It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What did Stanley Kubrik Know?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:31 AM
link   
I don't know how much you guys know about the film industry, but to make a long story short, a 'final print' is the reels of film that have been edited to a finished product. There is only one of them until the film makes it to duplication and gets distributed. On a major film, it is literally worth millions of dollars and is the ultimate culmination of the entire budget in a few metal cases. Stanley Kubrik was particularly careful with his final prints, often having motorcades and security ad nauseum to transport his final prints from place to place. Now that said, consider this...
While transporting the final print of 2001, Stanley Kubrik's train was stopped mid-route and boarded by federal agents, and spoke privately to Mr. Kubrik. He literally took a pair of siscors to his final print, cutting out a large amount of footage and handing it over to them. As to what scene was cut or who it was that wanted it removed, is one of many secrets Stanely Kubrik would take to his grave.




posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 05:27 AM
link   
Is that a fact?!?!

Hmmm... [/ makes you wonder...

Any backup to this story?

Some one was suggesting the recent upiter probe we ditched into the jovial atmosphere was infact an attempt to "nuke" it. HE had suggested the uranium batteried in the probe would become critical under the immese pressure of the Jupiter atmosphere.
This is when the guy mentions the fact that 2001 mentions jupiter as a "sun", now how would you trigger a hydrogen fusion reaction in a gas giant? YOU NUKE IT!
He then tell of plans to send another probe but this time with a bigger nuke/battery.
I must admit I have no clue as to the truth of this calim. I can't even remember what site i read this on..



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 05:33 AM
link   
While I do not believe that the moon shot was faked, I have often seen accusations that it was Stanley Kubrik that made the faked footage.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 05:40 AM
link   
Corthas - jupiter could not become a star regardless of what we do to it. We could detonate every single nuclear weapon that has or does exist at the core of jupiter at the same tme and it still wouldn't become a star.
Twitchy - Did ths episode actually happen? Do you have any evidence it did? Or is this just another rumor



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 03:53 PM
link   
To the best of my knowlege this story is accurate. I first heard about it on the set of my first film in a discussion with the director and some of the film crew. I went digging after that and found several references to the incident on the net and one of them mentioned a biography of Kubrick that describes the incident, but I just did a google search with several search terms and all I seem to be getting now is in regards to the Apolo program and the 17 minutes he cut after a screening. I will keep digging though to see if I can't pull it up from somewhere. If you guys find anything let me know!



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
I have never heard of anything like this before ! TBH if there was anything that the governement wanted cut out it could be something that could have been damaging to state during that time....I cant believe that he was carrying the filming of the landing, or the so called faked one. Shame that he never left a diary containing these secrets....



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Wasn't Arthur C. Clarke part of a group of writers hired by the government just to sit around and think of cool ideas? Anyone ever here of that?

If I'm not nuts, it's conceivable that Clarke used on of those ideas in Kubrick's film, and they government saw it as a security issue.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:07 PM
link   
As a bit of a film geek, I've heard a lot of the tall tales and myths regarding his productions. But I can't say I've ever heard of this one before.

Oh, and by the way, it's Kubrick, with c.


[edit on 28-10-2004 by rangeroftheeast]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
Wasn't Arthur C. Clarke part of a group of writers hired by the government just to sit around and think of cool ideas? Anyone ever here of that?


Well you could put it like that....

He worked on the research and development of radar during World War 2.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Corthas - jupiter could not become a star regardless of what we do to it. We could detonate every single nuclear weapon that has or does exist at the core of jupiter at the same tme and it still wouldn't become a star.
Twitchy - Did ths episode actually happen? Do you have any evidence it did? Or is this just another rumor


Tell this to the guy who wrote the article i had read, not me.

Irrelevant of the plausibility.. did A C Clarke mention Juptier was a sun in 2001 or not?



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 05:06 AM
link   
There had to be actors in those films, and gaffes and makeup , and techs and editors. He couldn't be the only one that knows what was in those cans.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Yeah, the editor would be the next step.

Also, an FOIA could be submitted to see if something could be turned up. I've never done one before, but I will be glad to help you in any way I can if you would like to follow-up on that.

Interesting topic! I'm going to enjoy following it!



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Did I read somewhere that Kubrick was bumped off because he sailed too close to the wind in Eyes Wide Shut, with respect to illuminati / Masonic rituals?

He died 5 days after the very first screening of the film.

Anyone else heard that story?



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 05:49 AM
link   
This is all I could find on the topic....
groups.google.com...




What about the twenty minutes >>censored



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 06:35 AM
link   
in order to trigger thermonuclear reactions within jupiter the planet would have to have at least ten times its current mass in order to have enough gravity to compress its gases enough for nuclear reactions to start. These people going on and on about the space probe with the nuke/battery really have to idea about how stars work.

As for stanley kubrick and the "eyes wide shut" i've only seen the last 15 mins of the movie so i cant comment.



posted on Oct, 29 2004 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Yes i accept the physics are not helping the jupiter/sun theory... again it wasn;t me that proposed this!
But does A C Clarke use the idea in his book 2001 , not nuking it to make it a sun but the "people" who made the monolith.. might have had the ideas to make it work. Anyway the question is: "In the book 2001 is jupiter a sun, Yes/No?"



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 06:15 AM
link   
I have been digging like crazy to find the references for the cut footage, and still nothing. It's frustrating because I know I read it on the net somewhere. AARRGGGH!
Here's some interesting google searches to tide the Kubrick Fans over while I'm digging...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...
www.google.com...



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by genuineninja
n order to trigger thermonuclear reactions within jupiter the planet would have to have at least ten times its current mass in order to have enough gravity to compress its gases enough for nuclear reactions to start. These people going on and on about the space probe with the nuke/battery really have to idea about how stars work.


Originally posted by Corinthas
Yes i accept the physics are not helping the jupiter/sun theory... again it wasn;t me that proposed this!
But does A C Clarke use the idea in his book 2001 , not nuking it to make it a sun but the "people" who made the monolith.. might have had the ideas to make it work. Anyway the question is: "In the book 2001 is jupiter a sun, Yes/No?"

1)Correct about the mass ratio needed to start and sustaine TNF, the battery is nothing more than a thermo-electric (peltier) warmer. We also ditched the probe to keep from contaminating the delicate moons, Jupitor swallows the probe and just gained a few elements from us.
2) The Lucifer incident happens in 2012, the second movie/book where the monoliths show up by the millions and create the "fiction" vortex that ignites Jove.

If I were to be concerned about anything, then the Monolith would be of interest. We find it on the moon, then discover one at Jupitor. But there is a twist, when you are watching the movie, notice the moon Mimas, distinguised by the large crater, Mimas is found at Saturn, OOPS!



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by curme
Wasn't Arthur C. Clarke part of a group of writers hired by the government just to sit around and think of cool ideas? Anyone ever here of that?


No... and niether has Sir Arthur Clarke heard of that. He's been writing scifi since Moses was a corporal and doesn't work for anyone except himself.


If I'm not nuts, it's conceivable that Clarke used on of those ideas in Kubrick's film, and they government saw it as a security issue.


It's an adaptation of a 1948 short story of Clarke's called "The Sentinel." If they was gonna whap it, it would have been suppressed LONG before then:
www.underview.com...


[edit on 31-10-2004 by Byrd]



posted on Oct, 31 2004 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Even though we have seen no evidence whatsoever that Kubrick really was forced to edit 2001 by the government, I will just prod the conspiracy gang in a somewhat plausible direction for fun.
We have generally come to agree that Kubrick did not blow the whistle on a government plot to set of a nuke on Jupiter, and it was a little late for the government to edit out Clarke's AC Clarke's knowledge of radar.

What could Kubrick possibly have had worth supressing -IF- there was any supression? Technique. Let us assume something which I actually believe is false, just for the sake of conspiracy theory; let's pretend that the government faked the moon landing. Although Kubrick obviously wasn't going in incorporate his fake moon footage into 2001, he might have used a similiar technique in 2001 which produced scenes where light, gravity, etc behaved in the way seen in our moon shots. If the deleted section of 2001 demonstrated that it was even remotely possible for the moon landing to have been filmed on earth, then the conspirators in a fake moon landing would want it out of public view.


As for Jupiter- i haven't seen 2001 so I dont know if it was supposed to be a sun in that movie or not. Out of morbid curiousity though... which planets, if any, would have liquid water if Jupiter was a small star?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join