Eyes Wide Shut

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
The same way Tadeusz loves Zappa and the Pope loves Jesus Christ i love Kubrick . I think he is the most intellectual of the 20th centuries film makers . He Inlayins ideas in elegant contrast to the aesthic grain of the film. However rewatching EWS i am still confused by it. Is it surreal in the most literal and banal sense? Is it a reactionary moral fable ? Is it him reconstructing pornography or the domestic genres ( cf. Epics/Spartacus or Full Metal Jacket/War) ? Is it a version of the rakes progress ?

anthony, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

I enjoyed EWS' dreamy qualities and the way it was like a David Lynch film, implying that beside our everyday life there is a universe next door of strangeness and menace.

I wonder to what extent do its problems come from its being based on a novel set in Habsburg Vienna before the first world war, with the story being only updated to the present day in the most superficial manner?

DV, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

DV is right - when you read the source material, it's surprising just how faithful EWS is to Schnitzler's slight, surreal comedy of manners. The tokenistic updating. and relocation to an obviously constructed 'New York', only adds to the film's detached and dreamlike air - nothing in it feels 'right' or 'real'. And I think Kubrick is gently mocking Cruise's status as number one sex symbol by getting him to play a bit of a bumbling idiot who stumbles from one encounter to another, seemingly oblivious to other people's desire for him. DV is also on the money w/ the David Lynch comparison - according to Lynch, Kubrick once nominated 'Eraserhead' as his fave film, and you can see the things that they have in common - exquisitely composed images, sloooow pacing, an air of menace and mystery, a refusal to give the viewer 'obvious' answers. Even after watching EWS a couple of times, I'd be hard-pressed to articulate what the film is 'saying' exactly - be careful of what you wish for? That the idea of infidelity is better than the actuality? That desire has nothing to do with 'relationships'? Or that dull marriages need a bit of spicing up? Not sure that Kubrick is "the most intellectual of the 20th century's filmmakers" tho' - Godard or Antonioni might have something to say abt that.

Andrew L, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

one thing that is funny about the Schnitzler novel is how short and fast paced it is. Things that in the film take ages (like, say, the wife dancing with that sleazy aristocrat) fly by in a sentence in the book.

My favourite bit of the film is when the frat boys shout at Cruise that he is a short arsed faggot. I'd love to know if that was Kubrick taking advantage of Cruise being a short-arse and widely rumoured to be secretly gay.

DV, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Godard and Antononi work wiht their bodies . Kubrick seems to work with his mind. Lynch is close but it seems much less horrorfic. More like a genteel Egoyan

anthony, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Haven't seen EWS: am inclined to "like" it cuz in film-review land it had a hard critical time in a boring way, but unlikely to seek it out as *I* have such a hard time w.Kubrick, every time. Kubrick = Antonioni = ppl who are called intellectuals and i TOTALLY CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY. No ideas that *I* wd call ideas evah bounce around in their movies (Antonioni = worse, since i believe he iz A MAJOR IDIOT).

ps I have still not seen clockwork orange or red desert, but as these are the definitive make-or-break items in each case, i am reluctant to do so: if they are bad, then where does that leave these alleged genii?

Of course they both haf zero sense of humour: is this the problem?

mark s, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Dont even get me STARTED on that piece of dung. Schniztler's novella was pretty good. Kubrick however took it to the 20th century and hence destroyed it.

nathalie, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Mark S, maybe they have a different sense of humour? I do see humour in some of their movies.
Anyway, I think Kubrick had it worked out so well. Use a celeb couple. This will give the viewer a stronger sense of him/her being a voyeur. Because that is what we are. (Classic example of this is "Peeping Tom.") Eyes Wide Shut is about infedility but not the reality of it. It is all a dream (hence the title of the book, Traumnovella or the title of the movie Eyes Wide Shut). It is of course extremely freudian. Schniztler was friends with Sigmund and that shows in the story. But where the book worked, I don't believe in the film. This sort of thing isn't really plausible in the 20th century. People work out their lack of chemistry in their own marriage in other ways. They don't suppress their urges, they will express them. Secondly Tom Cruise can't act.

nathalie, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Kubrick's 'sense of humour' - well, Dr. Strangelove obv. (tho' lots of it seems like Terry Southern to me, "precious bodily fluids" etc.) plus the fact that he did like to indulge rather broad English character actors (Leonard Rossiter in '2001' and 'Barry Lyndon', Michael Bates in 'Clockwork Orange', Sellars in 'Strangelove' and 'Lolita', even Alan Cummings in 'Eyes Wide Shut'.) I also think Lee Emery is v. v. funny in 'Full Metal Jacket'. 'The Shining', 'Clockwork Orange' and 'Eyes Wide Shut' all work for me as black comedies.

Antonioni's 'ideas' - that alienation can be a beautiful thing. Or, objects and landscapes can be more interesting than people, and that we can have 'relationships' w/spaces, architecture, colours.

Andrew L, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Eyes Wide Shut?

Eyes Wide Shit more like.

DavidM, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

I like dit allot thoug it was long as usual for Owl man. I was horrified at times. It had a dark ominous something in the background. Lie sexuality brings us both pleasure but hidden withiin is also menace. Kind of like the whole catholic guilt thing. I really enjoyed the two dwarfs and the littel girl part. What the...!?

