Wasn't there something about Spielberg wanting (*enter gasp of shock here*) Jake Lloyd to be in the film?

Personally, I'd rather him just hurry up doing whatever he's doing now, get Minority Report done and outta the way, then get cranking on Indy 4.

While I believe Speilberg is a good filmmaker and makes highly entertaining films, he is no Kubrick.

Speilberg's films are highly emotional, while Kubrick's film are about emotions (and sometimes the lack of emotions). Kubrick so often peels back the layers and just shows the emotions without comment, allowing the viewer to make their own conclusions.

Speilberg tends to throw a lot of things into films, while Kubrick veers toward simplicity, allowing no extraneous items to get in the way of what he is conveying in the film.

Kubrick used simplicity in his camera work and visual design. Just watch Kubrick create his images. The camera movement is kept to a minimum, as if to be the frame in which the canvas lies. (For an extreme at the opposite end, just look at Michael Bay films. The man just cannot keep his camera still.)

I think Kubrick was one of the very few living directors who was actually an artist first. I always felt that he was creating artworks with his films.

Speilberg, on the other hand is a major player/deal maker and does make good films, but his films do not qualify solely as art, like Kubrick did. (For an analysis of how Speilberg is handicapped by the business end of filmmaking, look at the last copy of Premiere magazine and the article describing how many decisions in Hollywood revolve around what Speilberg decides. The fact that he is so central and connected, and that so many other decisions rise and fall on what he decides to do is in my opinion, restrictive, not liberating. Artists cannot be restricted.)

I was also surprised by suddenly how "close" and "mentoring" Speilberg and Kubrick were. It was like these men had an extremely close relationship, yet no one was aware of it. Much of this comes out after Kubrick has passed on, so he can't confirm or deny it. (Of course, Speilberg doesn't tell us everyone he talks to, and Kubrick was quite the recluse.)

Much as I would like to see A.I. (after reading Brian Aldiss' short story), I would much more liked to have seen Kubrick's vision of it. Speilberg's vision will be radically different. Maybe this story and vision should have passed on with Kubrick.

dantoris: I haven't read anything about Jake Lloyd being in A.I. -- but I did read that he gave up the right to produce the first HARRY POTTER movie because he wanted Haley Joel Osment in the lead, and the author wanted a genuine English boy. They couldn't agree on that. I doubt Spielberg would consider hiring Jake Lloyd for anything, unless he felt he could coax a real performance out of the kid. And we know he is an excellent director of children, though Lloyd may already be too jaundiced to do anything with.

The film is a joint production between Warner Brothers and Dreamworks. I'm going to be most intrigued by this one, especially since it is the first script Spielberg has penned himself in a loooooooooooooong time.

Dan (UK)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nicolai P. Zwar:
I admit that I am actually looking forward much more to A.I than to INDY 4.

---

As for casting issues, Spielberg has Haley Joel Osmet and Jude Law, so I don't think we have anything to worry at the moment.

Regarding who will score the movie, am I the only one who sees either Carter Burwell or Michael Nyman (see Gattaca) for this as opposed to John Williams? To me anyway, this doesn't seem like a project that would fit his style...

NP Nothing, barely awake yet.

Wired magazine ran an article about Kubrick's attempts to make A.I. The articles is at:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.01/ffai.html

Wired also ran Brian Aldiss' short story "Super Toys Last All Summer Long" which Kubrick used as the basis for his adaption of A.I. The short story is only a couple of scenes long, and very poignant. While there was not enough in the short story for a full film, it did give a perfect jumping-off point for Kubrick to examine his usual theme of loss of humanity. See the story at:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.01/ffsupertoys.html

(Second post deleted)

NP: TESB, Special Edition

Schrader supposedly contributed what is always called the "religious" aspect of the images of CE3K's finale -- not having read any version of the script (unless you count the novelization, also hilariously credited to Spielberg -- and mind you, this is one of my favorite films), I can't say for sure what was kept and what was jettisoned.

Franklin J. Schaffner's LIONHEART (is that what you meant by "children's flic"?) was a noble attempt at -- what? I hope we'll find out someday. The Warner Home Video version is so abominable, we're not going to find out by watching THAT ... not until (fill in the blank) gets off (their collective butt) and shows us what Mr. Schaffner was trying to do in the first place. He was a master, and as I've asserted before: if he'd lived longer, he'd be batting in AT LEAST the same leagues as the equally great John Frankenheimer -- be it cable or big screen or whatever. I'd have welcomed it, as I do every single picture I'm fortunate to see from Mr. Frankenheimer.

As for JAWS:

Robert Shaw was a writer, yes, but he was NOT the fellow who created Quint's monologue. He DID contribute a monologue of such crazed, drunken miscellany that Spielberg, intimidated and appalled, let him go on for ten solid minutes, until the film ran out -- but it WAS Milius who wrote the final piece that we hear in the picture, and dictated its typing over the phone (this was about a dozen years before faxes became common)

And they both have/had a passion for including various "short stories" within the overall story arch (I just love that approach), which makes their movies bursting with details and worthy rewatchers.

First, I see Kubrick as a cold anti-romantic, Spielberg as a warm romantic---they've got practically opposing viewpoints when it comes to human nature. It could be as simple a difference as Spielberg being raised in California and Kubrick coming from New York City, but it's a distict difference in outlook.

Second, although Kubrick cared about box office, rarely did Kubrick's ideas tend towards the commercial. With Indy 4 and the Geisha bestseller and Harry Potter before Speilberg said no to it, I'm surprised this makes his agenda.

Of course, Kubrick may have entrusted enough of it to Spielberg so that Spielberg would be the only one who knew enough to do it, or perhaps it's an homage or sign of respect and friendship for the late director, but since when have those been reasons to green light a project in the cold world of Hollywood.

We'll just have to see.

Rocco--Peter Biskind's book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls has a lot of details on the making of Jaws. Spielberg is no where near the military history buff that Milius is and hadn't even heard of the Indianapolis before Milius told him the story of it.

NP: Amazing Stories: Dorothy and Ben (Georges Delerue)