How are these two film directors related? Is it true that David Lynch was inspired and influenced by Stanley Kubrick? What are the parallels between them?

vs.

Films by Lynch

The Alphabet (1968, short)
The Grandmother (1970, short)
The Amputee (1974, short)
Eraserhead (1976)
The Elephant Man (1980)
Dune (1984)
Blue Velvet (1986)
The Cowboy And The Frenchman (1988, short)
Wild At Heart (1990)
Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (1992)
Lumière and Company (1995, short)
Lost Highway (1997)
The Straight Story (1999)
Mulholland Drive (2001)
Darkened Room (2002, short)

Television Series:

Twin Peaks (1990-91)
American Chronicles (1990-91)
On The Air (1991-92)
Hotel Room (1992)

Films by Kubrick

Day of the Fight (1951) – short documentary
Flying Padre (1951) – short documentary
The Seafarers (1952) – short documentary
Fear and Desire (1953)
Killer’s Kiss (1955)
The Killing (1956)
Paths of Glory (1957)
Spartacus (1960)
Lolita (1962)
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb(1964)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
A Clockwork Orange (1971)
Barry Lyndon (1975)
The Shining(1980)
Full Metal Jacket (1987)
Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

Kubrick all the way, except for that Eyes Wide Shut horse manure.....

jerseykrs said:

Yeah, but do you see any connections between them?

they are so very different! Kubrick is so much more formal and structured than Lynch...

Lynch just follows dream logic... Kubrick tries to create a universe of rules within his films.

what they do share:

1. Conversations that seemed stiff, almost like a parody of the act of communicating.

2. Iconic surreal imagery or shots that are repeated within the film.

I consider Lynch to be a true auteur, almost to an extreme.

and not Kubrick? His style is almost concrete! And very much the other side of the same coin as..... John Landis.... believe it or not.

jerseykrs said:

ufoclub said:

I don't really see many resemblances either. The feeling and look of their films is quite different, though both seem to deal with altered worlds and an eeriness. They both express deeply masculine perspectives as well. Kubrick is much more of a humanist with political messages and moral lessons. Lynch is a postmodernist with an absence of message or morality.

Lynch writes his screenplays, and he has been involved with every level of his films production at one point or another: sound design, editing, camera work, lighting, casting, special effects, music, etc. His hands-on approach to every aspect of his films has helped to tie them all together with a common thread. That was all I meant by his EXTREME auteurism.

jerseykrs said:

So does Kubrick. He's written them all and has worked as the cinematographer on several. I think they're both verifiable auteurs.

http://www.sensesofcinema...brick.html

true Kubrick is even credited as a visual effects supervisor on 2001.

heartbeatocean said:

jerseykrs said:

Love that flick.

I used to like Lynch quite a bit when I was younger, but now I just find him needlessly cryptic.

Ace said:

Is there anything worse than doing something for no reason? I agree ace, needless just wastes my time.

jerseykrs said:

I watch Lynch films for the sound

Ace said:

But do you see any Kubrick influences on his work?

I like to think i like David Lynch movies
so i can be cool and different..

Okay, help me out here. The question is not if you like them, or which one you like better. The question is How is their work related? As in similarities and/or differences?

Or is that too much of a school essay question?

The problem is, I'm really curious about this!

Lynch is more insular, Kubrick the populist. Lynch hasn't shown the sheer knowledge of his material that Kubrick had, but very few were prepared as him.
I can only imagine Kubricks reaction to eraserhead though.
[Edited 9/14/05 21:36pm]

Kubrick. No contest.

lilgish said:

Can you expand on this statement? Not sure what you're referring to.

AsianBomb777 said:

heartbeatocean said:

It's a lot easier to make a Lynch style movie than a Kubrick style movie... if you were to imitate

My two favorite directors, hands down.

Both love to explore the darker side of humanity through the use of film

Both use long, moody shots, often fraying your nerves with their drawn-out pacing.

Both are masters of sound.

Both have quirky, off-beat characters. Their characters always seem totaly unique, like you couldn't possibly know someone like them, yet at the same time you can still believe that these people exist.

They also have mastered the use of subtle visual themes in their films. Often, they will use certain colors, sounds or what-not to represent certain ideas. Oftentimes, these visual themes repeat themselves over and over throughout a flim (and, sometimes, they will re-occur in other films as well).

Both venture into the surreal (although, Lynch delves much further)

I COMPLETELY disagree with Heartbeatocean that Lynch's films have no message or morality. In fact, I think Lynch's films ALL have an extreme morality to them. He is more subtle about his message than Kubrick, but it is there.

ufoclub said:

I've yet to see anyone manage to imitate either very well.

heartbeatocean said:

Everything Kubrick did was near perfect in detail. He never appeared to be a novice in his subject matter. Kubrick spent years in pre-production and it showed.

ex. The natural lighting used in Barry Lyndon.

heartbeatocean said:

I think Eyes Wide Shut is the only Kubrick film I've seen in its entirety, so I couldn't say.

I think I like Lynchs style of story telling over Kuberick's. Kubericks storys are very compelling but also hit the average viewer in thier appeal. Thus making htem mose classic than Lynch will ever be.

Kubrick also makes movies on a grander scale and thinks movies in a much bigger way than Lynch. AI was to be a 20 year project. Lynch would never have gotten that ambitious.

Lynch goes for the macabre, wierd, strange and unexplainable. There is a different thought process entirely with director vs audience. His characters are a lot more provoking and striking that Kubericks. And dialog. The dialog is very colorful and rich and original. His movies tend to be more smaller scale in that they deal with very few subject if any at all. You never know what to expect in a lynch film.

They do have similarities. They believe in the "shot" and go for that visual that is in their heads. They also are very smart and unconventional in achieving the "feeling" and "emotion" in thier movies through the visual style. They are also both dark and are willing to bring unusual elements and styles to thier pieces of work.

Kubrick and his work is ultimately masculine and heavy handed. Lynch has a much more varied feminine aesthetic and emotional quality to his work.