Does the moment in "Punch-Drunk Love" when Barry walks down the hallway toward the airplane (slow motion kicks in) remind of the moment in "2001" when the stewardess on the to-the-moon shuttle gets food and then walks upside down into the cockpit? Also, compare the color and pattern of the curtains in the Hawaiian hotel room where Barry and Lena get together with the bathrobe worn by the wheelchair-bound author in "A Clockwork Orange". And isn't Lena's apartment number 216, which is just one from 217, which is the number of the hotel room in Stephen King's "The Shining"?
i made this tangent a separate thread in a new forum so that you may venture out of the cosy kubrick cave.
poor johnny come latelys unfortunately have no idea how tired these sort of topics have become here. no disrespect to you of course, ouills cause those are indeed valid and interesting points... but for crip's sakes - hurry up blood!
The idea that Punch-Drunk Love is "Kubrickian" bothers me. So what if a few shots resemble each other? Kubrickian, or whatever that term means, is more than just the looks of a few shots. It articulates a tone and a greater idea of how to approach storytelling. All in all, a philosophy to filmmaking. Look at Jacques Tati if you want to find the hallmarks of Punch Drunk Love.
I don't think it's P's fault that you made the post that everyone's replying to?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fvidcaps%2Fros.jpg&hash=872057523c6b8f954430255bae96b57095b92f1f)
both good, the important thing is i'm meeting new people.
Certainly don't take all that the wrong way...
You have to keep in mind that this site started as a PTA site and Kubrick is an obvious favorite as well so while certainly not invalid, these comparisons have been made before (GT gets his stained panties in a wad all the time though I'm sure he'd love to argue with you about why your favorite movie isn't very good and I don't know who Slightly Green is).
Don't base your feelings about this site on these reactions alone.
QuoteBack to my twilit cave . . .
I think the misunderstanding is that Pubrick wanted you to explore the rest of our site and not just be synonymous with just Kubrick. I think we all value your opinions and would like to read your thoughts on other things cinema.
let's be clear, at the risk of stating the obvious ("pulling an ono" as we call it here) this is a messageboard, and as such, ppl post thoughts and others reply. you were at risk of flooding the kubrick forum with off topic conversations, and while your kubrick observations are brilliant, if you are really taking this so hard as to not come back again (i have to admit i thought you were kidding), then all i can say is shrug it off and check the rest of the site out. if you don't like your points being discussed as GT was doing then maybe you shouldn't post them. the other comments amount to no more than light jabbing.
in this particular case it may have felt like a barrage cos the subject of PDL is one of a handful of topics that have been done to death.. it's like if someone posted in the kubrick forum saying "hey dudes, do you think kubrick meant something by the end of 2001??" ok maybe not that bad. just hard to get ppl's attention on the topic.. whether i had left this in the new dvds thread or not.
edit: actually upon review, i was not critical of your post, pozer called you a johnny-come-lately but said your points were interesting, and GT was the only one that cared to discuss it. hardly a barrage. let's call this an overreaction and move on.. in fact, nothing has been said that is as harsh as your Mount Olympus comment which now looks completely unwarranted. so whatever, i'm not gonna grovel.. if you want to be with us, then you be with us. you see?
If it makes it any better, you've probably been officially dished the worse of it all at once (which is usually when it happens... right at the start).