Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.
hollycrap
Member
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:04 am

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread post by hollycrap » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:05 pm

nonhocapito wrote: there are no stars in the sky but there is a waning earth of exactly the same aspect and dimension as the Apollo images.

Image
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fImIzrFccw

How come the genius Kubrick forgot to put stars in the sky? :P

I mean, Hollywood was clearly involved at multiple levels with 9/11, there is nothing strange in assuming the same for the moon hoax...
Not so true nonhocapito, the earth in the Apollo photos (those displaying astronuts at the same time) show the earth ridiculously small ....

How would you prefer the photograph, with a small earth or with no earth at all.

Image

:lol:

pov603
Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:02 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread post by pov603 » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:10 pm

How would you prefer the photograph, with a small earth or with no earth at all.

Image

:lol:[/quote]

Come on, cut NASA some slack.
It was cloudy that day with a strong north-easterly wind blowing in.

Edit: I've just noticed you can 'seemingly' see the earth reflected in the visor!

fizban1977
Member
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 6:14 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by fizban1977 » Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:13 pm

Stanley also was also given a special lens to film Barry Lyndon from NASA made by Zeiss.

http://youtu.be/FmSDnPvslnA?t=2m8s

alexsanchez
Banned
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:52 am

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by alexsanchez » Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:23 pm

If you watch Kubrick's "2001," the special effects all look perfectly believable, like they're in 0 G space. Except when they are on the moon and they walk around like they are in a Charlie Chaplin movie. It totally breaks the continuity of the film. Obviously, NASA told Kubrick that he couldn't use the moon walk slow-mo effect because that would blow their cover on the upcoming Apollo 11 moon landing.

Game_Over
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:45 pm
Contact:

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by Game_Over » Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:29 am

I haven't noticed it on this thread yet, but clearly the Hilton Millenium Hotel was the monolith from 2001: Space Oddissey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUjxVdNEobY

lux
Member
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by lux » Wed Aug 29, 2012 3:00 am

... and the 2001 monolith was the UN building.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2252
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by fbenario » Mon Sep 10, 2012 10:25 pm

Image
Voyager 1 hits canvas backdrop at edge of space

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news-in-p ... 2090640226

michiganj
Member
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:17 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by michiganj » Sun Sep 30, 2012 11:54 pm

It seems that Scott Wenger also has an interest in the Apollo program and has his own collection of Declassified Apollo Documents, one of which is a memo to Mr. Eric Goldman, Special Consultant to the President, which mentions Kubrick.
http://www.private-files.com/documents/ ... ubrick.pdf

It appears that Scott has added some images to this document which includes the one posted by Alfie in The Moon Hoax thread. Unfortunately, the description does not reveal who the mystery man is.

Image

Image


I believe the memo is referring to the White House Festival of the Arts that was held on June 14, 1965.

It's interesting that, in the memo, George Stevens Jr. writes, "...a commentary should be written and delivered by someone outside of the motion picture field." And he suggests two people, Russell Baker and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
But, that's not what happened.

From the book by Emilie Raymond, From My Cold, Dead Hands: Charlton Heston and American Politics page 134-
It would be the first time the White House would pay tribute to so many forms of American art, including ballet, photography, drama, classical music, prose, poetry and jazz. Arts supporters composed the bulk of the guest list, but Goldman also invited a number of prominent intellectuals and artists to contribute to the festival program with readings, sculptures, and other artistic displays. The organizers of the festival originally slated Peck to close the daytime program by reading the narration for a compilation of five "great" American films made since World War II. When scheduling problems forced Peck to decline, the White House then invited Heston to weave together a series of clips from North by Northwest (1959), On the Waterfront (Elia Kazan,1954), Shane (George Stevens,1953), Friendly Persuasion (William Wyler,1956), and High Noon (Fred Zinnemann,1952).

It was during the planning of the festival that the first problematic aspect of the Great Society became evident--the programs could be politicized.
I wonder why Kubrick didn't make the list?

