Debunked: Shooting Stanley Kubrick [Hoax, Not Kubrick]

Fallingdown

Active Member
Heads up everybody . [...] T Patrick Murphy just released a video that will take Apollo debunkers by storm.

He claims to of interviewed Stanley Kubrick in 1999. During the interview he says he signed a 15 year nondisclosure and supposedly Kubrick admitted to faking the moon landings.[mod add: this claim comes at 18 mins timestamp]


It's pretty obvious the video tape is heavily edited of the interview. But it is proving or rather hard to debunk so......

HELP!!!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Heads up everybody . There is a new Loon on the loose. T Patrick Murphy just released a video that will take Apollo debunkers by storm.

He claims to of interviewed Stanley Kubrick in 1999. During the interview he says he signed a 15 year nondisclosure and supposedly Kubrick admitted to faking the moon landings. It's pretty obvious the video tape is heavily edited of the interview. But it is proving or rather hard to debunk so......

HELP!!!!!

Saying "the video tape is heavily edited of the interview" is kind of like saying
"confetti is heavily edited notebook paper."

Doesn't pass the smell test: Obscure film maker tries to pull scam using the only skill he's (marginally) got:
Editing film to his advantage.

Why in the world would Kubrick be talking with this nobody?
Why would he make such a confession?
How would a starving "filmmaker" keep world-changing knowledge secret for 15 years?

And even if we somehow write off all those important points...15 years from 1999 is 2014.
So we're to believe that a guy has this gigantic film, that his honor :rolleyes: compels him to wait 15 years to reveal,
(even though the interviewee is long dead)...and then he says
"Whew! Made it 15 years! Yay. But now I'll think I'll wait 'til almost 2016...for no good reason."

Yeah. Seems legit. :p
 
Saying "the video tape is heavily edited of the interview" is kind of like saying
"confetti is heavily edited notebook paper."

Doesn't pass the smell test: Obscure film maker tries to pull scam using the only skill he's (marginally) got:
Editing film to his advantage.

Why in the world would Kubrick be talking with this nobody?
Why would he make such a confession?
How would a starving "filmmaker" keep world-changing knowledge secret for 15 years?

And even if we somehow write off all those important points...15 years from 1999 is 2014.
So we're to believe that a guy has this gigantic film, that his honor :rolleyes: compels him to wait 15 years to reveal,
(even though the interviewee is long dead)...and then he says
"Whew! Made it 15 years! Yay. But now I'll think I'll wait 'til almost 2016...for no good reason."

Yeah. Seems legit. :p

Confetti Lol. But I agree totally. I have made all of those points. You know The people we are dealing with in there blind beliefs. I even brought up the fact that his last known supposed interview in 1997 was a fraud.

Adrian Rigelsford? Ever heard of him? Me neither, back then. Funny name, eh? Sounds like someone made it up. Sounds like a character from a British comedy film of the 1950s played, perhaps, by the surly and camp Harold Lang (you'd recognise him all right)

Stanley Kubrick, my boss, died suddenly and unexpectedly at his home in Hertfordshire in March 1999 after completing the editing on what was his final film, Eyes Wide Shut, starring Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. There was still much to do on the picture's post-production and this engaged us full time over the ensuing months.

(Snip)

The Durrants cover sheet to which it was attached stated: TV Times - 4 September 1999. The article was a two-page spread. In the centre was one of the photographs of the bespectacled and bearded Stanley that Christiane, his wife, had taken only a month or two before his death, while display type announced: World exclusive, Kubrick, The Last Interview. Beneath this, the text stated that Channel 4 would be profiling Stanley on the eve of the release of Eyes Wide Shut, that David Quinlan, the film editor of TV Times, was examining the man and his films and "Adrian Rigelsford and Kim Meffen, who visited Kubrick on set, uncover the truth in what turned out to be the last interview he ever gave".

The last interview he ever gave? Huh?

(Snip)


Several weeks went by as more pressing work was dealt with. Every so often I'd glance at the interview. It puzzled and intrigued me. One morning in October a meeting was cancelled and I had a spare hour. I reread the article. Did this really happen? Mmmm. I'd phone a couple of people?

Julian Senior, the head of publicity at Warner Bros in London and a close associate of Stanley's, didn't know anything about it and laughed at the suggestion. Brian Cook, the film's assistant director and co-producer, who never left Stanley's side throughout the shooting, shook his head, "Not on my watch." Jan Harlan, our associate producer, also said no. Margaret Adams, the production supervisor who had worked for Stanley on and off since 1970, knew nothing about it either. I showed the interview to Christiane Kubrick and she agreed with me. It was unlikely. Very unlikely


http://www.theguardian.com/film/2004/nov/20/features.weekend

That was why I decided to bring in here. I have hit a wall on this one. Besides this link all I can do is give my opinion and that and a cup of coffee will get you a headache with the CT'ers.
 



I apologize for bringing up this nonsense . The above is a clip to said " interview". I doubt Mr. Kubrick would let a 28-year-old unknown filmmaker yell at him and call him Tom .
 
that was painful. i made it to 18 mins then couldnt take anymore. It was somewhat promising at first but too many clips.. highly annoying even for an 'art' film.

it seems obvious to me it's a spoof. what was that film.. Spinal Tap. cant really remember Spinal Tapexcept i saw it in London and they all thought it was real...guess they dont have Laverne and Shirley cross the pond.

it starts off with things like "foreclosure film finance" :)
then opens with a debunked letter to Kubrick http://boingboing.net/2014/06/06/stanley-kubrick-explains-the-f.html

the 11 degrees of seperation was funny though.

Guy doesnt look enough like Kubrick during "eyes wide shut" to me though, not sure why they didnt fix his hair better. Maybe you cant make it too "real" looking or you get sued?

If he had had the "chemtrail labels" on the airplane dashboard, i MIGHT forgive the nauseating clip style, but he didnt. so i dont.

this one has 48 mins... although, it might be a government psychological test (like that Polybrius game) to see how fast people's brain's can melt. Like i said i only made it to min 18.. and i skipped through the Dr. Strangelove stuff. (to be fair i found Space Odyssey 2001 to be a wicked drag too... so what do i know, maybe it will become a cult hit)
 
sigh.. guess i should have read the comments first. heres Just where he reveals the moonlanding fake with no cut ups. So noone else has to suffer as i have.

im sure it will be removed from youtube pretty quick though..
 

Attachments

  • Bh.mp4
    16.8 MB · Views: 1,053
My first thought was that that doesn't look like Stanley Kubrick.

Here's another version including outtakes. For example, go the 7 minute mark where the interviewer asks the actor to tell a story about meeting Armstrong just before Armstrong died, and the actor then reminds the interview that he (Kubrick) died before Armstrong, so the interviewer then instructs him to tell a different story.

 

Attachments

  • Bh.00.mp4
    24.3 MB · Views: 1,212
From the comments.

it's not him. It's fake. Sadly. The moon missions were hoaxed and Kubrick already confessed in The Shining. But this is 1000% fake
Content from External Source
LOL he confessed in the Shining.
 
Back
Top