The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

00:00:00.440 Hello and welcome to the extra-secret, cursed third episode of our look into the life and works of Stanley Kubrick.

00:00:09.700 I'm joined today by our friend and guest, Chloe, at Proper Horror Show,

00:00:14.560 and Josh has returned again for this third episode where we're going to be discussing Clockwork Orange,

00:00:21.060 some of Kubrick's failed projects that he was trying to do between Clockwork Orange and what turned into Barry Lyndon,

00:00:27.280 which was Napoleon, and then we're going to be discussing Barry Lyndon in this episode.

00:00:31.120 If you are wondering why we seem somewhat high tension, why this episode is cursed,

00:00:36.880 and also why it is that this episode has taken so bloody long to come out,

00:00:40.960 well, this is the third time that we're recording it.

00:00:43.900 The second time today, the first time the audio was corrupted,

00:00:48.420 the second time we ran out of disk space, and now we're recording finally,

00:00:52.660 but there is a rogue and invincible fly in the studio.

00:00:56.440 I've genuinely shocked it twice, squashed it once, and it's still flying around.

00:01:02.500 I don't understand how it's even possible.

00:01:04.520 This fly has been designed by Miyazaki himself, and we're on the fourth phase.

00:01:08.840 This is kind of like Sword Slane Isshin in Sekiro,

00:01:12.160 so we can only hope that I can get a lightning counter on it at some point

00:01:15.800 and finally finish it off with a death blow.

00:01:18.200 But until then, if it flies about, you'll have to put up with it,

00:01:22.300 the same as we're putting up with it, I have a weapon with me, just in case.

00:01:26.720 But we will make do, as we shall.

00:01:30.440 So, let's start with the discussion of A Clockwork Orange again.

00:01:36.000 Endless reshoots.

00:01:37.200 Endless reshoots.

00:01:37.520 It's exactly what Stanley would have wanted.

00:01:39.420 Exactly.

00:01:40.100 Stanley Kubrick has been in charge of this production from beyond the grave,

00:01:43.820 and we simply did not know.

00:01:45.540 It's just that good.

00:01:48.540 It's quite romantic, really.

00:01:50.360 So, speaking of things that are crass, disgusting, violent,

00:01:57.040 filled with petty rage and envy.

00:01:59.360 Hello.

00:02:00.740 Enough about Josh.

00:02:02.160 Let's talk about A Clockwork Orange.

00:02:04.920 Yeah, quite the contrast to 2001, eh?

00:02:07.240 Yes, this was the follow-up film he did to what many would consider his magnum opus as 2001.

00:02:14.280 The magisterial sci-fi space opera Mind F, as that film was,

00:02:20.580 because a lot of people still don't understand what the hell was going on at the end of that film,

00:02:26.560 but we understand, because we know what it would have been like if we hadn't had breakfast this morning.

00:02:33.220 Unlike many.

00:02:34.820 And A Clockwork Orange is quite the tonal and subject 180 from 2001.

00:02:42.520 So, what inspired that?

00:02:44.900 What was the creative process like?

00:02:46.760 And then we'll all give our thoughts on the film and the meaning and themes that it presents.

00:02:51.560 Well, my suspicion is Stanley was riding a bit high from the success of 2001.

00:02:56.800 You know, it had been a big success for him.

00:02:59.740 It got him the acclaim.

00:03:01.420 It brought in sort of critical approval, mostly,

00:03:04.320 as well as the groundlings who came in to watch it whilst totally high.

00:03:10.200 And he had designed the publicity to make that happen.

00:03:13.780 But that had been a big studio project,

00:03:15.880 basically designed so that he could fill this new ultra-wide screen that studios wanted films for.

00:03:22.680 So, a bit of business savvy there.

00:03:24.720 It does seem, from what I've read in this book here, that you've lent me.

00:03:28.800 I've not read the whole book, but I've read a decent enough chunk of it now.

00:03:32.220 It's a visual analysis of the work of Stanley Kubrick.

00:03:35.720 And the author says that he'd known Stanley Kubrick since the 1950s

00:03:39.580 and had visited him during that time period in about 1959.

00:03:43.940 Went to Kubrick's home and found that the place was full of Japanese sci-fi films.

00:03:47.900 And so, it seems that he had been trying to study some of the cutting-edge special effects techniques

00:03:54.320 so that he could make a sci-fi film for 10 years up to the point where he got to make 2001.

00:03:59.660 So, like many of his ideas, this had been gestating in his mind for a long time.

00:04:04.300 And, of course, with 2001, the way that he writes and produces is

00:04:08.700 all of his films are based on a book.

00:04:11.220 And he simply teamed up with a sci-fi author to write a book that he would base the film on.

00:04:16.400 But the film ended up coming out first.

00:04:18.540 So, there's quite a rarity for Kubrick.

00:04:20.980 Well, yeah, he engineered the situation, yes.

00:04:25.120 Yeah, I mean, this is a similar case, as you will not be surprised to hear.

00:04:28.720 He found the book already written.

00:04:30.420 Although, interestingly, in this one, he felt he had a much freer hand

00:04:33.740 and didn't need the author as much.

00:04:35.340 So, obviously, Arthur C. Clarke had been brought in to assist greatly

00:04:39.420 with the screenplay for 2001.

00:04:42.240 In this one, and I've forgotten his name,

00:04:45.820 Anthony Burgess.

00:04:47.600 Thank you so much.

00:04:48.400 Anthony Burgess.

00:04:49.120 Who he left a little bit in the lurch in the aftermath of this film,

00:04:52.660 from what I remember.

00:04:53.820 Oh, yes.

00:04:54.340 Oh, we will cover that, because there are some fantastic shenanigans there. 0.83

00:04:58.960 Burgess was kept a little more out of the loop, as you say,

00:05:01.560 and Kubrick was a lot more hands-on.

00:05:03.440 But it would probably surprise people who are thinking of Kubrick

00:05:06.260 as the totalitarian, controlling perfectionist,

00:05:10.680 that he was quite loose with the script.

00:05:12.660 This is one of his early cases of basically scripting as he goes,

00:05:17.720 just taking pages out of the book and say,

00:05:19.920 yeah, we'll do this.

00:05:21.840 He adds a little bit in.

00:05:23.040 He adds a scene where Alex is first inducted into the prison.

00:05:26.600 That is entirely Stanley Kubrick's doing.

00:05:28.860 But otherwise, he was sort of writing as he went.

00:05:31.260 And I think the reason he went for this is feeding off that savvy

00:05:35.940 that he had when he went for Lolita.

00:05:38.460 I think he wanted something that was controversial,

00:05:41.600 would get attention,

00:05:42.640 but that he could hang some really interesting ideas off.

00:05:47.020 Yes, certainly.

00:05:47.800 And you can tell that there's a lot of improvisation within the film,

00:05:51.240 and that he used that in the production.

00:05:53.380 Because very, very famously, early on during the scenes of ultraviolence

00:05:58.840 that make up the first third or so of the film,

00:06:01.300 there's the rape scene where during the home invasion, 0.98

00:06:04.860 Alex and his droogs are about to rape a woman 1.00

00:06:06.880 while they're beating her husband, 1.00

00:06:08.600 and he starts to sing Singing in the Rain,

00:06:11.000 which, as far as I'm aware, quite famously,

00:06:13.520 was an improvisation by Malcolm McDowell on set at the time

00:06:17.140 because they were going through takes of it,

00:06:18.660 and Kubrick felt that it was just missing a little bit of something.

00:06:21.320 Three days of rehearsals because something was not quite right.

00:06:24.960 Maybe there's a fly, I don't know.

00:06:26.080 There needed to be something theatrical about it

00:06:28.580 because certainly the first portion of the film is very theatrical,

00:06:33.780 intentionally so one of the big set-piece fights,

00:06:36.400 and it is set in an abandoned theatre.

00:06:38.780 I'm glad you highlighted that, yeah.

00:06:41.180 And so he ends up singing that as he's going along as an improvisation,

00:06:46.080 and Stanley Kubrick very, very quickly rushes,

00:06:48.040 when he realises it's perfect, to buy the rights to the song

00:06:50.860 so that he can use it.

00:06:52.240 And then it's later incorporated into the film when they return,

00:06:55.480 when Alex returns to the home,

00:06:57.280 and he's caught humming the song,

00:06:58.840 and it brings back the writer.

00:07:00.740 What's the writer's character name?

00:07:02.880 He's named in the film as...

00:07:04.940 Frank, isn't it?

00:07:06.140 Mr. Alexander.

00:07:07.440 So Frank Alexander.

00:07:08.220 Yeah, they keep calling him Frank later on in the film.

00:07:11.040 So Frank catches him singing it,

00:07:13.600 and it brings to mind,

00:07:14.600 and it causes him to remember that

00:07:16.500 this isn't just that criminal who's been released from prison. 0.99

00:07:19.740 He's the man who raped my wife and caused her to die, 0.98

00:07:22.680 and crippled me as well. 0.99

00:07:25.000 So he clearly took a very, very improvisational tact with this,

00:07:30.680 if that's something that he re-incorporated into the plot later as well.