Pennysong Hanle y, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

peeping tom = not kubrick, nathalie

having relationships w.colours not ppl = a good direction for mark s possibly sigh

mark s, Sunday, 9 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Mark S. I know. I was talking about voyeurism used in film.

nathalie, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

I was really amped for this movie. I was expecting something dark, twisted and sensual.

What I got was Tom Cruise smugging the camera for THREE HOURS. "Eyes Wide Shut" can eat me. Had Tom been edited out of it, it would have been an infitely better movie. Hell, chopping out an hour of meandering would have made it a better movie. It tried so hard to be surreal that it ended up being ass.

Dan Perry, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Eyes Wide Shut is the best film ever made by a man or a woman.

Nick, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

I really hoped it would be Kubrick's balls out porn movie. Since he had made loads of other types of movies it would have made sense. I thought it looked great but was about as dull as 2001, which is a pretty high watermark in the dullness of cinema.

Anyone see the Kubrick doco's on the last week. Woody Allen on Dr Strangelove was very interesting, saying that it wasn't as funny as it should be as Sellars stretched himself too much and Kubrick had no real sense of timing. Interesting.

Pete, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Blimey they could have got me to say that and saved on airfare. I am inclined to argue that A.Lyne's Lolita = bettah.
Use Other Argts Please: "But 2001 is ABOUT boredom and sterility! It is a SATIRE!!"

mark s, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

2001 probably loses a lot without context, ie being on the big screen in the 60s. The perplexing ending is one of my favorite things ever committed to film.

Of the Kubrick movies I've seen, the best is CLEARLY "A Clockwork Orange". That's the only one with any real sense of pacing. "The Shining" has some brilliant moments in it, too. Haven't seen "Full Metal Jacket" or "Lolita" and I can't remember "Dr. Strangelove".

Dan Perry, Monday, 10 September 2001 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

six months pass...
The first time I saw it EWS I thought it was average, the second time I thought it seemed different, I actually got into the slow pace, I just don't know if the version is as Kubrick intended it, didn't he die before the final cut?

Daniel Cross, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Yes, he did. Tho I think it probably would have been a "failed" movie anyway. You know all those shots where Tom Cruise is in the back of the cab, in his gloves and dark coat, brooding and scowling? You can find the orig. script(s) online, and in them, these shots were all supposed to have voice-over, kind of "get inside his head" type moments... but we never really get inside his head... Kubrick raises questions that seem good at first because he's trying to hypnotize you, but even if you accept them as interesting ("is infidelity in mind equivalent to infidelity in body?" has some potential though I think is maybe a shallower subject than Kubrick thought) his angles of attack are all waaay too oblique; they bounce off the problem like lawn darts off a Michelin... the b&w 90210-style jealousy flashbacks with the naval officer didn't help... and I can't see Koobie throwing a Chris Isaac bar-rocker over his immaculately arranged confection, yet there it is... the mansion scene an ENORMOUS let-down; I was with it up to that point; "Nick Nightingale" was fantastic.

Tracer Hand, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (seventeen years ago) link

UPDATE: I've seen "Full Metal Jacket" now and it was EXCELLENT, better than "A Clockwork Orange". Kubrick should have done a series of movies about the Vietnam War.

Dan Perry, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (seventeen years ago) link

I thought the one bit where EWS really failed was the slapstick - that chase around the shop or whatever it was. Kubrick's best comic moments were always more oblique. For instance: Dr. Strangelove, to me, is the most obviously comic yet least funny character Peter Sellers plays in that film; HAL is the ultimate deadpan comic; and in The Shining you can interpret Scatman Crothers' axeing as a massive gag by SK at the audience's expense.

dan, Monday, 18 March 2002 01:00 (seventeen years ago) link

three months pass...
this movie is about the child parent relationship!!

also, it is one of the funniest movies i've ever seen

bc, Tuesday, 25 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

"maybe a shallower subject than Kubrick thought" = seven-word summary of his entire whatever, pretty much

mark s, Tuesday, 25 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

mark
i think you need to be nicer to the GREATEST FILMAKER OF THE 20TH CENTURY

anthony, Tuesday, 25 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Lyne's Lolita is terrible! Such an agonizingly stupid reading of the book (he thinks Nabokov actually wanted you to sympathize with Humbert, while Kubrick understood right off that H. was a total bastard who just happened to be the narrator, hence he's going to make himself look as much the victim as possible.)

Sorry, just had to get that off my chest. Haven't seen Eyes Wide Shut, actually.

Justyn Dillingham, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

i don't really like any of the versions of lolita, inc.nabokov's

kubrick's is ruined by peter sellers mainly: haha i tht lyne's worked bettah becuz the day i am sympathetic to jeremy irons is the day i exfoliate my legs w.nitric acid!!

mark s, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Kubrick = no-where nr a great filmmaker.

david h(owie), Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Of course they both haf zero sense of humour: is this the problem?

I think Kubrick is very humorous. EWS = essentially a comedy, as noted above. In fact, I would say most of Kubrick's movies are in some way humorous. Antonioni is mostly insufferable, except for L'avventura, which is a masterpiece.

As for Kubrick being great, what does it take for a director to be great? One great film? Kubrick has two: Barry Lyndon and 2001.

ryan, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

2001?

