first time really seeing this all the way through. This is Douglas's film more than it ever was Kubrick's. The proof is in the overwrought sentimentality and endless violin swelled character moments that are so on the nose their is little doubt in my mind who is the father of them. Still there are great moments when you can feel Kubrick's hand.

I can see that this is a great film. That's why I'm giving it four and a half stars. I can see the greatness. But there's some sort of disconnect that stops me from falling in love with the movie in the way that I feel I normally would. I'm not sure what is causing the disconnection, but it's there and it bothers me.

Kubrick knows no bounds, he has tried his hand at almost ever genre of film and mastered them all. Spartacus is the swords and sandals epic that is just that- epic!

I've avoided this film for years, both out of respect for Kubrick's desire to distance himself from it and my own lack of interest in the sandbox epic genre. While it is the least distinctly Kubrick of all of his films, it does bear some mark of its maker and is certainly worth a look. Though it is quite brisk for most of its three hour plus runtime, it becomes a bit anti-climactic after the big battle scene and the third act is nearly ruined by too much of the hammy and consistently overrated Sir Lawrence Olivier.

I finally watched this because more people said "I can't believe you haven't seen Spartacus" than with any other movie. It was really good. I just don't think I'm a fan of historical epics.

great

Alternately rousing and cheesy.

Pleased I watched this, it's a film I really should have seen years ago and I can now finally remove what is a 3 hour epic from my Watchlist.

Having recently seen STARZ production of Spartacus I found this version a little dated and unevenly paced. I'm not a TV fan but the STARZ version with its brilliant CGI and unique dialogue makes for fantastic entertainment.

Comparing this version to other epics made around the same time, Ben Hur for instance, I'd have to say Spartacus is good but Ben Hur is much better.

A great epic. For a Kubrick movie though it has to be one of his worst. It just doesn't have the feel of his movies. This is probably cause of the fact he did not write the script. It is still a fantastic movie and Kubrick does a very good job at filming it even though its truly not his film.

This review reportedly contains spoilers. I can handle the truth.

It's strange that this epic came along for Kubrick at the start of his career, but he might be the best thing that could have happened for the film. His lack of fuss is completely what the potentially stuffy “Spartacus” needs, far brisker than the previous year's “Ben Hur,” and certainly one of the more stimulating historical epics I've ever come across. Leading man Douglas is just as bland a hero as Charlton Heston was, but the homo-eroticism is amped up to even more fun degrees than in Wyler's film, and it's thankfully free of religious claptrap up until the very end.