00:07:35.700 Yeah, and then brings it back to the end credits as well,

00:07:38.200 as a key part of the message of this film.

00:07:40.040 A very jolly end to the film.

00:07:43.260 It's a great ending.

00:07:44.880 I think we should love it.

00:07:45.960 It's just this great contrast to kind of utopian planning,

00:07:51.040 which I think is a carryover from 2001,

00:07:53.900 that your best laid plans,

00:07:56.360 your most fantastic systems,

00:07:59.240 most genius designed schematics will fail.

00:08:03.620 You know, and I think that's a thread, yeah,

00:08:06.340 through 2001, through A Clockwork Orange,

00:08:09.360 also Barry Lyndon to an extent.

00:08:12.440 I can see that, yeah.

00:08:14.320 So shall we retread familiar territory that we covered

00:08:17.760 in the cursed second recording,

00:08:21.520 talking about... 0.64

00:08:22.720 They're all cursed. 0.90

00:08:23.440 Let's not count this one out either.

00:08:26.380 So one of the things I remember saying is that

00:08:29.680 in that first 40 minutes,

00:08:32.500 it seems to me to be trying to suggest

00:08:35.620 that there's an innate relationship between sex and violence.

00:08:39.040 And then following on from that,

00:08:41.540 you see some commentary on politicians.

00:08:44.220 You've got the gentleman who encourages Alex

00:08:48.160 to take part in the Ludovico technique,

00:08:50.900 who seems to represent the more right-wing faction.

00:08:53.960 And then you've got the writer, Mr. Alexander,

00:08:57.340 representing the liberals and his friends.

00:08:59.800 And they're both using Alex to their own ends,

00:09:02.720 basically to assume totalitarian power.

00:09:05.340 And it seems to my mind that the ideology is secondary to power,

00:09:10.020 as you rightfully pointed out.

00:09:13.300 And Kubrick's trying to point out that people will use crime

00:09:17.560 as a political football, if you will,

00:09:19.340 and that they don't actually care about the victims of crime

00:09:22.580 or the perpetrators.

00:09:23.600 They're just out for themselves.

00:09:25.920 That seems to be pretty explicit throughout the whole film.

00:09:29.880 Yeah.

00:09:30.300 And this might come about a bit dated by the time people see this,

00:09:35.840 but in a shocking amount of relevance,

00:09:38.620 what Mr. Alexander does to Alex,

00:09:43.020 basically torturing him, driving him insane,

00:09:45.320 so he jumps out of the window himself,

00:09:46.900 the minister puts Mr. Alexander in prison for that.

00:09:52.540 And he's able to do that because he's basically used

00:09:56.220 the Ludovico technique and other measures

00:09:58.320 to clear the prisons of people

00:10:00.740 so there's room for political prisoners.

00:10:03.320 Yes, that's one line that is thrown in there,

00:10:06.000 but I think is very important to characterise

00:10:08.120 what this particular state is and what it's doing.

00:10:13.120 It is concerned about crime on the streets,

00:10:16.060 but purely for pragmatic and image purposes,

00:10:20.620 what it really wants to do is punish its political enemies.

00:10:24.020 Yeah, absolutely.

00:10:25.320 Absolutely.

00:10:25.880 Well, it's a self-interested state.

00:10:27.960 Yeah.

00:10:28.240 As they all are.

00:10:29.320 You came in very quickly with basically a libertarian reading of it,

00:10:32.760 which I think Stanley supports quite merrily.

00:10:36.480 Maybe that's it.

00:10:37.240 He's tight-lipped about things,

00:10:39.160 but I think he basically sees through the bluster

00:10:42.940 and like, you know, certain academics like,

00:10:47.900 gosh, Adam Curtis, expert and Indian wife rejecter, 1.00

00:10:54.060 Neema Parvini would say it's the ideology is always secondary to power.

00:10:58.200 It's just a cover up for what power already wants to do.

00:11:01.500 If you're struggling, guys, I'm very sorry.

00:11:03.640 I've lost my voice for this recording.

00:11:05.540 We did say it was cursed.

00:11:07.160 You're going to have to power through.

00:11:08.380 But my reading of it was basically that, as Harry pointed out,

00:11:14.380 the droogs were in the same milk bar as some media executives and the singer.

00:11:21.520 They're all rubbing shoulders.

00:11:23.140 They are.

00:11:24.060 They're on different classes,

00:11:27.040 but morally speaking, they all occupy the same level.

00:11:31.180 And I think what Kubrick's trying to get at here is,

00:11:34.100 be it street gangs that are using violence to extort people of their money

00:11:40.420 and, you know, rape people, basically.

00:11:43.580 It's a very similar thing to what the government does. 0.99

00:11:45.800 They're a gang that takes what they want using violence. 0.88

00:11:50.140 And there's not really that much difference between the two.

00:11:52.600 And they're natural allies.

00:11:54.060 And I think that actually we do see that in reality.

00:11:56.920 You look at, say, particularly South America,

00:11:59.500 politicians and the cartels are, you know,

00:12:03.780 without one, the other can't exist.

00:12:05.740 They're so reliant on one another

00:12:07.100 that they are inextricably bound

00:12:11.900 and therefore they rely on each other.

00:12:15.080 And we see that as well with the two droogs joining the police, 0.99

00:12:19.480 as I can't remember who pointed that one out.

00:12:22.240 I think that was me again.

00:12:23.440 Yeah, so Alex has his group of three droogs who follow him about. 0.94

00:12:27.160 Now, after the first portion of the film,

00:12:28.840 I think the one that looks youngest kind of vanishes from the film.

00:12:31.940 So he might be dead.

00:12:33.140 He might be in prison.

00:12:33.960 He might have just gone back to school.

00:12:35.560 You don't know because they're all very, very young of school age.

00:12:38.580 But by the time he's out of prison,

00:12:40.280 the two who were the most traitorous to him

00:12:42.860 have managed to join the police and end up victimizing him themselves.

00:12:46.940 And I think there's something interesting

00:12:48.560 in the first portion of the film as well

00:12:50.820 that we didn't get onto in the first attempt at this discussion,

00:12:54.400 which was, as I pointed out,

00:12:57.160 there's obviously the very theatrical part of it

00:12:59.520 where the music that scores the majority of the film

00:13:02.780 is classical music.

00:13:04.560 But it's very distorted,

00:13:08.080 very uncanny sounding classical music

00:13:11.120 because it's all played on very strange sounding synthesizers

00:13:14.180 that make it sound more like wacky children's music

00:13:18.080 than it does like a full classical orchestra.

00:13:21.360 And I think that's a big theme through the beginning of the film

00:13:24.340 and later on as well,

00:13:26.540 which alongside a lot of the phallic imagery,

00:13:29.600 which is suggesting an innate connection between sex and violence,

00:13:33.020 there's this imagery to suggest a corruption

00:13:35.740 of the pure and the good and the innocent.

00:13:38.920 So when they're at the bar at the beginning of the film,

00:13:40.820 what are they drinking that is laced with drugs

00:13:43.960 that they use to get them excited

00:13:45.680 and get them riled up so that they can go and commit violence?

00:13:47.840 It's milk, which is typically considered a good drink

00:13:52.820 for children, growing children.

00:13:54.980 When they're in the theatre,

00:13:56.420 the abandoned theatre fighting with Billy boys,

00:13:59.000 the theatre is a place that's supposed to be grand,

00:14:01.300 extravagant, where you experience art and music,

00:14:04.760 whereas it's completely abandoned, destroyed.

00:14:07.820 There's an attempted rape going on.

00:14:10.400 It's the scene instead of for a grand play

00:14:12.860 for petty street violence.

00:14:14.620 So one thing that I think is interesting

00:14:17.140 about the music aspect of it

00:14:18.700 is when Alex goes to the record shop,

00:14:21.840 what do you see other than the soundtrack to 2001 placed there?

00:14:26.080 You see Pink Floyd albums?

00:14:27.580 Yeah, you see Animals by Pink Floyd.

00:14:30.800 You see The Magical Mystery Tour by The Beatles.

00:14:34.540 You see After the Gold Rush by Neil Young.

00:14:38.420 These are all sort of an era of music,

00:14:42.200 and I think that actually this sort of very childish iteration

00:14:46.180 of classical music,

00:14:48.640 I thought it contrasted quite nicely with the violence.

00:14:53.660 It's almost juvenile and revelling in it.

00:14:56.480 It's almost suggesting

00:14:57.500 almost like a psychotic aspect to it.

00:15:01.340 And I think that perhaps Kubrick is suggesting

00:15:03.380 that this nice, innocent, almost pure music

00:15:11.460 that comes from the 60s

00:15:12.500 that could perhaps be epitomised by that Beatles album

00:15:16.060 that he's got on display

00:15:17.380 because it's very juvenile, happy and cheerful.