1. First hour = tedium not 'hypnosis'.

2. Flying bone begats spaceship = clumsy facsimile of more graceful scene in A Canterbury Tale (1944) [falcon begats spitfire]

3. Women still know their place, in pink and receptionists and stewardesses in 2001.

4. "One long wig-out for stoners, their wits reduced to wet tar by too much acid..."

david h(owie), Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

bone->'spaceship' seems much more LOGICAL than a bird->a plane.

but I haven't seen the a bird->a plane and don't know why it happens.

RJG, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

actually its bone -> weapons satellite. Which makes perfect sense, esp considering what the bone represents. The cold war is all over that movie.

ryan, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

haha re girls in 2001: the stewardess who does the 180º vertical walk-turn has industrial strength VPL!!! => any philosophy the movie DID contain would be thus be set at naught... as it happens it doesn't contain any, so as you were

i quite like the bit where hal is killing the boring spacemen, but sadly the wrong robot wins

mark s, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

But more clumsy, less graceful, like the spaceships moving about in spacey bits, like three actors, strings, and staring over the side of the set, down at their puppet Spaceships, all juddery, Clangers-like incombumblence. Clumsy, not graceful. All content, no style.

david h(owie), Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

the clangers roXoR!! it is SO *WAY* bettah than 2001: better spaceships, better special effects, better characters (it actually HAS characters), better story, better music (ok i like ligeti), better curvature of planet surface

mark s, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

haha i read david h(owie)'s post where he says "still receptionists in 2001" and tht "how do you know what year it's set? i don't remember them mentioning that..."

mark s, Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Mark, you forgot the best reason Clangers >> 2001: better knitting!

RickyT, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

And and and 2001 only has a robot, whereas Clangers has a robot (metal chicken) and dinosaurs (soup dragon and child)

RickyT, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

But 2001 has APES!

Andrew L, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (seventeen years ago) link

four months pass...
i just watched EWS: i did like it kinda, even if it has – as usual w. kubriXoR — industrial strength bad acting and mucho lame clumsiness, and is entirely NOT "deep" or stuff

i like the weird glow he gave new york: nicole k is pretty good too, tho shelly duval is still the only woman SK actually ever met, i think (except for his daughter who wants a bushbaby)

mark s (mark s), Monday, 11 November 2002 22:57 (sixteen years ago) link

ews = kubrick's closest to realized potential

boxcubed (boxcubed), Tuesday, 12 November 2002 01:44 (sixteen years ago) link

Mark you should really watch Lolita again. (It contains the best acting in any Kubrick film ever, seemingly by accident)

Justyn Dillingham (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 12 November 2002 03:28 (sixteen years ago) link

(and also some of the worst, as does EWS - s.pollack-as-himself especially notwithstanding. and i loved EWS)

haha yes mark see lolita again - surely some new level of meaning to be gleaned there, as you must be about the kid's age by now

jones (actual), Tuesday, 12 November 2002 17:28 (sixteen years ago) link

one year passes...
for all of the films faults the masked ceremony scene is one of the most chilling sections of any movie ever. the masks are freaky as fuck. they make every move of the head or the body so weighted and confusing.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:49 (fourteen years ago) link

A dreadful film.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:52 (fourteen years ago) link

i pretty much agree.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:54 (fourteen years ago) link

Oh...good.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:56 (fourteen years ago) link

we have to, after all.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:00 (fourteen years ago) link

Talk To Her

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:04 (fourteen years ago) link

:_(

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:07 (fourteen years ago) link

no this film is so misunderstood. It is amazing.

kyle (akmonday), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:11 (fourteen years ago) link

Jed, do you like Morvern Callar? Kyle does.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:12 (fourteen years ago) link

no i dont - i like the last scene with the slow music and fast dancing but i pretty much hate it.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:15 (fourteen years ago) link

good. very good.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:16 (fourteen years ago) link

I love this movie so much. I keep meaning to watch it again.

morris pavilion (samjeff), Friday, 22 October 2004 23:36 (fourteen years ago) link

I'm with Kyle. The molasses pace of the dialogue takes some getting used to. If EWS were a song, it'd be Spacemen 3's "How Does it Feel".

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Friday, 22 October 2004 23:44 (fourteen years ago) link

wow, tom cruise sTILL is a sucky actor. why the fuck would anyone cast him? whjy does he clench his jaw all the time? is he trying to compete with Scarlett Johansen for the "Lets build a career out of one expression Lifetime Achievement Award"?!

ambrose (ambrose), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:21 (fourteen years ago) link

Eyes Wide Shut and Morvern Callar are both brilliant.

milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:34 (fourteen years ago) link

i just bought "Barry Lyndon" it's the only Kubrick i haven't seen.

jed_ (jed), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:43 (fourteen years ago) link

Ryan O'Neil is even worse than Tom Cruise, but I think that's the point.

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:45 (fourteen years ago) link

what?

RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:09 (fourteen years ago) link

I think the word is 'cipher'.

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:13 (fourteen years ago) link

I did not care for EWS at all. The thing that bothered me the most about it was the awful piano score that was going throughout the film. Each painfully drawn out note was like a punch to the head.

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:16 (fourteen years ago) link

The woman responsible for that lived around the corner from me, in Stoke Newington.

