Is Dr. Strangelove a classic film?

[docraven]

Originally posted by stevetseitz
… I just get so tired of the lavish praise for what I see as excellent but not truly classic films (2001, Dr. Strangelove).

As for DR. STRANGELOVE, I still find it fascinating. It is clearly developed as a farce, and in that context I believe the three performances by Peter Sellers rank with the best of his work, even with his wonderful Chauncey in BEING THERE (I personally found the Pink Panther stuff to be corny.). But this is a matter of taste, and we all respond differently to film. I could never prove any of these statements. However, my experience is that people still respond to the humor in DR. STRANGELOVE. I also continue to enjoy the performances by George C. Scott, Sterling Hayden, Keenan Wynn, and Slim Pickens. In context Peter Bull’s Russian Ambassador fits the style, but that one I do find a bit over the top. Still, it’s a matter of what you personally like or dislike.

Oh yes! And did I mention that when it was released in 1960 people were building bomb shelters. In fact, forty years later it still seems to have relevance to what is going on politically.

What is a classic film? If it is one that people still enjoy years after its initial release, I think DR. STRANGELOVE fits the bill. If it means one of the top ten films of all time, I wouldn’t consider it one.

[Johann]

Is Dr. Strangelove a classic?

Is the Pope catholic?
Does a bear shit in the woods?
Is Britney Spears a virgin?

wait, scratch that...

[docraven]

Exactly the point! Thanks Johann!

[Ansonm]

Well, certainly there is lateral for the definition of a classic. "Excellent, but not a classic" is good enough for me. Although, I think its a classic too!

[Russ]

Dr Starngelove is a Kubrick film that is not Sparticus or The Shining - ergo it is a classic

E=mc^2

It's that simple.

[jacobic216]

I believe a classic film is one that becomes ageless and finer over time. Dr. Strangelove is without a doubt one of these films.