[C19fan]

The article mentions Audrey Hepburn was offered the role of Josephine. She played Natasha in the Hollywood version of "War and Peace". Kubrick was going to use the upwards of 20,000 Romanian soldiers as extras. This project was doomed when "Waterloo", directed by Sergei Bondarchuk, lost money at the box office. The other what if movie was Alejandro Jodorowsky's aborted "Dune" project.

[Magnum44]

Did they have to ask?

[Sans-Culotte]

Well, at least he made Barry Lyndon as a consolation, which is one of my favorite films. I also liked Waterloo.

[morphing libertarian]

There was a great nap film. Silent. French. Five hours. I watched 2 hours. Had dinner. Back for last three. Used split and triple screen. Sepia for battle scenes.

[irishjuggler]

It’s a tough subject, and everyone is entitled to an opinion on what they imagine to be the greatest film never made. Alfred Hitchcock’s Kaleidoscope would probably get my vote.

[Phillyred]

[Jolla]

I have watched Waterloo a dozen times, great movie, Rod Steiger as Boney, Chrisopher Plummer as Wellington - even an appearance by Orson Wells. A very factual based movie - very in line with events.

[seawolf101]

Any Godzilla movie has to be near the top of the list.

[Rummyfan]

Dr Strangelove gets my vote.

[Fiji Hill]

Although it's probably not the greatest film ever made, my favorite movie is The Girl Can't Help It I've seen it in the theater at least 10 times and if it plays in a local theater, I'll go and see it again.

[KobraKai]

I don’t know about the greatest movie never made, but we got Barry Lyndon out of the deal, and I’m happy with that. That’s my favorite Kubrick film.

[Bullish]

The movie adaptation of the novel “Lolita” was a successful film, but it completely missed getting Nobokov’s psychological story into the film. He made a huge mistake allowing Peter Sellers to help him rewrite most of the screenplay written by Nobokov himself. Peter sellers wrote his own character into scenes that did nothing much for the story and just gave himself more screen time. Scenes and characters that weren’t even a part of the original novel at all. It could have been a great film without Peter Sellers involvement. Sellers came off as quite the camera hog for that one. Just my opinion about one of Kubrick’s films.

And if you think you shouldn’t read a novel like “Lolita” then you don’t really know enough about that book.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***”Waterloo”, directed by Sergei Bondarchuk,***

Got on DVD! Saw it back in 1971. Excellent movie!

Bondrchuk’s WAR AND PEACE is also a MUST SEE! I have the wide screen Russian Cinema Counsel version. The Kultur version is pan and scan, cut for TV, and a faded film.

I saw that Criterion now has a high def release of this movie.

The 1927 French version of NAPOLEON is on it’s way to me.

[colorado tanker]

Waterloo was great but couldn't be made today. Too many extras and they'd probably resort to CGI which would ruin it.

Not every Kubrick movie was great. I loved 2001 at the time and was amazed by the special effects, terrific for the time. I showed it to my adult kids a few years ago and they wondered what I liked about it. Way, way too slow. Relied on the special effects to cover for a plot that plodded. Did not age well.

[Jim Noble]

There were a number of areas in which my mostly excellent education was deficient.

The importance of Napoleon was one of them.

[stylecouncilor]

ping