Roger Ebert, in his 1976 review of Barry Lyndon, wrote “this must be one of the most beautiful films ever made.” That’s why the Blu-ray of Barry Lyndon is the best version to watch. Ireland and Europe never looked so good. But there are significant differences between Stanley Kubrick’s film and William Makepeace Thackeray’s classic novel. Thackeray’s Barry Lyndon narrates his own story. Critics of the time called Barry Lyndon the first novel without a hero. Barry Lyndon is a scoundrel and a con-man who manages to marry a very wealthy widow. But the Fates are against him. In Kubrick’s 3-hour film, an omnipresent narrator’s voice-over sets the scenes. Ryan O’Neal is a strange casting choice. The trials and tribulations of Barry Lyndon in the film version are distanced by Kublick’s aloof, almost documentary style in this film. Although many critics, including Ebert, consider Barry Lyndon one of Kubrick’s best films, I found it a bit tedious. Barry Lyndon isn’t a great movie, but it sure looks great! GRADE: B
This is one of my husband’s favorite movies–especially (or perhaps mostly) because of the way it looks. The scenes shot in candlelight are really spectacular–I understand that Kubrick’s cinematography crew had to device new ways to film the lighting. But I’m baffled as to the choice of Ryan O’Neal who seems to bring nothing to the film but his Irish ancestry. (Later, Ryan O’Neal and Farrah Fawcett named their son Redmond–in honor of the character whose real name is Redmond Barry.)
I didn’t know about Ryan and Farrah naming their son Redmond, Deb. Your husband has great taste in good looking movies. The scenic shots are spectacular. And those candlelight scenes are very intimate.
At the time, I loved this movie but I have the feeling I’d be less taken with it now. Somehow Ryan O’Neal has lost any authenticity for one thing.
Three hours is a bit long for a story like BARRY LYNDON, Patti. The pacing is almost glacial.
I’ve never seen this one, but a friend of mine says it’s the longest three hours he ever spent in a theater.
Kubrick doesn’t generate any suspense in BARRY LYNDON, Bill. The documentary style may be at fault.
I think the phrase “like watching paint dry” was used at the time. I agree that Ryan O’Neal was terrible casting.
But the paint is beautiful, Jeff.
I really enjoyed this when it came out and would like to see it again.
The Blu-ray version really brings out the color and texture, Scott. I picked up a copy of BARRY LYNDON in Blu-ray at BJ’s Warehouse for $7.99.
I saw it when it came out, and it was a long, somewhat tedious film. Beautiful, yes, but it takes more to film than beauty to keep me interested. As I recall, I liked Tom Jones better, and Beckett best of all. I know these films are unlike, but they just came to mind.
TOM JONES and BECKETT had more plot in their films, Rick. And better actors.
Saw it on the big screen when it was new. Loved the effect of the interior scenes lit only by candles and lamps. Casting Ryan O’Neal never made sense; like putting Tom Cruise in EYES WIDE SHUT. The visuals, fashions, and sense of immersion in a period maybe justify 3 hours, but a long period film like TREE OF WOODEN CLOGS is far more compelling for my money.
You’re absolutely right, Ron. Kubrick was an odd director who was more interested in visual effects than storylines. Almost all of his movies look great.
Kubrick liked either flamboyant actors, or pretty manikins. At times, both might crowd in. I’ve enjoyed BL for its wit as well as its composition…but it ain’t no rollercoaster, no.
Most of the wit comes from Thackeray not Kubrick, Todd. Even though Kubrick wrote the script, he “borrowed” heavily from Thackeray’s classic novel.