The Shining Creativity of Stanley Kubrick

Stanley Kubrick filming "Barry Lyndon" (1975)

Introduction:
The following is a research paper I wrote for my Humanities course this past December. The topic was creativity, and the creativity of an artist of our choice. We had to include a definition of creativity, as well as our artist's own definition of creativity, and what their own creative process looked like. We also had to choose one work of art they created, and discuss what went into making it--from the artist's inspiration to the physical creation of the work. I chose to write about Stanley Kubrick, my second favorite filmmaker of all time behind Alfred Hitchcock. In this essay, I discuss in great detail Kubrick's unique style of filmmaking, and how he applied it in the making of "The Shining" (1980). In honor of the late Mr. Kubrick's 85th birthday, I feel that this is the right time to share it on The Magic of Film. Though it is a research paper, and cannot include too many of my own opinions, it aptly expresses what I think of Kubrick as an artist, and highlights why I admire him the way I do.

Text:
What is creativity? It's a simple enough question, but the answer is the hard part because there is no one definition. One definition of creativity is "the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.; originality, progressiveness, or imagination" ("creativity"). That is ultimately what creativity is, but it still isn't that simple. Every artist has their own individual perspective on creativity, and their own creative process.

Director Stanley Kubrick is unquestionably one of the finest and most creative filmmakers in the history of cinema, and in the history of art in general ("A Life in Pictures"). Each of his films are so different in terms of subject and construction, which is a testament to his creativity ("A Life in Pictures"). He can make a powerful anti-war film such as "Paths of Glory" (1957), a lavish science fiction epic like "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968), a humorous political satire like "Dr. Strangelove" (1964), and a profoundly disturbing horror film like "The Shining" (1980), amongst others.

Kubrick had a very distinct creative process, and always had complete control over his every aspect of his project. He was a perfectionist like no other, and was famous for filming one scene in a movie over many weeks to ensure that it was absolutely perfect. As a result of this tendency, his film shoots were very long and demanding ("A Life in Pictures"). The longest of his shoots was "Eyes Wide Shut" (1999), which went on for just under two years from late 1996 to summer 1998 ("Eyes Wide Shut"). Because it took him so long to make a film, Kubrick only made thirteen feature films over the span of his forty-five year long career as a director ("A Life in Pictures").

Just like his extended production schedules, Kubrick's films are very carefully crafted and paced, stylistically and symbolically photographed, with much of their content left to the viewer's interpretation ("A Life in Pictures"). As Kubrick states himself, "The essence of dramatic form is to let an idea come over people without it being plainly stated. When you say something directly, it's simply not as potent as it is when you allow people to discover it for themselves" (qtd. in "Kubrick").

This is applicable to almost every film Kubrick made. One of his tendencies was to stretch things out and make them as long as possible to promote the feeling of realism ("A Life in Pictures"). This style is reflected mostly in of the films from the latter half of his career, including "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968), "A Clockwork Orange" (1971), "The Shining" (1980), and "Eyes Wide Shut" (1999). Another notable motif in Kubrick's films was his use of classical music. Notable examples of this are his uses of Johann Strauss's The Blue Danube Waltz in "2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968), extracts of Rossellini and Beethoven in "A Clockwork Orange" (1971), and pieces by Bach, Handel and Mozart as well as traditional Irish music in "Barry Lyndon" (1975) ("A Life in Pictures").

Most of what Kubrick made was so different stylistically from anything anyone had seen before. Because of this, many of his films were initially met with a mixed critical reaction. Many of his portrayals of society provoked enormous controversy, as was the case with "Paths of Glory", "Dr. Strangelove", and "A Clockwork Orange". However, as time passed, his films have come to be regarded much more favorably ("A Life in Pictures"). For instance, filmmaker Woody Allen said that he initially disliked "2001: A Space Odyssey", but came to view it as a "truly sensational film", saying "it was one of the few times in my life that I realized the artist was well ahead of me" (qtd. in "A Life in Pictures").

A much younger Stanley Kubrick prior to his career as a filmmaker

Stanley Kubrick was born in New York City on July 26, 1928 ("A Life in Pictures"). As a youth, Kubrick had a fascination for photography. Kubrick's family's home in New York City had a dark room, and his father encouraged him to take pictures. Kubrick launched a career for himself as a photographer for his school newspaper, and later for Look Magazine. He was always experimenting with his photography, trying to achieve photographs that would appeal to the imagination ("A Life in Pictures").
Kubrick began his career as a filmmaker by making documentaries, using his career as a still photographer as a springboard. His early work--"Fear and Desire" (1953), "Killer's Kiss" (1955), and "The Killing" (1956)--were all very artistic, and won him much acclaim in the movie industry ("A Life in Pictures"). In the late 1950s and early '60s, Kubrick's talent for making artistic, philosophical and controversial films became more and more apparent with films like "Paths of Glory" (1957), "Spartacus" (1960), and "Lolita" (1962) ("A Life in Pictures").

He became tired of working under contract, and after making "Spartacus" for Universal Pictures, he decided he would only make films that appealed to him creatively, and where he could do things his way. It was here that his perfectionist methods of filmmaking took over ("A Life in Pictures"). Though he exercised this style throughout all of his films, one of the most notorious examples of Kubrick's controlling, perfectionism was in the making of "The Shining" (1980), based on the Stephen King novel of the same name ("A Life in Pictures").

The story is about Jack Torrance, an alcoholic writer who accepts the job of caretaker for a remote hotel with a sinister history to it over the winter. He brings his wife and young son with him to the hotel. Unbeknownst to him, his son has the ability to see things before they happened. He predicts bad things will happen. Sure enough, the writer goes crazy and tries to murder his family, just as the previous caretaker had supposedly done before him.