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:19 (fourteen years ago) link

I love the score! I love slow, drawn-out minimalism.
(xpost)

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:20 (fourteen years ago) link

i still contend that eyes wide shut actually was a 24 hour long film, because it sure fucking felt like it

todd swiss (eliti), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:21 (fourteen years ago) link

That's what's great about it!

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:22 (fourteen years ago) link

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:24 (fourteen years ago) link

which Cypress Hill tune is that?

Riot Gear! (Gear!), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:37 (fourteen years ago) link

Red Eyes Wide Shut

Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:40 (fourteen years ago) link

I prefer Sinker's "Eyes Wide Sh!t" (I wonder if it's still online?)

Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:41 (fourteen years ago) link

Ryan O'Neil is even worse than Tom Cruise, but I think that's the point.

yes

gabbneb (gabbneb), Saturday, 23 October 2004 18:09 (fourteen years ago) link

three years pass...

A friend of mine and I were talking about Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut" last weekend. My friend observed that whenever he asked his guy friends if they liked "Eyes Wide Shut", an overwhelming majority praised it, but when he would ask his women friends what they thought, an overwhelming majority said they hated it.

Being curious, I looked at the ratings for EWS on the movie database, and indeed there is a pretty significant gender split, with males rating the movie much higher than females across age groups.

Of course, I'd take the movie database's ratings with a grain of salt, but assuming it might reflect a true difference...theories? Perhaps women find Nicole Kidman's character more interesting than Tom Cruise's, but given the short-shrift in the storyline?

Joe, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 22:36 (eleven years ago) link

oh dere's tits

sexyDancer, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 22:40 (eleven years ago) link

Hmm, I hate admitting that it might be the fact I'm a woman. But I did hate it at the time. The idea seemed terrific on paper but I hated the way it played out. Now, after so many years and having read his biography (well, both Kubrick's and Cruise's), I think I might actually turn around and actually enjoy it. At the time I hated it because it was a late 19th century Freudian book converted to a 20th century story. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? I think I was (maybe still am) very hesitant to praise Freud.

stevienixed, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 22:56 (eleven years ago) link

I watched it again recently and I was really struck by how AWFUL Tom Cruise is.

libcrypt, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 22:57 (eleven years ago) link

Cruise seems willfully bad in this film. I feel like Kubrick must have directed him to be so incredibly flat for a purpose. In a way it feels appropriate, as the doctor is dreaming all these scenes and he is not really functioning as an agent. Rather, this action is happening to him, and his blankness can be seen as an indicator of his remove.

wmlynch, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 23:46 (eleven years ago) link

it was a late 19th century Freudian book converted to a 20th century story.

Still seemed very 19th-century Viennese to me (under the veneer, where it counts).

Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 23:53 (eleven years ago) link

to be honest, i never thought his performance was that bad and i've seen it many times. i see how it could be seen as flat though -- that seems to be his attempt to act dumbstruck by what's happening to him, which actually does lack depth.

but nicole kidman is awesome to watch in this -- it's the sort of unstable character she knows how to play.

Surmounter, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 23:54 (eleven years ago) link

also um yeah the boys like this movie cuz there are like, 40 naked women in it?

Surmounter, Tuesday, 1 July 2008 23:55 (eleven years ago) link

only in the newly available Euro version.

Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:01 (eleven years ago) link

Dr, I don't agree, really, the story was transposed to Hollywood/LA. I shoudl see it again. I'm relying on my (crappy) memory. What I now realize: how painful it is to see their marriage fall apart on screen. Very weird and, in a way, painful.

stevienixed, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:06 (eleven years ago) link

It's set in New York! An invented Kubrickian one, of course.

Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:09 (eleven years ago) link

at the same time that you were more dear to me than ever, i would have given everything -- everything -- for just one moment

with him

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:09 (eleven years ago) link

xpost with HOLLYWOOD ACTORS. :-) Yes, yes, I know,you're right.

stevienixed, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:23 (eleven years ago) link

Men are more likely to be kubrick fanboys would prob answer the question as to why men like it better.

Regarding cruise: movies like ews always make me feel sort of confused when people criticize performances. I don't have any idea if a performance is good or not. Why criticize cruise and not, say, an actor in a bresson film?

Which is to say, that all talk about the goodness or badness of a performance seems to be ignoring the very large gap between intention and effect. I am always dumbfounded when asked to consider the quality of a performance and I don't quite know how to resolve that.much of the time people's responses to an actor seem to involve either massive amounts of projection or a sort of consumer choice as to whether you find the actor generally palatable.

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:26 (eleven years ago) link

if you don't have the 2.5 hours free to watch EWS then just watch the video for Laura Branigan's "Self Control" which is the same plot and many of the same shots but is like 5 minutes long, predates EWS by 15 years and has a really cool song over it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZtn9AwgfQQ

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:31 (eleven years ago) link

"I don't have any idea if a performance is good or not."

i find this truly bizarre. i can watch any old crap if the performances are good. acting seems to vary wildly in quality, to me, and that's not just projection.

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 00:53 (eleven years ago) link

But how do you know it's good? I don't get it :/

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:01 (eleven years ago) link

how do you know ANYTHING's good? most stuff ilx talks about is subjective

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:03 (eleven years ago) link

how do you know a shot is well framed or that dialogue is good?

xpost

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:04 (eleven years ago) link

surmounter, watch that video. you will thank me.

