Stanley Kubrick explains the ending to 2001 and Shining

[BayAreaGuy]

It's a very old audio so the sound quality is horrible. It was also posted today so not many people have heard it.

He basically explains everything bluntly. It's nothing groundbreaking. It's what people already knew. But if you're a fan of these movies, it's great hearing him say it since he's known for secrecy.

cliffs:

2001:
- Godlike entities or creatures of energy take the guy
- They put him in a "human zoo" to study
- The beings recreated a French style, inaccurately, to make him comfy
- He's sent back to Earth a "super being"
- It follows a number of mythologies, which is what they were going for.

The Shining:
- The picture at the end suggests "evil reincarnation cycle"
- Nicholson had always worked there





Here's another fun video of Kubrick making The Shining

 

[Cheese]

evil reincarnation cycle


ok that makes some sense. But Jack seem like being there. It seem more like his Family is the one that is suck in some terror cycle.

 

[Peteyandjia]

That was great, listening to how patient Kubrick was with that moron asking him if he had superpowers.

It’s always cool just to hear him, since he did so few interviews.

 

[Plissken]

I love how small the on set crew is for these shots, that's something I would think is best for the immersion of the actors.

 

[Uncommon Valor]

Currently reading 2001 now. How does it compare to the movie?

 

[Adamant]

The Shining was a masterpiece. The movie was much better than the book. King can suck it.

 

[Idonotbelieveit]

The Shining was a masterpiece. The movie was much better than the book. King can suck it.

Shelley Duvall was awful though

 

[Zer]

Shelley Duvall was awful though

I always thought she was terrible and it was pretty horrific performance, but then I realized it's Kubrick so that was probably completely deliberate. I guess it helps you buy Jack turning into what he does when he has to hang around her all day. Kubrick famously treated Duvall like complete shit on that set

 

[badascan]

Currently reading 2001 now. How does it compare to the movie?

It's identical to the movie in most respects but fleshes out what the film presents in a more vague sense.

 

[TheRuthlessOne]

I always thought she was terrible and it was pretty horrific performance, but then I realized it's Kubrick so that was probably completely deliberate. I guess it helps you buy Jack turning into what he does when he has to hang around her all day. Kubrick famously treated Duvall like complete shit on that set

Kubrick borderline tortured her during filming for it

 

[Fedorgasm]

The Shining was a masterpiece. The movie was much better than the book. King can suck it.

Yeah it takes a special kind of idiocy to vehemently object to someone making your shit book into a brilliant movie.

Then it takes an otherworldly level of stupidity to then remake the movie to ensure its as bad as your shitty book.

That just proves that Stephen King is a hack.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I always thought she was terrible and it was pretty horrific performance, but then I realized it's Kubrick so that was probably completely deliberate. I guess it helps you buy Jack turning into what he does when he has to hang around her all day. Kubrick famously treated Duvall like complete shit on that set

Didn't even like her in any Altman stuff?

 

[Headkicktoleg]

Yeah it takes a special kind of idiocy to vehemently object to someone making your shit book into a brilliant movie.

Then it takes an otherworldly level of stupidity to then remake the movie to ensure its as bad as your shitty book.

That just proves that Stephen King is a hack.

He's not a hack he just has no idea what makes a movie good.

 

[Which Doctor]

He's not a hack he just has no idea what makes a movie good.

Or a good finale.

 

[Which Doctor]

I always thought she was terrible and it was pretty horrific performance, but then I realized it's Kubrick so that was probably completely deliberate. I guess it helps you buy Jack turning into what he does when he has to hang around her all day. Kubrick famously treated Duvall like complete shit on that set

She was a real thing culturally back then so I don't think the choice was too crazy considering the times (from an industry standpoint). She had that essence of Mayberry, frontier innocence, a country flower/dingbat ready to be soiled and crushed...by the likes of you.

Would you have preferred Madeline Kahn in the role, or Phyllis Diller? Rip Taylor?

 

[Locoo2]

Kubrick borderline tortured her during filming for it

so did he do so because he couldnt stand her performance or because she wanted her to be anooyed and perform that way ?

 

[Happy Man]

Does he talk about Lolita? I always wonder if He was just like "Lost my mind for a year, thought this was a good idea."

 

[the ambush]

Some things are better left unexplained if you ask me.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

I disagree. Shelly Duvall gave a great performance in the Shining


The opening scene where she is at the table trying to explain how jack broke her sons arm, while smoking the cigarette was fantastic. You know she was lying and her performance during that scene was amazing

 

[moreorless87]

The Shining was a masterpiece. The movie was much better than the book. King can suck it.

As I mentioned in the film club thread I think that actually Kubricks film owes more to Last Year in Marienbad from 1961 than it does King's book. Indeed I think you could argue that really Kubrick's film is more a decronstruction of Kings book and that kind of modern horror story generally, hence having Jack and Shelley Duvall go waaaaay over the top acting wise.