Stanley Kubrick claimed that the novel caught his interest due to his interest in the supernatural. He thought the novel was excellent, claiming that "It seemed to strike an extraordinary balance between the psychological and the supernatural in such a way as to lead you to think that the supernatural would eventually be explained by the psychological" ("Kubrick on The Shining"). Kubrick collaborated on the screenplay with novelist Diane Johnson, and in doing so essentially re-wrote Stephen King's novel. He changed elements of the novel he felt weren't interesting, or things he felt he could make tweak to keep the audience from predicting the next part ("Kubrick on The Shining").

Kubrick himself stated that one of the novel's strengths was that it is never clear whether these are ghosts we're seeing or a projection of the writer's disturbed mental state ("Kubrick on The Shining"). For the purposes of adapting the story to the screen, Kubrick regarded The Shining as a straight up supernatural story. Jack Torrance, the writer, comes to the hotel an angry and hateful man, who loathes his family. He comes to Overlook, a place where in the past a man has murdered his family, ready to do the evil spirit of the hotel's evil bidding ("Kubrick on The Shining").

In creating the Overlook Hotel, the primary setting for the film, Kubrick had the Art Director Roy Walker travel around the United States photographing hotels. He and Kubrick would look through the photographs, and create the set of the hotel based off of them. Kubrick said he wanted the hotel to "have an authentic feel rather than like a traditional spooky movie hotel" ("Kubrick on The Shining"). For the role of the intimidating Jack Torrance, Kubrick immediately thought of Jack Nicholson. He believed Nicholson was one of the greatest actors in Hollywood, who could pull off any role. For the role of Mrs. Wendy Torrance and their young son Danny, Kubrick cast Shelley Duvall and Danny Lloyd respectively ("Kubrick on The Shining").

Jack Nicholson (left) and Stanley Kubrick on the set of "The Shining" (1980)

The filming of "The Shining" proved to be exceptionally difficult. Kubrick let his perfectionist style run unchecked and unchallenged throughout production. After filming the scene where the blood comes pouring out of the elevator, Kubrick complained that it didn't look like blood. The scene was redone three times, and took nine days to set up each time. It took about a year before the scene was done to Kubrick's satisfaction. The scene where Jack is threatening Wendy, and Wendy is backing up the stairs and swinging the bat at Jack was filmed 127 times, while the scene Mr. Hallorann explains what shining is to Danny was filmed 148 times ("Trivia").

The "give me the bat" scene, which was filmed around 148 times

What's worse was Kubrick's treatment of Shelley Duvall. He would be very harsh in his criticisms of her performance, and he would have her redo take after take after take till he was satisfied. Her character had to be hysterical, frightened, and desperate all the time. Kubrick pushed her harder and harder with his criticism and the many takes till she really was hysterical. When he didn't get what he wanted, he would lose his temper with her, and even accused her of wasting everybody's time. Duvall claimed that she did admire Kubrick's work ethic in retrospect, but that it was a very difficult experience for her, and one she'd never want to repeat (Vivian Kubrick).

However, Kubrick's creativity and genius are very apparent in "The Shining". His use of the Steadicam to film the actors walking through the sets of film resulted in eerie long and very smooth tracking shots. By comparison, the scenes in which a character meets an apparition are filmed and cut very abruptly. As Kubrick explained, "the paranormal visions are momentary glimpses into the past and the future, and must be short, even abrupt" ("Kubrick on The Shining").

Kubrick's crazed sense of perfection dragged the filming process over 11 dreary months from May, 1978 to April, 1979 (Trivia). "The Shining" was finally released on 23 May, 1980 ("The Shining"). As was common with most of his films, it received initially mixed reviews from film critics ("A Life in Pictures"). Variety Magazine targeted the film for distorting the novel, and that "the crazier Jack Nicholson gets, the more idiotic he looks. Shelley Duvall transforms the warm, sympathetic wife of the book into a simpering, semi-retarded hysteric" (Variety).

Among the film's negative critics was Stephen King. In a 1986 interview with American Film, King said of the film, "It's like a great big beautiful Cadillac with no motor inside, you can sit in it and you can enjoy the smell of the leather upholstery - the only thing you can't do is drive it anywhere" (King). He disliked the creative liberties Kubrick took with the story, particularly with regards to Jack Torrance, who King viewed as a good man who was fighting alcoholism, and eventually succumbs to evil because of it. In the movie however, Jack is just a bad egg from start to finish ("Trivia").

"The Shining" was completely ignored by the Academy Awards, and was even nominated for two Razzie Awards, which are like the Oscars but focus on the worst in film rather than the best. Shelley Duvall was nominated for Worst Actress, and Kubrick, in one of the most ironic miscarriages of justice in film history, was nominated for Worst Director. Luckily, both people "lost" (O'Neil). Justice was eventually dispensed, however. Contemporary critics laud "The Shining" as a very influential film in the horror genre. Film critic Roger Ebert added the film to his Great Movies series, in which he wrote, "Stanley Kubrick's cold and frightening "The Shining" challenges us to decide: Who is the reliable observer? Whose idea of events can we trust?" (Ebert).

Several filmmakers have expressed that "The Shining" had influenced or effected them. Martin Scorsese named it as the seventh scariest horror film of all time (Scorsese). Joel and Ethan Coen acknowledged the film as one of their inspirations for their film Barton Fink (1991), which is also about a writer with writer's block living in a large, eerie hotel (Levine, p. 83).

