Battle of Directors is a weekly column that pits two filmmakers against one another, sheds light on their respective filmographies, and then asks readers to state which director they prefer. Thoughtful discourse and discussion is encouraged and desired. Enjoy!
Each week I ask readers to take a leap of faith. Some of them do, and some of them end up leaving snippy comments that force me to contemplate the purpose of my existence. Which, coincidentally, is what both filmmakers seem to constantly work at through their own films: existence and what this is all supposed to amount to.
Similar to last week’s pairing (Quentin Tarantino vs. Wes Anderson), there’s a stark dissonance in content and style when it comes to Terrence Malick and Stanley Kubrick. The former auteur is an existential poet with an eye for sweeping and sumptuous landscapes. The latter is a brilliant, creative satirist with the ability to configure some of the most fascinating films ever made. One is more partisan to structured narratives, the other discursive ones.
What Kubrick and Malick have in common is their reclusiveness. The two press-shy and quiet directors take years, sometimes decades in between projects. Yet, while Malick and Kubrick focus on radically different subjects and themes, both make layered and complex films – all of which seem to have something to say. We’re just fortunate enough to listen.
Five example films from Stanley Kubrick:
The Shining
2001: A Space Odyssey
Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
A Clockwork Orange
The Killing
vs.
Five example films from Terrence Malick:
Days of Heaven
The Thin Red Line
Badlands
The Tree of Life
The New World
…
So which filmmaker do you prefer?
The choice is yours.
29 thoughts on “Battle of Directors: Stanley Kubrick vs. Terrence Malick”
Ah, my two favorite filmmakers. I feel like its impossible to compare, but while I’m more drawn to Malick’s style, Kubrick’s sheer genius gives him the edge.
These are your two favorite? Well, if so, I apologize Jordan.
This is nearly impossible. In terms of my favorite films, Days of Heaven is at the top from the filmographies of these two directors. Looking at their entire lists, I do have to give the edge to Kubrick, however. The Shining, Dr. Strangelove, Full Metal Jacket, and 2001 are four classics that put him over the top.
I’m still having a hard time coming around to Full Metal Jacket.
As for Days of Heaven, yes, I watched it for the first time last night. Floored me.
I’ve only seen Full Metal Jacket once, and it was just a few years ago. For some reason, my expectations were pretty low, so I was very impressed. Glad to hear that you saw Days of Heaven. That’s such an amazing movie. My favorite from Malick, which is saying a lot.
You’ve started a street fight between my 18-year-old self and my current self. Do I go with the Clockwork Orange poster on my dorm room wall, or my gape-mouth wide-eyed viewing of Tree of Life?
I’m going to give it to Kubrick. For The Shining. For Dr. Strangelove. For Eyes Wide Shut. For being the director that really helped me to understand the meaning of auteur.
Sorry Terrence.
Love to start fights — particularly intellectually driven ones. I’m inexperienced when it comes to these two filmmakers. Limited. I still need to see Clockwork Orange for example.
Is The New Wonder your portmanteau of The New World and To the Wonder?
Haha, apologies for the error … rectified! Anyway, I’m sure you have more to say on this matchup than pointing out a silly error of mine.
Malick.
James. You’ve written essays on Malick. I know you can articulate on this matter. Also what happened to the Days of Heaven analysis?
Well fuck, you just picked two of my favorite directors of all time. That being said, Terrence Malick is admittedly my favorite all time filmmaker. However, Kubrick is arguably more important because his The Shining was what got me into movies in the first place and he has a lot of classics.
I guess I’ll go with Malick since he is, as I said, my favorite filmmaker, but this was a tough one. The Tree of Life and Days of Heaven are more than enough to sway me to the side of Malick, though.
So long as I can make you squeam, Christopher, I’ve done my job.
This is all revenge for my staggering anticipation for To The Wonder isn’t it?
Shoutout to David Lynch!! One of the only directors who can compare
As a whole, Kubrick.
Care to elaborate?
Shit… this is not a battle of the directors. This is a battle of the Gods. Two titans in the world of American Cinema. Two of the great American filmmaking Auteurs ever…
Fuck man. I guess I have to go with Malick. So far from what I’ve seen. The dude is batting a thousand. He’s made one great film after another. I know there’s been mixed reviews about “To the Wonder” but that’s not going to stop me from seeing it.
