Thoughts on Dr. Strangelove for my film class

Nicole Murray

Film 340: The Director’s Signature

Dr. Strangelove Weekly Reflection

​I was at Barnes and Noble this weekend doing my reading and the barista at the café asked me how I liked the Love and Death in Kubrick book I was reading.  I told her I was reading it for a class and she indicated that she loved Kubrick and she was interested in finding out if it was worth the read.  Although I have always been interested in film, I never was very fascinated with Kubrick.  I know that his version of The Shining wasn’t really King’s vision.  I found his films abstract and disconcerting for the most part.  That being said, watching Dr. Strangelovefocusing on the themes and viewing it from a more critical frame of mind, I actually enjoyed the movie a lot.  I also found the reading fascinating.

​Dr. Strangelove was of course satire focusing on technological changes and insufficient communications destroying the world as we know it.  It reminds me of something I started thinking a lot about when I did some recent reading on WWI and WWII.  The technological advances that have been made in the last 150 years have made the world a much smaller place.  People used to only see their portion of the sandbox.  Now, they see other people’s portions of the sandbox and wonder why other people seem to have prettier portions of the sandbox.  Also, we speak from our perspective—how we were raised, how we see the world from our portion of the sandbox.  We need to learn how to communicate with the other areas now because we can no longer pretend they are not there.  

​Kubrick made this movie in the height of the cold war era.  Children were learning how to “duck and cover” in case of nuclear attack from the U.S.S.R..  There were visions of the button around that could be easily pushed that would lead to our annihilation. I took a class on Russian Politics when I was an undergrad and couldn’t believe how spot on Kubrick was in his conversation in the War Room where they were discussing bankrupting the nation and the arms race, the space race.  We discussed this in class.  In fact, years later, when Reagan spoke of a potential “Star Wars” weapon, Gorbachev’s comment was along the lines of if Reagan was trying to bankrupt them.  The U.S.S.R. always had problems monetarily and Lenin was even advised by Socialist parties in other countries that he did not have the starting capital to make communism work at that time.  The reading did highlight that the film was “arguable ahead of its time”. I would have to agree that that assessment.

​Regarding motifs throughout the film, I saw copious usage of gum, cigars and music.  Gum and cigars pose a kind of fetish allowing someone something they can do with their mouth so as not to talk, or a kind of distraction.  Gum as something to freshen the breath, maybe a way of freshening the air and getting rid of the bad taste left in the mouth from the horrible things being considered and done by the men that are chewing it.  Cigars can and have had phallic significance.  Men showing off their manhood, in a way exactly what the men in the war room are attempting to do.  As we discussed in class, there is only one woman in the movie. Here we are talking about the good ole boys’ network and the games they play.

​Webster’s book also speaks to the beginning refueling scene of the plane as being more maternal love and nourishment than sex.  Webster goes on to cite other instances in the film that lend to the idea that the immaturity of the military.  I found this in interesting assessment.  The ultimate example of this being that the “Doomsday Device”, created as a deterrent for war, creates total annihilation because no one is aware of its actual existence or its capabilities. Only a known threat can function as a deterrent.

​I found Kubrick’s discussion of political theory very interesting—especially Ripper’s comment “and when they realize there is no possibility of recalling…there will be only one course open. Total commitment.” This idea of group solidarity and that politicians and military men would rather back a crazy general than admit a mistake proves to be inaccurate and why war was thought to be “too important to be left to the generals.”

​Another motif we saw was the idea of mechanical devices failing.  This is something that Webster spoke of in the book.  Mandrake was unable to make a phone call due and had to “appropriate money from the Coca-Cola machine”.  (Added meaning also in the subordinate’s unwillingness to destroy the machine as it would mean they would owe the Coca-Cola company for its loss).  The communications were destroyed on the B52 making contact impossible…after the missile failed to shoot it down entirely…and the door wouldn’t open to let the bomb drop…but Kong was able to get the missile to fly anyway (showing humanity’s own hand in creating its own destruction even when everything has happened to try to stop that very destruction).

​My only real concern in the movie was why Dr. Strangelove?  Thinking on it, he is the one that explains the theory behind a Dooms Device, and why anyone would think that this was a plausible deterrent.  We also see the kind of mind that would come up with such a ludicrous plan in that Strangelove is clearly an ex-Nazi.  People who would see such a device as a good idea would see how they could benefit from the elitist society left over.  Such a person does not need to be a Nazi, so to speak, but would have an elitist view of the world and who should be allowed to contribute.

​All in all, I found the movie quite satisfying from a satirical point of view.  It has made me very excited for this portion of the class and more Kubrick movies.