Thursday, 30 January 2014

The Stanley Kubrick Conspiracy - Part 2: Kubrick on the Moon

According to the Clavius website, the first mention of Stanley Kubrick and his possible involvement with the Apollo cover-up appeared in 1995 on the Usenet newsgroup - The Clavius group have dedicated themselves to sceptically debunking all notions of an Apollo cover-up (meaning that they are not exactly the most unbiased or objective source of reference material!), however the time frame they refer to does seem to tally. There are no apparent references to Kubrick and the Apollo cover-up before this time period. Using, I have trawled through archived early-internet pages and cannot (at least not yet) find the original "1995" source of the Kubrick connection. The earliest Usenet item I have been able to find dates from June/July, 1996 and can be found HERE & HERE
This item uses (word for word) the text that appears in the article referred to on the Clavius website. I have, therefore, had to unfortunately consider the validity of Clavius’ date reference in their reposting of the article that allegedly kicked-off the Kubrick connection. The article is entitled “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax”.
Here is a section of the alleged original Usenet article:

“In early 1968, Mr Kubrick was secretly approached by NASA officials who presented him with a lucrative offer to "direct" the first three moon landings. Initially Kubrick declined, as 2001: A Space Odyssey was in post-production at the time, but NASA sweetened the deal by offering to allow Mr Kubrick exclusive access to the alien artefacts and autopsy footage from the Roswell crash site. NASA further leveraged their position by threatening to publicly reveal the heavy involvement of Mr Kubrick's younger brother, Raul, with the American Communist Party. This would have been an intolerable embarrassment to Mr Kubrick, especially since the release of Dr. Strangelove. Kubrick finally relented, and for sixteen months he and a special effects team led by Douglas Trumbull worked in a specially-built sound stage in Huntsville, Alabama, "creating" the first and second moon landings. This effort resulted in hundreds of hours of 35 mm and video "footage" of the Apollo 11 and 12 moon missions.”

The article claims that astronauts were launched via the Saturn V rocket into Earth orbit for several days and then returned on schedule. Meanwhile, Kubrick's footage was “broadcast” as the “live from the Moon” images. Kubrick allegedly did the same with Apollo 12, but declined to work on Apollo 13. The article claims that a “director” called “Randall Cunningham” was responsible for Apollo 13. In an article entitled “Lunar Lunacy”, Colette Bancroft made an astute and slightly amusing observation: “Randall Cunningham. Never heard of him, can't find him on the Internet Movie Database, but . . . sounds like Richie Cunningham . . . who was played by Ron Howard, who directed Apollo 13… the 1995 movie, not the 1970 mission. I think.”

There are some clear flaws in the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article. For starters, Kubrick never had a brother called “Raul” (let alone one who was involved with the American Communist Party.) It is interesting that those researchers who were the earliest to begin discussing the Kubrick paradigm, also cited this “brother Raul” – indicating that they may have read this early article. Fortunately, most of these researchers quickly became aware of the non-existence of “Raul” and ceased referring to this aspect. However, it is still slightly worrying that certain researchers cited this as factual, before taking the time to evidentially prove or disprove the claim. I am also a little wary of the reasons cited for Kubrick’s involvement (access to extraterrestrial artefacts). If Kubrick did participate in a cover-up, it is much more plausible that he was granted carte blanche to direct however and whatever he wanted (with full studio backing, financing, promotion, etc.) for the rest of his career– which is exactly what he did, at least until his final film anyway.
Interestingly, Wikipedia has a page dedicated to debunking “conspiracy theories about the Moon landing”, with a section highlighting the Kubrick connection. The page cites the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article as the probable origin of the Kubrick connection. The page also notes that the article has since “been quoted as in earnest by Clyde Lewis.”
 It is odd that Wikipedia cite this individual alone and nobody else. Why? Clyde Lewis (born Louis Clyde Holder) is a peculiar character. He has championed his self-styled “conspiracy theorist” personae with all the grace and solemnity of a game show host. He has also had a long-standing connection with a number of individuals in the mainstream media / entertainment industry. To my mind, he raises some of the serious concerns that I have about other similarly high-profile figures in the alternative knowledge arena (such as Alex Jones), leading me to suspect that Lewis may be an agenda-steered purveyor of disinformation. &
Lewis appears to have been one of the first individuals to publicly state that Kubrick was involved in the Apollo 11 cover-up. He was also one of the earliest people to use direct quotes from the “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article. This has prompted some people to suggest that Lewis himself may have authored the original article. If this is the case, then it is possible (emphasis on that word!) that Lewis is the original source of the “Kubrick faked the Apollo footage” hypothesis – a disturbing thought!

