Review of Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
Stanley Kubrick is infamous for his witty films that satire governmental and societal actions though history. In this film, Dr. Strangelove, Or: How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964), Kubrick is once again directing a film that is a biting, sardonic comedy that pokes fun at the nuclear fears of the 1950s. The screenplay for the movie was written by Stanley Kubrick and Terry Southern, and was based on the novel Red Alert written by Peter George. In this film, which is classified as a black comedy/fantasy, technology runs amok and takes over society and mankind. The irony of the situation, however, became apparent when shortly after the movie was produced, the nuclear fears became an actual world scenario among events such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, The Bay of Pigs, and the assassination of President Kennedy. It was this last event that actually delayed the release of the movie from 1963 to 1964. In this film, Kubrick attempts to give his opinion about the situation the world was in through his mocking of certain societal values, his purposeful distortion of history, and his manipulation of the viewer's sentiments.
Throughout the film, Kubrick displays, exaggerates, and mocks certain values of society of his time. The most noticeable case of this is through the selection of names for his characters. These characters are all male, military characters whose names carry some sort of sexual innuendo or connotation with them. One such name is "King" Kong, who is a Major in command of a B-52 bomber, which is one of three main settings for the action of the movie. This name suggests a beast with a primitive desire for destruct...
... middle of paper ...
...vernment that led them into such a crisis. In stating that this movie is a valuable piece of our cultural history, it is not to say that this film should be taken as a historical piece only. There is a danger in relying on material culture for historical knowledge. This danger exists in the fact that during the course of years, creative intentions become lost, and only the product remains. To rely on this film for historical knowledge, rather than cultural information, would be gravely wrong. This is because this film was not made to be historically informative, and centuries from now, society may not know that Kubrick's suggestive names, distortion of actual history, and cultural bias were simply vehicles used to convey an opinion. So these same vehicles that make this film effective as a societal criticism make it inaccurate as a source for historical knowledge.
Films are necessary in our time period because the human eye can articulate the message intended through sight allowing visual imagination to occur. In the book, world 2 by Max Brooks, he creates a character by the name Roy Elliot who was a former movie director. Roy Elliot manages to make a movie titled “Victory at Avalon: The Battle of the Five Colleges” and some how it goes viral. Similarly, Frank Capra’s film, “Why we Fight” expresses a sense of understanding the meaning of wars. Films do not inevitably portray truth because they display what the film director views as important and beneficial for people to know.
The film Dr Strangelove or How I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb is a satirical film, illustrating Kubrick's interpretation of his world at the time. It surrounds the rumours about the Soviets Union spreading communism and constructing a
Dr. Strangelove is a 1964 black comedy satire film about nuclear war between the USSR and the USA. It has received many awards including #26 on the American Film Institute’s top 100 movies list and a 99% favorable rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The film begins with General Jack D. Ripper putting his base on high alert and ordering his bomber wing to preemptively drop nuclear bombs onto the Soviet Union. His second in command, Mandrake, tries to stop him after finding out the Pentagon ordered nothing and finds out that Ripper is insane in thinking the Soviets are trying to poison the American water supply. The Pentagon finds out and tries to stop it but they could not find the three digit code in time to stop the planes. General Turgidson recommends
In today's day and age, it's rare to see famous historical events and societal disasters not be picked apart by film directors and then transformed into a box office hit. What these films do is put a visual perspective on these events, sometimes leaving viewers speculating if whatever was depicted is in fact entirely true. I have never felt that feeling more than after I finished watching Oliver Stone’s JFK.
...e black comedy, Dr. Strangelove, incorporates Kubrick’s political beliefs through the film’s distinctive style, utilization of motifs, and the suggested affiliations between war and sex. Stanley Kubrick emotionally distances the viewer from this terrifying issue by illustrating the absurdity of the war. By implying sexual frustration and suppression as a reason for war tension, Kubrick displays a worst-case scenario of the Cold War in comical fashion. Dr. Strangelove is an anti-war satire that implicitly conveys the importance of sexual expression while humorously portraying the worthlessness of war and violence that ravaged the sanity of the 1960s American public.
by Kong when he reaches the top of the building with Anne (Figure 1) . Cynthia Erb describes this use of sexuality and raciness in King Kong as a, “type of commodification that was feat...
