I wonder if this screening was interrupted by the hauntological
phenomenon of Kubrick's revenant malevolently (re)materialising as an
obsequious Delbert Grady in order to 'correct' the film programmers
from the Error of Their Ways?
---------------------------
Cinematheque to screen Kubrick movie that he himself tried to quash
Saturday, August 04, 2007
John Petkovic
Plain Dealer Reporter
Forget "2001." The real odyssey is that of "Fear and Desire."
For 53 years, Stanley Kubrick's debut has drifted in obscurity, lost
despite numerous rescue missions.
"It hasn't been available for decades," said John Ewing, director of
the Cleveland Institute of Art Cinematheque. "I tried to show it in
1996 but couldn't."
The reason is Kubrick, who dismissed the film as "inept and
pretentious." So much so he had associates prevent it from being
shown.
"He didn't own the rights," Ewing said. "So he'd get other people,
even Martin Scorsese, to step in and prevent it from being released."
Kubrick even tried to destroy it. It was a failed mission: A recently
restored print is finally getting shown -- tonight at the
Cinematheque.
"With Kubrick's passing, the film might actually get out," Ewing said.
"It's only fair. Who is Kubrick or his family to get in the way of
this film? There are other people who worked on it, and film buffs
want to see it. It's a Kubrick film."
Acting in it gave Paul Mazursky an insight into the mind of the
legendary director.
"He had more ambition than anyone I had ever met," Mazursky said in a
2001 interview. "I was a college student when I went to Stanley's to
audition for Fear and Desire.' He was living in Manhattan in a sparse
apartment -- a couple of tables, a chair, some cameras. I just read
some lines, and he asked me to go right away to California to shoot a
movie."
Kubrick borrowed $30,000 from an uncle to shoot "Fear and Desire,"
with a camera that was jury-rigged to a baby carriage.
More at
http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/ent...ainment 
Movies