00:15:22.120 But at the same time, you could draw another parallel

00:15:24.480 between the fact that, yeah, it's happy, juvenile, cheerful,

00:15:27.660 but also was made by people who were completely laced with drugs

00:15:31.380 the entire time that they were making it.

00:15:33.840 Well, yeah, he's basically pointing out the corruption of it.

00:15:37.120 I got that little jab there, by the way.

00:15:39.680 Not lost on it.

00:15:40.740 Great band, by the way.

00:15:42.240 I like The Beatles.

00:15:43.040 I wasn't insulting The Beatles,

00:15:44.300 but they were massively high on drugs.

00:15:47.460 Well, on the early 60s,

00:15:49.720 it was methamphetamine that they were high on,

00:15:51.540 and the late 60s, it was weed and LSD.

00:15:54.680 Great combo.

00:15:55.180 But, yeah, I think that what Kubrick's trying to point out here

00:15:58.880 is the strange hypocrisy going on here,

00:16:03.460 in a very subtle way, I think.

00:16:04.880 This is one thing that I picked up on either so slightly.

00:16:07.660 Personally, I think it's more about how this society

00:16:10.160 that has sprung up, that he's depicting in this world,

00:16:13.460 this dystopia,

00:16:14.680 is completely corruptive of everything that it touches,

00:16:18.060 because even Alex himself, he's still at school.

00:16:21.560 He's very clearly a child, and he acts like a child.

00:16:25.180 A lot of the time.

00:16:26.160 But at the same time,

00:16:27.360 he's conducting these reprehensible acts of ultra-violence.

00:16:31.080 And when we talk about how Alex is manipulated

00:16:33.540 and used throughout the film,

00:16:35.700 it can make him seem like more of a sympathetic character

00:16:38.980 than he is.

00:16:40.080 And I'm sure that many have tried to accuse Kubrick

00:16:41.880 of excusing Alex's crimes with that latter half of the film.

00:16:46.040 Now, Alex is still a reprehensible and unforgivable human being.

00:16:50.180 The problem is that he's also human

00:16:52.640 in that he has some positive and admirable qualities as well,

00:16:57.340 things that we can relate to him of,

00:16:59.040 like his love of classical music and Beethoven in particular,

00:17:02.660 and his vital and youthful energy that he projects

00:17:08.480 even through his violent and evil acts

00:17:11.360 is something that, along with his negative side,

00:17:15.980 is stripped of him by the Ludovico technique

00:17:18.940 in the middle of the film.

00:17:20.680 So even though, yes,

00:17:22.880 you have made the streets marginally safer

00:17:25.580 by taking him off them,

00:17:26.760 you've also stripped this world and this society

00:17:29.580 of some of the beautiful and divine things

00:17:33.100 that human beings are capable of.

00:17:35.660 I think Kubrick would want Agnesi,

00:17:40.320 he would want you to be very aware of Alex as a child.

00:17:44.120 You know, he cast Malcolm McDowell,

00:17:45.880 who'd really been only known for the film If,

00:17:50.200 where he was a schoolchild.

00:17:52.980 You know, he'd got big attention for that,

00:17:54.740 so Kubrick would want that association in your mind.

00:17:58.500 And I think there's plenty there to support

00:18:01.680 what you're talking about in terms of people being corrupted,

00:18:03.960 and I almost wonder if Kubrick's sort of ahead of the game

00:18:07.240 in sort of pointing the finger at boomers.

00:18:09.800 Like, Alex's parents are absolutely,

00:18:13.780 like, the mother is hilarious. 0.85

00:18:15.580 They're absent.

00:18:16.520 There's a scene early on in the film

00:18:18.600 when they're planning the heist on the cat lady's house,

00:18:22.280 where they're in a bar, and there's a woman serving at the bar. 1.00

00:18:26.140 I think his mother says earlier on

00:18:29.820 that she works in the factory or something,

00:18:32.600 but there's a woman serving drinks in there 1.00

00:18:35.280 who has the exact same purple hair as her

00:18:37.480 and the exact same style

00:18:38.720 and is wearing the same style of clothes.

00:18:40.720 To the point where I almost got confused for a moment

00:18:42.440 because I was going, wait, is that Alex's mother

00:18:44.280 serving drinks in this pub?

00:18:46.360 And if so, is it just that she doesn't see Alex

00:18:49.620 or does she not notice Alex?

00:18:51.200 Because I don't think that Stanley Kubrick

00:18:52.880 would make the decision to have such similar clothes.

00:18:56.560 And the character that's also focused on

00:18:59.000 for the beginning part of that scene,

00:19:00.700 you follow her in a tracking shot

00:19:02.480 going through the pub

00:19:03.720 until the camera decides to fixate on Alex instead.

00:19:07.340 So it's either suggesting that that is Alex's mum

00:19:09.820 and she's either too oblivious or uncaring to say anything.

00:19:13.300 Or as a kind of stand-in for his mother

00:19:16.540 to say the same thing,

00:19:17.760 which is this is going on in plain sight

00:19:20.160 for all of the adults to see,

00:19:21.700 but it's being ignored

00:19:22.840 as kind of like a microcosm of society.

00:19:25.800 Well, the adults do absolutely ignore it.

00:19:28.380 They're too afraid, really, to stand up to Alex.

00:19:31.060 So they know what's going on.

00:19:32.200 So that could be in there.

00:19:33.320 I've got to say that's a detail I hadn't picked up on.

00:19:35.520 I only picked up on my most recent watch through of it.

00:19:38.540 So they're in there, you point out,

00:19:40.500 they're drinking milk,

00:19:41.620 which is normally wholesome.

00:19:42.680 Obviously, they're drinking it directly from the breast. 1.00

00:19:45.660 Yeah, again, another childish part of it.

00:19:48.120 So showing that corruption,

00:19:49.280 showing it from there, from the parents as well.

00:19:53.500 I suppose another thing I wanted to touch on

00:19:57.000 is the fact that we do have that extreme 40 minutes,

00:20:00.480 but that is to make sure you can't excuse what Alex does.

00:20:05.000 You aren't left with any wiggle room.

00:20:06.740 You're shown everything to know exactly who he is.

00:20:10.340 And you have to have that in mind

00:20:12.520 when you then approach the question of

00:20:14.200 how do you deal with someone like Alex?

00:20:17.820 You know, someone who's got that high appreciation

00:20:20.200 but is not a total grug.

00:20:23.520 But also, you can't expect to trust him in society

00:20:28.760 when he's already committed the violence

00:20:31.760 and the crimes that he has.

00:20:33.500 One of my takeaways from the failure

00:20:36.660 of the Ludovico technique in the film

00:20:38.340 is that Kubrick is trying to suggest

00:20:40.400 that perhaps some people can't be rehabilitated.

00:20:43.840 And I do agree with that.

00:20:45.380 Well, by the end of the film,

00:20:46.460 the whole point is that they have reversed

00:20:47.980 the Ludovico technique.

00:20:49.220 They've gone and tinkered in his brain

00:20:50.680 and he's back to normal.

00:20:52.740 And then he's incorporated into the government.

00:20:54.780 So they have returned him

00:20:56.680 to his primal, feral, violent state.

00:21:00.700 And then they've gone,

00:21:01.480 you're going to make an excellent bureaucrat.

00:21:04.540 But I also think that he's clearly

00:21:08.240 got a few more screws loose than before as well

00:21:11.300 because of the nature of the images

00:21:13.300 that are appearing in his head

00:21:14.380 were even more unhinged than before.

00:21:16.280 Maybe even made him worse.

00:21:17.960 I mean, possibly because he's on the other...

00:21:20.640 He knows at this point how the state

00:21:23.260 can use its own violence.

00:21:25.860 And he knows that if he's part of the state

00:21:28.320 that all of a sudden,

00:21:29.640 well, I can get to do that from now on.

00:21:31.500 If he behaves himself to a point

00:21:34.320 and works his way up,

00:21:36.160 and it seemed like the minister

00:21:37.340 was very, very eager to carry on

00:21:39.820 working with him past that point.

00:21:41.500 Because again, the minister has already

00:21:43.020 taken Alex's street troops

00:21:44.920 and put them in positions of power

00:21:47.120 and authority in society as police officers.

00:21:49.140 So what's he going to do with Alex

00:21:51.160 promoting him even higher than that?

00:21:53.360 He's probably going to make

00:21:54.440 an excellent politician, sad to say.

00:21:56.740 We should also highlight again

00:21:58.480 in that scene of the demonstration

00:22:01.160 of the Ludovico technique success,

00:22:04.360 we got another perfect example

00:22:06.620 of how the violence outside of power

00:22:11.780 and the violence within power

00:22:13.300 are kind of interchangeable.

00:22:14.660 You know, the battle with Billy Boy's Nazi gang 0.94

00:22:17.660 happens within the theatre,

00:22:19.820 literally under a proscenium arc,

00:22:22.260 and Alex's demonstration

00:22:23.440 is on a theatrical stage.

