(important part)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khygYFuwCx4
This guy interviewed Stanley Kubrick and signed an agreement not to release the footage for 15 years. The time is up and he released it, but it's all spliced with bits of Kubrick's films.
(original)
https://vimeo.com/148297544
I ripped the part where Kubrick admits to filming the moon landing, cut out the spliced clips and uploaded it to both vimeo and youtube.
>>17066984
Can't really tell this is him. If you didn't mention that this was Kurbrick I would have assumed that this was some homeless nut. Heck, it could be one that looks a little like him that was paid to say this.
>inb4 op is a faggot
how the fuck can you even watch it. it looks put together as fuck. the original video...how the fuck can you fuck up something so bad? HOW? I AM ACTUALLY FUCKING MAD. HOW???????????????????????????????
>>17066999
This, I'm also extremely fucking mad. I want the raw footage, I couldn't barely make it bearable with sony vegas.
>>17066998
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3p1T3sVX4EY
It's not, Stanley Kubrick doesn't have that accent. He also has a more gentle voice. The old dude in the video seems to have a bit of an uglier voice that's a completely different pitch.
Also he only remotely looks like Kubrick (Balding bespectacled bearded man) obviously the tight camera angle and lighting is meant to obscure any distinctive features and the fact his head is way more thinner than Kubricks (Stanley had a moon head hehe...)
Uhh, guys, why is the purported interviewer's channel filled with videos of kids playing sports and lots of conspiracy theory bullshit?
youtube.com/channel/UCieWhWDESsyo4EDPq-KYuQg/feed
>an imovie production
the free editing software that come installed on macs?
Yea, this guy is a pro filmmaker....
>>17067015
The audio doesn't sink with the interview. It's overdubbed. And the video is probably edited so amateurishly to hide that.
Fake and gay.
>>17066984
I already tried to tell you how fake this is last time. Stop shilling this video.
>>17067050
*sync
>>17066984
Maybe he's fucking with us, under the title it says he'll publish the final edit in 48 hours. I want to believe, but his youtube is pretty sketchy
>>17066998
Nice try Obama...
>>17066984
If this was real, why wouldn't they put up the raw footage immediately instead of splicing a clusterfuck of clips together? Wouldn't the person who put it up be afraid of government backlash? Why would he dicktease the public with something so huge?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPHRpFFRDUk
Obvious fake. At 7:33 the interviewer announces, "cut," and then tells the actor playing Kubrick what to say.
>>17067740
9:44 calls the actor Tom.
"Tom, you're going to tell me a story."
How could someone just go on the internet and lie like that?
I'm sad. I really wanted this to be real.
>>17066984
it is him
>>17069322
Yeah guys. Look at the one mole on his head and not the fact that he didn't have long white hair during the production of Eyes Wide Shut
Still nothing compared to what he and Anne pulled off in 1945
>>17066984
This is AT LEAST the third thread I've seen for this. Are you fucking daft? If you're gonna test and re-test this shit, don't do it in the same place you fucking dumb twat.
>>17067058
And yet this thread has been shilled for like a week now.
>1 /x/ casual posters
>0 cabal master assassins sent to wipe Kubrick off the books
Jimmy Church is going to be talking about this tonight on Coast To Coast AM.
>>17066984
Stop spamming this obvious fake.
>>17066984
totally not stanley k.
I want to slap this interviewer.
Possibly the most revealing interview in the past 15 years and he decides to "improve" it with stupid lighting and editing.
>>17066984
Accent is fake
Actor looks barely anything like him
The raw version literally shows the actor asking the cameraman for the next line