Even though Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb screened in the midst of the sobering Cold War, critics were keen on praising the film for its mastery of humor applied to such a sensitive matter. The film is exceedingly loaded with metaphors, innuendos, and allusions that nothing can be left undissected or taken for face value; the resulting effect is understood to be part of Kubrick’s multifarious theme. Kubrick has stated that what began as a “the basis for a serious film about accidental war ” eventually birthed an absurd and farcical classic comedy. The director fuses together irony, satire, and black humor to create a waggish piece but most of all the situation of the times and its gravity is the essence of what the audience finds so hilarious . Using caricatures rather than characters, exaggerated script, and sexual undertones, Kubrick manifests to the audience their own predicament and just how ridiculous it is to even consider brinksmanship as a means to preserve the American lifestyle.
In Dr. Strangelove, Stanley Kubrick took a serious issue and turned it into a political comedy. He was able to illustrate a satire of the hazardous notion of a nuclear war and the insane individuals who were coordinating it, and furthermore, addressed the issue of stereotyping. This movie was created in 1964; today in 2005, we still have nuclear weapons. Yes, the United States and other countries still have nuclear weapons, however, a question does arise, do we still have insane individuals coordinating war plans and security procedures? If you are expecting to find the answer in this essay, do not continue reading for that reason, the answer will not be found in this essay. The reason being is the answer needs to be realized and determined by every individual, not just me. However, if questioned that in Dr. Strangelove was there an individual who was insane and should he have not been placed in command of a military base, then I would have to answer yes there was such an individual. This individual was General Jack Ripper.
--clockwork orange... at times I wish I had those eye-lid clamps for some of my classes, that and bottle of visine, too. it's a nicely designed page, with lots of information on his films. I forgot he was the one who directed dr. strangelove, a personal classic of mine.
V for Vendetta is a rather graphic novel written by Alan Moore in the late 1980's. The novel takes place in an alternate-reality; one in which Britain is ruled by a fascist government rules over Britain, and the rest of the world is believed to be in ruins due to nuclear war. The main protagonist/villain, depending on your viewpoint, of the story is a man simply called "V", He is a mysterious man and a self-described anarchist who survived a government experiment of a compound called Batch 5. Although his face is never shown in the book, V still draws the reader’s attention by being such a dark presence.
In this 1956 remake of the 1934 version of Alfred Hitchcock’s The Man Who Knew Too Much, Dr. Ben McKenna, played by James Stewart, and Josephine ‘Jo’ Conway, played by Doris Day, inadvertently get involved in an assassination plan after a mysterious Frenchman is murdered and their son is subsequently kidnapped. Hitchcock himself said, “Let’s say the first version was the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional,” (Spoto) to which I interpret as him admitting that his skills and cinematic techniques as a director had improved throughout his career.
Requiem for a Dream is a movie that was directed by Darren Aronofsky. It's a story about the decent in to the hell and torment of drug addiction; however, Aronofsky sets out to demonstrate both the seductive ecstasy of a high and the shattering anguish of addiction. Character development is the main focus of Requiem, which is shown through creative camera angles, precise editing, and brilliant acting.
One could easily dismiss movies as superficial, unnecessarily violent spectacles, although such a viewpoint is distressingly pessimistic and myopic. In a given year, several films are released which have long-lasting effects on large numbers of individuals. These pictures speak
...ctual roles, or adding in exciting events that revise the storyline. These changes are beneficial to producers because they engage a large audience and generate massive profits. In contrast, they do not always have a positive effect on viewers. Although they are entertaining which is an important aspect of theatre culture, they also are often misguiding. Many spectators take movies at face value, without considering that they may not exactly qualify as primary source material. Even when an historical event is fabricated to teach or enhance a moral message, it still doesn’t compensate for bending the truth. Moviegoer’s may have a positive experience and gain some skewed historical perspective, perhaps better than what they knew before the movie, but they loose out on the truth and therefore, a genuine understanding of the historical event, and its significance.
The film tells the story of a deranged United States Air Force general who orders a first strike nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. United States Air Force Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper who was the commander of Burpelson Air Force Base, launches a planed nuclear attack on the Soviet Union via his nuclear-armed B-52 fighter jets, which were holding at their fail-safe points, to move into Soviet airspace, based upon a twisted paranoia that the communist party was contaminating “our precious bodily fluids”. The movie follows the course of events proceeding General Jack D. Ripper’s ordered attack.