The story goes on that some artists, including Robert Lowell, opposed Johnson's military policies and declined an invitation to the event.
Indeed, the president's Vietnam policies troubled a number of the artists who decided to attend the festival, but they did not want to miss such a prestigious event, especially if they could use it to make a public statement.

Although he accepted his invitation "with pleasure," Macdonald warned that he shared Lowell's disapproval regarding Johnson's foreign policy. Macdonald surprised and repulsed the festival's organizers when he brought to the actual event a petition of protest that stated: "We should like to make it clear that in accepting the President's kind invitation to attend the White House Arts Festival, we do not mean either to repudiate the courageous position taken by Robert Lowell, or to endorse the administration's foreign policy. We quite share Mr.Lowell's dismay at our country's recent actions in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic."

When the disheveled Macdonald approached Heston in the Rose Garden and the actor refused to sign his complaint, Macdonald reportedly called Heston "a lowbrow lackey of Hollywood." Defending himself, Heston cited his record of civil rights activism. "But that really isn't the point," Heston continued. "Having convictions doesn't mean that you have to lack elementary manners. Are you really accustomed to signing petitions against your host in his home?" Jack Valenti remembered, to his "undying pleasure," that Heston "just ate [Macdonald's] ass out" for his lack of "propriety": "And then he gave Macdonald precise directions as to what he could do with his petition, and they were very precise."

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2252
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by fbenario » Mon Oct 01, 2012 2:05 am

michiganj wrote:Image
Hilarious. Kubrick looks an awful lot like Rowan Atkinson, moron/shill/very, very bad actor who's not funny (since forced humor by definition is a waste of time).

Image

Image

Image

hoi.polloi
Member
Posts: 5060
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by hoi.polloi » Mon Oct 01, 2012 6:21 am

Interesting post.

I suppose Heston would probably consider a gun more appropriate than a petition.

fbenario
Member
Posts: 2252
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by fbenario » Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:43 pm

I'm stunned. I hoped by now we had reached the ultimate in silliness - but we apparently haven't. Sad.
Nicole Kidman on Life With Tom Cruise Through Stanley Kubrick's Lens

There was a lot of interest in Eyes Wide Shut before it was released. But the weekend it came out, July 16, 1999, was the death of JFK Jr., his wife and her sister -- a black, black weekend. And for Stanley to have died [on March 7, 1999, at age 70] before the film opened … well, it all felt so dark and strange. Stanley had sent over the cut he considered done to us, Tom and I watched it in New York -- and then he died. The next morning, I got the phone call. That was one of the worst calls -- I just started screaming; I had Isabella and Connor in the kitchen with me. Tom and I immediately got on a plane. The funeral was so traumatic. I truly loved Stanley and felt very connected to him. He was in our lives intensely for about four years.

People have asked me if Stanley ever told us what Eyes Wide Shut was about -- and the answer is no. He didn't believe in interpretation. He always said, "Never say no to an idea -- you never know how that idea will ignite another idea." He also said: "Never put me on a pedestal. When someone's on a pedestal, there's no creativity." That's how I approach every creative person now -- it does not help to glorify them.

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/nicole-kid ... 19801.html

icarusinbound
Member
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:49 am

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by icarusinbound » Thu Oct 25, 2012 11:20 pm

fbenario wrote:
Terence.drew wrote:Kubrick's memorable stunning image is of a full moon on Earth. Camera - Moon - Earth - Sun.
NASA new video is of new moon on Earth. Sun - Camera - Moon - Earth
IFC Films Picks Up Fantastic ‘Shining’ Doc ‘Room 237′

For film fans, one of the most enticing films coming out of the 2012 Sundance Film Festival was Room 237, an experimental documentary directed by Rodney Ascher which explores wild theories buried deep in Stanley Kubrick‘s masterpiece The Shining.
...
Here’s how I described the film in my review:

Room 237 is broken into nine sections, each of which do their best to convince you that The Shining has some kind of alternative, hidden subtext. The most controversial and well-known theory is the Moon landing justification. The explanations for it range from laughable to interesting. Other ideas include The Shining being an anti-holocaust piece.

