The Stanley
Kubrick Exhibition presented an informative though abridged look into the works
of American film director, Stanley Kubrick (1928 – 1999). Renowned for works
such as Lolita, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and A
Clockwork Orange, Kubrick was a well-known perfectionist and meticulous
planner. However, the exhibition dedicated to him left a lot to be desired in
terms of the usage of the exhibit space, and the limited information regarding
the director outside of his major productions.
The
entrance to the Kubrick Exhibition was located on the first floor of the
building. Perhaps due to space constraints, the exhibit lacked a grand
entrance. Moreover, the entrance space left a lot to be desired in terms of
sensory stimulation. Photographs and captions lined the way towards the first
viewing room, and conveyed a sense of solemnity even though the exhibit was a
cause for celebration, and not mourning. Moreover, the lights were not
conducive to reading (the numerous documents on display); they were dim and
sleep-inducing throughout the entire exhibit
Kubrick’s
works were displayed in makeshift rooms. These rooms were not arranged
sequentially, but were interconnected such that the viewer was able to move
around freely. Instead of presenting a cohesive look at Kubrick’s works, I
walked from room to room as if I were in a maze, and left the exhibit with a
scattered understanding of his works. The exhibit failed to track the evolution
of Kubrick’s works, something that seemed like a logical tool necessary in
order to contextualize his many films. While many of the costumes, gadgets, and
sculptures from the films were on display, again, the lack of chronological
clarity ruined an opportunity to further satisfactorily.
The
individual viewing rooms were poorly designed and often too small to
accommodate the traffic. Each room was accessible from two adjacent rooms.
Picture a square: the doors were located at adjacent corners of the square.
Everything from manuscripts to design sketches, signed cards, and privately
exchanged letters between Kubrick and his friends were lined along the wall. On
the wall farthest from the entrances was the screen on which clips from each
movie were displayed. As the rooms filled up, the audience began to cluster
near the wall opposite the movie screen. I did not browse through all the
display cases in The Shining viewing room because the crowd
watching the film completely overwhelmed the space. As such, the experience was
uncomfortable at times. One redeeming quality of the viewing rooms was the
strategic placement of an information board right in front of the bench. This
allowed the viewer to watch the clips, read the blurb (if he/she does not want
to spoil the film), or do both at the same time. This information board also
displayed documentary footage from the shooting of the film which provided
additional information for enthusiasts. With this wealth of information, one
only wished that the lone bench in each room was longer, and not so
square.
While the design of the
exhibit space was far from perfect, the materials for each film were
informative and thought-provoking. Kubrick’s meticulous notes on scenes
sketches, set designs, logos, and filming schedules were framed and placed all
along the back wall. Kubrick’s obsession with clarity and perfection was
evident, if only from the series of similar but slightly modified sketches of
the logo for The Shining, on which Kubrick had obsessively written
detailed notes about shade, color, and density of ink amongst other
typographical and visual features. In some viewing rooms, large sculptures and
props created more traffic problems—although I suspect that most viewers would
agree that they were nevertheless welcome. In the A Clockwork
Orange viewing room, two female mannequin sculptures seen in the movie
were installed on opposite ends of the room. This placement was reminiscent of
the film’s opening scene, in which the camera slowly zoomed toward the back of
a room with mannequins lined up on each side. In contrast, in the 2001 viewing
room, additional displays (e.g. a colored panel of planets and stars) were
dissonant with the grandiose and rather solemn mood of the film.The lack of
consistency in the relationship between the space and the exhibited works
conveyed nothing but carelessness on the part of the curators.
Located
off on the side was a viewing room that showcased a montage of Kubrick’s works,
and another room that displayed materials relating to two of Kubrick’s
unfinished works. Ironically, these two rooms were tucked away between viewing
rooms and were quite secluded; to access the room displaying unfinished works,
one had to walk through a very dark viewing room. This montage of all of
Kubrick’s works would have attracted a much larger audience had it been placed
at either the entrance or the exit of the exhibit.
In
aggregate, the Stanley Kubrick Exhibition failed to effectively convey its
informative richness to its viewers due to its suboptimal floor-plan and usage
of space. Emphasis was not placed on a generalized understanding of Kubrick’s
work. While I left with more knowledge regarding Kubrick’s stylistic quirks in
each major film, I remained puzzled about the man himself because the exhibit
comprised a mere assemblage of facts, images, tables, and figures about his
films. Hopefully, future exhibitions will better synthesize Kubrick’s works
with his biography, and provide a space in which the ethereal qualities of
films like 2001 and Spartacus are given the
focus they deserve.
No comments:
Post a Comment