures. Russians, by nature, are more stoic, less flamboyant and colder. We have to remember that when we look at art. I read something about Russians once, "In Russia, a smile is seen as somewhere between disengenuous and mildly retarded." Hence, Fedor.

I agree with what you're saying 100%, but in this case it's odd that the american Kubrick is MUCH colder in his films (imo) and the Russian has much more soul or heart. Again, this is coming from somebody who hasn't seen even 1 Tarkovsky flick, but I've been reading up on him today. I've seen several of Kubrick's films though and he does strike me as cold and pessimistic about human nature.

I saw something poignant on a youtube comment of all places. They said Kubrick is the stuff of nightmares and Tarkovsky is the stuff of dreams.

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

Thanks for the encouragement. I definitely intend to.

The way I see it, you're venturing out into an area that loads of people, including myself, would love to try, but don't really have the drive or guts to do so. So remember that whenever shit gets hard. And remember James Cameron made Piranha 2...or parts of it...then he got fired from it!

 

[Guestx]

The way I see it, you're venturing out into an area that loads of people, including myself, would love to try, but don't really have the drive or guts to do so. So remember that whenever shit gets hard. And remember James Cameron made Piranha 2...or parts of it...then he got fired from it!

I've tried other careers and what I've learned is that all I really want to do is make films.

But it's definitely hard to get off the ground with it. It sure as hell would help if I had some actual money that I could devote to budgets for my projects.

 

[Rimbaud82]

I agree with what you're saying 100%, but in this case it's odd that the american Kubrick is MUCH colder in his films (imo) and the Russian has much more soul or heart. Again, this is coming from somebody who hasn't seen even 1 Tarkovsky flick, but I've been reading up on him today. I've seen several of Kubrick's films though and he does strike me as cold and pessimistic about human nature.

I saw something poignant on a youtube comment of all places. They said Kubrick is the stuff of nightmares and Tarkovsky is the stuff of dreams.

I can understand where the person who wrote that comment is coming from. It's not all happy and uplifting however, Tarkovsky does look at the negative aspects of human life and he can be/often is quite critical of human society in general, but fundamentally his view of human existence is a positive one, informed by his religious beliefs of course...to him, man is an inherently spiritual being and art is one method of connecting with this. I'd say I agree with him there...even if I am certainly no Christian.

Why are you watching YouTube videos, hurry up and watch the films themselves! lol

 

[Agent Mulder's Hair]

I can understand where the person who wrote that comment is coming from. It's not all happy and uplifting however, Tarkovsky does look at the negative aspects of human life and he can be/often is quite critical of human society in general, but fundamentally his view of human existence is a positive one, informed by his religious beliefs of course...to him, man his an inherently spiritual being and art is one method of connecting with his. I'd say I agree with him there...even if I am certainly no Christian.

Why are you watching YouTube videos, hurry up and watch the films themselves! lol

This ^ makes me want to watch his stuff even more. I'm a Christian myself, and I hold the same viewpoints as you described Tarkovsky holding about human nature.

I can certainly appreciate the artistry of Kubrick, though. I mean, it's there plain as day. And as a person who loves to solve puzzles and play chess, I dig that Kubrick seems like that kinda guy. But honestly Kubrick, regardless of talent, his stuff always gave me the impression that he was a twisted sick dude and a pervert at his core. His films seem to me to indicate he felt everyone else was a pervert too, on some level. And I don't personally like that outlook. But again, the dude was brilliant, there is no question. And I can appreciate the artistry.

 

[Plissken]

Prefer Tarkovsky myself. Had more real emotion in his films where Kubrick could often feel sterile. I also just overall prefer his style.
Tarkovsky actually has more similarities to Malick in many ways or Kiyoshi Kurosawa than Kubrick.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

Man with a choice between these two I vote...

Spoiler

<{monica}>

Seriously though, I've never heard of Tarkovsky, but Kubrick is my GOAT so I gotta go with him.