It's alright. Much better than Kubrick's first movie "fear and desire". I still found the story a little slow and hard to follow. The dialogue and acting is good. This is the movie where Kubrick's cinematography really hits its stride. There are many amazingly framed scenes that are a pleasure to look at. With all that said I would still only recommend this movie if you want to watch everything in Kubrick's filmography, otherwise I'd still skip this one

I've always loved Stanley Kubrick, so going back and watching one of his super early films is a pretty good time. I'm getting to see his elements starting out a little bit smaller, but still pretty great. This is a pretty well done short story with wonderful cinematography. Kubrick just knew where to put a camera and how to light it since his birth I guess. Only problems I have are with a bit of the acting. The female character especially is just kind of flat in her delivery if you ask me. Also, you could probably trim about 10 minutes or so off to pace it better. The biggest problem though, is not on Kubrick at all. The production company forced him to do a happy ending, and it frankly doesn't feel right. Overall though, this is a really enjoyable watch. I mean, I'm already older than he was when he made this. That makes me feel so useless.

With _Killer’s Kiss_, his second feature film, Stanley Kubrick gets his hands dirty in New York's darkest, dingiest corners. There, he renders a punched-out boxer and a world-weary dancer, neighbors in a rundown tenement building whose thin, unwashed windows offer only glimpses of the opposite one-room apartment. Naturally, their eyes meet somewhere in the middle and they fall in love, but before they can run away together, the couple must extricate themselves from the hungry tentacles of their unhappy professional lives. The plot may be sluggish and limited, the cast populated by one-note characters who go through the motions like automatons, but this film's real attraction is the mood, texture and spirit of this very specific time and place. That’s where we best see Kubrick’s influence, leaning in close to relish the squalid quarters and little pleasures of metropolitan life at the poverty line in a booming post-war era. The forests of spooky, towering alleyways with nary a pedestrian in sight. The sad, claustrophobic action of a pay-per-hour dance hall. The deadening sense of isolation amidst a city of millions. I suspect there’s a reason the flowering young filmmaker would only shoot adaptations after this; he’s better at sculpting, finessing and enhancing a narrative than effectively moving its occupants from scene to scene. Operating with a very low budget, Kubrick uses creative camerawork, smart set decorations and selective focus to make everything look like a million bucks. Sometimes he gets carried away by the artistry, veering so far to indulge a photographic instinct that the technique steals focus from the drama. I can excuse a little enthusiasm at the expense of storytelling, especially when the story is already this secondary. Our man was still finding his footing, after all. Learning the ropes while on the job.

This is way better than his first movie. Not anything special story wise but the action scenes were engaging. The way the boxing scene was shot really was fantastic and made it look real. It can be hard to make boxing look real in movies but they do a good job with what they had at the time. The fight at the end was also great. The acting was alright, Frank Silvera was the best.