00:22:26.160 You know, it's all support

00:22:28.320 But it's interesting

00:22:30.000 because the theatrical stage

00:22:31.360 is made to look a bit more

00:22:32.880 like a cinema screen.

00:22:34.280 So is Stanley Kubrick saying something

00:22:36.120 about the use of imagery

00:22:37.860 that people are being fed

00:22:39.420 when they go to the cinema

00:22:40.900 or when they watch television

00:22:42.280 as a subtle means of mind control

00:22:45.180 and social engineering.

00:22:46.580 Because certainly by that point

00:22:48.440 of the 1970s,

00:22:50.800 television and film

00:22:51.800 has already begun to swing that way.

00:22:54.000 I mean, you mentioned Adam Curtis.

00:22:55.200 A lot of his documentaries

00:22:56.180 talk about how by the 50s and 60s,

00:22:59.940 government social engineers

00:23:01.060 had already begun to do this.

00:23:02.200 And Peter Hitchens talks about it

00:23:03.560 in The Abolition of Britain,

00:23:05.900 that the government had an agreement

00:23:07.540 in Britain in the 1970s

00:23:09.760 with the soap operas

00:23:10.780 to present particular storylines

00:23:14.140 to try and push public opinion

00:23:15.840 in one way.

00:23:17.680 So if anything,

00:23:18.480 I would say what you said

00:23:19.460 was that the Ludovico technique

00:23:21.900 was a failure.

00:23:23.640 It was actually a grand success

00:23:25.560 because it did exactly

00:23:26.420 what it was supposed to do.

00:23:27.100 Well, it was a failure

00:23:27.360 to rehabilitate a criminal,

00:23:29.280 but it is not necessarily

00:23:30.700 the purpose

00:23:31.280 in that they're trying

00:23:32.260 to use Alex and the technique

00:23:34.180 for political ends.

00:23:35.980 Well, yes,

00:23:37.380 but if you're going

00:23:38.100 from the pure pragmatic sense

00:23:40.040 of we're not rehabilitating him,

00:23:41.740 we're just brute force

00:23:42.840 preventing him

00:23:43.720 from committing crimes again,

00:23:45.680 it's a success.

00:23:46.600 It's more of a media firestorm

00:23:48.720 that comes after he tries 0.96

00:23:49.600 to kill himself.

00:23:51.320 So I would say Kubrick is saying, 0.99

00:23:53.780 listen,

00:23:54.420 these social engineering techniques

00:23:55.960 are terrifyingly effective

00:23:58.740 for a lot of what they're trying

00:24:00.780 to put into your mind

00:24:01.840 and the kind of effect

00:24:03.320 that they will have on you.

00:24:04.460 I mean,

00:24:06.060 to support that,

00:24:08.720 right,

00:24:09.280 so there's kind of an adage

00:24:11.980 that sci-fi isn't about the future,

00:24:14.020 it's about the present

00:24:15.280 via an allegory.

00:24:16.900 And there's a fair amount

00:24:17.680 to talk about in 2001

00:24:19.280 about how it's commenting

00:24:20.360 on what was happening at the time.

00:24:21.980 Obviously,

00:24:22.480 Strangelove was doing

00:24:23.440 current events via satire,

00:24:25.860 but Clockwork Orange,

00:24:26.980 I think,

00:24:27.300 is really in that tradition.

00:24:30.320 Stanley Kubrick isn't doing

00:24:31.560 about a scary future dystopia.

00:24:33.480 He's talking about Britain 0.71

00:24:35.060 and America

00:24:35.700 and what they're already doing.

00:24:37.740 The fact that he's,

00:24:39.300 for his sets,

00:24:40.400 I don't know if we've said it

00:24:41.320 in this version of the recording,

00:24:42.900 maybe we already did,

00:24:44.080 sorry.

00:24:45.600 But he could take his failed

00:24:48.220 Soviet-inspired,

00:24:50.320 grand socialist UK

00:24:52.980 failed architecture projects

00:24:56.220 and just,

00:24:57.260 he didn't need to build them.

00:24:58.380 He just had them in London already.

00:25:00.180 He went to a place

00:25:01.120 called Thamesmead

00:25:02.140 and this was already

00:25:04.420 the massive tower block

00:25:05.920 meant to house people,

00:25:07.940 you know,

00:25:08.120 the grand system

00:25:09.000 for accommodating citizens

00:25:10.620 that had already turned 0.94

00:25:12.520 into a total shithole. 0.99

00:25:14.340 He just found it 1.00

00:25:15.460 and filmed there.

00:25:16.620 Had Milton Keynes

00:25:17.740 been built by this point?

00:25:18.980 Because Milton Keynes

00:25:19.940 is the perfect example

00:25:22.280 of a socialist government,

00:25:24.820 necessitated new town

00:25:28.600 for new British people

00:25:30.160 where it was supposed to be

00:25:31.760 a socialist idea

00:25:33.140 of a community

00:25:33.860 where everything

00:25:34.520 is perfectly ordered,

00:25:36.340 perfectly metered out

00:25:37.560 where you've got the town

00:25:38.680 spread into particular blocks

00:25:40.640 and ordered very,

00:25:41.740 very rationally

00:25:42.520 which has actually

00:25:44.180 flipped the opposite way

00:25:45.440 and is now just a place

00:25:46.660 where big brand consumer stores

00:25:49.060 hawk their wares

00:25:50.580 and nobody spends any time

00:25:52.360 with anybody

00:25:53.020 because it's the perfect

00:25:53.900 drivable city

00:25:54.800 so you get no foot traffic

00:25:57.060 so nobody speaks

00:25:58.400 to each other

00:25:58.960 and everybody is

00:25:59.920 completely atomised

00:26:00.880 and isolated

00:26:01.440 from one another.

00:26:02.820 So there's a lot

00:26:03.820 of examples

00:26:04.460 of government planning

00:26:05.660 of the 60s and 70s

00:26:07.660 going in that direction.

00:26:09.220 So you're right,

00:26:09.620 Kubrick was,

00:26:10.740 I mean,

00:26:11.020 he was living in Britain

00:26:11.820 by this point.

00:26:12.640 He was living

00:26:13.020 in a manor estate,

00:26:15.440 was it,

00:26:15.680 near London?

00:26:16.320 So at this time

00:26:17.160 he had moved

00:26:18.240 to Abbotsmead

00:26:19.240 which was a lovely

00:26:20.680 sort of closer place.

00:26:21.660 He would,

00:26:22.700 in 1980,

00:26:24.060 he would relocate

00:26:25.020 to an even more remote place

00:26:27.360 with greater privacy barriers

00:26:29.720 via massive hedges.

00:26:31.160 A man after my own heart.

00:26:32.860 Oh, it's wonderful.

00:26:34.000 It's wonderful.

00:26:34.500 He just made,

00:26:34.980 he just made Abbotsmead

00:26:36.300 his domain.

00:26:38.280 Luckily,

00:26:38.920 Christiane,

00:26:39.520 his wife,

00:26:40.020 was strong-willed enough

00:26:41.260 to say,

00:26:41.600 no, Stanley,

00:26:42.400 you cannot take over

00:26:43.180 the entire house.

00:26:45.000 But, you know,

00:26:46.180 he, 0.88

00:26:46.540 he worked ridiculous hours. 0.70

00:26:48.520 He wanted to be there

00:26:49.300 for his family as well

00:26:50.240 so it made sense

00:26:50.980 that he just cuts out

00:26:51.880 any travelling

00:26:52.480 that he doesn't have to do

00:26:53.740 and lets him do

00:26:54.900 as much from home

00:26:55.780 as possible.

00:26:56.500 That will become

00:26:57.200 important in my reading

00:26:58.700 of Eyes Wide Shut.

00:26:59.880 Ooh.

00:27:00.600 A bit of foreshadowing.

00:27:02.200 Ooh.

00:27:02.980 I'm looking forward to that.

00:27:03.660 Yeah, I'm looking forward to that.

00:27:05.160 To carry on.

00:27:06.420 I was,

00:27:06.760 I was just going to finish

00:27:08.240 and say that,

00:27:08.780 yeah,

00:27:09.100 so Stanley Kubrick

00:27:09.900 in that situation,

00:27:11.620 all he really needed to do

00:27:13.160 was travel outside

00:27:14.160 of his little

00:27:15.040 hidey hole

00:27:16.340 that he had made

00:27:16.940 for himself

00:27:17.480 and see what Britain

00:27:18.680 was looking like

00:27:19.700 at the time

00:27:20.220 for inspiration,

00:27:21.360 for the aesthetics.

00:27:22.380 Oh, totally.

00:27:23.580 And you'd already

00:27:24.280 had works like

00:27:25.100 J.G. Ballard's

00:27:26.080 High Rise

00:27:26.600 which were way

00:27:27.940 ahead of the game

00:27:28.580 and just basically

00:27:29.880 charting how

00:27:31.000 a massive complex

00:27:32.440 like a High Rise

00:27:33.240 would turn people

00:27:34.180 into savages.