This is the journey most of Kubrick's films have been on. They are true artistic visions that spend a long time in production, and when they are finally released, People aren't quite sure what to make of them, because they hadn't seen anything quite like it before. As time passed, they grew to like his films, even to cherish them ("A Life in Pictures"). That's the type of film he made, the kind that challenged you at every turn, sometimes even besting you. Just as he pushed his actors, he pushes his audience to make sense of what he is showing us. He does this in "The Shining" by presenting us with a situation that could go one of two ways, even if he is biased towards one of them. The combination of unique aesthetics, stylistic plot structure, effective performances, and eclectic uses of music are what make Kubrick's films masterpieces, and Kubrick a great filmmaker.

"creativity." Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers. 02 Dec. 2012.
Ebert, Roger. The Shining. Great Movies, 18 June, 2006.
Web. 1 December, 2012.

"Eyes Wide Shut". IMDB.com. n.d., Web. 25 November, 2012.

"Making 'The Shining' (1980)". Dir: Vivian Kubrick. Perf: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Stanley Kubrick, Scatman Crothers, Danny Lloyd. 1980. DVD.

Levine, Josh. The Coen Brothers: The Story of Two American Filmmakers. Toronto.
ECW Press, 2000. Print.

O'Neil, Tom (2008-02-01). "Quelle horreur! 'The Shining' was not only snubbed, it was Razzed!". Los Angeles Times. Web. 8 December, 2012.

Scorsese, Martin. "11 Scariest Horror Movies of All Time". The Daily Beast. Pub. 28 October, 2009. Web. 11 December, 2009.

"The Shining" (1980) Dir: Stanley Kubrick. Perf: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, Scatman Crothers, Joe Turkel, Barry Nelson, and Philip Stone. Warner Bros, 1980. DVD.

"The Shining (1980): Trivia". Imdb.com. n.d., Web. 13 December, 2012.

"The Shining" Variety. Variety Staff. Pub. 31 December, 1979.
Web. 8 December, 2012.

"Stanley Kubrick". IMDB.com. n.d., Web. 23 November, 2012.

"Stanley Kubrick: A Life in Pictures". Dir: Jan Harlan. Perf: Woody Allen, Malcolm MacDowell, Martin Scorsese, Tom Cruise, etc. Warner Bros Home Video, 2001. Youtube.com.

"Cult Oddities". Stephen King. American Film. Pub: 1986.
Web. 13 December, 2012.

"Kubrick on The Shining". Interviewed by Michel Ciment. Three Interviews with Stanley Kubrick. The Kubrick Site, 1982. Web. 1 December, 2012.

The Night of the Hunter (1955)

Star Rating: **** (4/4 stars)
Charles Laughton's "The Night of the Hunter" combines exquisite cinema with two of the most classic areas of literature: fairy tales and religion. Its biblical attributes range from numerous bible quotations, to the allusion of two endangered children being found in a boat by the side of a river by a woman who becomes their savior and protector. It also explores the concepts of false prophets and human duality, adding to its biblical nature. On the other hand, Jeffrey Couchman, author of "The Night of the Hunter: Biography of a Film", said that the film is like a traditional fairy tale, in the way that it features children all alone on the run from unfathomable evil.

"The Night of the Hunter" is about the Harper family in West Virginia during the Great Depression. Ben Harper, the father, is arrested and executed for killing two men during a robbery, in which he stole about $10,000. Before his capture, he gave the money to his young son John (Billy Chapin), and told him and his younger sister Pearl (Sally Jane Bruce) to hide it on the property and tell no one of its whereabouts. While in jail waiting for his sentence to be carried out, Ben shares a cell with the Reverend Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum), a fortune hunter and serial killer masquerading as a reverend. He hears Ben talking about the money in his sleep, but Ben refuses to tell him about it. After Ben dies without telling him anything, Powell finds the home of the Harpers. He quickly beguiles the grief-stricken widow Willa Harper (Shelley Winters), and marries her.

John instantly knows that Powell is only trying to find the money, and is cold and indifferent to him. Powell tries to find out where the money is from the children, but staying true to their promise to their father, they say nothing. Powell becomes more and more threatening. When Willa realizes what Powell is doing, he murders her, and hides her body at the bottom of the Ohio River. He now becomes the children's' guardian. After abusing and threatening the children, they run away. They paddle up the Ohio in a small boat, where they are eventually found by Rachel (Lillian Gish) a strict and tough-spirited lady who looks after several stray children. She takes John and Pearl under her wing, and gives them a place to stay. For the time being, she protects them from Powell.

"The Night of the Hunter" was the first film I saw starring Robert Mitchum, and I can't see him in anything else without seeing him as Reverend Powell. I won't even bother calling him "evil", because in addition to being a cliché, the term doesn't even do him justice. To coin a biblical phrase, he's a false prophet. The film virtually spells this out for us when we see him for the first time during a voice over from Rachel warning the children against false prophets. Powell lets his religious and charming persona blind others to his true criminal nature, and when all is done no one even suspects him.

While he's ultimately the bad guy of the piece, Powell is also somewhat of a metaphor for human duality. The word "hate" is tattooed on each of the knuckles of his left hand, while the word "love" is tattooed on the fingers of his right hand. He symbolizes the fight of good against evil for a group of onlookers by comically wrestling with his own fingers, having "love" pin "hate" to the table. This whole bogus performance, together with the contrast of his roles as a killer and preacher, symbolizes treachery in the form of decency, but is also a symbol for good and evil because these traits exist within one person.

The other staple in the film is Lillian Gish, whose performance as Rachel is both relieving and highly entertaining. When we first meet her, she's a tough and protective lady, whose very religious and peaceful. However, when danger threatens her children, she dashes into the house and unexpectedly emerges brandishing an enormous shotgun. Rachel is like Frances McDormand's Marge Gunderson in "Fargo" (1996). She steps in and becomes a driving force in the story's resolution, and brings the tragic series of events to a close with some calming words that sooth the audience, and establish the film's core message. "There's more to life than a little money ya know," Marge says to the killer she's just arrested. In Rachel's case, she smiles proudly after the Harper children, and proudly declares that "children are man at his strongest", and that "they abide, and they endure."