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:04 (eleven years ago) link

guys maybe women don't like it because it's about a dude cheating on his wife?

gabbneb, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:06 (eleven years ago) link

Well you know that stuff is good because there are usually accepted criteria for what good framing is, namely that they are effective. So can a good performance exist in a totally worthless film or vice versa? How do you separate the performance from the film in general?

For example: "cruise is stiff and blank and therefore bad" vs. "it's supposed to be that way don't you see"

There is an infinite distance between those two statements.

So we just throw our hands up at that and proclaim that it's subjective?

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:09 (eleven years ago) link

gabb its about a dude wanting to but not cheating on his wife after she told him how much she wanted to but didnt cheat on him

deeznuts, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:10 (eleven years ago) link

xp no, but we shouldn't dismiss arguments based an actor's performance, either

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:11 (eleven years ago) link

good call deez

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:12 (eleven years ago) link

I guess the fact that it's acceptable to make both of those statements when talking about movies is what is disturbing me. There's something inconsistent in the discourse.not meaning to be annoying here, just a quibble.

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:12 (eleven years ago) link

i think gaps like that are the basis for any discussion about any art form

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:13 (eleven years ago) link

it's not annoying :-)

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:14 (eleven years ago) link

gabb its about a dude wanting to but not cheating on his wife after she told him how much she wanted to but didnt cheat on him

right, what i said

gabbneb, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:15 (eleven years ago) link

wouldnt you basically evaluate an actors performance the same way youd evaluate its framing or whatever else, ie how well it achieves what you think the movie wants it to?

deeznuts, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:15 (eleven years ago) link

oftentimes. what was the director's intention etc? you don't always know that either.

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:16 (eleven years ago) link

That's a great point surmounter! (about the gap being necessary for conversation)

I do suppose you have to take into account what the actor is "trying" to do in order to judge the performance, however problematic that may be.

I just also wonder if there could be a different way to approach a performance. Maybe not!

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:17 (eleven years ago) link

By the way, I take back what I said upthread about antonioni six years ago!

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:24 (eleven years ago) link

ryan, i don't know how to talk about it because i'm so baffled by that take on acting. to me the acting is the single most prominent feature in any film. can a bad film be saved by good performances? most definitely. can a film be very good if the acting is bad? most definitely not!

"Well you know that stuff is good because there are usually accepted criteria for what good framing is, namely that they are effective."

there are accepted criteria for what makes acting good and they are as hard to pinpoint as what makes a shot good or bad.

lots of xposts

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:25 (eleven years ago) link

jed,

you're not the only one who's noticed that Laura Branigan/EWS connection. check out the edit of the two someone put together:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

Pleasant Plains, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:26 (eleven years ago) link

"can a bad film be saved by good performances? most definitely. can a film be very good if the acting is bad? most definitely not!"

see i disagree w/ this - i dont think id ever watch a film purely for a performance or performances

deeznuts, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:27 (eleven years ago) link

PP, you got me!

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:29 (eleven years ago) link

Jed, I guess it's the difference between seeing acting as a "craft" and seeing it, as someone totally uneducated about it like me may be likely to do, as an attempt at "realism" or the production of some unstated intent on the part of the filmmakers.

ryan, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:29 (eleven years ago) link

deeznuts, would you watch a film for the cinematography alone?

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:32 (eleven years ago) link

i totally love EWS

omar little, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:34 (eleven years ago) link

yeah, but - to be 'clearer', & to flip what you said on its head, i definitely dont think bad acting can kill a good film, but im equally sure good acting cant save a bad one - i guess my prob with your statement is that i see acting as a definite part of the whole, & thus yr opinion inherently doesnt make sense to me: if bad acting kills a good film, its not a good film, & vice versa

it might be true that i value cinematography, or plot, or whatever, more than acting, but at the same i wouldnt say any one of those could in & of itself make a movie good or bad

deeznuts, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:37 (eleven years ago) link

ok yr right. i just meant it can make a bad film better or even enjoyable.

jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:39 (eleven years ago) link

i think really excellent acting can make a film that is otherwise a trifle totally compelling. i'm not sure how i'd regard something like 'the good thief' if it didn't have such a great cast. but there are a few films in which "bad" acting is beside the point. like ryan said, bresson's pics.

omar little, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:48 (eleven years ago) link

deez breakin it out

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:49 (eleven years ago) link

so many good directors manipulate bad actors for the sake of their scenarios, though (Joan Crawford, Ali MacGraw, Keanu Reeves, Scarlet Johanson, to name a few).

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:52 (eleven years ago) link

^^^ this

See, like, in the scene in which Tom Cruise goes back to the hooker's apartment the next day and encounters her roomie, there are a lot of agendas going on there:

-- Tom Cruise thinks he's being Tom Cruise
-- "Dr. Bill Harford" also thinks he's being "Tom Cruise," or whatever the equivalent of "Tom Cruise" is in his universe.
-- Stanley Kubrick thinks both Tom Cruise and Dr. Bill are being smug jerks with not half the mad ladykilling skillz they think they have.
-- Red-haired roomie is all "lol u might have AIDS, Tom Cruise"

Kubrick wins, and both Tom Cruise and Dr. Bill are none the wiser.