00:27:35.560 I've seen

00:27:36.120 Ben Wheatley's

00:27:37.440 2015 film adaptation

00:27:39.000 of that

00:27:39.560 which is

00:27:40.380 interesting.

00:27:42.420 Book is better.

00:27:43.180 Book is better.

00:27:43.880 And that's...

00:27:44.540 You should watch

00:27:45.040 Kill List though.

00:27:46.220 You should absolutely

00:27:47.120 watch Kill List.

00:27:48.280 Very Kubrickian.

00:27:49.680 Yes, I agree there.

00:27:50.760 And, you know,

00:27:53.380 that's even without

00:27:54.180 the complexity

00:27:54.880 of only putting

00:27:55.980 English people

00:27:57.140 in the high rises.

00:27:59.020 But, as we're saying,

00:28:01.040 Stanley's talking

00:28:01.660 about that aspect

00:28:02.460 of failed planning.

00:28:04.380 But I think

00:28:04.860 he is an extremely

00:28:06.240 well-read man.

00:28:07.220 Like, we've come

00:28:07.640 across that so much.

00:28:08.760 How much research

00:28:09.840 he does before

00:28:10.480 he goes for something.

00:28:12.540 He absolutely knew

00:28:14.020 about a lot

00:28:14.880 going on at that time

00:28:15.960 to make sure

00:28:16.960 messages were

00:28:18.080 conveyed to the public

00:28:19.100 via the soaps,

00:28:21.080 via films.

00:28:22.660 Eddie Benet's

00:28:23.320 already had a number

00:28:24.260 of published works

00:28:25.160 explaining exactly

00:28:26.380 step-by-step

00:28:27.160 how to do that.

00:28:28.680 Oh, yeah.

00:28:29.220 And you'll know,

00:28:29.920 like, put this

00:28:30.860 in your movie.

00:28:31.740 Put this small thing

00:28:33.100 in your movie.

00:28:34.620 It won't affect

00:28:35.320 your plot,

00:28:35.840 but we just need

00:28:36.480 people to be aware

00:28:37.520 of this.

00:28:37.980 We need to see

00:28:38.540 women smoking,

00:28:39.560 for example.

00:28:41.100 We need...

00:28:42.620 Or...

00:28:43.300 Oh, let's jump

00:28:44.200 forward a few decades.

00:28:45.260 In the 80s,

00:28:46.180 enjoy your black 0.54

00:28:48.220 best friend 0.61

00:28:48.900 in every single

00:28:50.740 summer blockbuster.

00:28:53.440 It's just that kind

00:28:54.580 of pair up

00:28:55.180 that's just put in there.

00:28:56.020 Or by the 80s as well.

00:28:56.500 Women can be 1.00

00:28:57.320 action heroes too now

00:28:58.800 when you get to

00:28:59.420 Aliens.

00:29:00.200 Yeah, yeah.

00:29:00.720 And the Terminator

00:29:02.000 franchise as well.

00:29:02.680 79, wasn't it?

00:29:03.840 Yeah.

00:29:04.500 Going into it.

00:29:05.380 Best one.

00:29:06.180 Alien, but in Alien

00:29:07.380 she's more

00:29:08.240 necessitated by circumstance.

00:29:11.300 And that's a horror film

00:29:12.900 as well,

00:29:13.300 so it's kind of more

00:29:13.920 like a trope

00:29:14.580 of the last girl.

00:29:16.080 Whereas when you get

00:29:17.060 to Aliens,

00:29:18.220 she is badass 1.00

00:29:19.900 James Cameron

00:29:21.140 action hero

00:29:22.040 and she's got

00:29:22.560 the mech suit

00:29:23.280 at the end

00:29:23.740 when she's fighting

00:29:24.260 the alien queen.

00:29:25.460 At least it makes

00:29:26.040 a bit more sense

00:29:26.800 because Aliens

00:29:27.580 is a good film.

00:29:28.420 Well, they knew

00:29:29.420 better how to do it

00:29:30.500 back then.

00:29:31.320 This is...

00:29:32.200 You know,

00:29:32.720 I say,

00:29:33.260 I say,

00:29:33.840 how do we do it?

00:29:34.580 And they say,

00:29:35.020 we can't do it now.

00:29:36.100 We don't know how.

00:29:38.800 So, yeah.

00:29:40.880 Stanley, I think,

00:29:41.780 is very clearly talking.

00:29:43.540 The Ludovico technique

00:29:44.780 isn't some terrifying

00:29:46.220 feature thing.

00:29:47.580 It's happening now.

00:29:48.480 Like, he's probably aware of...

00:29:50.100 And I know this sounds CIA,

00:29:51.680 but CIA operations...

00:29:53.480 Sorry,

00:29:53.800 it sounds tinfoil.

00:29:55.100 Well, this wasn't even

00:29:55.940 something...

00:29:56.620 It was happening.

00:29:57.380 The Ludovico technique

00:29:58.420 basically was something

00:29:59.540 that had already been

00:30:00.280 going on since the 50s.

00:30:01.520 Anyway,

00:30:01.880 in my research

00:30:03.140 for another video series,

00:30:05.100 when you look at

00:30:05.820 the asylums 1.00

00:30:06.700 that people were put into

00:30:09.120 of deviant sexuality

00:30:10.860 and they were exposed to...

00:30:13.220 I'm sure Josh probably

00:30:14.020 knows about this,

00:30:14.520 aversion therapy

00:30:15.480 where they were fed

00:30:16.640 particular drug cocktails

00:30:17.980 to induce nausea in them

00:30:19.500 while they're being...

00:30:19.960 So, it's a real...

00:30:21.080 The Ludovico technique

00:30:22.400 is a real thing,

00:30:23.240 yeah, as you're saying.

00:30:24.480 They're subject

00:30:25.480 to particular stimuli

00:30:26.560 while being made

00:30:27.520 to feel terribly nauseous

00:30:29.420 and actually vomiting

00:30:30.980 and defecating

00:30:32.500 all over themselves 0.89

00:30:33.380 in the hopes

00:30:34.540 that it would produce

00:30:36.060 those same effects

00:30:37.200 if they experienced

00:30:38.240 that stimuli

00:30:38.900 out in the world. 0.91

00:30:39.840 So, say somebody's gay, 0.85

00:30:41.480 you want to make it 0.59

00:30:42.640 so if they have

00:30:43.380 any sexual attraction

00:30:44.220 to other men

00:30:44.960 out in the world

00:30:46.140 that they also feel

00:30:47.160 nauseous and sick

00:30:48.680 like they're going to die

00:30:49.720 so they don't engage

00:30:50.960 in that kind of behaviour.

00:30:52.300 That had been going on

00:30:53.140 in asylums in America 0.99

00:30:54.420 at least since the 50s

00:30:55.960 and even had been happening

00:30:57.500 in England as well.

00:30:59.140 I found some examples

00:30:59.960 where it happened

00:31:00.520 in a hospital in Chester.

00:31:02.320 Well, the understanding

00:31:03.100 is that it's conditioning

00:31:04.380 and of course

00:31:04.920 behavioural psychology

00:31:06.020 sort of kicked off

00:31:07.660 in the 40s

00:31:09.980 and 50s really

00:31:11.040 the post-war

00:31:12.440 if you will

00:31:13.140 but by the 1960s

00:31:15.320 you had the cognitive

00:31:16.000 revolution as well

00:31:16.920 and so by the 70s

00:31:19.860 there were already

00:31:20.300 lots of criticisms

00:31:21.740 of behaviourism

00:31:23.440 and so Kubrick

00:31:24.600 would have seen

00:31:25.220 a plethora of them

00:31:26.660 because it was

00:31:28.260 sort of the in thing

00:31:29.480 to insult

00:31:30.960 the behaviourist

00:31:31.940 understanding

00:31:32.580 of human psychology

00:31:34.200 so you could have

00:31:35.100 a reading of it

00:31:35.800 whereby Kubrick

00:31:37.320 is siding with

00:31:38.080 this new approach

00:31:39.720 of shaping humanity

00:31:41.840 perhaps

00:31:42.160 but I don't think

00:31:42.820 that's necessarily

00:31:43.740 what's going on.

