"It's crazy how you can get yourself in a mess sometimes, and not even be able to think about it with any sense. And yet, not be able to think about anything else. You get so you're no good for anything or anybody. Maybe it begins by taking life too serious. Anyway, I think that's the way it began for me."
Comparing this to the other films he made, it simply is not as strong and for a good reason since this really is his first feature film (I don't feel it is right to count Fear and desire among them). But that does not change the fact that Killers kiss is a great noir movie, fresh and youthful with a hint of what was about to come from one of the greatest directors of all time.
Though at times cliche and predictable, a very young Kubrick (26) is able to imprint his talents through the use of very daring and brave mise en scene. Any of the film's follies are quickly permissible if one understands and views it as a sort of trial and error that gives way to a fantastic career.
I love returning to this movie! The imagery is very potent. More so than the Killing. The story though flawed, has emotional resonance. Kubrick achieved so much with so little. This is his most youthful movie. He could get away with a rough sense of spontaneity, being its only his second movie. This is kubrick's sunrise.
Showcasing a gritty New York City and a climactic ending in a mannequin factory, Kubrick makes a passable noir that would be perfected in The Killing.
A few surprising touches single out this early Kubrick film from other B-movies. However, these hardly make up for what is otherwise a film with a very simple and clichéd plot. The film is still worth a viewing, though, simply because it is one of Kubrick's first, which contains tiny inklings of his greater and later genius.
Filled with noir iconography captured by the eye of a young Stanley Kubrick. There are so many purely photographic moments that show a real affection for the genre's tropes. The plot is extremely convoluted, as most film noirs deliberately are, but I found myself being really drawn in by the visuals. The contrasty black-and-white cinematography is beautiful even if the film itself is a little rough around the edges.
The visuals attest to Kubrick's photographer's visual sense, so it looks amazing in spots. The story, though, really does nothing for the film. It's great to look at, and interesting to watch to see where Kubrick began, but outside of that it is forgettable.
Not Kubrick's best, for sure: Wonderfully shot but lacking rhythm. The characters are somehow kind of plain, cliché and not relatable. The sreenplay its not amazing also. It seems like it has all Kubrick's vocabulary in it already but very raw and not used in the best way. And what the f*** about that ending?!
Definitely not Kubrick's best. the plot are pretty standard for a film of Kubrick. Nice B & W cinematography though
This film is endlessly underrated! This is actually a pretty great movie, not perfect, but far from the amateur seal it is currently given.