"Upon my viewing of them, I found them to be well acted but superficial/cliche renderings of, in AB, modern suburbia, and RR, post war US, social expectations and the rebellions against these to be what you see is what you get."
Stereotypes are not necessarily cliches or superficial. The Canterbury Tales were filled with stereotypes, but were hardly two dimensional. All the characters in AB were stereotypes, even Wes, who is an artist type. But the stereotypes were used to reveal the American desperate need for and failure to find an identity, and they were also used to illustrate some of the tectonic plates of our society: adolescent, career mom, dad who settled, army, etc.
"Are you saying that these works are much more subtle and complex critiques than I perceived, or that if you squint your eyes and project beyond the writer/director's intent, there is much to learn."
I credit the writers/director with plenty. I don't know who wrote AB, but the direction was first rate. I went to read Richard Yates (author of RR) and found him to be one of the best post WWII writers. Although like the rest of them, he is a one trick pony. Nevertheless, he had something to say in RR and he said it well. The movie is a fairly loyal adaptation except in the end. In the book, Frank abandons his children to some relatives. In the movie he is last shown with the kids in the park, suggesting that he was at least a good father.
Joanna