Several of the other chapters dissect the production design and mise en scene of the film in excruciating detail. For example, one woman has made detailed maps of the Overlook and decided it couldn’t be a real structure. Another believes Kubrick was so obsessed with subliminal advertising at the time, he flooded the movie with sexual images. And yet another believes Kubrick composed the film to be a mirror unto itself and, to illustrate, we watch several scenes from The Shining overlapped from two different sources: One running the film forward, the other running it backward. The results are jaw-dropping.

http://www.slashfilm.com/ifc-films-pick ... %2FFilm%29
'Room 237' is currently receiving a lot of media critique and mention in the UK on Radio 4 (Britain's version of NPR). As the BBC's classic MSM conduit, I was shocked to catch a comment today made by a reporter who casually referred to Kubrick's part in "faking the film of the moon landings"... this was said without caveat or parenthesis, and was either a slip-in of a personal opinion, or an aired disinfo counter-bluff. I have no recollection of such an uncritical dispassionate mention of a counter-perspective being made by the BBC ever, before this time.

Image

tokyojoe1
Banned
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 8:21 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by tokyojoe1 » Sat Dec 05, 2015 12:12 am

I've been thinking about Kubrick being an A list Hollywood disinformation agent and it makes sense.

It also puts Eyes Wide Shut in a different light. If Vigilant Citizen is disinformation then it would make sense that the same guy who pushed the moon hoax and the nuke hoax would make a movie about the shadowy Illuminati/Occult world. His death seems almost too good to be true so that the conspiracy crowd can say he was taken out for revealing the truth.

If Kubrick was as reclusive as they say, he would probably LOVE the idea of faking his death and moving to some tropical place to retire with a new identity.

Farcevalue
Member
Posts: 390
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 11:21 am

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by Farcevalue » Sat Dec 05, 2015 6:48 am

I saw this article a while back and found it to be an interesting speculation on Kubrick faking his death to focus on directing the 9/11 event. Why not?

http://www.chartword.com/2015/02/stanle ... .html#more

The Chartword site also links to a Twitter account in the previous post that supposedly has a Kennedy-Kubrick smoking gun, but my Twitter search experience has yielded nothing but tedium as yet.

It did have a five minute video of the infamous Kennedy conspiracy speech and in it he lauds the press starting at 4:00. I have heard that the subconscious mind may ignore negative directives and focus on the declaratives that remain once the negative exhortations are removed or ignored. If that is the case, the role of the media was certainly clarified in the following quote:
Not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply give the public what it wants, but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices. To lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion. [Emphasis added]

tokyojoe1
Banned
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 8:21 pm

Re: Musings about Kubrick, Hollywood and the Moon Hoax

Unread post by tokyojoe1 » Mon Dec 07, 2015 10:31 pm

Farcevalue wrote:I saw this article a while back and found it to be an interesting speculation on Kubrick faking his death to focus on directing the 9/11 event. Why not?

http://www.chartword.com/2015/02/stanle ... .html#more

The Chartword site also links to a Twitter account in the previous post that supposedly has a Kennedy-Kubrick smoking gun, but my Twitter search experience has yielded nothing but tedium as yet.

It did have a five minute video of the infamous Kennedy conspiracy speech and in it he lauds the press starting at 4:00. I have heard that the subconscious mind may ignore negative directives and focus on the declaratives that remain once the negative exhortations are removed or ignored. If that is the case, the role of the media was certainly clarified in the following quote:
Not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, not to simply give the public what it wants, but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices. To lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion. [Emphasis added]
Perhaps, but did they really need Kubrick for 9/11?

I've assumed that they've needed many years to put 9/11 together (1st WTC bombings, the USS Cole, build up Bin Laden, create vicsims and backstories, etc.) If Kubrick finished Eyes Wide Shut and then "died" in March 1999, he would've had two and a half years to "direct" 9/11. Would that be enough? Don't forget this man was 70 years old. How reliable would he be at that age. What if he suddenly died in the middle of directing 9/11, which would probably be very stressful on an old man? Too many risks involved.

I'm open to it, but I don't know at this point.

Post Reply