"The Night of the Hunter" was the first and only film directed by actor Charles Laughton, star of "Mutiny on the Bounty" (1935), and "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" (1939). Laughton took immense care in the making of "The Night of the Hunter", and gave it his all. He had a very clear vision of how he wanted his film to look. To distinguish it from other films of the time, he directed the film using lyrical and surrealist techniques that recalled films of the German Expressionist period, like "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1920), and "Nosferatu" (1922).

The film frequently makes use of visually distortive and manipulative elements to emphasize mood and evoke emotion, such as the stylized use of light and shadows on the sets. No matter how frightening the scene might get, there's still so much poetry in the camerawork. It makes the scene even more frightening, but also radiant at the same time. One such scene is the one where Powell's shadow darkens the interior of the children's bedroom when he arrives for the first time. Another is when Willa's dead body is tied up in her car at the bottom of the river, with her long hair drifting in all directions amongst the seaweed. In short, in bringing a very deliberate artistic vision to life, Laughton filmed one of the most beautiful nightmares you'll ever have.

When "The Night of the Hunter" first hit theaters, people didn't know what to make of it. Most audiences in the 1950s wanted entertaining movies that they could "escape to", to avoid the hubbub of everyday life. Instead, they got a movie that was challenging, scary and unlike anything they'd seen before. They didn't react positively to the experience at all. This was a huge disappointment for Laughton, who never directed another film, which is probably one of the greatest pities in cinematic history. There can be little doubt that "The Night of the Hunter" is a masterpiece, and even one of the most beautiful, and most uniquely photographed movies ever. It is quite the feather in Laughton's cap, as well as in Mitchum's, and Gish's, and the actors' playing John and Pearl for that matter.

"Brick" (2005)

Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Nora Zehetner in Rian Johnson's "Brick"

Star Rating: **** (4/4 Stars)
The best part about Rian Johnson's thriller "Brick" is how easily he (Johnson) takes the defining characteristics of a classic Film Noir, and applies them to a high school setting. The players in this drama may be teenagers, but no Noir elements are watered down. There are real criminals, real crimes, and real murders. This contrast between youthful "innocence", and horrific adult brutality is what makes Brick stand out in the library of recent Noirs.

It's also very well connected with other films of its genre. It has the dense, dramatic, and suspenseful feel of a Film Noir down perfectly. It's wide landscape shots recall John A. Alonzo's cinematography of "Chinatown" (1974). Our protagonist's persisting love for his deceased ex-lover also suggests movies like "Laura" (1944), and "Vertigo" (1958). An exchange between the protagonist and a femme fetale-like character ends with the line, "Now you are dangerous", was directly taken from "The Maltese Falcon" (1941). It's haunting, experimental, often sinisterly upbeat and almost Spaghetti Western like soundtrack even channels "The Third Man" (1949) at times.

The title of this film is a reference to a brick of heroin, which is the device that drives the plot forward. The whole complicated situation begins over the murder of a high school stoner named Emily (Emilie de Ravin). Her ex-boyfriend Brendan (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) investigates into the killing without notifying the authorities. He uses three seemingly unrelated words Emily had mentioned during their last phone call before abruptly hanging up as leads to begin his investigation. He delves deep into his high school's underworld, and penetrates a community of drugs, corruption and temptation.

Along the way, Brendan encounters such obstacles as a dangerous drug baron and his agent (Lukas Haas and Noah Fleiss respectively), and a seductive member of their drug ring named Laura (Nora Zehetner). Brendan is also aided in his quest by an acquaintance named The Brain (Matt O'Leary). All the necessary plot advancers are in place, and Brick film unfolds at an easy pace, not too fast, and not too slow. It keeps you engaged as it throws its complex plot at you, and it doesn't disappoint when it the ending comes. The film even ends with a catchy line as icing on the cake.

It seems like an artsy film that takes so many risks as this should have flaws. I will say it requires an enormous suspension of disbelief in order to take Brick seriously, because all these horrible things are happening to a group of high school kids, and no adults seem to notice till much later in the movie. Regardless, the film's intelligent script, surprisingly beautiful cinematography, engaging premise and characters make it well worth watching. Brick actually makes a fine companion piece with Christopher Nolan's "Memento" (2000), a film which also uses classic Noir elements to make a wholly original work. The premise of Memento is that a man with short term memory loss tries to find and kill the man who murdered his wife. There are two plotlines in that movie. The main one, about the man searching for his wife's killer, is told in reverse chronological order. In the other plotline, the same man is in a hotel room having a lengthy phone conversation with an unknown person that is moving in chronological order. At the climax of the film, the two plotlines intersect, and the film ends (or begins?)

Obviously, the two films differ in terms of plot structure. Aside from a few flashbacks, "Brick's" narrative is chronological. The similarity between the two movies lies in the innovative ways that the their directors tell an otherwise standard story. In "Memento's" case, it's the two plotlines going in opposite directions, while in "Brick" it's these complex crimes happening within a high school community rather than an adult one. Similarly, after watching "Memento" I said to myself, "there has to a flaw or plot-hole here somewhere", and simply couldn't find one. Even if there are flaws, these films both have enough else going for them that they can be forgiven.

"Brick" is writer/director Rian Johnson's first feature film. He's since made two other acclaimed films: "The Brothers Bloom" (2008), and "Looper" (2012). The latter is an ambitious twist on time travel movies with an inventive, thought provoking premise in much the same way "Brick" is an inventive variation on modern Film Noirs. Johnson seems to have a talent for taking the basics of making films of classic genres, and running with them to create something a little different. He's only directed three films so far, but I think he shows a lot of promise as a filmmaker.

