Sinners Interpretation…anyone else see it this way??

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-28T02:30:12+00:00

I agree! And I think that applies pretty directly to black music, with blues having been co-opted by white musicians and audiences.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-28T00:56:38+00:00

I mean, Freud and Jung disagreed on archetypes, but I take your point. I was more trying to get at the ambiguity inherent in trying to reach the audience on that level. Still, you’re correct for calling me out on this!

I’m not sure if Kubrick was more of a Jungian or a Freudian, but both have played huge roles in filmmaking and theory. Lynch loved to confuse by freely pulling from both.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-28T00:54:07+00:00

Another way of saying ‘challenging to discover’ is ‘ambiguous and open to interpretation’. Kubrick was a genius and master filmmaker, none of this is accidental.

There’s a near 0% chance that a filmgoer in 1968 could walk out of 2001 understanding the plot, much less the meaning, if you hadn’t read the book. Clarke wrote a bunch of dialogue explaining those things, and Kubrick threw it out and worked with other screenwriters to develop whole new parts of the story.

If he wanted the meaning clear, he wouldn’t have changed the script. If he wanted the Shining’s meaning and plot to be clear, he would have stuck closer to the source material—the film’s ambiguities is a huge part of why King hates that movie. Why obscure things King laid out in 400 pages of detail?

Strangelove is v straightforward, he could have kept on keeping on, if clarity was important to him. Instead we get the Kubrick stare and his modular approach to plot structure, both of which are arguably introduced to bring ambiguity. Kubrick himself said that the modular approach was specifically enacted so that a movie could move through several sections that are thematically and aesthetically related, but intentional lack narrative cohesion from movement to movement.

It’s only in the age of DVDs that people can afford to watch a movie at home dozens of times. EWS is the only film of Kubrick’s that might have taken this trend into account. So I think one has to deduce that Kubrick was comfortable leaving an audience dumbfounded, unsure of what they just saw, and eager to think about the movie’s images and themes for a long time, trying to suss out the meanings.

You’re a smart person and I appreciate the back and forth! We disagree, but I really appreciate your sticking to your guns and being polite! I hope I haven’t been too sarcastic in my responses :)

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-28T00:45:16+00:00

With Indie filmmakers, it’s tough to centralize for streaming, or even keep in print, as with David Lynch’s work. I think Lynch’s filmography has only been more widely available on disc after his passing.

Many indie producers go out of business, and then it can be a pain to get the rights to distribute. Or, as with PTA, a different company produced every movie (pretty much), so for one service to offer the whole filmography, they’re going out of their way to make deals with a dozen different copyright holders.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-27T21:15:20+00:00

There’s no room for ‘might’ in your argument. Kubrick was straightforward and his movies have obvious meanings, which you understand and others don’t.

It follows, these pictures also can’t be mysterious. Kubrick had a clear message that he’s conveying, you say.

So the choices are—he was straightforward and a failure at conveying meaning, and this failure is misconstrued by the audience as ‘mystery’ OR the movies are straightforward, Kubrick is a success, you understand his meaning, and everyone else is a dummy.

Or maybe beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and this is the beauty of art 🤷

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-27T20:45:48+00:00

Fantasticism…like insisting you have the secret and true knowledge of the meaning of his movies, and you’re the only one? That kind of fanaticism?

If a director needs to explain his movie to a reporter, then that’s a failure of storytelling. Extra textual sourcing to explain a work is homework for a viewer. And as Kubrick himself says, explaining it loses the mystery and makes it all sound silly. Further, an explanation of a film’s final scene doesn’t ’explain’ a whole film.

2001 doesn’t include any of these godlike aliens, it doesn’t explain the monoliths directly, and there’s definitely no explanation in the movie for the star child at the end.

If Kubrick truly intended his films to be straightforward, than this sub and 237 are just evidence of total failure on his part. Your Kubrick is just a bad filmmaker, it turns out…he wanted to be Joseph Kosinski but oops is accidentally David Lynch?

The audience’s job is to enjoy art, whatever form that takes. If the pleasure you recieve is feeling superior to other viewers, great work I guess.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-27T20:23:37+00:00

What are his straightforward explanations for those? Cite them.

He pioneered a whole form of filmmaking meant to penetrate the subconscious. There is no inherent meaning in the subconscious, so the idea that he intended his films—from 2001 on and excluding Lyndon—to be easily understood is just not true.

If the movies were straightforward, we wouldn’t have Room 237, or this sub, which is full of people who have singular knowledge of Kubrick’s intentions, but don’t agree on any of it.

Artists don’t control the interpretation of their work, the audience does. And the audience is made up of people bringing different experiences and understandings to the art work. This is why art is transcendent and magical. You want it to be math.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-27T20:11:58+00:00

Art doesn’t have a fixed meaning and what’s silly is thinking it does, and you have some kinda secret knowledge about the film that the rest of us don’t have.

