I'm glad he references the multiple take syndrome of what he is criticizing. If he had the same expectation of a Kubrick venture as any other filmmaker, he would be wrong, but he's rightly admitting that Kubrick is looking for something else by fostering a shooting style that disables a lot of an actor's function. When Kubrick would defend his shooting style, he would use R. Lee Ermey as someone who would only require a few takes when they were filming, but Ermey was already geared to the mechanical look and feel of a performance that Kubrick wanted. Kubrick reminds me of European filmmakers who were interested in mechanizing actors to act in certain ways. Jean Pierre Melville and Robert Bresson did this. It isn't conducive to getting the best performances, but Kubrick never wanted his films to be about actors and performances. They have to fill his world with requirements of his vision.
And I don't think anyone who is a Kubrick fan really needs to take great offense either. It's just two different worlds reflecting against each other.