Summer of Film Debuts

Happy (almost) summer, everyone!

Let the months of taking it a little easier begin. For me, summer is the time to catch up on all the things I've put on the backburner during the school year. Things like watching movies, or rather watching *more* movies. Summer is also a grand opportunity for rising filmmakers to make a movie or two, which is even part of the premise of the J.J. Abrams movie "Super 8" (2011).

In view of this, I thought I'd try something new on "The Magic of Film". Every Friday this summer, going from today to the 20th of September, I'm going to be posting a review of an acclaimed director's first theatrically released film. I won't say what movies I'm posting and when, you'll have to find out for yourself. But some of the directors I'll be focusing on are Terrence Malick, Stanley Kubrick, Quentin Tarantino, Jean-Luc Godard, The Coen Brothers, etc.

A director's debut isn't always their most remembered film, but it's one of their most important. It's their trial run in the field of filmmaking, and it takes so much courage to make. It's exciting, terrifying, and wonderful at the same time. It's also fun to watch a director's debut after they've launched a successful career for themselves, and look for elements that might have blossomed into prominent motifs in their later films. For example, would the colorful shots, quirky characters and moral dilemmas featured in Paul Thomas Anderson's "Hard Eight" (1996) reappear in "Boogie Nights" (1997), "Magnolia" (1999), or "There Will Be Blood" (2007)? In some cases, a director's debut may be very different from their other films. After making a high school coming of age film like "American Graffiti" (1973), would've thought George Lucas would become famous for the "Star Wars" trilogy?

I've chosen a wide variety of directors to honor this summer, including Classic Hollywood, modern, foreign, and independent filmmakers. In addition to being directors I really like and admire, they have also left very distinct marks on filmmaking. Some of these marks are so deep you don't even notice them when you see them. Whether you know it or not, every time you see a movie today with highly philosophical themes, you are seeing the impact of the French New Wave of the 1950s and '60s, of which Jean-Luc Godard is one the pioneering filmmakers. Whenever you see a summer action blockbuster, you are seeing the impact of Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. Many of the films I'll be reviewing are some of the films from which modern cinema draws such a heavy influence, while some are among the director in question's lesser known work. But whether they are well known films are not, they are all the starting points of incredible artists.

While I can't possibly honor all of the most inspiring and domineering creators in the film industry in a single summer, the directors I'll be honoring are some of my favorites, and ones that I have the most fun discussing. You might not agree with or be enchanted with all of these choices, but hopefully I can at least convince you to look at the work of all of these amazing artists in another light.

The Great Gatsby (2013)

The "Very Entertaining" Gatsby's first appearance

Star Rating: ***1/2 (3.5/4 stars)
Baz Luhrmann's take on F. Scott Fitzgerald's landmark novel "The Great Gatsby" follows in the tradition of its past screen adaptations in that it has left critics thoroughly divided. Critics are complaining about it right and left, saying it's plagued with flaws in the music, the sets, and the adaptation of the story in general. According to the consensus of review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, one of the most common complaints is that it fails to capture the heart of the original novel. I wouldn't know about this, not having read the book. I'm not going to compare this film to a book I haven't read, and while it may not have captured the novel's heart, it certainly has a heart of its own.

Perhaps I'd feel differently about it had I read the book, but I really enjoyed this movie. What I see here isn't necessarily a fractured adaptation of an unfilmable novel, but a very intentional artistic take on a difficult story to tell. Luhrmann's film is by no means perfect, but it is skillfully crated, and has enough going on for it that you forgive it when it stumbles. If it fails to please you, it'll at least engage you.

For those of you unfamiliar with the plot, "The Great Gatsby" is set in New York during the Roaring Twenties, and is about Nick Carraway (Toby Maguire), a World War I veteran who becomes dazzled by the extravagant lifestyle of his next door neighbor, a famed millionaire by the name of Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio). Gatsby lives in a large mansion, and is a famous name throughout New York. He hosts large scale, and very well attended parties. Carraway secures an invitation, and, through a fateful turn of events, he and Gatsby become friends. Soon, it becomes apparent that Gatsby is really intent on rekindling his romance with Carraway's married cousin Daisy Buchanan (Carey Mulligan). That's the basic premise in a nutshell, but it's so much more complex than that. If you wrote an entire treatment of the story, it still wouldn't do all the complexities justice.

The performances all around are fantastic. Maguire, Mulligan, and DiCaprio also hit the ball out of the park with their roles. This film is another jewel in the crown of the New Wave of Leonardo DiCaprio's career, who has really widened his acting range over the last decade with films like Shutter Island, and most recently Django Unchained. DiCaprio is very eccentric, very deep, and very authentic as the celebrity millionaire in the title role.

Largely due to the actors, by the end of "The Great Gatsby" we identify with the right people, and we hate the right people. This is also due to the script, written by Luhrmann and Craig Pearce, which is also good. It's a well told story in terms of structure, acting and, for the most part, execution. However, the film does have some tonal inconsistencies. The first half is pretty upbeat and lighthearted, and the second half intensely tragic. The very rapid change in tone is worth noting, and is so noticeable that my film going companion tapped me and whispered: "And here's where it gets really depressing."

The things really worth noting other than the acting are the visuals. The way "The Great Gatsby" is shot and edited, with its long takes sped up or slowed down, really increases the experience, and when juxtaposed with Calloway's narration, makes for effective story telling. The colors, the costumes, and the sets of the film are also quite dazzling. The party scenes at Gatsby's mansion are large wide shots of the highly decorated interior of the house and the all the guests in their crazy '20s attire. The city scenes are filmed similarly, with lots of aerial photography of New York that is sped up, slowed down, cut together swiftly, or else just played at regular speed and is pleasant to look at.

If there's a single aspect of "The Great Gatsby" that left me a little divided, it'd be the music. Jay-Z's modern music feels a little too anachronistic at times, and trips over Craig Armstrong's more cinematic score, adding to the tonal unevenness of the film. It takes you out of the nostalgic feel of the 1920s that the visuals very aptly put you in. Especially during the party scenes, when there are jazz musicians playing, what's coming out is 21st century rap music, which feels a little too experimental. Some of the music choices worked, but only to the extent of coming across as artistic and expressionistic, but not really serious or compelling. Armstrong's more traditional film score worked very well, and was played obviously during the more serious moments.

But no matter. The music may take you out of it momentarily, but it doesn't break the experience. You're back in the mood a scene later. I reiterate: "The Great Gatsby" isn't a bad film at all. It may not be a good adaptation per se, but it's certainly a good film. A bad film can't be this effective. It can't have a heart like this film obviously has, and expresses so clearly. At any rate, it's good because it's arty and quirky. It's good because it's different. It's great fun to watch, and when the "fun" ends, it becomes highly engaging and compelling. It might not be what critics or fans of the novel want it to be, but it is unapologetically what it is, and for that I applaud it. Perhaps in ten years it might grow on people, and become one of those films that gets a slow start and garners more respect over time as well as an enormous cult following.

Turner Classic Movies Film Festival Number 4!

The fourth annual Turner Classic Movies Film Festival is gearing up to be another splendid film viewing experience like none other. As it has in past years, the Wednesday before the festival has provided a good taste of the fun that is in store. For several hours in the lobby of the famed Roosevelt Hotel, the TCM crew have been filming hosts Robert Osborne and Ben Mankiewicz interviewing several of the stars who will be in attendance for some of the upcoming film screenings. Many of these illustrious names include Julian Sands, Lili Zanuck,Jane Withers, and Theodore Bikel, to name a few.

The festival will officially kick off tomorrow evening with a red carpet gala premiere of a restoration of the musical "Funny Girl" (1968), starring Barbara Streisand and Omar Sharif. When asked if either of the afore mentioned stars would be in attendance, Robert Osborne said they would not, but that someone very special would be there as a surprise.

This year's festival will showcase exactly 78 films, along with numerous other events. Amongst the highlights are conversations with Eva Marie Saint, and Max von Sydow, who will introduce screenings of "On the Waterfront" (1954) and "The Seventh Seal" (1957) respectively. Other notable events are screenings of "A Room with a View" (1985), "Bonnie & Clyde" (1967) "On Golden Pond" (1981), "Badlands" (1973), "Deliverance" (1972), "The Twelve Chairs" (1970) with Mel Brooks in attendance, "Plan 9 from Outer Space" (1959), "The Birds" (1963), "The African Queen" (1951), a 75th birthday salute to Bugs Bunny, and a 3D presentation of Alfred Hitchcock's murder thriller "Dial M for Murder" (1954).

These will be shown at multiple classic Hollywood venues, including Grauman's Chinese Theater, the Egyptian Theater, the El Capital Theater, and the Cinerama Dome. The festival will run from Thursday evening to Sunday evening. Film lovers have turned up from all over the country (and the world) for this event. Whether they are here for the first time or have been coming all four years, everyone is in complete agreement that this festival is going to be something to remember.

Django Unchained (2012)

Star Rating: ****
There's one thing that is essential to understand about "Django Unchained" before you see it: it's purely fiction, a fantasy. It is violent, it is profane, it is disturbing... but it doesn't mean any harm. It is a creation from a filmmaker who loves movies and preserving and embodying certain passages of film history in his own films. With that in mind, it is not a societal drama and it is certainly not a history lesson. It is a thrill ride, with historical context. With all that understood, you may proceed. If you don't get this, there's a much higher chance that you will be shocked and offended by it.

That's not to say it won't smack you in the face with its content--because it will! In fact, a more appropriate title for the film would have been "Tarantino Unchained". For in "Django", Tarantino is more violent, more bloody, and more profane than he's ever been. The bloodshed here may not be in such frequent quantities as in "Kill Bill", but it looks more realistic, which makes it worse. There are several shootouts, and one incredibly rough scene where a slave is savagely ripped apart by dogs. Just when I thought onscreen violence couldn't get any worse, there's always Tarantino.

The profanity: Tarantino goes a little ape with the "n" word. True, this may have been appropriate because of the time period, but it does get bothersome. I have to wonder if he was having fun and got carried away while writing the script.

Now for those of you who are not familiar with the premise (but why would you be reading this if you weren't) "Django Unchained" is a homage to spaghetti westerns, which specialized in action, thrills and violence. The setting is the deep south in 1858, three years before the Civil War, not two as the title card suggests. A German dentist turned bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) recruits a slave named Django (Jamie Foxx) to help him find a group of murderous outlaws who only he (Django) could indentify, in exchange for his freedom.

After the outlaws have been seen too, Django sticks on with Dr. Shultz to search for his wife who had been sold off years earlier. Django and Dr. Shultz search every plantation they come to for Django's wife Broomhilda (Kerry Washington). They eventually learn that she's on the most horrible and brutal slave plantation in the United States, Candyland, owned by Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio). Shultz and Django masquerade as potential customers, and go to Candyland in search of slave to purchase: Broomhilda.

Leonardo DiCaprio has certainly blossomed as an actor. He's no longer the street-smart love struck Jack from "Titanic". That ship has sailed. After several movies with Martin Scorsese and Christopher Nolan, DiCaprio has become a very serious leading man. Calvin Candie is a charming, seemingly level headed individual. And yet it is Candie who orders the execution of the slave who is, in a word, destroyed by vicious dogs in a scene as jarring and disturbing as the ear cutting scene in "Reservoir Dogs" twenty years earlier. Here is when we are convinced of Candie's cruelty and malevolence. It's not enough knowing he owns the most brutal slave plantation in the country, we have to see it for ourselves.

Tarantino is known for writing quirky characters with fascinating interests, such as the religious Jules from "Pulp Fiction", and the "detective" SS Colonel Hans Landa (also played by Christoph Waltz), from "Inglourious Basterds". In "Django Unchained", bounty hunter King Shultz used to be a dentist, and he uses his dentistry credentials as a cover. He drives around in a carriage with a large tooth attached to a spring on the top. There's a small "cavity" in the tooth where he stores wanted posters. Calvin Candie is a "Francophile", and has a good deal of interest in French culture, but doesn't speak a word of French. I really like the way Tarantino writes his characters. They are who they are, and aren't sorry for it. And neither is he.

"Django Unchained" is a very well made movie, with good characters, an eclectic soundtrack, and a great script, though not as talky as Tarantino's others. It has incredibly funny moments and incredibly disturbing moments. Sometimes the disturbing moments are funny. It strongly resembles "Inglourious Basterds", which may not surprise you. Both movies are period pieces, and deal with difficult times in history.

In both movies, Tarantino is having fun with subjects that are really touchy, even today. He claims that he wanted to make a film about slavery, but he wanted to do it like a spaghetti western, rather than a social issues movie. He calls it a "southern", rather than a western. I can see he does care about slavery, but it's his style to do entertainment movies (Hiscock). It was the same case with "Inglourious Basterds". He has the same message about slavery that he had about Nazism, and it's right there: it's bad. It's no deeper than that. What you see is what you get. And he makes that point, as if he needed too.

Revenge is a theme that both films have in common, and has been prominent in Tarantino's work as far back as "Kill Bill". In "Inglourious Basterds", Shoshanna wanted revenge against the Nazis for the slaughter of her family. Now Django wants to get revenge on white slave owners, specifically the ones who harmed him and took his wife. Let's just say that the body count at the end of both movies are enormous.

I hear one more revenge drama is the cards for Tarantino. The project, still in development, called "Killer Crow" about three black soldiers during World War II who go AWOL, and shoot their white superiors. This should conclude Tarantino's "American History/Revenge Trilogy" (Gates, Jr.). That should make one heck of a box set.

Tarantino makes excellent movies that you almost feel guilty for liking because of how violent and controversial they are. But there is no denying his talent, or the quality of his work. With "Django", he has made what is possibly his most controversial work. This film is not for everybody. Only the selected few who can appreciate this is for what it is: an art-house film that knows what it is, isn't sorry for it, and doesn't even pretend to be.

Hiscock, John (April 27, 2007). "Quentin Tarantino: I'm proud of my flop". Telegraph.co.uk.
Retrieved 8 February, 2013.

"Django Unchained Trilogy and More: Tarantino Talks to Gates". theroot.com. December 23, 2012.
8 February, 2013.

Moonrise Kingdom (2012)

Star Rating: **** (4/4 stars)
I remember thinking to myself, "I hope 'Moonrise Kingdom' is at least nominated for Best Original Screenplay, if for nothing else." Sure enough, the one and only nomination the film received from the Academy was for its screenplay. I hope it wins too--it's the best screenplay in any movie I've this year, even outdoing dialogue master Quentin Tarantino's outrageous "Django Unchained".

Wes Anderson's talent lies in crafting idiosyncratic and often very flawed characters and putting them in even stranger situations. "Moonrise Kingdom" is no exception, and may even be a perfect example of his style. The story, set in a fictional town in Rhode Island in 1965, is about two very troubled children who fall in love, and run away together. This arouses considerable agitation amongst the locals, and a search party is formed to find them.

The children are orphaned Khaki-Scout Sam (Jared Gilman), and school girl Suzy (Kara Hayward). Both are very troubled children, and form a strong bond with each other. In one scene, Suzy's parents discover a collection of letters they'd written to each other. Sam tells Suzy she's pretty, and how he's recently been in trouble for lighting a shed on fire while sleep walking. Suzy tells Sam how she's recently been suspended from school for talking back to a teacher, and that she likes him a lot. Sam also sends Suzy a picture he drew of a girl (presumably Suzy) totally naked. "You're a great artist," Suzy writes to him.

The dialogue between the children is wonderful. Another of Wes Anderson's strengths is writing the most bizarre dialogue, and having his actors deliver it in an incredibly deadpan manner. They do seem a tad somber and don't smile a lot, but it's what they say and how they act with each other that makes the performances so good.

While a search party frantically scours Rhode Island for them, Sam and Suzy set out through open fields, over rivers, and through forests and beaches. The scenery is visually pleasing. My good friend Matt Hedges was actually the primary camera intern on the project, and told me it was one of the best experiences of his life. The music composed for the exploration scenes by Alexandre Desplat is so lyrical and adds so much to these parts. It grounds these moments in emotional reality--on the line between seriousness and utter bliss.

In addition to the lucid soundtrack by Desplat, Anderson also uses music from composer Benjamin Britten. Suzy is a part of a choir that performs Britten's Noah's Fludde, which is how she and Sam meet. Britten's pieces used throughout the film are mostly for children's voices, and also add a lot of feeling to the scenes.

"Moonrise Kingdom" also features performances from so many prominent actors including Wes Anderson regulars Bill Murray as Suzy's father, and Jason Schwartzman as one of Sam's fellow scouts' cousins. There's also Frances McDormand as Suzy's mother, who is secretly seeing Police Captain Sharp (Bruce Willis), adding to Suzy's dismay at home. Edward Norton is Scoutmaster Randy Ward, head of Sam's scouts. Harvey Keitel puts in an appearance as a commander, and Tilda Swinton appears towards the end as a Social Services representative. It's wonderful to see all these faces and everyone delivers so well, but the main spectacle are the two children.

Such fine acting from newcomers Kara Hayward and Jared Gilman. While complimenting the writing of their scenes together, I may have neglected to mention their performances. They're so real, that you simultaneously want to hug them and keep as far away from them as possible. I'd be scared out of my wits of these two if I ever encountered them. They do get violent with people who try to oppose them, and even go so far as killing a dog, which was very unpleasant to watch. But these are extensions of their distressed personalities, which also make them seem real, though I could have gone without seeing the dog go. If you can suspend that and look at everything else, that's when the touching love story really bites you.

"Moonrise Kingdom" is a good companion piece with Wes Anderson's breakthrough film "Rushmore" (1998), featuring Jason Schwartzman as the idiosyncratic idol of trendy Rushmore prep-school. "Rushmore" focuses on Schartzman's coming of age, and the same could be said for Suzy and Sam in "Moonrise Kingdom". They do sort of come of age, even though they're still quite young, and things remain more or less the same with Suzy, if not for Sam.

That's another nice thing about the story in "Moonrise": that it doesn't end with "happily ever after". Yes, it is a happy ending. We see what we want to see--that Sam and Suzy continue seeing each other after the ordeals that follow them running away. On the other hand, they're seeing each other in secret, indicating things are more or less back to normality as we saw it at the start of the movie, with some definite improvements. And the music in that last scene doesn't hurt a bit, unless you enjoy getting sort of misty eyed. I dunno, maybe it's just me.

I feel like the music and art design should have received nods from the Academy, but they did nominate the right thing. In "Moonrise Kingdom" all the sprockets are going like made to create an excellent movie. Man, that screenplay...

Frankenweenie (2012)

Star Rating: ***1/2 (3.5/4 Stars)
When I watch either version of Tim Burton's "Frankenweenie"--whether it's his original 1984 short or the remake--the one thing I think of is how far the "Frankenstein" story has come over the years. More specifically how the movies have shaped how we view the story. If you look at Mary Shelley's original novel published in 1818, you will find it is totally different from the film traditions. Many of the iconic attributes we associate with "Frankenstein"--the hunchbacked lab assistant, the bride with the outrageous hairdo, the blind man in the woods, the policeman with the mechanical arm, the climax at the burning windmill--have all come from the movies and not the novel.

Producers and directors, even comedians, have been "re-animating" the story at every turn. And as if that wasn't enough, now we're bringing dogs back to life. Dogs! I wonder what Mary Shelley would say if she saw what has happened with her creation. It's certainly taken on a life of its own. Dare I say she's created a monster?

"Frankenweenie" (2012) is a few things: it's Tim Burton remaking his own short film of the same name. It's also a homage to the original Universal films from the 1930s. Mostly the "Frankenstein" movies, but all the monsters are in here. This time Victor Frankenstein is a young boy who has knack of filmmaking and science. His only friend is his dog Sparky. When Sparky is hit by as car and killed, Victor gets the radical idea of bringing him back to life. Needless to say, things get out of hand.

When the other kids learn that Victor brought his dog back to life, they're all afraid he'll win first place in the science project, so they all plagiarize and reanimate their pets. One kid brings back a fish who becomes invisible. Another one reanimates a rat who grows into a horrific wolf-like being, and another who brings back a gerbil wrapped in bandages, resembling a mummy. There was a boy who created sea-monkeys resembling The Creature of the Black Lagoon, and an Asian boy who reanimated a turtle who grew five times it's natural size, forming a Godzilla like creature. There was also a girl who tried reanimating a bat, but the electricity struck her cat, and the bat and cat became blended into a vampire-cat.

All these creatures run amok and wreak havoc, sending the film to its familiar climax at an old windmill on the outskirts of town. I sat watching these creatures, wondering exactly what point they served in the narrative. The answer is actually quite simple: to create conflict and add flavor to the story, but most of all this is Tim Burton having fun with his source material. Why not mix it all up? All the monster movie references may generate some eye rolls, but even so, it's too much fun not to like!

"Frankenweenie" does feature some Tim Burton regulars, only this time no Johnny Depp. No Helena Bonham Carter. Instead we have Winona Ryder, ("Beetlejuice", "Edward Scissorhands"), voicing Victor's next door neighbor, who becomes one of his allies as the film progresses. Victor's mother is voiced by Catherine O'Hara ("The Nightmare Before Christmas"). Victor's science teacher is voiced by Martin Landau, who played Bela Lugosi in "Ed Wood" (1994), another affectionate nod to classic horror films. It's nice to see Burton reuniting with some old talent who appeared in, and really made, his earlier and better movies.

One of these being Burton's original "Frankenweenie" short. It's easy to dismiss it without watching it because of the title and the premise. But shorts can be goofy and experimental and get away with it. What's so nice about "Frankenweenie" (1984) is that it turns out to be a really entertaining, ambitious film despite appearances. Burton made a bit of a risky move expanding it into a feature. At least he had the sense to make it an animated film. Animated films can also get away with almost anything plot wise. It turned out to be well worth it though. The remake is well done and just as fun and endearing as the original, even if it does drag in bits. This is definitely Tim Burton's finest work in years.

It's been nominated for an Oscar for Best Animated Film, alongside "Brave", "ParaNorman", "Wreck-It Ralph", and "Hotel Transylvania". I think "Frankenweenie" has a good chance of winning, and personally hope that it does.