[ SECRET POST #2924 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2924 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 055 secrets from Secret Submission Post #418.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - take it to comments ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[a_potato]

Hmm.

It might be a different way of looking at the world? His framing speaks to me, and the fact that it's got a mathematical basis just makes it all the more thrilling. Perhaps Kubrick's limitation is that he can only appeal to a certain segment of the population, whereas other directors can tap into a broader spectrum.

[cushlamochree]

I mean I can certainly appreciate the quality of his framing and I think his movies are really phenomenal in a lot of ways. They're stupefyingly perfect. He's an amazing director for all that I'm criticizing him.

But his films don't ever go beyond impressive I guess. There's almost kind of... I don't know this is probably crazy but you almost think of neoclassical art, where it's all perfect technique and restraint and severity, which is a hell of an accomplishment but I've never felt it to be really complete. Ultimately you're probably right - it does just come down to a difference in sensibility and taste.