In October 2002, the William Karel directed “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary film was aired on French TV channel Arte. The film “seemingly” supported the idea that the television footage of the Apollo 11 “Moon landing” was faked and recorded in a studio by the CIA, with help from Stanley Kubrick. The film included “interviews” with notable agenda players such as Donald Rumsfeld, Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Vernon Walters and Apollo astronaut Buzz Aldrin.

However, investigation of these interviews revealed that they were actually carefully edited from existing interviews that had no connection to Kubrick or the faking of the Apollo 11 footage.

The official presentation of the film says: “Filmmaker William Karel pursues his reflection on the relation of the United States with image, cinema and their capacity to produce ‘show’. What other story can lend itself to such an examination but the space conquest, a war of image and show more than anything else. What if it was just a huge hoax initiated by the two great powers? Between lies and truths, this film mixes actual facts and others, completely trumped-up. Playing with irony and lie, its purpose is to entertain and raise the question of the use of archive, which can be made to tell whatever you want.”

Whatever one makes of the mockumentary, there is a certain irony to this exercise in contextual dissembling – given that it is something the mainstream media appears to do on a daily basis. Tellingly, the film exercises techniques that have been the hallmark of certain media psyops – such as the 1938 “War of the Worlds” broadcast.

It is curious that the film also contains interviews with Kubrick’s widow Christiane – who discusses the Kubrick / Apollo connection in a far more “realistic” context than the other featured interviews. We really do need to ask why she became involved. The most interesting and detailed parts of the film are contained in her interviews. If, as some people have suggested, the film was a CIA exercise in debunking, was Christiane a willing and witting participant? If she was referring to something other than the Apollo hoax and the footage was used out of context, I would like to know what she was actually referring to…

The “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article and the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary may suggest that the whole Kubrick / Apollo connection has been orchestrated as a metaphorical “wind-up” or practical joke. If this is true, the joke would have to have had a gestation period of decades before coming to fruition. There appears to be no mention of it until the last five years of Kubrick’s life and yet the “clues” always seemed to be there. Was Christiane Kubrick complicit with this by taking part in the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary? Was Stanley Kubrick “seeding the clues” (over several decades) to a complex and sick prank, rather than revealing his involvement? Whilst I tend to doubt that Kubrick was complicit in a career spanning elaborate practical joke, we cannot fully discount the possibility.

There are worrying indications that Kubrick was at least partial to this way of thinking. Kubrick had a number of doppelgangers. However, he and his family always maintained that they were unsanctioned. One such individual was Alan Conway. He “became known for impersonating the film director Stanley Kubrick. Conway and his wife were travel agents with offices in Harrow, Muswel Hill and London… Kubrick's lawyer found out that there was someone impersonating him and, when he informed Kubrick of the impostor, Kubrick was said to be fascinated by the idea. Stanley Kubrick's wife, Christiane, was less taken with the idea, as she later reflected ‘It was an absolute nightmare. (There was) this strange doppelganger who was pretending to be Stanley. Can you imagine the horror?’” Apparently he wasn’t a very good impersonator though!

The “Stanley Kubrick and the Moon Hoax” article and the “Dark Side of the Moon” mockumentary have done much to muddle the notion of Kubrick’s possible involvement in the Apollo cover-up. If Kubrick’s involvement was real, then these pieces are certainly convenient for those agenda players wishing to prevent researchers from getting too close to the truth.

As a bizarre postscript to this blog article, I feel it is worth mentioning the theory that “2001: A Space Odyssey” was also utilised as part of the agenda-driven drug related counter-culture of the late 1960s. It is important to note that this phenomenon has a clear overlap with the work of NASA and the state-sponsored mind control paradigm (respectively).

Kubrick certainly had contact with a number of the agenda players within this scene. For example, Alfred Hubbard (who allegedly introduced Kubrick to LSD) was a key player within the CIA’s LSD distribution network. It is also curious that members of the 60s counter-culture began experiencing incredible highs through a combination of watching the “Stargate” finale sequence of “2001: A Space Odyssey” and a generous supply of LSD! Viewing figures allegedly skyrocketed, following this “revelation”, prompting theatres to repackage the film with the tagline: “The Ultimate Trip”. The tag has remained with the film till this day.

Another related theory surrounds the connections between Kubrick and the psychedelic, trippy tunes of progressive rockers Pink Floyd. There is an apparent correlation between the track “Echoes” (taken from their 1971 album “Meddle”) and the Stargate sequence in that they are both 23 minutes long, and changes in the music seem to follow changes in the images. However, despite claims that Kubrick made the film with Floyd’s music in mind, it is obvious that the band were still in their Syd Barrett / “See Emily Play” / “Arnold Layne” phase at this point and had yet to experiment with album-spanning, audio operas. It is entirely possible that the band was inspired by “2001: A Space Odyssey” and designed “Meddle” to fit the “Stargate” sequence, after the fact.


Roger Waters (bass player and key songwriter with Pink Floyd) revealed a significant connection with Kubrick when recording his later solo album “Amused to Death”. The album (released in 1992) was inspired by the book “Amusing Ourselves to Death”, an excellent work by Neil Postman that observed the dark nature of the mainstream television media. The album also featured scathing criticisms of the first Gulf War and George Bush Senior.

Waters stated in an interview with Rockline on 8 February 1993 that he wanted to use samples of HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey on the album. Stanley Kubrick, the director, turned him down on the basis that it would open the door to many other people using the sound sample. Others think that Kubrick refused because Pink Floyd had not allowed him to use music from Atom Heart Mother in his film A Clockwork Orange… There is a backmasked message on Amused to Death that appears in the song "Perfect Sense Part 1", in which Waters' backmasked voice says, ‘Julia, however, in light and visions of the issues of Stanley, we have changed our minds. We have decided to include a backward message, Stanley, for you and all the other book burners.’

Waters has had a long fascination with the larger agenda scope and certain esoteric issues. I have always found it curious that Floyd’s classic album “Dark Side of the Moon” (A “Moon” nod to Kubrick maybe!?) synchronises so well with the esoterically crucial film “The Wizard of Oz”. The person accredited with “discovering” this synchronicity described how "I have never said that I sat down and synchronized the whole movie before this. I've merely stated that back in 1979, when I was in high school, I fell asleep with Dark Side on the turntable, playing side two continuously. When I woke up, The Wizard of Oz was on TV — the Scarecrow was dancing that insane dance while the album was playing 'The lunatic is on the grass.' It was the funniest damn thing I had ever seen."

Just who is the identity of this person who allegedly “discovered” the now infamous mash-up of Floyd and Oz? Why, none other than the previously mentioned Clyde Lewis! The man who some believe kicked-off the whole Kubrick / Apollo 11 connection. What are the odds of that, eh!?

In Part 3, I will look at some of the more curious connections between Kubrick and the Apollo cover-up.
Stay tuned!

Kubrick Related Articles:
Updates, 6th Annual British Exopolitics Expo & More Stanley Kubrick Apollo Fakery -
Foxes, Saturn, Kubrick, Doctor Who and The Singularity -
A Movie About Kubrick Faking the Moon Landing? -
Stanley Kubrick - Updates -

Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One -
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two -
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics -


captron52 said...

Amazing entry! said...

Namaste brother; I think TPTB knew the Kubrick hoax was a Pandora's box never to be shut therefore they assembled a trail of conspiracy goobly gook to muddy the waters. Excellent post brother thanks for the read and links.

In Lak' ech, beyond the viel.... living for love...

The Truth Seeker's Guide said...

Cheers Ron.
Thanks for your support my friend.

The Truth Seeker's Guide said...

Cheers Chris.
Yeah, somebody has certainly tried to muddy the whole connection to the point where people either don't know what to think or don't care anymore!
There is some truth here somewhere... just not sure what it is though!
All the best!

Jasun said...

reading avidly along. One point:

"If Kubrick did participate in a cover-up, it is much more plausible that he was granted carte blanche to direct however and whatever he wanted (with full studio backing, financing, promotion, etc.) for the rest of his career– which is exactly what he did, at least until his final film anyway."

What about his many-year struggle to make Napoleon?

The Truth Seeker's Guide said...

Cheers Jasun,
Obviously this was merely an informed consideration on my part. But you are right about the Napoleon project, as it is an oddity and doesn’t fit the pattern of his other abandoned projects - films halted for ostensibly creative and personal reasons as opposed to financial. Napoleon was, as I understand it, an MGM project. I would argue that they gave him creative (emphasis) carte blanche - provided he met one criterion critical to most Hollywood backing: profit margins. As you no doubt know, MGM suffered serious financial doo-doo around the time of the Napoleon project and ultimately couldn't finance it for risk of it breaking the bank. This decision was seemingly informed by several "Napoleonic" box office disasters. When the project folded, Kubrick moved to Warner Bros where (I believe) he found his "carte blanche" creative and financial freedom.
One could also loosely argue that he did get to make the Napoleon film in the end, albeit much more watered-down in the form of Barry Lyndon.
It’s always good to chat to a fellow “Kubrickian”. The man was a truly gifted rarity in my opinion!
All the best.
Carl (The Guide)