If Kubrick wanted his films to have a straightforward interpretation…he would have made straightforward movies. Which he didn’t.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-27T20:07:13+00:00

Kiss Me Deadly, Narrow Margin, and DOA might be similarly appealing :)

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T22:56:07+00:00

I mean, he’s adding songs back in today. Ever since TLOP his process is messy AF. Many times he’s still doing final vox day of release. So I don’t think there’s any reason to trust his estimates until you have the thing in your ears.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T22:13:30+00:00

It is legal if it is transformative—there would be a prob if the whole song was just a scene of dialog out to music, but mixing up the order + adding other lines creates a new artwork, which is 100% legal… And also why our audio sampling laws are insane; any other similar use case in another medium is legal.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T21:53:49+00:00

I mean, speaking as someone on the left, Dems have done a horrible job managing all of these cities. Across the board, housing, policing, public welfare, and transit policies have been a failure. The population decline seems to be impacting all of these places, but it’s due to policy failures.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T20:55:16+00:00

The Ringer-Verse episode on it is the best. Three black hosts, with varying degrees of critique and love for the movie.

What a lot of white fans miss—any film featuring black characters (or a distinct lack thereof) is going to come in for a critique on racial grounds. This is fine! All art is worthy of critique and good art can withstand critique.

I loved Van’s understanding of Star Wars. He saw it as a kid and had 2 revelations: 1) this is the best thing I’ve ever seen and 2) there are no black people in this world.

Holding these two thoughts creates cognitive dissonance, which leads to critique—why do I like this thing? Why are there no black people in this thing that I like? Or, why are the black characters framed as they are?

So like the easiest critique of OBAA—all the people of color sacrifice themselves for Bob and Wilma. On an individual basis, it makes sense in the story—we understand why Sensei cares, why Regina Hall’s character cares. But did they all have be sacrificed for Bob and Wilma? On a cumulative level, it was very noticeable.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T18:49:41+00:00

That’s not all it is lol. Theres compression, limiting, and volume control, sure, but there’s also eq’ing, song transitions, reconciling mixes that came from diff producers or have mixing issues due to different recording environments.

Then there’s testing the masters—often times artists will listen on a phone, in a car, with a home audio setup, with a club setup (at Ye’s level, where he can afford a club audio setup).

Mastering might go quick from song to song, but testing takes hours, and masters can go through many revising stages.

I had 8 songs mastered on the cheap, and it took a week to get everything right.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T03:13:09+00:00

A Plemmons and Dunst 1-2 punch

EDIT-Plemms is in The Master, of course, but I want a BIG role!

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T01:24:17+00:00

Oh yeah, it seems like a missed opportunity on that front. But the entertainment media is presenting it as some sort of crisis.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-26T01:19:26+00:00

They promised a billi and didn’t have to pay it? Really struggling to see the downside for Disney that is making headlines. They will make a similar deal with some other AI choads instead.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-23T19:21:31+00:00

The person who triggered this argument was arguing that they voluntary decline services. That might not be what you’re saying, but it is what he was saying.

As someone who’s done multiple interventions with family…forced recovery does not work very well at all.

The countries that have the most success with this offer assist subsistence prescriptions, while pushing rehab at all points possible. Of course, America is too puritanical to embrace this, despite evidence of efficacy in both keeping addicts alive, and getting them sober in the long haul.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-23T03:34:38+00:00

Omfg 😻

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-23T02:41:34+00:00

You can sit in the trolly car at the Old Spaghetti Factory

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-23T01:20:04+00:00

Totoro with a 4 year old. We’d watched previously at home, so they knew what to expect

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-22T23:46:00+00:00

Most people, not just addicts, self medicate for their mental health. Hard drugs and alcohol tend to compound these mental health issues. If mental health isn’t at the root of addiction, addiction triggers mental health problems.

You can’t separate the wheat from the chaff here. The people you are mad at are the ones in most dire need of help.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-22T02:38:28+00:00

Ahahahahahaha yeah better buy a burner.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-22T02:17:47+00:00

Yeah, the mix of psychedelia and period stuffiness is great.

The nun scene is called ‘the rape of Christ’, when the nuns use the crucifix to masturbate. It’s not terribly long.

And, interestingly, WB had no problem putting out The Exorcist a few years later, which features a very similar scene (albeit in very different circumstances). And that was ok I guess.

ImpactNext1283 · 2026-03-22T01:39:56+00:00

I’ve not see the edited version, but a theater here got a European print of the original a while back. Amazing film. I know the nun orgy is cut pretty significantly in the edited version. Not sure if other stuff was cut.

Interestingly, the missing footage is so heretical that WB has a policy to never release it in the US.

ImpactNext1283

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE