3 ms·

Tbh, Stanley Kubrick is vastly overrated. Yes every one of his movies has great cinemotography, and is technically excellent, but many of his movies are not exc

Tbh, Stanley Kubrick is vastly overrated. Yes every one of his movies has great cinemotography, and is technically excellent, but many of his movies are not excellent as movies. Eyes Wide Shut, full metal jacket, and the shining are not 10/10 movies, and David Fincher, Harmony Korine, Charlie Kaifman have all created movies better than all those movies listed. The problem with Stanley Lubrick is because he has a style that is very attractive to viewers, and his movies are very accesible also, he gets massively overrated by a lot of casual film watchers, which is fine so are a lot of directors, but his hype has leaked even to actual film critics with years of experience. It also doesn't help that movies like Room 237 come out that jack of Stanley Kubrick and draw meaning out of things that had no meaning. Sad that people glorify Kubrick but don't even know who Charlir Kaufman or Harmony Korine are, even though both directors have created movies that are just as good as a lot of Kubricks films.

smacktoward 8y ago
This is the first time I've ever heard Kubrick's work referred to as "accessible." If anything, the standard knock on him is that his movies are too distant and clinical for the average moviegoer; people admire 2001: A Space Odyssey, but they love Star Wars.
- Udik 8y ago
  Well, they are sort of accessible- 2001 is particularly cryptic and slow paced, but it's still a high budget science fiction movie with spaceships and talking computers. While most people won't ever think of enduring the screening of a Bela Tarr movie.
eanzenberg 8y ago
That's, just like, your opinion man.
- scruffyherder 8y ago
  I'm Enjoying my coffee.
mcv 8y ago
I'm not sure I'd call Stanley Kubrick's movies accessible. Sure, there are less accessible movies out there, but also much more accessible ones. And accessibility is not a bad thing; movies are meant to be watched. I personally find Kubrick's movies excellent. Rarely perfect, but often highly innovative in one area or another, and all completely different. They range from glacial 2001 to funny Dr Strangelove, to historical costume drama to brutal war movie, and he manages to capture the essence every time. There are many other deserving directors out there, but it'd be nuts to not consider Kubrick among the greatest directors.

smacktoward 8y ago

This is the first time I've ever heard Kubrick's work referred to as "accessible." If anything, the standard knock on him is that his movies are too distant and clinical for the average moviegoer; people admire 2001: A Space Odyssey, but they love Star Wars.

Udik 8y ago
Well, they are sort of accessible- 2001 is particularly cryptic and slow paced, but it's still a high budget science fiction movie with spaceships and talking computers. While most people won't ever think of enduring the screening of a Bela Tarr movie.

eanzenberg 8y ago

That's, just like, your opinion man.

scruffyherder 8y ago
I'm Enjoying my coffee.

mcv 8y ago

I'm not sure I'd call Stanley Kubrick's movies accessible. Sure, there are less accessible movies out there, but also much more accessible ones. And accessibility is not a bad thing; movies are meant to be watched. I personally find Kubrick's movies excellent. Rarely perfect, but often highly innovative in one area or another, and all completely different. They range from glacial 2001 to funny Dr Strangelove, to historical costume drama to brutal war movie, and he manages to capture the essence every time. There are many other deserving directors out there, but it'd be nuts to not consider Kubrick among the greatest directors.