Kubrick has been snuffed.

Rating: 7/10 (13 January 2009)

Make no mistake, Spartacus is a very strong epic and one that deserves to be called one of the best historical epics in American cinema, yet I can't help but wonder what might have been if director Stanley Kubrick was given more control over production. With Kirk Douglas in the starring role as well as producer, he seemed to sort of take over the look and feel of the movie in order to push forth his agenda that he was fighting for. Indeed, because of this, Spartacus has the feeling of more play and light-heartedness than other epics such as Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago.
The supporting cast is very strong with Laurence Olivier, Jean Simmons, and Peter Ustinov all giving great performances and bringing these characters to life. However, Tony Curtis as a minstrel-type slave does not feel right and for the most part feels very out of place with this story. It is obvious with this film that Kubrick had his own ideas on how to present it but was snuffed by the studio system that still loomed above in the early 1960s. After this, which made plenty of money but also made Kubrick upset at Hollywood, he decided to move to England and finance his projects independently. Watch his films after Spartacus and judge for yourself whether he made a wise decision or not.