I love Kubrick. I think anything he did from “Lolita” to “Eyes Wide Shut” is a track record that can’t be matched by anyone. Except for Malick maybe. If Kubrick was alive, I think he would find his match.
It’s interesting to contemplate what Kubrick would be doing now. If anything.
Ok, what about Kubrick vs. Malick if it was a pro wrestling match?
First, I think you left one of Krubrick’s best films — “Paths of Glory” — off the list. But if I have to chose with the five films you have included in your sample, I’d go with Malick. “The Killing” is a very good genre film, but not classic like all five of the Malick films you list. Now, if you took “The Killing” out and replaced it with “Paths,” I’d go with Krubrick by a nose.
You’re not limited to the five films mentioned. Malick only has five though, so I did what I could to make the matchup more even. I still very much enjoy “The Killing” … it’s not major Kubrick by any standards. But it’s a fun little genre heist film.
This is definitely the hardest battle of directors yet, and props for
making this column because it’s great. This is hard because I love
Malick, but honestly I can’t just can’t not pick Kubrick. For me he is
The Auteur. His career has flourished in both critical and commercial
fame, being the only director who’s almost every film is both a
touchstone of pop-culture and a challenging enigma at the same time.
Whenever I question the power of cinema, I can watch a Kubrick film, and
be relieved. I also think “2001: A Space Odyssey” is the greatest film ever made, so there’s that.
Appreciate your support man. Glad you enjoy the column.
It’s very rare for a filmmaker to garner both critical and commercial success. And it’s good that you can find solace in a filmmaker.
Tough, man, tough. Gotta go Kubrick here.
You know I try to make this tough Alex.
it’s close, but ive gotta go with Kubrick. his overall influence on various genres and the medium as a whole is unparalleled. the only other living director who looks like he could be a challenger imo is Paul Thomas Anderson. we’ll see how his filmography stands up in 20 years time. i think if we were just considering living directors, Malick vs Haneke is a great matchup. they’re polar opposites in terms of themes and style, but they’re both great in their own right. another great matchup would be Paul Thomas Anderson vs The Coen bros.
My choice is definitely Terrence Malick…! Definitely may hurt some people here, I know, but here’s why :
I ended here by making a search on google on Kubrick and Malick, just to say how I estimate both. Malick is my favorite director of all time, and “2001” maybe my favorite movie ever. Never a movie left such a deep effect on me. (But two movies come close : “The New World” and “The Tree of Life”.
But, the more I watch their respective filmographies, the more I feel Malick tries to answer to Kubrick, and mostly with The Tree of Life. The problem why I can’t appreciate Kubrick as I would like is because of how he was sometimes excessive. I agree with all Ebert’s reviews of Kubrick’s movies, including his disdain of “A Clockwork Orange”. Kubrick was a genius, but an excessive genius, a tormented one… while Malick is more – I have to say – peaceful. He’s a kind of modern Shakespeare, who can write about evil and film beautiful tragedies (“Badlands”, “Days of Heaven”) without ever contempting in it… which Kubrick doesn’t escape. And Kubrick is more like the excessive Marlowe… we all know how Kubrick could be cruel with his actors. Kubrick was obsessed with the dark side of human, and even if some movies are clearly anti-war, some are really more ambiguous (“A Clockwork Orange”, “Lolita”, “Eyes Wide Shut”), to say that this obsession sometimes turned to fascination and seduction.
I talked more about Kubrick than Malick, but what can I say, except that is movies are SO rich, so sensitive (although many say the contrary), so deep and incarnated. Malick seems inspired by phenomenology. Although people tend to oppose Malick and Kubrick, I think they ask the same deep questions about human existence, but I would say that Malick has more answers (or attempts to answer) than Kubrick. I think Malick find some meaning where Kubrick sees none and somehow deperate about human and life in general.
So, finally, I would say that Malick has a better long effect on me than Kubrick, and for that reason, I do not hesitate to choose him.
My favorite movies of all-time (all directors included) :
1 – 2001: A Space Odyssey
2 – The New World
3 – The Tree of Life
I love Malick’s work. But there is only one Kubrick