Console best movie i've ever seen.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Joshua Warren I really don't know what to say about this film, it's about a con-man that pretends to be Stanley Kubrick, and that's it. Kubrick being in real life quite a recluse (in a sense of the word) gave him a great chance to take his name. No one had seen a Kubrick film in over 10 years, and Kubrick had stayed out of the spotlight since the 60's, so you can at least appreciate the fact that this story is quite plausible. Well it says, based on a true-ish story, not sure what that means.The bad sides however, is it's lack of direction. he basically just goes around scamming people with his various "Kubricks", until he's revealed to be a fraud. And that's about it. Also it uses the soundtracks from various Kubrick films, it's funny at times, but almost feels like a bad attempt to copy the genius of Kubrick films. They even attempt to copy one of his quick edits from A Clockwork Orange, which frankly was just silly.So if you're a Kubrick fan, you might find this an amusing 1 hour 20 minutes film to kill some time one day when you're bored. If you haven't seen a single Kubrick film, this is huge waste of time.So I give this film a 6/10.

njmollo If any proof was needed to show that John Malkovich is probably the most over-rated actor of his generation, then this it it. His performance is a total embarrassment, as is his attempt at an English accent.What is a great premise for a movie is ruined within minutes by inept direction and poor casting. In the most unsubtle and ham-fisted of ways this film tries to reference Kubrick's pictures by using music associated with his films. Two boys walk down a west London street with....what else but bowler hats.This is unwatchable rubbish, plain and simple.

marvinbluth I saw the trailer for this twice in a theater, and was truly underwhelmed. Although I LOVE Kubrick, and I read the original article over ten years ago, the trailer turned me off, so much so, I had no desire to see the film. It opened and closed in Los Angeles, one theater, one week, which is not a good omen. Then I rent it,,,,,,,,,, IT"S GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a really funny, very clever film, about how people would want to believe this guy, and do anything to get close to him, all because they love Kubrick and his films. I've read some really nasty criticisms, that make no sense to me. No, there's no explosions, no special effects, no incredible fight scenes, no car chase, there's just a wonderful little story based on real life, that's great. RENT THIS,,,,,,OR BUY IT!!!!!!

CinemaHound Malkovich gives a performance that carries the picture. But the picture goes nowhere! I wasn't offended by all the gay stuff in it. but I might have been were I gay. It's a bit much.While there are a lot of references to Kubrick movies, there are few, if any, attempts to include any of his cinematic signatures; i.e. the tracking shot, the bathroom scene, the sullen stare into the camera. There are repetitive inclusions of music associated with this movies, Zarathustra, Thieving Magpie, Sarabande, snippets from Wendy Carlos' Clockwork Orange score. These become tiresome.The movies fails, because the Alan Conway character is never explored in any way. This is Brian Cook's fault, not Malkovich's. Here's and example: The high point of this long-running con occurs in a restaurant, where Conway takes in super sharp Frank Rich of the New York Times. Now, regardless of Conway's background or motivation, this should have been a great moment for him. Was he scared? Was he challenged? Was he so into the con that it was inconsequential to him? He did go to the trouble of verifying Rich with the maitre'd. The script thought it was important. But the scene tells us nothing.It's worth seeing, I suppose, for Kubrick fans like myself. But it adds nothing to the canon. The screenplay is fine, probably hits the right notes, but the direction is fatal.