Pancakes Hackman, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 12:53 (eleven years ago) link

you don't usually go to kubrick for good performances, but this being what it is, ie a psychological drama where not much really 'happens', good acting is required, and, in this case, not forthcoming.

banriquit, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:10 (eleven years ago) link

^nonsense^

bad actors ... (Joan Crawford, Ali MacGraw, Keanu Reeves, Scarlet Johanson, to name a few)

really, Ali MacGraw stands alone in this group. The others are frequently good movie stars.

Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:28 (eleven years ago) link

jed is so OTM re: "Self Control"

HI DERE, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:33 (eleven years ago) link

really, Ali MacGraw stands alone in this group. The others are frequently good movie stars.

"stars" exist to be manipulated.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:47 (eleven years ago) link

blowin' minds

banriquit, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 13:50 (eleven years ago) link

a good performance is when you can tell the actor's committed to something that exists in the world of the film (even if that thing is "getting high and watching tv")

Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 14:13 (eleven years ago) link

Can we talk about "Self Control" some more? Then again there's this thread:

"Self Control" by Laura Branigan

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 14:16 (eleven years ago) link

Alex in NYC, prophet!

Actually, it looks an awful lot like "Eyes Wide Shut," complete with horny strangers wearing masks. I'm not even joking.

-- Alex in NYC (vassifer), Monday, February 28, 2005 1:11 PM

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 14:19 (eleven years ago) link

a good performance is when you can tell the actor's committed to something that exists in the world of the film

Extra points when you stop seeing the actor as "the actor" and just buy into the veracity of the character.

HI DERE, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:14 (eleven years ago) link

Kubrick was clearly not trying to get naturalistic performances out of his actors. Especially that opening party scene, everything is chopped and screwed. Whether it is effectively dream-like is up to the viewer.

Eazy, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:18 (eleven years ago) link

if you men only knew

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:19 (eleven years ago) link

See it all, or see NOTHING. Anything less is THEFT.

cecelia, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:20 (eleven years ago) link

i love when she's just gotten stoned and can't look at tom cruise's face without cracking up

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:20 (eleven years ago) link

Extra points when you stop seeing the actor as "the actor" and just buy into the veracity of the character.

Gene Hackman and Vanessa Redgrave to thread.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:21 (eleven years ago) link

My theory has always been that the baubled lights in every scene (party lights, christmas lights) are little baubles of germs and AIDS and the clap that show the threat of nonmonogamy, so that when they turn off the Christmas lights in their home at the end, they're commiting themselves to a good clean monogamous marriage.

Eazy, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:22 (eleven years ago) link

lololol try watching 'wetherby' and not see it as 'vanessa redgrave takes on thatcher'.

banriquit, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:24 (eleven years ago) link

whoa eazy that's crazy. i always noticed all those touches of light.

this dress is KILLER

http://img.slate.com/media/32000/32119/Kidman.jpg

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:25 (eleven years ago) link

try watching Wetherby without falling asleep.

Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:25 (eleven years ago) link

in support of eazy's theory, for a reason i could never until know figure out we were shown eyes wide shut in sex ed as a pro-abstinence film...btw kubrick died of syphilis...

deeznuts, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:27 (eleven years ago) link

Well, the theory also makes sense considering that Kubrick started thinking about this movie in the late 80s/early 90s, when the idea was in the air that cheating would kill you.

Eazy, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:29 (eleven years ago) link

btw kubrick died of syphilis...

Uh?

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:29 (eleven years ago) link

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/tuesdayweld/eyeswideshut1.jpg

And they really are in most of the sexy scenes in the movie.

Eazy, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:31 (eleven years ago) link

good shot

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:31 (eleven years ago) link

the good doctor

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 17:32 (eleven years ago) link

http://i31.tinypic.com/2cxeyr6.jpg
This shot is the one that gets me

I like the theory about the coloured baubles. They're everywhere: "Don't you want to go where the rainbow ends?" Also, Bill goes to Ziegler's pool room near the end, where he says he's 'just knocking a few balls around' - i.e. Ziegler just messes people up for his own amusement.

Ismael Klata, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 18:17 (eleven years ago) link

I just remembered - I've played on that pool table! It's now in a hotel in Birmingham.

Ismael Klata, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 18:19 (eleven years ago) link

wow!

Surmounter, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 18:19 (eleven years ago) link

eye-balls

sexyDancer, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 18:20 (eleven years ago) link

one year passes...

tis the season for this movie

surm, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 06:32 (ten years ago) link

http://www.black-scale.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/ews-2.jpg

surm, Tuesday, 13 October 2009 06:35 (ten years ago) link

i totally love EWS

― omar little, Wednesday, July 2, 2008 1:34 AM (1 year ago) Bookmark

passive aggressive tea wisdom (latebloomer), Tuesday, 13 October 2009 06:37 (ten years ago) link

Pancakes Hackman otm.

Rewatched this again last night after seeing this thread. Dr. Bill fails to get this infidelity thing because he's approaching the whole thing as a question of control -- either comes off as a smarmy jerk (two girls at the party, the hooker) or thinks he's got some sort of upper hand until he gets smacked down (hooker roommate drops the "she has AIDS" bomb, he thinks he can wander around the masquerade orgy but then gets penalized, gets called away at the party to clean up someone else's mess instead of flirting).

Kidman's character is great because she's not necessarily breaking this whole "men active, women passive" thing, but showing that there's just as much power in her approach. She comes off as flirty but not smarmy with the Hungarian at the party, and she's the the one who draws the lines in the whole interaction. So she's actually more involved with defining these lines, whereas Cruise's character just kind of goes along when he's offered sexual situations.

Also, how great is it that Dr. Bill has all this amazingly messed-up stuff happening all around and all he can mentally return to is the idea of this guy with his wife?

mh, Wednesday, 14 October 2009 17:40 (ten years ago) link

i find that totally realistic. like, that's what i would be thinking about.

surm, Thursday, 15 October 2009 00:29 (ten years ago) link

one year passes...

This was on TV last night, I saw 20 minutes of it. It was terrible.

resonate with awesomeness (jel --), Monday, 11 July 2011 21:25 (eight years ago) link

fascinating

Ask The Answer Man (sexyDancer), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:23 (eight years ago) link

i saw this on a tv station that heavily edits everything it shows. i also saw evil dead ii on this station. i feel like maybe i should like rent it or something.

plax (ico), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:34 (eight years ago) link

evil dead ii i mean; this looked p rubbish

plax (ico), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:35 (eight years ago) link

best kubrick movie

iatee, Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:38 (eight years ago) link

i can't watch kubrick movies; they make me seasick

plax (ico), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:39 (eight years ago) link

Trick to Kubrick is you really have to watch them so many times you forget about the actors and plot and focus on the details in the background.

Ask The Answer Man (sexyDancer), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 00:49 (eight years ago) link

I think there could have been a great movie here with two leads that actually had chemistry. Cruise actually has some good moments, but none of them are in a scene involving Kidman.

Matt Armstrong, Tuesday, 12 July 2011 01:15 (eight years ago) link

some great moments; I enjoy it more than it deserves. Cruise is pretty great it in.

so confused (blank), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 01:19 (eight years ago) link

lol yeah pretty much agree with Matt, iow

so confused (blank), Tuesday, 12 July 2011 01:21 (eight years ago) link

seven months pass...

been kinda obsessed with this movie lately, partly because after all this time and dozens of viewings, im not entirely sure what it's "about," and that's certainly not for the movie lacking the sense that it's about something. (if that makes sense)

more and more i think a lot of takes on the "fantasy" elements of the movie, while obviously not far off, don't really account for what seems to be a very weird subtext about power, or maybe the rituals of power or how its constituted, and that maybe what happened is that Cruise somehow peeks beneath the curtain (maybe led there by his own fantasizing) and saw something he wasn't supposed to see. something about that orgy scene, and especially his unmasking and the "sacrifice" it sets in motion, seems very primal, for lack of a better word.

anyway, it's just a weird, totally beautiful and ultimately elusive movie.

ryan, Sunday, 11 March 2012 22:22 (seven years ago) link

sometimes i think this is kubrick's best looking movie. the use of lighting is so striking

these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Sunday, 11 March 2012 22:55 (seven years ago) link

a very weird subtext about power, or maybe the rituals of power or how its constituted, and that maybe what happened is that Cruise somehow peeks beneath the curtain (maybe led there by his own fantasizing) and saw something he wasn't supposed to see. something about that orgy scene, and especially his unmasking and the "sacrifice" it sets in motion, seems very primal, for lack of a better word.

this is exactly what the film suggests, but if it's a puzzle, there seen to be several key pieces missing. you get this suggestion of a relationship between desire, fantasy, wealth and power, but it never congeals, remains a dream. the "primal" quality you note winds up being little more than the propulsion engine that draws us through the labyrinth, and it dissipates entirely once we emerge on the other side. fascinating, but also quite frustrating. the paranoiac in me has always wondered whether or not it's really the film kubrick was trying to make...

and, yeah, i agree that it's one of kubrick's best-looking films, if not the best.

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:14 (seven years ago) link

i especially like that the amazing final scene with Sydney Pollack is basically "you didn't see what you thought you saw." There's this massive draw back or dissembling that seems to be going on, and then yeah Kidman says we need to fuck and poof--wherever things seem to be leading is left off, unactualized.

ryan, Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:21 (seven years ago) link

Pollack's puppetmaster character almost made me think it was suggestive that Kubrick cast another director in that role...

and his fascinating final line "Life goes on, until it doesn't. But you know that, Bill." Right before Bill goes home and turns off (!) the Christmas tree lights.

ryan, Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:45 (seven years ago) link

good point. half the movie is lit by christmas lights.

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:53 (seven years ago) link

My theory has always been that the baubled lights in every scene (party lights, christmas lights) are little baubles of germs and AIDS and the clap that show the threat of nonmonogamy, so that when they turn off the Christmas lights in their home at the end, they're commiting themselves to a good clean monogamous marriage.

