3 ms·

So far ahead of his time. He really wanted to make a film on Napoleon. Though not officially related to his work, one got made last year to mixed reviews. And

So far ahead of his time. He really wanted to make a film on Napoleon. Though not officially related to his work, one got made last year to mixed reviews. And he started production on the movie "AI - Artificial Intelligence" after a short story from 1969. He handed it off to Steven Spielberg. /// Stanley Kubrick's Napoleon: The Greatest Movie Never Made - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018 https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018

CamperBob2 3y ago
The crazy thing is, we now have "Dr. Know" from AI, and nothing is really stopping us from building that bear. Nothing but battery life, I guess.
dragonwriter 3y ago
Lots of films have been made about Napoleon, many long before Kubrick (before he was born, even) and several while he was an active director, I don't how him wanting to do one and one recently being made makes him "ahead of his time".
- whycome 3y ago
  You're right. He had a vision for not just a movie, but something of a massive scale. That wasn't really the norm for a historical epic like this anymore. You're right that there are a bunch of films about Napoleon (https://www.vulture.com/article/napoleon-movies-history.html https://www.vulture.com/article/napoleon-movies-history.html) but nothing attempting the scale. The latest Napoleon was the first to attempt that scale ($200m). https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018 https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018 > Slated for production immediately following the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey , Kubrick’s "Napoleon" was to be at once a character study and a sweeping epic, replete with grandiose battle scenes featuring thousands of extras. To write his original screenplay, Kubrick embarked on two years of intensive research; with the help of dozens of assistants and an Oxford Napoleon specialist, he amassed an unparalleled trove of research and preproduction material , including approximately 15,000 location scouting photographs and 17,000 slides of Napoleonic imagery. No stone was left unturned in Kubrick's nearly-obsessive quest to uncover every piece of information history had to offer about Napoleon. But alas, Kubrick’s movie was not destined to the film studios, first M.G.M. and then United Artists, decided such an undertaking was too risky at a time when historical epics were out of fashion. He also backed off on AI because the scale/requirements. In my opinion he had the vision, but the tech and audiences just weren't ready. But maybe the same things might have been said about 2001.
  - pierrec 3y ago
    I would say Waterloo (1970) is very close to that never-made epic Napoleon film, though it only focuses on one event. The film employed an army of around 15000 extras and 2000 horses, remodeled the entire landscape required for the battle, including transplanting a forest, etc. The scope is certainly more narrow than an all-encompassing biopic, but is that a bad thing? To me, the direction and cinematography are good, but of course not Kubrick-level, because nothing is.
    - 0xDEADFED5 3y ago
      i watched that recently and though it was impressive in scale i couldn't stop thinking about all the horses that died during filming =/
  - flipthefrog 3y ago
    "A bunch of movies" you say. If you want to talk insane ambition and vision, technically groundbreaking and giant scale filmmaking that was so far ahead of its time it took decades to be recognised, Abel Gance's 1927 Napoleon fits the bill nicely.

CamperBob2 3y ago

The crazy thing is, we now have "Dr. Know" from AI, and nothing is really stopping us from building that bear. Nothing but battery life, I guess.

dragonwriter 3y ago

Lots of films have been made about Napoleon, many long before Kubrick (before he was born, even) and several while he was an active director, I don't how him wanting to do one and one recently being made makes him "ahead of his time".

whycome 3y ago
You're right. He had a vision for not just a movie, but something of a massive scale. That wasn't really the norm for a historical epic like this anymore. You're right that there are a bunch of films about Napoleon (https://www.vulture.com/article/napoleon-movies-history.html https://www.vulture.com/article/napoleon-movies-history.html) but nothing attempting the scale. The latest Napoleon was the first to attempt that scale ($200m). https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018 https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/9671018 > Slated for production immediately following the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey , Kubrick’s "Napoleon" was to be at once a character study and a sweeping epic, replete with grandiose battle scenes featuring thousands of extras. To write his original screenplay, Kubrick embarked on two years of intensive research; with the help of dozens of assistants and an Oxford Napoleon specialist, he amassed an unparalleled trove of research and preproduction material , including approximately 15,000 location scouting photographs and 17,000 slides of Napoleonic imagery. No stone was left unturned in Kubrick's nearly-obsessive quest to uncover every piece of information history had to offer about Napoleon. But alas, Kubrick’s movie was not destined to the film studios, first M.G.M. and then United Artists, decided such an undertaking was too risky at a time when historical epics were out of fashion. He also backed off on AI because the scale/requirements. In my opinion he had the vision, but the tech and audiences just weren't ready. But maybe the same things might have been said about 2001.
- pierrec 3y ago
  I would say Waterloo (1970) is very close to that never-made epic Napoleon film, though it only focuses on one event. The film employed an army of around 15000 extras and 2000 horses, remodeled the entire landscape required for the battle, including transplanting a forest, etc. The scope is certainly more narrow than an all-encompassing biopic, but is that a bad thing? To me, the direction and cinematography are good, but of course not Kubrick-level, because nothing is.
  - 0xDEADFED5 3y ago
    i watched that recently and though it was impressive in scale i couldn't stop thinking about all the horses that died during filming =/
- flipthefrog 3y ago
  "A bunch of movies" you say. If you want to talk insane ambition and vision, technically groundbreaking and giant scale filmmaking that was so far ahead of its time it took decades to be recognised, Abel Gance's 1927 Napoleon fits the bill nicely.