00:31:44.480 I think what he's

00:31:45.480 doing is showing

00:31:46.580 the inhuman brutality

00:31:48.480 of it

00:31:49.200 because it does

00:31:50.200 raise the question

00:31:51.120 of are these scientists

00:31:54.660 just because they

00:31:55.680 dress it up

00:31:56.420 in a veneer

00:31:57.060 of respectability

00:31:57.920 because they've got

00:31:58.500 their white lab coats on

00:32:00.320 are they any less brutal

00:32:02.520 than Alex is

00:32:04.140 they've just abstracted

00:32:05.660 the violence out

00:32:06.700 a few steps

00:32:08.080 whereas Alex does it

00:32:09.340 in person

00:32:10.320 and beats people 0.99

00:32:11.880 to death

00:32:12.460 they force people

00:32:14.660 into a feeling

00:32:15.540 of constant

00:32:17.540 half death

00:32:18.540 to the point

00:32:18.980 where they feel 0.99

00:32:19.460 they need to kill 0.99

00:32:20.060 themselves. 1.00

00:32:20.680 Well they're

00:32:21.220 torturing him

00:32:21.940 fundamentally

00:32:22.500 aren't they

00:32:23.040 and just because

00:32:25.080 their ends are

00:32:25.900 supposedly to

00:32:26.780 rehabilitate a criminal

00:32:28.100 you could even argue

00:32:29.540 that that's even

00:32:30.580 as much antisocial

00:32:32.620 as anything else

00:32:33.900 because of course

00:32:34.720 I quite like

00:32:37.400 I'm not sure

00:32:38.280 if he's a prison warden

00:32:39.420 or he's basically

00:32:40.560 he argues

00:32:41.840 that the point

00:32:42.960 I think he might be

00:32:44.000 the priest maybe

00:32:45.440 not the priest

00:32:46.560 the guy who's running

00:32:48.000 the prison

00:32:48.460 he's just like

00:32:49.040 yeah punishment

00:32:49.560 should be

00:32:50.680 for punishment's sake

00:32:52.540 that you get it

00:32:53.640 because you deserve it

00:32:54.660 which is true

00:32:55.100 I must say as well

00:32:56.560 just on the point of him

00:32:57.900 Kubrick's films

00:32:59.820 there's a few modes

00:33:01.640 of Kubrick's films

00:33:02.800 and some of them

00:33:03.580 drift into

00:33:04.800 overt

00:33:05.900 over the top

00:33:06.720 satire

00:33:07.480 and this is definitely

00:33:08.800 one of them

00:33:09.680 because when you get

00:33:11.020 to that character

00:33:11.980 he feels like

00:33:12.980 he's straight out

00:33:13.760 of a python film

00:33:14.720 oh as in the actual

00:33:15.900 prison warden

00:33:17.040 rather than the governor

00:33:18.180 but the two

00:33:19.540 certainly interact

00:33:20.560 with one another

00:33:21.100 don't they

00:33:21.480 oh yeah

00:33:21.760 I got them mixed up

00:33:23.220 who you were referring to

00:33:24.420 but the prison warden

00:33:25.880 who screams and shouts

00:33:27.160 at the top of his voice

00:33:28.360 in the most

00:33:29.960 aggressive way possible

00:33:31.320 he felt straight

00:33:32.540 it felt like

00:33:33.280 John Cleese

00:33:33.820 should have been

00:33:34.280 playing him

00:33:34.820 I very much got that

00:33:36.300 and I actually

00:33:37.280 pointed it out

00:33:38.160 as I was watching it

00:33:39.440 and also

00:33:40.000 did you notice

00:33:41.400 that it's obviously

00:33:42.700 trying to be very martial

00:33:44.060 and then you see

00:33:44.820 Alex has a red

00:33:46.080 armband on

00:33:47.020 I did notice

00:33:47.580 when they were singing

00:33:48.320 through their hymns

00:33:49.320 very very clear

00:33:50.860 in the frame

00:33:51.460 I wasn't entirely sure

00:33:54.580 what Kubrick was trying

00:33:55.380 to get at there

00:33:56.280 so I don't know

00:33:58.000 whether either of you

00:33:58.840 have an explanation

00:33:59.700 for why

00:34:00.360 bringing in

00:34:01.940 the Nazi aspect

00:34:03.140 I think he was using

00:34:04.540 very clear

00:34:06.020 and familiar

00:34:06.720 imagery

00:34:07.680 that we

00:34:08.780 already by that point

00:34:10.340 associated with

00:34:11.880 authoritarian

00:34:12.760 top down

00:34:13.640 totalitarian governments

00:34:14.760 to draw that

00:34:15.960 to draw that

00:34:17.120 comparison

00:34:17.620 from the audience

00:34:18.340 I think that's

00:34:19.300 what he was doing

00:34:19.880 there

00:34:20.100 but at the same time

00:34:22.620 the government

00:34:23.840 presents to him

00:34:25.680 images of the

00:34:26.640 Nazi regime

00:34:27.640 whilst they're

00:34:28.760 torturing him

00:34:29.660 to draw some kind

00:34:31.300 of negative

00:34:32.240 emotional reaction

00:34:33.360 from them

00:34:34.000 so interestingly

00:34:35.000 enough

00:34:35.440 we are shown

00:34:36.520 that this regime

00:34:37.620 totalitarian

00:34:39.160 authoritarian

00:34:40.000 as it may be

00:34:40.980 is explicitly

00:34:42.040 anti-fascist

00:34:43.000 as well

00:34:43.420 so perhaps

00:34:44.720 he's drawing

00:34:45.420 a comparison

00:34:46.120 saying

00:34:46.560 well

00:34:47.500 really

00:34:48.420 they're both

00:34:49.020 just using

00:34:49.820 imagery of their

00:34:51.060 enemies

00:34:51.660 to make you

00:34:52.660 hate their

00:34:53.000 enemies

00:34:53.360 while there's

00:34:54.340 more that

00:34:55.020 connects them

00:34:55.660 than separates

00:34:56.280 them

00:34:56.580 I can see

00:34:57.620 that yeah

00:34:58.100 yeah

00:34:59.620 I was going

00:35:00.580 to raise that

00:35:01.180 as well

00:35:01.440 the use

00:35:02.140 of World War

00:35:02.740 Two footage

00:35:03.420 to condition

00:35:04.380 behaviour

00:35:04.920 I think

00:35:05.380 is an

00:35:06.920 indicator

00:35:07.440 of I guess

00:35:08.560 the cynicism

00:35:09.300 of the regime

00:35:10.100 again

00:35:10.800 what's interesting

00:35:12.000 as well

00:35:12.440 is Kubrick

00:35:13.000 being Jewish

00:35:14.560 using that

00:35:15.520 I read a

00:35:16.260 really interesting

00:35:17.040 anecdote

00:35:17.560 from this

00:35:19.000 where at the

00:35:20.020 end when he's

00:35:20.640 the author's

00:35:21.300 talking about

00:35:21.760 his personal

00:35:22.260 experience

00:35:22.940 with Kubrick

00:35:24.460 he said

00:35:25.280 that around

00:35:26.860 the time

00:35:27.540 of Doctor

00:35:28.500 Strangelove

00:35:29.220 Albert Speer

00:35:30.280 had been

00:35:31.500 released from

00:35:32.200 prison

00:35:32.520 and also

00:35:33.080 had released

00:35:33.640 his memoirs

00:35:34.520 inside the

00:35:35.220 Third Reich 0.89

00:35:35.840 and so he

00:35:36.720 recommended Kubrick

00:35:37.860 read them

00:35:38.540 so that he

00:35:39.440 would be able

00:35:40.000 to get an

00:35:40.460 idea of the

00:35:41.680 kind of

00:35:41.960 political dynamics

00:35:42.960 that go on

00:35:43.760 within these

00:35:44.380 regimes and

00:35:45.140 these administrations

00:35:46.380 and he even

00:35:48.060 suggested that

00:35:49.120 Albert Speer

00:35:49.840 maybe be brought

00:35:50.760 onto the film

00:35:51.620 as a set

00:35:53.680 designer

00:35:54.160 and apparently

00:35:55.600 Kubrick was

00:35:56.660 actually really

00:35:57.260 into the idea

00:35:58.120 but thought that

00:35:59.040 he would be too

00:35:59.580 expensive

00:36:00.080 so decided

00:36:00.940 against it

00:36:01.600 so that's the

00:36:03.220 only reason

00:36:04.000 that Kubrick

00:36:04.980 didn't have

00:36:05.460 Albert Speer

00:36:06.700 the architect

00:36:08.020 and later

00:36:08.940 head of munitions

00:36:10.640 for the Third

00:36:11.540 Reich

00:36:12.020 on the set

