Metascore

Universal acclaim - based on 11 Critics What's this?

User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 271 Ratings

  • Starring: George C. Scott, Peter Sellers
  • Summary: Through a series of military and political accidents, a psychotic general - U.S. Air Force Commander Jack D. Ripper (Hayden) - triggers an ingenious, irrevocable scheme to attack Russia's strategic targets with nuclear bombs. The U.S. President (Sellers) and Dr. Strangelove (Sellers), a wheelchair-bound nuclear scientist who has bizarre ideas about man's future, work with the Soviet premier in a desperate effort to save the world. Collapse
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 11
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 11
  3. Negative: 0 out of 11
  1. This landmark movie's madcap humor and terrifying suspense remain undiminished by time.
  2. 100
    Seen after 30 years, Dr. Strangelove seems remarkably fresh and undated - a clear-eyed, irreverant, dangerous satire. And its willingness to follow the situation to its logical conclusion - nuclear annihilation - has a purity that today's lily-livered happy-ending technicians would probably find a way around.
  3. Reviewed by: Ty Burr
    100
    Is ''Dr. Strangelove" Kubrick's best movie? Along with ''Paths of Glory," absolutely.
  4. Yet some of the laughs come too easy and linger too long; for the film's message to have maximum impact, the laughter has to stick in your throat.

See all 11 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 76 out of 81
  2. Negative: 3 out of 81
  1. Dr. Strangelove is very simply one of the best films ever made. It easily takes the title of best comedy film. Wickedly smart and satirical, Dr. Strangelove still very much applies to the present day situation, 47 years later. Superbly acted, well written, and directed by the great Kubrick, Strangelove delivers everything you could want from a movie: humor, drama, history, and a main character with Alien Hand Syndrome. No matter what kind of movies you like, Dr. Strangelove is for you. Expand
  2. According to Morrissey’s recent manifestation “more gay people, more peaceful the world”, war is the malicious ramification of heterosexual meual men’s urge to kill their peers (I’m paraphrasing here), which tallies germanely with this Kubrick’s black war satire. Under the cold war backdrop, a rogue nuclear attack to Soviet Union commenced by a fervid anti-communist USA general, which would (irrevocably) launch a doomsday machine (a Soviet Union’s ultimate self-destructive nuclear contraption), and would annihilate all the human beings on the earth. It may sounds ridiculous and far-fetched by the mass, Kubrick’s masterful endeavor has overcome the detached accessibility of the warfare lingoes and the exclusivity of the decision-makers’ political impasse to implement a stranger-than-fiction satire which grants a considerable closeness to its audience with ease. Running within 100 minutes, the film slickly unreels its storyline with great force of dark humor which imbues parodic and even cartoonish idiosyncrasies to the permeating machismo in the air. Peter Sellers’ three-faceted versatility, George C. Scott’s Communism-slamming extravaganza and Sterling Hayden’s trigger-happy paranoia plus Slim Pickens’ cowboy hat, the ensemble cast owns their respective frantic glory within a compacted steak of time, umpteen gags and mockeries can be savored ad infinitum, Sellers’British accent (as Group Captain) when confronting Sterling’s General Rippers is unimpeachably spontaneous, Keenan Wynn’s coca-cola joke is pertinently deadpan serious and Sterling’s conspiracy theory about water fluoridation and the fearful deprivation of life essence during a sexual intercourse (the man just cannot face his natural aging mechanism of the body) are plainly golden ideas, outlandish but vividly rib-tickling, and astringently self-reflective.

    Kubrick’s trademark set design which would prevail in his later color features has not fully exploited this black-and-white war farce, and the (not-too-obvious) misogyny and chauvinism overtone does impede the sensitive nerves a bit, nevertheless, it is not my favorite Kubrick’s film, but it is an outstanding comedy which I presume can stay untainted by numerous re-watches, for me the first round is more than gratifying and since my generally inert resistance towards war-related films, a second round may take some time despite of its overall peerlessness.
    Expand
  3. ArnR
    5
    What an over rated movie! I give it a 5 only because I love most of Kubrick's work. If you want the real deal, without the comedy, catch Sydney Lumet's Fail Safe. Expand
  4. ArthurD.
    4
    I honestly don't get why this movie is being hyped so much. I watched it because everyone seems to be so positive about it, but this movie was so boring that I wanted to put it off halfways. It's absolutely NOT funny, or maybe I just don't have any humor...or maybe you're all jumping on the bandwagon. I know that there are a lot of Kubrick fans out there who love everything that he has made, just because he made it! If it had been made by somebody else everyone would have disliked this movie! Expand

See all 81 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. Metacritic's Best and Worst Movies Based on Novels

    Metacritic's Best and Worst Movies Based on Novels Image
    Published: December 15, 2009
    While The Lovely Bones is receiving a cool reception from critics, some novels have made a more successful transition from page to screen. Metacritic's film editor selects ten of the best-reviewed adaptations in our database ... and ten of the worst.