Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

Absolutely Brilliant!

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Stanley Kubrick is a cinematic god, up there with Orson Welles and Akira Kurosawa as one of the greatest directors to have ever walked the planet. Made by his brother-in-law shortly after his sudden death at age 70, Stanley Kubrick: A Life in Pictures (2001) could have been quite sugary and light, with nothing but praise for the late filmmaker.While there is a lot of praise on display, the documentary does portray a more even-handed view of Kubrick. The man could be difficult to work with, a trait most acutely displayed in his appalling treatment of Shelley Duvall during the making of The Shining (1980). However, he could also be warm and generous. He was, in short, perfectly human. I did wish some of his other collaborators could have been interviewed, but I'm perfectly happy with who did appear. Kubrick's career is covered in great detail, with the film itself clocking in at almost two and a half hours. Kubrick fans will definitely be interested.

This film brings me to tears every time I watch it. Jan Harlan's fantastic documentary about the great Stanley Kubrick is a true masterpiece. By giving insight into his past, films, family, and unfinished projects, Jan Harlan gives Kubrick fans a new look at a man who's greatness will never be equaled. The pacing of this documentary is wonderful, and ever second of it is informative and entertaining. Tom Cruise does a fabulous job of narrating it, as well. Jack Nicholson is the one who says it all; "Everyone pretty much acknowledges he's the man, and uh, I still think that underrates him." STANLEY KUBRICK: A LIFE IN PICTURES is one of the greatest films ever made.

The presentation of Kubrick's filmic life is chronological; it's a simple and non original method that is compensated by the clarity of the speech and the coherence of the internal structure. This speech is made from a duality which is inherent of Kubrick's social and filmic life. He has been considered as a genius for his director capabilities, but also as a madman for the inaccessibility of his private life.The documentary begins with a negative approach, illustrated with quotations showing how mad were Kubrick's projects. This negation will soon be compensated with positive contemporary interviews from his family, directors and actors. This double movement will reproduce itself all along the documentary with an alternation between Kubrick's films and his state of mind within and between the shootings. All is presented in the optic to show us that whatever the press has said about Kubrick, he was really a good director who made great movies with great people.The content of the documentary is as impressive as the art of Kubrick, even if his begins are shortly showed. That's not astonishing because Kubrick himself has never considered his begins worth seeing it (he denied his first movie, Day of the light). His second movie, Fear and desire, and his third one, Killer's kiss, are not detailed, but Jon Harlan makes us understand that Kubrick genius was already there.A switch in the art of Kubrick is showed from his Spartacus, produced by Kirk Douglas. There, Kubrick understood that sharing responsibilities was a dead end, the producer riding the boat while the director was washing it. Over, from there, Kubrick will made his movies alone..from Lolita to Eyes wide shut.The documentary shows then his second task: to give humanity to a non-human director. The press said that he didn't like mankind, which was a real paradox because in all his movies, the central interest was the search for humanity in mankind..but nobody understood that point.The only problem with this documentary is that Jon Harlan has too much orientated his speech; the interviewed actors are just saying how human he was and how good he was..it's a little bit boring a the end (but very interesting as well !!)We'll expected a better form for the content of this documentary, but Jon Harlan has the merit to make us believe that even if Kubrick was a genius director, he was also a human being. It's a good point.

Nobody denies that Stanley Kubrick was a unique director, one of the best ever of those who worked in the United States, and that the story of his life and his pictures is something really interesting and worth seeing. I had devoured a book about Kubrick's films before, and I was absolutely fascinated. But I am not supposed to review Stanley Kubrick but this movie about him.I rate it only 5 out of 10 because in my opinion it is too long but at the same time does not take its time to deal with the individual films – there are too many of them (although Kubrick himself is stated to have considered them too few!). Maybe they should have decided to concentrate on particular aspects of Kubrick's work. The interviewees are credited only by their functions not by their names, so we often do not know who we have in front of us. And altogether, as this film was made as a huge homage to Kubrick after his death, it is much too glorifying, too humble and too full of devotion. And hymns of praise sung to somebody else is not what one wants to hear for 135 minutes throughout.