00:36:13.400 of Doctor

00:36:13.740 Strangelove

00:36:14.540 well you know

00:36:15.900 Ken Adams

00:36:16.520 who did the

00:36:17.260 set design

00:36:17.840 for Strangelove

00:36:18.760 it's basically

00:36:19.920 stormed off

00:36:20.760 no that's

00:36:22.020 unfair

00:36:22.280 dropped out

00:36:23.860 of Barry

00:36:24.260 Lyndon

00:36:24.640 basically

00:36:25.080 had a bit

00:36:25.540 of a breakdown

00:36:26.200 so that

00:36:28.000 opportunity

00:36:28.540 was there

00:36:29.220 it was there

00:36:30.020 we could have

00:36:30.820 had the legendary 0.65

00:36:31.860 Kubrick

00:36:32.660 Speer

00:36:33.380 collaboration

00:36:34.360 but it was

00:36:36.120 just too

00:36:36.700 expensive

00:36:37.220 it was just

00:36:37.860 it was just

00:36:38.640 being a bit

00:36:39.200 too penny

00:36:40.300 pinching

00:36:41.120 ironically

00:36:41.680 enough

00:36:42.160 there's a

00:36:44.020 wonderful poetry

00:36:45.040 to that

00:36:45.580 anecdote

00:36:46.080 isn't there

00:36:46.600 there really

00:36:47.460 you know

00:36:47.920 I was going

00:36:48.300 to add to

00:36:48.700 that while

00:36:49.200 we're talking

00:36:49.660 in that area

00:36:50.340 in oh

00:36:52.380 gosh

00:36:52.880 hang on

00:36:53.900 oh no

00:36:54.240 that was

00:36:54.500 1976

00:36:55.340 okay

00:36:56.020 he was

00:36:57.960 considering

00:36:58.740 a film

00:37:00.000 set around

00:37:01.320 a filmmaker

00:37:02.720 working for

00:37:03.680 Goebbels

00:37:04.180 really

00:37:05.480 yeah

00:37:05.980 well I mean

00:37:06.360 there were

00:37:06.580 a few

00:37:07.080 because obviously

00:37:07.720 he was head

00:37:08.020 of propaganda

00:37:08.720 so there is

00:37:09.680 that

00:37:09.960 he wanted

00:37:11.000 to make

00:37:11.460 that film

00:37:11.860 that was

00:37:12.220 his way

00:37:12.700 into covering

00:37:13.260 World War II

00:37:13.880 for a while

00:37:14.360 he was thinking

00:37:14.740 can I do

00:37:15.220 this

00:37:15.560 and then

00:37:16.380 it's really

00:37:17.080 interesting

00:37:17.580 that he

00:37:18.860 sort of

00:37:19.260 skips from 0.99

00:37:19.780 around that

00:37:20.800 time

00:37:21.360 that I

00:37:21.920 can't be

00:37:22.380 certain

00:37:22.780 from my

00:37:23.520 research

00:37:23.940 that he

00:37:25.340 may have

00:37:26.120 you know

00:37:26.580 gone from

00:37:27.720 that to

00:37:28.240 Clockwork

00:37:28.740 Orange

00:37:29.040 or from

00:37:29.580 Clockwork

00:37:30.000 Orange

00:37:30.300 to that

00:37:30.840 I mean

00:37:31.220 given

00:37:32.220 from Doctor

00:37:32.900 Stranger

00:37:33.300 we

00:37:33.680 I don't

00:37:34.580 feel he's

00:37:35.120 partisan

00:37:35.560 he sees

00:37:37.460 shenanigans

00:37:38.040 in the US

00:37:38.660 shenanigans

00:37:39.280 with the

00:37:39.760 Soviets 0.97

00:37:40.060 I think

00:37:41.240 I think

00:37:42.020 there is

00:37:42.380 probably

00:37:42.860 as Josh

00:37:43.420 is suggesting

00:37:44.040 something

00:37:44.500 of a more

00:37:45.260 principled

00:37:46.600 obviously he

00:37:47.800 kept his

00:37:48.200 political views

00:37:49.000 close to his

00:37:49.660 chest

00:37:49.960 but there is

00:37:50.380 something

00:37:50.640 potentially

00:37:51.300 a more

00:37:51.720 principled

00:37:52.300 libertarian

00:37:53.440 style outlook

00:37:54.220 where he's

00:37:54.740 just seeing

00:37:55.460 these

00:37:55.960 states

00:37:57.040 each as

00:37:57.700 monolithic

00:37:58.540 sources of

00:37:59.300 power

00:37:59.680 that are

00:38:00.300 in for

00:38:00.980 power

00:38:01.260 for its

00:38:01.640 own

00:38:01.880 sake

00:38:02.280 rather than

00:38:03.640 being driven

00:38:04.260 purely by

00:38:05.240 ideology

00:38:05.880 as you

00:38:06.340 mentioned

00:38:06.600 the ideology

00:38:07.560 comes second

00:38:08.440 so I

00:38:09.240 think he

00:38:09.680 is able

00:38:10.120 to

00:38:10.540 distance

00:38:11.580 himself

00:38:12.200 somewhat

00:38:12.760 when he's

00:38:13.460 examining

00:38:13.840 these subjects

00:38:14.480 in his

00:38:14.820 films

00:38:15.140 yeah

00:38:16.040 if you

00:38:16.540 read

00:38:16.880 if you

00:38:18.320 read

00:38:18.580 say

00:38:18.820 Michael

00:38:19.260 Michael

00:38:20.220 Hare's

00:38:20.760 book

00:38:21.060 which is

00:38:21.640 just

00:38:21.820 effectively

00:38:22.520 a

00:38:23.020 reprint

00:38:23.860 of a

00:38:24.340 sort of

00:38:26.880 what's the

00:38:27.260 word I'm

00:38:27.520 looking for

00:38:27.920 a memorial

00:38:28.540 article

00:38:29.280 about

00:38:30.200 Kubrick

00:38:30.640 for

00:38:30.960 Bloomsbury

00:38:31.580 I may be

00:38:33.200 getting that

00:38:33.600 wrong

00:38:33.840 the book

00:38:34.580 is just

00:38:34.860 called

00:38:35.080 Kubrick

00:38:35.520 it's very

00:38:35.960 short

00:38:36.340 it's about

00:38:36.780 70 pages

00:38:37.580 or

00:38:38.520 Nathan

00:38:40.500 Abrams

00:38:41.220 and

00:38:41.940 Colker's

00:38:43.060 Kubrick

00:38:43.580 and Odyssey

00:38:44.180 you will

00:38:45.680 get a

00:38:46.100 vision of

00:38:47.060 Kubrick

00:38:47.700 that's

00:38:48.380 sort of

00:38:48.880 intensely

00:38:49.420 Jewish

00:38:49.860 and very

00:38:50.480 identified

00:38:51.140 with being

00:38:51.800 Jewish

00:38:52.200 that doesn't 0.65

00:38:53.860 show up

00:38:54.260 in any

00:38:54.660 of the

00:38:54.900 other

00:38:55.060 books

00:38:55.540 I

00:38:55.980 also

00:38:56.580 really

00:38:57.100 do not

00:38:57.760 get that

00:38:58.180 impression

00:38:58.600 from his

00:38:59.120 films

00:38:59.500 like I've

00:39:00.460 specifically

00:39:00.940 paid attention

00:39:01.680 to it

00:39:02.420 and

00:39:02.820 re-watching

00:39:04.160 it all

00:39:04.440 recently

00:39:04.880 and I've

00:39:05.720 just not

00:39:06.080 really seen

00:39:06.600 very much

00:39:07.100 of it

00:39:07.400 I hear

00:39:08.500 about it

00:39:09.040 in his

00:39:09.500 views on

00:39:10.000 contracts

00:39:10.560 but other

00:39:10.960 than that

00:39:11.540 I don't

00:39:13.700 really see

00:39:14.200 it that

00:39:14.480 much

00:39:14.840 perhaps it

00:39:16.440 did come

00:39:16.800 across more

00:39:17.480 in his

00:39:17.780 interpersonal

00:39:18.400 dealings

00:39:19.920 with people

00:39:20.400 just because

00:39:20.940 of course

00:39:21.340 in the same

00:39:22.860 way that

00:39:23.220 there's a

00:39:23.560 typical

00:39:23.900 Anglo

00:39:24.400 style of

00:39:25.080 behaviour

00:39:25.420 there is

00:39:25.860 a typical

00:39:26.300 more

00:39:27.020 Jewish

00:39:27.360 style

00:39:27.780 of behaviour

00:39:28.300 in the

00:39:28.640 way that

00:39:28.960 they talk

00:39:29.540 to one

00:39:29.840 another

00:39:30.100 and talk

00:39:30.440 to other

00:39:30.680 people

00:39:30.980 I mean

00:39:31.200 you just

00:39:31.460 watch

00:39:31.660 Seinfeld

00:39:32.260 and you

00:39:32.880 get a

00:39:33.140 good

00:39:33.260 example

00:39:33.640 of that

00:39:34.120 Curb Your

00:39:34.460 Enthusiasm

00:39:35.020 is great

00:39:35.400 for that

00:39:35.700 as well

00:39:35.980 Larry David

00:39:36.960 puts it

00:39:37.780 front and

00:39:38.180 centre

00:39:38.500 and it

00:39:39.540 allows

00:39:41.000 Gentiles to

00:39:43.180 be able to

00:39:43.440 talk about

00:39:43.920 it as well

00:39:44.300 in doing

00:39:44.960 so

00:39:45.280 I think

