Four soldiers trapped behind enemy lines must confront their fears and desires.Four soldiers trapped behind enemy lines must confront their fears and desires.Four soldiers trapped behind enemy lines must confront their fears and desires.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Quite a few people claim to have seen this film, but anybody who tell you that it is not as bad as Kubrick would lead you to believe is flat-out lying about having seen the film. Kubrick is the greatest artist of the last couple centuries, but this film is BAD. Not Kubrick bad, but Ed Wood bad. There are lines like, "I felt fear. Fear I hadn't felt since I kissed my dying grandmother." And the whole thing looks like it was made in somebody's backyard.
There is one thing funnier than this film: the trailer! It was shown with the film at the George Eastman House, and trust me, if you ever get the chance to see it, the trailer alone is one of the most hilarious pieces of film you will ever see. It's a gem!
"Fear & Desire" should be seen, if only to show how an awful, pretentious young filmmaker can flourish to such heights as "Dr. Strangelove," "2001," and "Barry Lyndon." Interestingly enough, the Eastman House print (one of the two still in existence, I believe) was short the film's official running time by a couple of minutes, and there are a few unlikely jump-cuts in the film, which leads one to believe that Kubrick himself cut this film a bit, as he did with "The Shining." However, the other remaining print is the original camera negative, which is stored somewhere out of the country. I would kill to get my hands on that print.
If you get a chance to see this film, do so, and see Kubrick's genesis, and how far he came.
There is one thing funnier than this film: the trailer! It was shown with the film at the George Eastman House, and trust me, if you ever get the chance to see it, the trailer alone is one of the most hilarious pieces of film you will ever see. It's a gem!
"Fear & Desire" should be seen, if only to show how an awful, pretentious young filmmaker can flourish to such heights as "Dr. Strangelove," "2001," and "Barry Lyndon." Interestingly enough, the Eastman House print (one of the two still in existence, I believe) was short the film's official running time by a couple of minutes, and there are a few unlikely jump-cuts in the film, which leads one to believe that Kubrick himself cut this film a bit, as he did with "The Shining." However, the other remaining print is the original camera negative, which is stored somewhere out of the country. I would kill to get my hands on that print.
If you get a chance to see this film, do so, and see Kubrick's genesis, and how far he came.
Kubrick's visual flair is undone by a pretentious script and uneven acting. Then too the storyline is a real stretch, so, all in all, I can see why the legendary filmmaker disowned this his first feature length effort. Nonetheless, there's all kind of tension implicit in four guys trapped behind enemy lines. So the premise has real potential. Too bad the script seems more interested in literary tropes than their life-and-death anguish. It's hard to be absorbed into the characters when they're spouting dialogue from Shakespeare. After all, these are supposed to be ordinary guys, not someone declaiming from center stage. And just who decided Pvt. Fletcher should impersonate a dopey clown that's about as humorous and affecting as a kick in the shins. And what about the girl whose deadpan expression never changes regardless the provocation. Clearly, at this stage, Kubrick is more skilled with camera than with actors. All in all, there may be something profound somewhere in the mess, but excuse me if I don't go digging in what may be a fool's errand.
Fear and Desire (1953)
** (out of 4)
Stanley Kubrick's first feature film isn't nearly as bad as some reviews have said and I'm really not sure why he doesn't want the public to see this one. Four soldiers are shot down behind enemy lines and must face their fears in order to survive. The film has an extremely low budget, which hurts matters but it's interesting enough to see Kubrick working on his technique. The camera-work by Kubrick is certainly the highlight and there's some nice editing along the way.
As of today the Kubrick estate hasn't released any of his shorts but you can find the online at various places.
** (out of 4)
Stanley Kubrick's first feature film isn't nearly as bad as some reviews have said and I'm really not sure why he doesn't want the public to see this one. Four soldiers are shot down behind enemy lines and must face their fears in order to survive. The film has an extremely low budget, which hurts matters but it's interesting enough to see Kubrick working on his technique. The camera-work by Kubrick is certainly the highlight and there's some nice editing along the way.
As of today the Kubrick estate hasn't released any of his shorts but you can find the online at various places.
It's remarkable how much of a mess this film is. The mythology is that Kubrick himself hated the film in his later years and wanted to suppress it, and you can quite see why. The only upside is that this film proves that even geniuses have to start with some terrible work to learn from and improve. Only watch this if you are a Kubrick completist, otherwise avoid.
I've been dying to see this film for some time now - ever since I first fell in love with Kubrick's movies - but I was also a little hesitant, due to repeated reports that this film was seriously, even fatally flawed. Now that I've finally seen it, I can confirm it: it is quite flawed.
The dialogue, including its attempts at humor, is consistently corny. The music is like a bad imitation of Bernard Herrmann score. The acting is often sub-par. The budget is obviously very low. The editing is often awkward. And so on.
Yet, despite all of this, I found myself getting absorbed in it, and, by the end, I caught myself nodding in overall approval. Despite the films warts and moles, Kubrick manages to create a decent little film. Elements of his later, oft-famed style can be found throughout, especially in the cinematography. Taken for what it is, I think it's an enjoyable movie.
As for the films many flaws, just keep in mind that even the tallest man was born small. I'd recommend this film to any serious Kubrick fan. Watching it, one knows that big things lay ahead.
The dialogue, including its attempts at humor, is consistently corny. The music is like a bad imitation of Bernard Herrmann score. The acting is often sub-par. The budget is obviously very low. The editing is often awkward. And so on.
Yet, despite all of this, I found myself getting absorbed in it, and, by the end, I caught myself nodding in overall approval. Despite the films warts and moles, Kubrick manages to create a decent little film. Elements of his later, oft-famed style can be found throughout, especially in the cinematography. Taken for what it is, I think it's an enjoyable movie.
As for the films many flaws, just keep in mind that even the tallest man was born small. I'd recommend this film to any serious Kubrick fan. Watching it, one knows that big things lay ahead.
Did you know
- TriviaStanley Kubrick later denounced this film as amateurish, saying he considered it like a child's drawing on a fridge.
- GoofsThe lieutenant and Fletcher approach the house and are seen from behind standing on a well-tended lawn. The front shot shows them standing on uneven ground with tall straggly weeds.
- Quotes
Lieutenant Corby: Well, we have nothing to lose but our futures.
- Crazy creditsPreserved by the Library of Congress - Packard Campus for Audio Visual Conservation
- Alternate versionsBlu-ray Disc releases in America also include The Seafarers (1953), a short film from Stanley Kubrick, as a bonus feature. The European Masters of Cinema release also includes two additional shorts, Day of the Fight (1951) and Flying Padre (1951).
- ConnectionsEdited into Gli ultimi giorni dell'umanità (2022)
- How long is Fear and Desire?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $33,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $953
- Runtime
- 1h 2m(62 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content