If you like most of Kubrick's films, would you probably like this one?

Kathy and others,

Since making my post here last week I thought more about the OP's question. While it is correct to note, as Kathy generally agrees, that Barry Lyndon is as a type of subject matter not at all similar to any other Kubrick film, and in fact the same can be said of the others, there is something perhaps beyond the high level of craft that Kubrick shows in his films.

And that similarity is probably on the thematic level. Take in addition to BL a Kubrick film that on the face of it has as little to do with BL as any, and that would be A Clockwork Orange. How can these two films be seen in any way as similar?

I think the thematic similarity is one where the approach of the individual to his life, his perception of the relation between intent and actions, and his relation to society, differs from what we see "actually" occuring in such relations.

Alex DeLarge goes about his life (until arrested, of course) as a vicious predator, yet one who does so without seeing himself as purposely vicious. Instead he metes out his punishments and even rewards in a complex dynamic where he advances what he sees as his own interests in responding to the opportunities and challenges presented by others and the world around him. This of course hardly makes him exceptional; in fact other than the RESULTS of such dynamic being so violent and damaging, it is essentially true of all of us. In fact this gives him a certain, if tennuous, element of being an Everyman, albeit couched in a very particular obnoxious set of surface qualities and behavior.

Eventually Alex finds his approach to life no longer works. He obviously deserves to be caught and held, eventually imprisoned, for his dispatch of the cat lady. But it is really his misreading of his fellow droogies that specifically leads to his being caught. But, despite the viewer's satisfaction that Alex is no longer pursuing his nefarious ways, what can be said about the end result? Society attempts to deal with him in A Clockwork Orange's singular manner of treatment, which breaks down, rendered ineffectual.

No doubt the champions in that society of the Ludovico Technique were generally sincere in hoping it would succeed. And no doubt we must concede it was aimed at a real and significant problem. But...

Before proceeding with that analysis, I think it should be obvious what parallels exist between Alex and Barry, albeit not of the variety that make up the surface veneer of the two characters. For all the singular aspects of his life, his behavior and his actions, Barry like Alex has that Everyman aspect of using his wits to advance his interests and deal with others. Like Alex he succeeds, until he does not. What is it about both that enable them to succeed, but then not see the downfall awaiting them?

I think what unites them is that they in effect overrate their own ability to pursue their interests in the world. Ironically this overrating DOES carry each farther than they otherwise likely would have gone. But then it all comes apart.

The social element in their respective narratives is also critical. Alex's encounter of course is with the law, while Barry's is with high society. Both antagonists are capable enough of destroying our protagonists. But hardly in a productive or suitable way.

I think in fact this is common to both films - the "hero", really an anti-hero (even calling Alex an anti-hero seems a bit much), gets further in the world by pursuing their self interest in a clever enough way, but also in a way that leads to their downfalls. Society grinds them down, almost without any consideration of the relative merits and demerits of the hero. I say almost because concededly the surface level assessment of both is negative, for understandable reasons. But where society proceeds from such assessment, how it exactly goes about grinding them down, is not a pretty picture, either.

In effect Kubrick takes a decidedly pessimistic view of this overall dynamic. That which the protagonist sees as his own merits and virtues leads them to an approach to life that first rewards them and then destroys them, to no overall good end for anyone.

It is not coincidental that these two films were successive works of Kubrick's, either. One can also see at least in part of 2001 a preceding element of pessimism, and after Barry Lyndon Kubrick's focus changed somewhat, first to the isolated and incipiently psychotic Jack Torrance, then the ensemble of dysfunction in Full Metal Jacket. And ultimately Eyes Wide Shut, which I agree with those who see it as a sort of parody.

So in the end I think at least for the later central part of Kubrick's career we can see this similar pessimistic take on how man pursues self intent and interest, and how social forces ultimately respond. And it ain't pretty.