Author Topic: Stanley Kubrick confesses to faking moon landings! (Read 8939 times)

Exponent8 · « **on:** December 09, 2015, 04:03:58 PM »

A filmmaker, T. Patrick Murray, signed a 88-page NDA to interview Kubrick three days before his death in March of 1999. He was not able to divulge the interview until 15 years after his death.

Trailer for film "Shooting Stanley Kubrick":

First 30 minutes of film was uploaded to youtube last night:

Exponent8 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 09, 2015, 04:05:46 PM »

Transcript:

Quote

K: I'm so preoccupied. With my work, innovation, risk-taking, regrets...
T: Why are you giving this interview?
K: Because, it started to get to me after awhile. Well, this is difficult, because it is the first time I've talked about it. (sighs)
T: Sure, take all the time you need.
K: I've always been conflicted by it, but not consciously until years later. I was just blown away by the chance, the opportunity, the challenge of making this, this production, and I went into this like it was a regular film, like another regular film of mine, not thinking too much about uh the long term effects of what it would mean to society if it was ever discovered.
T: What are you talking about? I'm dying to know what you're talking about.
K: Well, a confession of sorts. A movie I made, that nobody is aware of - even though they've seen it.
T: A movie you made, no one knows you made? Is that what you said?
K: That's right. Is that intriguing? Do I have you intrigued?
K: I perpetrated a huge fraud on the American public, which I am now about to detail, involving the United States government and NASA, that the moon landings were faked, that the moon landings ALL were faked , and that I was the person who filmed it.
T: Ok. (laughs) What are you talking...You're serious. Ok.
K: I'm serious. Dead serious.
K: Yes, it was fake.
T: Ok. Wait. Wait...
T: I don't want this to be an R-rated film, but seriously, what the blank, but seriously...
T: I, I, I worked almost eight months to secure this once in a lifetime interview that almost no else could ever get, and instead of talking about his sixteen films that I've endured since I was a child...That we didn't land on the moon, you're saying?
K: No, we didn't.
K: It was not real.
T: The moon landings were fake?
K: A, a, a.. fictional moon landing. A fantasy. It was not real.
K: Don't you think it's important for people to know the truth?
T: The moon landing in '69, which was two years before my birth...
K: Is total fiction.
T: Total fiction.

Exponent8 · « **Reply #2 on:** December 09, 2015, 04:07:08 PM »

Continued:

Quote

T: Is that?...So, that's the 15 year thing. So that's makes sense now. That's why I can't release it for 15 years now, that makes total sense now.
T: Did we...we didn't land on the moon you're saying?
K: No, we didn't.
T: Why are you telling me?
K: A, a, a, a massive fraud. An unparalleled fraud perpetrated against them. They SHOULD know.
K: Nixon want to uh, they were planning, yeah, he want to fake this, this moon landing...
T: Are you contending that people DON'T want to know the truth about the world, reality, the moon landings...?
K: The government, knowing this, takes advantage of it by perpetrating fraud after fraud after fraud.
T: How did you end up giving in? Being complicit with this fraud?
K: I didn't want to do it.
T: This is NOT where I thought this interview was going!
K: With my help, with my, with my aid, and it is, it is bothering me.
T: I only have this certain amount of time with you. And I'll talk about whatever you want, but...
T: You're not...This isn't some type of joke, or...
K: No. No, it's not.
T: Or a film within a film thing...
K: Not joking. NOPE.
T: Okay.
K: The conspiracy theorists were right, on this occasion.
T: I don't know what to ask you first.
K: I thought it was wrong, I just...I didn't believe in perpetrating a fraud like that.
T: But you did.
K: It also undermined my artistic integrity to do that.
T: Ok, but you ended up saying yes. Why?
K: Well, yes, but because basically I was bribed. To put it bluntly, that's what it was. It was just a plain fucking bribe.
T: Why are you telling me?
K:A, a, a, massive fraud. An unparalleled fraud perpetrated against them. They SHOULD know! Don't you think it's important for people to know the truth?
T: Why did they have to fake it? Why? Why would they ever need to do something like that? Why would the government ever want or need to do...
K: It's no secret that NASA always wanted to fulfill this Kennedy prophecy.
T: Take it from the beginning...

Exponent8 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 09, 2015, 04:08:38 PM »

More:

Quote

T: I gotta be honest, this is where he (Kubrick) got me. I mean, when I actually put myself in his position, when I actually imagine that he was telling the truth, and that he was presented with this opportunity and if in the one in a billion chance that I lived his life and I was presented with the same opportunity, what would I do?
T: Yeah, he wanted his approval points up and he thought nothing could do it better than this.
T: What a conflict. I mean, gosh, I can't imagine being presented with that opportunity. On one hand, I'd really would want to do it, but then I'd probably say I'm committing a crime, and lying...
T: It depends, but my guess would be...no, if you're good, but you would do it.
K: Spielberg, (inaudible) Scorsese, even Woody Allen. There isn't one of them who wouldn't do this.
T: I gotta admit: I'd do it. I'd do it too.
T: But they dangled all this power and all this flattery on you, essentially?
K: Yeah, it got to me after awhile. You can listen to so much of that stuff before you start to believe it.
T: They just said you were the greatest and stuff?
K: Yeah, yeah - and I agreed with them.
K: Why are you telling the world? Why does the world need to know that the moon landings aren't real and you faked them?
K: Which I consider to be my masterpiece.
T: And you can't take credit, or even talk about...
K: Well, I am now..
T: Right, so you'll be dead. In ten years, or 15...
K: Right, ten or 15 something like that.
T: So, you can't talk to Roger Ebert about it. Does that frustrate you?
T: Why did they have to fake it? Why would they have to do that?
K: Because it is impossible to get there.
T: Ok, back up, back up, back up....

HiddenServant · « **Reply #4 on:** December 09, 2015, 04:33:14 PM »

How can we find out more about this?
This is very very profound to know.

Exponent8 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 09, 2015, 05:49:39 PM »

He has a website in addition to the trailers, it seems.

http://webhdtv.wix.com/shootingkubrick

Exponent8 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 09, 2015, 05:54:32 PM »

I also found this trailer for it on Murray's FB page:

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #7 on:** December 10, 2015, 03:49:36 AM »

Quote from: Exponent8

A filmmaker, T. Patrick Murray, signed a 88-page NDA to interview Kubrick three days before his death in March of 1999. He was not able to divulge the interview until 15 years after his death.

Trailer for film "Shooting Stanley Kubrick":

First 30 minutes of film was uploaded to youtube last night:

The first 30 minutes:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/S3ocNZGOLY0[/youtube]

This would be incomprehensible to anyone who has not seen all of Kubrick's films, because it is a series of short clips, a second or even less, from his films and from historical archives. It has the aspect of a broken mirror.

And then at 32:38 the sound cuts out and the rest is silent for 2:08.

.

.

2Vermont · « **Reply #8 on:** December 10, 2015, 04:23:22 AM »

Quote from: Exponent8

A filmmaker, T. Patrick Murray, signed a 88-page NDA to interview Kubrick three days before his death in March of 1999. He was not able to divulge the interview until 15 years after his death.

That was 2014. Why is this the first time we're hearing about it? It's nearly 2016.

Exponent8 · « **Reply #9 on:** December 10, 2015, 11:46:20 AM »

Quote from: 2Vermont

Quote from: Exponent8
A filmmaker, T. Patrick Murray, signed a 88-page NDA to interview Kubrick three days before his death in March of 1999. He was not able to divulge the interview until 15 years after his death.

That was 2014. Why is this the first time we're hearing about it? It's nearly 2016.

Who knows?

Does it really matter when? I think what matters is that he is getting the truth out.

Exponent8 · « **Reply #10 on:** December 10, 2015, 11:48:06 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

The first 30 minutes:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/S3ocNZGOLY0[/youtube]

This would be incomprehensible to anyone who has not seen all of Kubrick's films, because it is a series of short clips, a second or even less, from his films and from historical archives. It has the aspect of a broken mirror.

And then at 32:38 the sound cuts out and the rest is silent for 2:08.

.

That is why I included the transcript, so you can read what is said.

Exponent8 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 10, 2015, 12:12:24 PM »

Looks like it is starting to get some reporting on it:

http://yournewswire.com/stanley-kubrick-confesses-to-faking-the-moon-landings/

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #12 on:** December 12, 2015, 01:50:29 AM »

Quote from: Exponent8

Quote from: Neil Obstat

This would be incomprehensible to anyone who has not seen all of Kubrick's films, because it is a series of short clips, a second or even less, from his films and from historical archives. It has the aspect of a broken mirror.

And then at 32:38 the sound cuts out and the rest is silent for 2:08.

That is why I included the transcript, so you can read what is said.

The transcript ends with this:

Quote

T: So, you can't talk to Roger Ebert about it. Does that frustrate you?
T: Why did they have to fake it? Why would they have to do that?
K: Because it is impossible to get there.
T: Ok, back up, back up, back up....

Why would they have to fake the moon landing? Because it's impossible to get there.

Why is it impossible to get there? This next question is not in the audio. Has it been deleted? Is it somehow part of the silent 2:08 at the end of the clip?

Is the problem ambient deadly radiation like that in the Van Allen belts that would microwave the astronauts like a TV dinner?

Or what?

Incidentally, I have known several engineers who are involved in the space program in one way or another, and when I am in their company and the topic of man traveling in outer space comes up, I am fascinated by their collective response when I ask the question or voice the proposition as follows:

I ask how space travelers can be protected from deadly radiation bursts from the sun, or perhaps from other stars, which come at odd times and would overtake any spacecraft by way of speed since the crafts are unable to outrun or otherwise avoid being hit by such rogue waves of lethal radiation energy.

Or, I propose the concept that at Fukushima when crews were looking for a way to protect the workers from deadly radiation, they went to NASA asking for use of space suits so the Fukushima workers might be safer from radiation, they were told by NASA that there are no space suits ever made that have any radiation shielding built-in, so these suits would be of no use in nuclear reactor clean-up.

In either case, these engineers, who normally are quite conversant and logical, suddenly go into a kind of hypnotic trance state and clumsily change the topic, as though they have been programmed to never talk about deadly radiation and how it affects space travelers in current technology.

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #13 on:** December 12, 2015, 02:01:31 AM »

.

Coast-to-Coast-AM is right now talking about the Kubrick interview "released just yesterday."

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #14 on:** December 12, 2015, 02:22:30 AM »

.

Here is the actual interview. I don't have any problem understanding this:

Unedited Interview With Stanley Kubrick – Part 1
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/ABxAN8cfiOI[/youtube]

And this:

Unedited Interview With Stanley Kubrick – Part 2
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/embed/9imVp8tlecY[/youtube]

.