MovieChat Forums > Fear and Desire (1953) Discussion > By no means a bad film.

By no means a bad film.

posted 14 years ago by JackRabbitRutherford
13 replies | jump to latest

Of course compared to Kubrick's classics, it pales in comparison. But as a stand-alone film, you can't honestly tell me it's horrendous and offers nothing to film. I found it to be a great precursor to the psychological war films that would follow year laters. It's easy to side with Kubrick that it was a bad film in an effort to have his own tastes be comparable to yours, but he was a raving perfectionist, and although it's not perfect, it's still better than a lot of other drivel that passes for good.

[–] Klarkash-Ton 14 years ago

I definitely don't think it's a good film, but it's better than most of the low-budget movies of that era.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D26ACg91cEI&feature=channel

[–] IceboxMovies 14 years ago

I first watched it two years ago on YouTube, and all it merited from me was an amused shrug.

Watched it again today and liked it a whole lot more.

What I don't understand is how we're going to stay alive this winter.

[–] Monsieur_Arkadin 13 years ago

I agree. I didn't really think it was "good." But after hearing so much about it, I found it interesting in a sort of goofy way. If it wasn't Kubrick it wouldn't have been so reviled, however, if it wasn't Kubrick it also would have been forgotten much more quickly.

Jack White killed a man with his bare hands.... While singing and playing guitar.

[–] FANatic-10 10 years ago

I found it interestingly quirky and arty for a film of its time, some interesting shots, but it was also a very slow hour. At times it felt like a not very good episode of the old series "Combat" with subpar acting.

[–] dyahrmarkt 9 years ago

It's horrendous.

Please nest your IMDB page, and respond to the correct person -

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

Horrendous almost beyond the infinite...

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] Errington_92 9 years ago

There can be arguments about the lack of production quality, sub-par sections of the script or acting. Though I was intrigued by Fear and Desire's subject matter, exploring how individuals can become warped in horrendous situations.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not.

[–] corscorpionis660 8 years ago

I thought it was pretty good, some interesting psychological/existential reflections on war. I thought the part about Sydney going bananas was a little ham-handed, but other than that I thought it was pretty enjoyable.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Prequell 8 years ago

This is a great film.

8 out of 10.

People who think this is a bad film are just stupid. Stuff like Citizen Kane and Touch of Evil are worse than this IMO. This was an extremely well made movie for the issues he had with it. I didn't nearly expect anything like this when I heard how it was made. Maybe it's even possible that just because of the fact that Kubrick wanted to destroy this film makes people think it should be a bad film. No it's a great film, for it's time, and definitely for it's budget, it's even still a great film, still has things to offer to the genre. If you think this is a bad film you haven't seen any bad films.

[–] CoSMiGoNoN (77) 7 years ago

It's really bad.

[–] TheBadgerMan (81) 7 years ago

I was surprised when I saw its low IMDb score. Then I watched it. Kubrick rightly disowned it. Tough to get through.

[–] BrandNewPoster (6241) 10 months ago

It's alright, a 6/10.