In Paths of Glory, we see Kubrick's "coming out"; the beginnings of his future aesthetic, with uncompromisingly straight-up dialog and a directness and unaffectedness of approach that made him an the undisputed master we now know him to be.
In The Killing, we see the beginnings of his beginnings. The hints are there, but it's too patchy to be able to say that the end product is well-knit. Some of the dialog is good. Attention to getting professionalism out of the actors/actresses lapses often enough to attract notice and mar the experience. I used to think that voice-over was invariably a cheap expedient; but upon refection, Kubrick's voice-over work in Barry Lyndon is well, well implemented. The voice-over work in The Killing grates the moment you first hear it, and then it becomes a noir ghost come back to haunt you every time it kicks in.
I think the story is trying to say something about "best-laid-plans", and that's cool. But the set-up for the denouement doesn't feel whole and right and good. Hayden's character has 2 million bucks, but buys a cheap, cardboard suitcase from a rundown dive of a luggage shop to stow it in? Sorry, it just doesn't compute, narratively speaking. I'm reminded of the ending of Manon of the Spring. Montand's character finds out that his whole amoral/jaded outlook on life was the result of a letter lost in the mails, before the age of the telephone. You have to digest that plot twist in light of the technical limitations of the period in which it is set. The plot twist at the very end of The Killing doesn't have this excuse. Even the similar, chaos-wrought twist at the end of No Country for Old Men works better because it is truly out of Anton Chighur's control. Perhaps Kubrick might have more carefully considered how to engineer this to make Hayden's character a true victim of circumstances.
What's good? Like I said, much of the dialog is good; some of it soars. Characterizations are generally good, even if the acting is a little stilted here and there. Of course, the cinematography is excellent. Oddly, the decision to make Hayden's character's love interest a last-minute, undeveloped character struck me a lot more honest than other crime movies where the plot development seems to be on its knees begging us to emotionally bond to criminals by over-developing the love interest angle. The Killing doesn't do this, and in fact even goes the other way, by showing shallow, self-deceived romantic conceits and feints among the criminal set. That's honest, and therefore good.
It's worth watching simply because it's Kubrick. If it works better for you than it did for me, then good. If you find some of the same issues I did, then at least it informs your perspective on how a great director/artist like Kubrick grows. Personally, I've always enjoyed watching artists grow, even in retrospect.
In The Killing, we see the beginnings of his beginnings. The hints are there, but it's too patchy to be able to say that the end product is well-knit. Some of the dialog is good. Attention to getting professionalism out of the actors/actresses lapses often enough to attract notice and mar the experience. I used to think that voice-over was invariably a cheap expedient; but upon refection, Kubrick's voice-over work in Barry Lyndon is well, well implemented. The voice-over work in The Killing grates the moment you first hear it, and then it becomes a noir ghost come back to haunt you every time it kicks in.
I think the story is trying to say something about "best-laid-plans", and that's cool. But the set-up for the denouement doesn't feel whole and right and good. Hayden's character has 2 million bucks, but buys a cheap, cardboard suitcase from a rundown dive of a luggage shop to stow it in? Sorry, it just doesn't compute, narratively speaking. I'm reminded of the ending of Manon of the Spring. Montand's character finds out that his whole amoral/jaded outlook on life was the result of a letter lost in the mails, before the age of the telephone. You have to digest that plot twist in light of the technical limitations of the period in which it is set. The plot twist at the very end of The Killing doesn't have this excuse. Even the similar, chaos-wrought twist at the end of No Country for Old Men works better because it is truly out of Anton Chighur's control. Perhaps Kubrick might have more carefully considered how to engineer this to make Hayden's character a true victim of circumstances.
What's good? Like I said, much of the dialog is good; some of it soars. Characterizations are generally good, even if the acting is a little stilted here and there. Of course, the cinematography is excellent. Oddly, the decision to make Hayden's character's love interest a last-minute, undeveloped character struck me a lot more honest than other crime movies where the plot development seems to be on its knees begging us to emotionally bond to criminals by over-developing the love interest angle. The Killing doesn't do this, and in fact even goes the other way, by showing shallow, self-deceived romantic conceits and feints among the criminal set. That's honest, and therefore good.
It's worth watching simply because it's Kubrick. If it works better for you than it did for me, then good. If you find some of the same issues I did, then at least it informs your perspective on how a great director/artist like Kubrick grows. Personally, I've always enjoyed watching artists grow, even in retrospect.