Old MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Comprehensive Kubrick Retrospective Coming to Queens in June


Amid the mythology surrounding his nearly 40-year expatriation in England, it can be sort of easy to forget that Stanley Kubrick was a Bronx native who cut his teeth as an NYC street photographer. And while his only real dabbling in New York cinema was 1955’s Killer’s Kiss (count the production-designed Manhattan of Eyes Wide Shut if you must), I guess he did a respectable enough job with his other 11 films to warrant a dynamite upcoming retrospective at the Museum of the Moving Image.
The series starts June 3 with curator David Schwartz’s lecture “A Kubrick Odyssey” before moving on to screen each of Kubrick’s feature films (with the exception of his 1953 feature debut Fear and Desire, which Kubrick eventually disowned). The museum will also precede its June 10 and 11 screenings of The Killing with Kubrick’s hard-to-find 1951 short, Day of the Fight; Kubrick biographer Vincent LoBrutto will lecture following the June 10 showing. Meanwhile, Matthew Modine will be in house to chat about Full Metal Jacket on June 17.
The series also includes work by Kubrick’s hero Max Ophüls (La Ronde, which was, coincidentally, based on a play by Eyes Wide Shut source Arthur Schnitzler) and the 75-percent great Spielberg/Kubrick love child, AI: Artificial Intelligence. The retrospective concludes July 8; tickets are available now.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon