Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Art and Cultural History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Art and Cultural History Art and Cultural History Forum - Music, Literature, Mythology, Visual Arts, Sports, Popular Culture


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 22nd, 2017, 09:18 AM   #1

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,573
Blog Entries: 6
Dr. Strangelove


Isn't it time to re-release Kubrick's masterwork, Dr. Strangelove?
larkin is offline  
Remove Ads
Old October 22nd, 2017, 09:54 AM   #2

Corvidius's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: Dinotopia
Posts: 964

Been on Blu-ray since 2012. Very good clean transfer as well, just like new.
Corvidius is offline  
Old October 23rd, 2017, 04:33 AM   #3

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,573
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corvidius View Post
Been on Blu-ray since 2012. Very good clean transfer as well, just like new.
Of course but we own it because we knew of its renown.
I meant released in Cinema in the remote possibility that some young people might be exposed to it.
The DVD market is so flooded with CGI junk.
larkin is offline  
Old October 23rd, 2017, 06:31 AM   #4

Corvidius's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Jul 2017
From: Dinotopia
Posts: 964

It would be great if this and a host of other films would be re-released to the cinema, but it would be for a niche audience and so not bring in the $$$.

Certainly films like this need to be exposed to a young audience in place of the mind numbing crap thrust in their faces, and I would go as far as say that such films should be shown in schools, and maybe some do this, but for the vast herd out there, just grass and nettles to browse on.
Corvidius is offline  
Old October 23rd, 2017, 11:23 AM   #5
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: uk
Posts: 1,627

If this film was rereleased at rhe cinema today it would bomb. Modern audiences wouldn't get it, and those who have seen it in the intervening 50 or so years would question the point of paying to watch it in the cinema when they have the film at home.

Some films NEED to be experienced at least once at the cinema; Star Wars, Indiana Jones, 2001 etc - and some don't. Strangelove quite firmly sits in the latter category.
paranoid marvin is offline  
Old October 23rd, 2017, 08:44 PM   #6

VHS's Avatar
VHS
Viable Holistic Solutions
 
Joined: Dec 2015
From: An inconsequital planet
Posts: 3,322

Why do we call in theatres in North America?
When I first came to Canada, I could not understand why ads for movies say "playing in theatres everywhere".
The last time I watched movies on big screen was on a cruise ship.
VHS is online now  
Old October 31st, 2017, 11:46 AM   #7

David Vagamundo's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 2,993

Quote:
Originally Posted by paranoid marvin View Post
If this film was rereleased at rhe cinema today it would bomb. Modern audiences wouldn't get it, and those who have seen it in the intervening 50 or so years would question the point of paying to watch it in the cinema when they have the film at home. . . .

.
I agree with that. Strangelove is firmly placed in the Cold War years. Younger people wouldn't get it at all.
David Vagamundo is offline  
Old October 31st, 2017, 06:46 PM   #8
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2013
From: portland maine
Posts: 2,027

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Vagamundo View Post
I agree with that. Strangelove is firmly placed in the Cold War years. Younger people wouldn't get it at all.
I was wondering how it might be morphed into present time?( terrorism rather then cold war. what type of fear driving type of president President, who would star in the film as the Peter seller 's characters?
Port is offline  
Old November 1st, 2017, 07:22 AM   #9

larkin's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,573
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by paranoid marvin View Post
If this film was rereleased at rhe cinema today it would bomb. Modern audiences wouldn't get it, and those who have seen it in the intervening 50 or so years would question the point of paying to watch it in the cinema when they have the film at home.
Quote:
This is a separate issue. The large home screen and the death of the sixplex. Films in the cinema must have the broadest appeal to draw an audience. Strangelove does not have that kind of broad appeal but it is an important film none the less.
Some films NEED to be experienced at least once at the cinema; Star Wars, Indiana Jones, 2001 etc - and some don't. Strangelove quite firmly sits in the latter category.

I beg your pardon, Dr. Strangelove was a film about the folly and actual danger of nuclear confrontation and the insane idea of mutual assured destruction. It was a black satire that mimicked the reality.
25 years later, the menace has returned without the equilibrium of the Cold War along with the new and dangerous idea that smaller nukes may be effective. Nuclear bombs do one thing and they do it extremely well, they destroy whole cities and their population and the current US president has ordered refurbishment of the entire nuclear arsinal. Dr. Strangelove is an important film that needs to be seen by a new audience..
As enjoyable as Star Wars and Indiana Jones were in the cinema, the are about a hero or heros in an adventure. Simply put, they are fluff and do not reflect authentic personal dangers.

"What good are nuclear weapons if you can't use them."
William Kristol, on FOXTV
larkin is offline  
Old November 1st, 2017, 08:23 AM   #10
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: uk
Posts: 1,627

Quote:
Originally Posted by larkin View Post
I beg your pardon, Dr. Strangelove was a film about the folly and actual danger of nuclear confrontation and the insane idea of mutual assured destruction. It was a black satire that mimicked the reality.
25 years later, the menace has returned without the equilibrium of the Cold War along with the new and dangerous idea that smaller nukes may be effective. Nuclear bombs do one thing and they do it extremely well, they destroy whole cities and their population and the current US president has ordered refurbishment of the entire nuclear arsinal. Dr. Strangelove is an important film that needs to be seen by a new audience..
As enjoyable as Star Wars and Indiana Jones were in the cinema, the are about a hero or heros in an adventure. Simply put, they are fluff and do not reflect authentic personal dangers.

"What good are nuclear weapons if you can't use them."
William Kristol, on FOXTV
But Strangelove wouldn't benefit from a huge screen, Dolby surround sound etc whereas an action film would.

As for it's relevance, yes the threat of mutually assured destruction is still there, but the mistrust with East and West isn't, neither is the paranoia. Perhaps in some, but not for many. The world is a much smaller place and the paranoia that either side could release a surprise nuclear strike, or that 'Commies' are trying to poison us is no longer there.

But modern audiences wouldn't get much from the film. Firstly they won't recognise any of the actors, secondly it's black and white, thirdly it's an ancient (from their pespective!) movie and also they wouldn't get much of the humour (eg Sellar's Nazi salute) as it was relevant to the time but not as easy to understand today.

Maybe I'm doing younger audiences a disservice, but as a teenager I certainly wouldn't have gone tovthe cinema to watch a film that had been released half a century before.


But Strangelove is a brilliant movie, and if they could make a modern day equivalent then that would be fantastic; but I doubt that it is possible to do so.
paranoid marvin is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Art and Cultural History

Tags
strangelove



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.