00:39:46.800 with Kubrick's

00:39:47.400 films the

00:39:47.660 only one

00:39:48.220 that I get

00:39:48.600 any sort

00:39:49.060 of overt

00:39:49.900 you could

00:39:51.040 say

00:39:51.360 Jewish

00:39:52.240 themes

00:39:52.760 coming

00:39:53.100 through

00:39:53.460 is in

00:39:54.160 Spartacus

00:39:54.920 and that's

00:39:55.360 mainly

00:39:55.880 because

00:39:56.320 of the

00:39:57.000 fact that

00:39:58.900 it was

00:39:59.060 mainly

00:39:59.500 being

00:40:00.100 coordinated

00:40:00.740 by Kirk

00:40:01.540 Douglas

00:40:01.880 who was

00:40:02.760 doing it

00:40:03.160 for his

00:40:03.460 own

00:40:03.640 personal

00:40:04.200 communist

00:40:04.980 reasons

00:40:05.500 as we

00:40:05.820 discussed

00:40:06.260 in our

00:40:06.640 first

00:40:07.200 discussion

00:40:07.740 on Kubrick

00:40:08.320 yeah

00:40:08.580 absolutely

00:40:09.560 so I

00:40:10.240 think

00:40:10.580 trying to

00:40:11.560 remember

00:40:11.800 how we

00:40:12.060 got onto

00:40:12.480 this

00:40:12.680 tangent

00:40:13.060 but

00:40:13.900 I think

00:40:15.700 that vision

00:40:16.480 of him

00:40:16.820 as committed

00:40:17.440 to that

00:40:17.900 as being

00:40:18.240 partisan

00:40:18.780 to that

00:40:19.300 as well

00:40:19.680 I feel

00:40:20.140 is more

00:40:20.640 the author's

00:40:22.680 obsessions

00:40:23.240 than Kubrick's

00:40:24.740 because

00:40:25.040 he was not

00:40:26.140 obviously

00:40:26.700 partisan

00:40:27.220 politically

00:40:27.760 he was not

00:40:28.460 obviously

00:40:28.940 partisan

00:40:29.500 in where

00:40:30.320 he chose

00:40:30.760 to live

00:40:31.320 and

00:40:32.440 he just

00:40:34.060 seems like

00:40:34.500 a guy

00:40:34.720 who really

00:40:35.220 is on

00:40:35.840 his own

00:40:36.580 he's a

00:40:37.540 very

00:40:37.740 individualistic

00:40:39.040 person

00:40:39.520 obviously

00:40:39.920 he's

00:40:40.240 family oriented

00:40:41.660 and that

00:40:42.080 isn't

00:40:42.800 separate

00:40:43.240 to being

00:40:43.680 individualistic

00:40:44.780 but he

00:40:45.100 seems to

00:40:45.900 just one

00:40:48.000 of the

00:40:48.240 themes

00:40:48.480 that I

00:40:48.760 see running

00:40:49.240 through

00:40:49.500 his

00:40:49.800 films

00:40:50.560 is that

00:40:51.740 he

00:40:52.160 doesn't

00:40:52.980 seem

00:40:53.380 married

00:40:53.820 to any

00:40:54.520 one

00:40:54.860 group

00:40:55.200 of

00:40:55.440 people

00:40:55.820 he tries

00:40:56.620 to

00:40:57.280 follow

00:40:58.640 first

00:40:59.140 principles

00:40:59.740 as we've

00:41:01.040 been

00:41:01.240 alluding

00:41:01.620 to

00:41:01.860 previously

00:41:02.620 I think

00:41:04.460 if there

00:41:05.540 is one

00:41:06.040 overriding

00:41:07.060 theme

00:41:07.520 that comes

00:41:08.040 through

00:41:08.340 quite a

00:41:08.800 few

00:41:08.960 of his

00:41:09.180 films

00:41:09.500 it's

00:41:10.440 probably

00:41:10.800 some

00:41:11.220 of his

00:41:11.540 anti-war

00:41:12.680 themes

00:41:13.160 that come

00:41:14.160 from

00:41:14.480 Pats of

00:41:15.200 Glory

00:41:15.680 even

00:41:16.340 Spartacus

00:41:16.860 has a

00:41:17.120 bit of

00:41:17.400 them

00:41:17.580 Doctor

00:41:17.840 Strangelove

00:41:18.620 Full Metal

00:41:19.400 Jacket

00:41:19.960 that's

00:41:21.020 probably

00:41:21.680 the

00:41:22.340 one

00:41:23.240 primary

00:41:24.440 theme

00:41:24.900 that's

00:41:25.220 a big

00:41:25.720 through

00:41:25.980 line

00:41:26.200 through

00:41:26.360 his

00:41:26.500 career

00:41:26.860 but

00:41:28.300 that doesn't

00:41:28.980 have to

00:41:29.300 be

00:41:29.440 partisan

00:41:29.860 that can

00:41:31.560 just be

00:41:32.040 a

00:41:32.320 first

00:41:32.840 principle

00:41:33.200 kind of

00:41:33.500 thing

00:41:33.640 the

00:41:34.020 interesting

00:41:34.300 thing

00:41:34.520 with

00:41:34.640 Nathan

00:41:34.920 Abrams

00:41:35.380 as well

00:41:35.820 you bring

00:41:37.320 him up

00:41:37.800 is that

00:41:39.120 of course

00:41:39.760 he's going

00:41:40.200 to be the

00:41:40.560 one to

00:41:40.860 try and

00:41:41.300 put that

00:41:41.860 on him

00:41:42.240 in the

00:41:42.460 same way

00:41:42.840 that that

00:41:43.200 essay

00:41:43.640 that I

00:41:44.160 referenced

00:41:44.480 when we

00:41:44.740 spoke about

00:41:45.160 2001

00:41:45.760 tried to

00:41:46.760 make

00:41:47.080 Hal

00:41:47.600 about the

00:41:48.240 Holocaust 0.95

00:41:48.560 which was

00:41:49.280 an

00:41:49.960 incredible

00:41:50.700 reach

00:41:51.380 also

00:41:52.060 the

00:41:52.620 empty

00:41:53.040 space

00:41:53.660 the

00:41:53.960 blackness 0.86

00:41:54.520 of

00:41:54.700 space

00:41:55.240 apparently

00:41:56.260 featuring

00:41:57.060 in a

00:41:57.400 film about

00:41:57.920 travelling

00:41:58.300 through

00:41:58.560 space

00:41:59.020 featuring

00:41:59.460 long

00:42:00.080 shots

00:42:01.000 of

00:42:01.540 the

00:42:01.940 emptiness

00:42:02.340 of

00:42:02.700 space

00:42:03.120 means

00:42:04.080 you're

00:42:04.360 writing

00:42:04.640 about

00:42:05.000 the

00:42:05.240 Holocaust 0.95

00:42:05.700 question

00:42:06.720 mark

00:42:07.100 very

00:42:07.720 strange

00:42:08.340 and very

00:42:08.860 tribal

00:42:09.760 ethnic

00:42:10.200 self-interest

00:42:10.840 kind of view

00:42:11.560 to take

00:42:11.900 on it

00:42:12.160 Abrams

00:42:13.220 seems very

00:42:13.720 similar to

00:42:14.180 that

00:42:14.400 because I've

00:42:15.080 read a little

00:42:15.640 bit of his

00:42:16.080 other work

00:42:16.680 he has an

00:42:17.380 essay that he

00:42:18.780 did for the

00:42:19.300 Jewish

00:42:19.620 Historical

00:42:20.140 Quarterly

00:42:20.800 Review

00:42:21.080 whatever it

00:42:21.560 is

00:42:22.080 a good few

00:42:22.720 years ago

00:42:23.200 now about

00:42:23.780 Jewish

00:42:24.920 overrepresentation

00:42:26.040 and involvement

00:42:26.760 in the

00:42:27.120 porn industry

00:42:27.800 from the

00:42:28.640 beginning

00:42:28.960 is actually

00:42:30.060 a very

00:42:30.400 interesting

00:42:30.860 essay

00:42:31.400 but he

00:42:32.240 seems very

00:42:32.900 obsessed with

00:42:33.820 his own

00:42:34.500 tribal

00:42:35.660 history

00:42:36.480 which is

00:42:37.180 of course

00:42:37.540 he has every

00:42:38.240 right to do

00:42:38.780 but he'll look

00:42:39.580 into something

00:42:40.080 like the

00:42:40.400 porn industry

00:42:40.880 and go

00:42:41.100 hey there are

00:42:41.760 a lot of us

00:42:42.180 here

00:42:42.460 and then he'll

00:42:43.160 go well

00:42:43.540 obviously it was

00:42:44.240 a good thing

00:42:44.720 then

00:42:44.940 so he has a

00:42:47.300 very very

00:42:47.860 self-interested

00:42:48.720 morality

00:42:49.120 which he's

00:42:50.260 trying to put

00:42:51.240 on Kubrick

00:42:51.900 which Kubrick

00:42:52.740 doesn't seem

00:42:53.260 to display

00:42:53.780 if you would

00:42:54.340 like to see

00:42:54.760 the full

00:42:55.140 version of

00:42:55.640 this premium

00:42:56.140 video

00:42:56.560 please head

00:42:57.160 over to

00:42:57.500 lotuseaters.com

00:42:58.480 and subscribe

00:42:59.240 to gain full

00:43:00.000 access to all

00:43:00.940 of our premium

00:43:01.660 content

PREVIEW： The Career of Stanley Kubrick： Part III

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript