Marcus Richey asks: "I working on what might be the difference between Kubrick's "profound" pessimism and the pessimism I see in the work of the Coens. Any comments?" I'm not too sure about the Coens, but they do seem to revel in both pop culture cross references (especially stylistic comparisons to film noir in BLOOD SIMPLE and BARTON FINK) and perversely offbeat characterizations. On the other hand, I continually think of Kubrick as the most successful misanthrope since Jonathan Swift. From PATHS OF GLORY on, his films seem to be an unceasing indictment of the stupidity, cruelty and progressive de-"humaniza- tion" of the human race, whether set in the past (BARRY LYNDON) or the future (A CLOCKWORD CLOCKWORK ORANGE), whether concentrating on the foibles of one individual or a whole government (DR. STRANGELOVE), whether set in a family (THE SHINING) or a war (FULL METAL JACKET). What does it say that 2001 is his most upbeat film--when "salvation" comes only when a human is transformed into Something Else by an alien intelligence? Look at the humans in 2001--there is not one remarkable line of dialogue; cliches and banalities and government subterfuge are hailed as a "great speech"; they traverse the cosmos, but not one looks out the window and sees anything but the Void; the most sympathetic character is a *computer*! And then look at the Star Child--he looks down at the earth, and his eyes are filled with wonder! Don Larsson, Mankato State U (MN) ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]