Skip to content


15 Things That Stanley Kubrick Can Teach You About Filmmaking

23 April 2015 | Features, Film Lists | by David Biggins


It’s my belief that you can learn over a hundred things from watching a single Stanley Kubrick film. Kirk Douglas called him a “talented shit”, referring to Kubrick’s exasperating perfectionist streak; he was famous for doing take, after take, after take until he got exactly what he was looking for. He was a firm, sometimes obsessive, director who wouldn’t move on to the next scene until his artistic vision had been perfectly realised.

Kubrick wasn’t born a brilliant director; he started working as a photographer and after he’d eventually moved into filmmaking, with the documentary Day of the Fight, he’d still look to other people for ideas on how to improve his abilities.

He pored over books, journals and magazines to keep up to date with the latest innovations in cinematography and dedicated himself to perfecting his craft. It can be argued that his genius emerged from always pushing himself to find new ways of telling stories on the big screen.

I’ve selected fifteen examples of filmmaking techniques, which demonstrate different artistic strokes to come from Kubrick’s mixed and colourful pallet. Please feel free to talk about your own favourite filmmaking techniques that Kubrick used in the comments below.


1. Match Cuts


How do you jump forward several million years in time without confusing the audience? For 2001: A Space Odyssey, Kubrick’s answer was simple. He linked the two different time periods with separate shots that looked graphically similar; the shape of the bone in the first shot resembles the shape of the satellite in the second shot (also, both the bone and the satellite are moving in the same direction).

The cut creates a link between the human race at its most primitive, when it is starting to use bones as tools, and at its most technologically advanced, when it has managed to achieve space travel. This ‘match cut’ wasn’t invented by Kubrick but, so far, no one has ever used it quite as dramatically.


2. Using Natural Lighting


Kubrick is often praised for his innovative use of ‘natural light’ in Barry Lyndon, which was (mostly) lit using sunlight and candlelight. But ‘natural light’ doesn’t necessarily mean just sunlight or candlelight; it can also mean using the light that would be available to the characters at that moment in time.

In other words the glow from a computer screen could be considered natural light, and also the light coming from a light bulb. If you consider ‘natural light’ in these terms, Kubrick often preferred to light his films in this way.

For example, he insisted that the war room bunker in Doctor Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb should really be built out of concrete to stop the film crew from being able to use artificial light (unlike in a normal studio, if the ceiling was solid concrete, it wasn’t possible to place light bulbs in it). As a result the war room was built with a large circular lighting rig that complimented the famous set’s round table.


3. Using Artificial Lighting


Artificial lighting is easier to manipulate, and can also help with ambitious artistic decisions. One example of Kubrick using artificial light is during the ‘dawn of man’ sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey, which was shot in a studio so that the light could be made weaker to help convey an earlier point in the earth’s history.

The Shining uses both natural and artificial light to help change with the mood changes that occurs during the horror. The first part of the film uses natural light, which gives the image a warmer, more comfortable, feel. As the film progresses, and winter hits the hotel, blue filters were used on the outside windows and the lighting was switched to artificial; this change creates a cold, chilling, atmosphere.


4. Vanishing Points

Vanishing points

According to the Collins English Dictionary a ‘vanishing point’ is “the point to which parallel lines appear to converge in the rendering of perspective, usually on the horizon”.

Ken Adam, the production designer for Doctor Strangelove, claims to have enlightened Kubrick on the value of having a ‘vanishing point’ when sketching a set or framing designing a shot. Adam perhaps didn’t appreciate the impact that their conversation would have on the legendary director.

Kubrick used ‘vanishing points’ for framing, as the technique creates a ‘one-point perspective’ where the audience can see that all shapes on the screen get smaller in all directions, drawing your eye towards the centre of the screen. It is perhaps the most easily definable element of a film that makes it recognisably ‘Kubrickian’.


5. Tracking Shots

Tracking shots

Kubrick used his camera to create a great sense of scale and depth in his films. They feel dynamic because he let his camera flow through the narrative; firstly through tracking shots and secondly through using Steadicam shots (see below).

A tracking shot would tend to follow a film’s subject from behind, in front or along their side. Kubrick’s Paths of Glory buses tracking shots to reveal the great enormity of war in the first world war. The flowing movement reveals soldier, after soldier in the winding french trenches.

As well as showing the full scale of first world war, the tracking shots in Paths of Glory also allow for the actors’ movements to be fully captured without interruption; they can walk, run, as well as dive from enemy fire and their fearful body language from the moment is entirely readable (in a way that static shots can’t always allow for).


6. Steadicam Shots


The Shining made extensive use of the ‘Steadicam’, where the camera operator’s movement is isolated with a camera stabilizer mount, which stops the picture from shaking. The invention of the Steadicam combined the smoothness of a dolly tracking shot, with the flexibility of a handheld camera.

The Shining’s sets were designed specifically with the Steadicam in mind. It’s a great tool for directors, as it allows camera operators to follow actors around complex scenery. This means that directors can film a scene in one long continuous take, not having to disturb the actors.

It also gives the camera operators a great deal of flexibility; during the maze sequence the camera operator was able to run after the actors, giving a remarkable sense of speed and danger. Unlike a dolly, which would have appeared effortlessly smooth, the fact that a real individual is carrying the Steadicam heightens the sense of pursuit during the scene.


7. Hand-held Camerawork


Kelvin Pike, the camera operator for Doctor Strangelove and The Shining, used handheld cameras in Doctor Strangelove’s battle sequences. This gives the sequence the feel of a documentary, as if a war correspondent had captured the spectacular footage.

The shakiness, and the poor camera angles, heightens the sense of danger and authenticity (the footage doesn’t look at all fake). Continuing this theme, the film’s Director of Photography, Gilbert Taylor, used real Royal Air Force stock footage, adding to the sense of realism and immediacy.

Picking the right moment to use a hand-held camera can really add drama to a film. Almost all of Barry Lyndon is shot with a camera on a tripod, yet when Lyndon’s wife goes mad, the scene is shot hand-held and the chaos of the moment is intensified.

It’s worth mentioning that using a hand-held camera doesn’t literally mean that the camera has to be held in one of the crew’s hands. Hand-held cameras are often strapped to the operator using a harness for stability and control.



Pages: 1 2


Other Brilliant Movie Posts On The Web

Like Our Facebook Page and Get Daily Updates
  • Pingback: What Can Stanley Kubrick Teach You About Filmmaking? | The Radio Face Report()

  • Brian Lussier

    It’s a good list, and all these things are true, but I’d just point out, for future reference, its lack of variety. Too many of these fifteen points are about camera work: you’ve got Steadicams, wide angles lenses in two different situations, the vanishing point, tracking shots… Perhaps something like his use of editing would have been good. Nowadays, it seems filmmakers are just cutting, cutting, cutting, like the film was cut with a lawnmower. Kubrick can teach us when NOT to cut, which is just as important. Spielberg said that Kubrick taught him how to shoot things in masters and to trust the audience to be their own editors in their mind’s eye. That’s important to me. I also feel it’s kind of a mistake to not mention his outstanding and unparalleled use of music. Just food for thought for the next time you write something similar: try to be perhaps more varied so it doesn’t feel repetitive.

    • Franco Gonzalez

      Also keeping things as simple as posible is another thing someone can learn from Stanley Kubrick, in every aspect, the script, photography, sound design, production design, editing, etc.

  • JesterRaiin

    > The shakiness, and the poor camera angles, heightens the sense of danger and authenticity (the footage doesn’t look at all fake).

    In some instances – yes.

    Unfortunately, nowadays shaky, dynamic camera is used in entirely wrong moments and clearly without a skill. Effectively, we see perfectly still and calm scenes but the picture isn’t.

    It’s best observed in tv series, where actors do nothing aside of simply talking, or during action sequences, when dynamism (probably used to hide the fact that actors can’t fight) makes it impossible to tell what is really going on.

    • marcopolo

      This is the ‘amateur documentary’ look which I hate and irritates me….no amateur film maker shakes a camera like that even under fire on the front line.

      • JesterRaiin

        Precisely. I haven’t seen much shakiness in movies recorded with a sport head camera, dammit!

  • Pingback: Covert Bacon | CB Pig Pen: Friday, 04/24/15|Covert Bacon()

  • steveranden
  • steveranden

    “expletive-filled,” not “expletive-filed.”

  • Pingback: Random Things › <b>15 Things</b> That Stanley Kubrick Can Teach You About Filmmaking <b>…</b>()


  • I feel that what you’ve listed are not lessons to be learned from Kubrick, but technical components of his style. To merely emulate this in one’s own film would be to fall far short of Kubrick’s daring artistry. The real lesson to be learned from Kubrick is to develop and concentrate one’s own style, and find one’s own methods of effective storytelling and audiovisual expression, just as Kubrick did with these techniques.

  • Maximo Cunillera

    I learned that There is differents aspects of Kubrick, one is the man devoted to the story but never compromising his vision, other is like a chess player he can wait for the right time to develop a proyect, and also we find the man with a passion for all details in the cinematography.
    There is the reclusive man protective all about of his privacy, and there is the artist who defend his work, controlling everything about his films

    A lot to learn on the same person,
    Kubrick a giant among greats

  • Pingback: 15 Lessons From Kubrick | Political Film Blog()

  • Tony Martinez

    I’m afraid that you missed the point of #1. The match cut between the bone and the orbiting craft (which is in fact a bomb) is meant to signify that despite the evolution of man, we are still savage animals. Our weapons have merely become more sophisticated.