A while back, I wrote a review for Barry Lyndon here that basically was the same as almost everyone else's review here. Pros being: beautiful to look at and great atmosphere, while cons were: cold, boring and slow.

Upon viewing Barry Lyndon a few times, this has got to be one of the greatest films ever made. Only Kubrick's 2001 can really top it. It is often maligned as a film full of style but with little, if no content. This criticism is not quite unjust for the casual viewer: the visuals are so incredibly overwhelming that the characters often seem like nothing but decoration. However, the human story is also overwhelming. Perhaps too overwhelming. You must, however, pay attention to the story, characters and events. The more you pay attention to a Kubrick film, specifically his post-Strangelove films, the more it gets under your skin, grips you. If you refuse to try to grasp his work, to give yourself into it's unconventional strangeness, to, indeed, become obsessed with it, then you will not receive the full impact Kubrick wanted the film to fill you with.

This may not be exactly what audiences want when they see a film. Indeed, it's amazing Kubrick was given so much freedom by Warner Brothers and MGM. They expect thrilling, disposable entertainment, drama, horror, comedy - something to grip them for about two hours, to get some kind of high and escape from their otherwise dull existence. Who can blame the audience, and it shows how much audiences crave these kind of films with the kind of entertainment in multiplexes today. Kubrick's early movies fall closer to this category. The Killing, the film about a race track heist is pure entertainment, a restrained, less violent Resevoir Dogs. Paths of Glory showed how Kubrick had already mastered filmmaking. By his fourth film, he had already created a film that ranks with the all-time best. He had mastered conventional filmmaking. Calling Paths of Glory conventional is an oversimplification: for it's time it was so unnerving, so truthful and hard and realistic that it was a pretty uncompromising film for it's time. Kubrick had mastered the war film, the drama, managing actors and film composition with this film. He would then bring his skills to Lolita, which is as good as any domestic drama today, and Dr. Strangelove, still incredibly funny and topical as long as man is capable of destroying his entire race. Spartacus showed Kubrick mastering the "Hollywood film" - everything about it still holds up with any epic Hollywood film today or since about the Roman Empire. It even gives Ben Hur a run for it's money. It is far and away, however, a true Kubrick film. Perhaps the only one where, if you had not known he directed it, you might not be able to guess it.

With 2001: a Space Odyssey, Kubrick has created something so different, so original, so strange that his followers and admires were baffled. Some had thought Kubrick had become mad, some thought he must be experimenting with drugs, some thought he became emotionally cold. Quite the contray, Kubrick was perfectly sane, sober and human. What he had done was change the motion picture medium - from disposable entertainment to a viscereal work of art. Not the Andy Warhol "art" (in other words, crap), but a true piece of art, evidence being that it still touches and grips people at the farthest reaches of their mind and soul even though it came out in 1968.

From 2001 onward, Kubrick went in this direction. Because his film compositions were so beautiful to look at, and because his narrative techniques so different, the cliche" of "cold Kubrick" was born. What he did was balance every element of filmmaking so well that audiences could focus on any part of it they wanted. Critics are quite strange, aren't they? They spit on "Spielbergian" films, call them silly, sentimental and resent being manipulated, used - and yet, when Kubrick makes a film, they crave manipulation, almost beg for it, desperately wanting something to tell them "it's okay, it's only a movie", and they resent Kubrick leaving them in the cold to figure out the film for itself without any help or cues and become uneasy at the fact that Kubrick lets the viewer analyze the film without any rules or restraints. Kubrick had always said: "Either you care or you don't." And he wanted the audience to either care, or not care. There was no in between. And therefore, you either become obsessed with his work, care about every moment of it, or dismiss is as "cold".

Barry Lyndon is, in my mind, one of the most emotional films of all time. The story about an Irish rogue and his fortunes and misfortunes set in the 18th century. Ryan O'Neil plays Redmond Barry, whom, after killing an English officer in a duel in an attempt to prove his love for his cousin Norah Brady, begins his quest to gain riches and wealth, and as the narrator says: "Never fall from the rank of a gentleman."

The power of this film is beyond words. You LIVE with Barry, you see his entire life fold before your eyes. People often complain about Ryan O'Neil's performance - but he does a great job. Realistic and convincing. Keep in mind that Barry is uneducated and shallow. The most wonderful part about his performance is you can never hate or quite love him. He's not a conventional hero or villain. At once, you can't stand Barry for his shallowness, his indifference to his fellow humans and his taking advantage of those around him. On the other hand, he is brave, a romantic and he is capable of love, seen throughout the film - above all, though, he is not obvious - that is the secret to his success, and the reason why Ryan O'Neil's performance is such a great one. He rises in society through his shallowness, his ambiguous motives - you can never tell exactly what's going through his mind. He goes from a poor Irish lad to a British soldier, is abducted into Prussian army service, escapes from that and becomes a gambler and then marries a widow, just for her riches and little else.

Barry's tale is a tragic one. He searches for riches - but never seems to know why (the narrator says he feels "destined" for riches, but Barry seems to search for them without a rhyme or reason), and as he gains them and the more he is surrounded by people, the more he becomes isolated - he abuses his stepson and wife, he ruthlessly takes over Lady Lyndon's estate and abuses all those around him, to the point where nobody loves him and he loves nobody, except for his young son Bryan, who tragically dies with his parents at his side on his death bed (in one of the most chilling and devestating scenes of harsh reality ever). The film ends with Barry losing everything and everyone.

Notice I did not warn you about giving away plot details. I didn't do this because the title card at the very beginning of the film and the title card at the intermission tell you everything that is going to happen, as well as the omniscent narrator. Barry Lyndon is not a film about what is going to happen, but how it will happen, why it has happened, when did it happen. The point is to create a strong sense of fate - which is the complete opposite of the less sober and more spontaneous, violent and bizarre A Clockwork Orange, Kubrick's previous film which emphasized on the free will and the importance of choice.

Kubrick's film requires patience and involvement. If you allow Kubrick to work his magic and if you insert yourself into Barry's world, this film is a highly rewarding, haunting and possibly a life changing experience (it makes you want to get off your butt and do something meaningful in your life so you do not end up like Barry). Check it out soon.

Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD
Video Occasion: None of the Above
Suitability For Children: Suitable for Children Age 13 and Older