Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Michelle Ridley The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

charlieehrlich Legendary director Stanley Kubrick made his feature debut with this allegorical drama about war. Four soldiers whose plane has crashed discover they're behind enemy lines in an unnamed country. Desperate to escape, they decide to build a raft and travel up the nearby river into allied country. However, their presence is discovered by a local woman who stumbles across them in the woods, and they learn that an enemy general is nearby, determined to flush them out. Stanley Kubrick served as producer, director, screenwriter, editor, and cinematographer on Fear and Desire, which he made on a budget of only $40,000. One of the soldiers was played by Paul Mazursky, who later went on to a distinguished directorial career of his own. Kubrick displayed little enthusiasm for his debut feature later in his career, and is said to have attempted to prevent it from being screened on several occasions

LeonLouisRicci Dualistic and Binary this Debut, a Low-Low-Lowest of Low Budget Feature Films, of Iconic Director Stanley Kubrick, is Viewed Today (despite the director actively disowning and destroying prints aggressively) as a Treat and a Tiresome, Embarrassing affair with Touches of a Maverick Artist on Display.The Movie has Moments of Brilliance and Flourishes Unlike any 1953 Films of any Budget or Pedigree. The Violence is Shocking, Expressionistic, and Brutal with Spurts of Nightmarish Images Presented in Unorthodox Displays and Staccato Editing.It has a "Twilight Zone" Feel (many years away from the groundbreaking series) and in a Korean War Time-Space Places the Soldiers in Mismatched Uniforms from the Military of the Sub-Conscious. At the time Only Sam Fuller Dared Showcase this sort of Anti-Establishment Message.But with every WOW aspect there are Cringe Inducing, Dated, Amateurish Aspects like Post Production Dialog Dubbing (the film was shot silent), Awful Acting, Sub-Professional, Low-Brow Writing that Tries Unsuccessfully to be Philosophically Profound, and other Irritants Linked to No Budget, Rookie Filmmakers Straining to make it all Work.Overall, it's the Stand-Out, Unconventional Style of the Director that Surfaces Throughout the Film that makes it a Must See for Film Students, Kubrick Devotees, and Anyone Interested in Primitive Art. However it is one of those that Must be Viewed in Context to Appreciate.

Dario Vaccaro Stanley Kubrick's first feature film was thought lost for many years, but fortunately a copy has been restored and now anyone can watch the first work by maybe the greatest director of all time. Sure, "Fear and Desire" is no masterpiece as Kubrick's late works, not even close, but it still manages to somehow show the brilliance that surrounds the director's works. Set in a metaphoric place as the narrator urges us to know (and yes, that's the main problem of the film: it's too explanatory, something Kubrick will grow extremely away from), representing any war and not one in particular, showing how the event of falling into the enemy lines affects four soldiers, leading one to madness, another to the search for glory and so on. Although very heavily expository, the writing is not as bad as many (including the director himself!) say: the concepts are smart, but surely too stuffed into an hour's film. What I really think should be praised is the powerful idea of using the same actors to perform both sides of the conflict, building up an unsettling sequence close to the end of the movie, which also stands to mean that both sides of a war fight for the same values turned upside down.Obviously, the true highlight of the film is the man behind the camera, with beautiful shots and careful cinematography. The kiddo was already off to a great start.

wiseguymattt If you watch the film as an avid Kubrick fan, you'll love it purely because of the genuine effort you know went into it. Stanley wanted so badly for this movie to be made even after he went over budget by several thousand dollars. I imagine he wanted to stop circulation of this film because in comparison to his others, it is, like he states, "a child's drawing on a fridge." But this does not diminish its value in the slightest. In terms of personal enjoyment, I felt it was difficult to get engaged into the story and I found myself snapping in and out of concentration. I was thankful it was just over an hour long seeing as much more would have truly tested my patience. I've seen A Clockwork Orange, the Shining, and 2001: A Space Odyssey. After having seen those then watching Fear and Desire, I was blown away by how much Kubrick improved. It's clear he understood cinema on a deep level and that's why I love him. Going back to his very first feature, it's nice to see he started just like many other independent artists--creating a film they want to make with all their heart. I don't think this film should be rated based on its quality. It's clear it's very amateur and the storyline is weak, the acting sub-par, sound quality fluctuating, the picture scratchy and inconsistent. Despite all this, I love the movie. It's the first footprint left by one of the best filmmakers this world has ever seen.