― Eazy, Wednesday, July 2, 2008 1:22 PM (3 years ago) Bookmark

these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Sunday, 11 March 2012 23:57 (seven years ago) link

pollack's so good in this. i love his last scene where he's laying things out for cruise - where he's kinda pulling back the curtain on all the weirdness cruise experienced that night, as if to reassure him, but you're further unsettled by his urgency to get that reassurance across. and i love the blue pre-dawn light flooding into his pool room from outside

these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Monday, 12 March 2012 00:04 (seven years ago) link

im still not entirely sure why Kubrick chose to set the movie during christmas, perhaps for no other reason than to institute this colored lights scheme.

and this has obviously been pointed out many times, but i find it interesting how the movie is divided into two parts with the orgy/ceremony in the middle as a kind of hinge. before it seems like Eros holds sway, and after Thanatos (or at least every erotic possibility seems poisonous or dangerous, as when he literally leans in to kiss the corpse of the dead girl who saved him). at the very least that seems like a starting point to make sense of how it's structured.

ryan, Monday, 12 March 2012 00:08 (seven years ago) link

my friend describes the visual aesthetic of this film as GLARE

Literal Facepalms (Dr Morbius), Monday, 12 March 2012 00:11 (seven years ago) link

im still not entirely sure why Kubrick chose to set the movie during christmas, perhaps for no other reason than to institute this colored lights scheme.

yeah, that's one of the things that really eats at me in trying to figure out what the film's about. christmas = what, exactly? death & resurrection, the pretty surface of things, consumerism, home & family? none of the interpretations i try to attach to it make much sense. like it seems as though EWS is "supposed" in some sense to culminate in cruise's sacrifice, his death...but it doesn't. it's a transformational journey through a sexual underworld that provokes no transformation other than a realization that home is relatively safe and, hey, everybody has lustful thoughts every now and then.

Fozzy Osbourne (contenderizer), Monday, 12 March 2012 00:49 (seven years ago) link

three months pass...

i saw this movie in 1999 and didn't think much of it.

rewatched it two nights ago and I think its AMAZING!! A completely cheap erotic thriller, pretty much--aka my favorite kind of movie.

homosexual II, Sunday, 24 June 2012 07:39 (seven years ago) link

It's the Ben-Hur of erotic thrillers.

old people are made of poop (Eric H.), Sunday, 24 June 2012 07:53 (seven years ago) link

Druid orgy = chariot race.

clemenza, Sunday, 24 June 2012 10:29 (seven years ago) link

"cheap erotic thriller" via Schnitzler

Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 24 June 2012 13:44 (seven years ago) link

it's still a great film about marriage. and I agree it is one of kubrick's best looking films.

akm, Sunday, 24 June 2012 15:51 (seven years ago) link

Well, it's a surreal looking film, that's for sure. It's as if the Archers' soundstage fantasies were adopted into a paranoid erotic thriller that's neither erotic nor thrilling but is frequently laugh out loud silly, or at least chuckle-inducing, from the score to the orgy to Sydney Pollack, who I think is sort of hilarious in any role. I guess I wish this movie were funnier on purpose. Like, it's the world's most expensive looking cheap erotic thriller. Was Kubrick simply taking the piss?

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 24 June 2012 17:14 (seven years ago) link

no, I think it's frequently profound and on the level.

Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 24 June 2012 18:11 (seven years ago) link

that scene with kidman and cruise stoned in pants and talking veeeery slooowly is brutal though.

jed_, Sunday, 24 June 2012 18:24 (seven years ago) link

cracking movie. the critical kicking it got baffled the life out of me.

dunno if you've all seen this btw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjmFQfQH2QM

piscesx, Sunday, 24 June 2012 18:53 (seven years ago) link

All the slow talking is a way of making a dream rhythm (first party scene, too).

Odd Spice (Eazy), Sunday, 24 June 2012 18:54 (seven years ago) link

So it's a profound mediation on ... marriage? Marriage is scary? Infidelity is a walking nightmare? Eh. I'm not convinced of any depths, let alone profundities.

One of the ironies of this film is that by casting Cruise and Kidman, Kubrick picked two actors with absolutely no chemistry.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 24 June 2012 19:03 (seven years ago) link

Marriage as sublimation, knowledge (or lack thereof) of the Other's desire (and the terrifying potential of that), the seduction of fantasy, the obscure relationship of Power to these mechanisms, etc.

Really a masterpiece for me.

ryan, Sunday, 24 June 2012 19:36 (seven years ago) link

Huh. I mean, I can see those things, but it's hardly some oblique meditation. I always thought the flick was way too on the nose.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 24 June 2012 19:53 (seven years ago) link

Yeah those thing are all more or less part of the text rather than subtext. But as I tried to say in a few posts upthread I def get the sense that it's about something else that it deliberately pulls back from, like pulling a curtain back only for it to snap back into place before you can make out what you saw. That's the source of my fascination anyway--the way it's constructed in such an elusive manner.

ryan, Sunday, 24 June 2012 20:09 (seven years ago) link

What makes Kubrick Kubrick, rather than Schumacher, is the way in which he embodies those ideas in color, geometry, rhythm, etc., in ways that gives the film (and all of his films) their own internal vocabulary.

Odd Spice (Eazy), Sunday, 24 June 2012 20:11 (seven years ago) link

Like you hear reports that Kubrick deliberately sought to make the dialogue as banal as possible--and I think that sort of thing creates a weird stiltedness, a haziness that never quite conceals into people saying exactly what they mean.

ryan, Sunday, 24 June 2012 20:12 (seven years ago) link

Oh, there's no question it's a Kubrick Film.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 24 June 2012 20:46 (seven years ago) link

My theory has always been that the baubled lights in every scene (party lights, christmas lights) are little baubles of germs and AIDS and the clap that show the threat of nonmonogamy, so that when they turn off the Christmas lights in their home at the end, they're commiting themselves to a good clean monogamous marriage.

― Eazy, Wednesday, July 2, 2008 1:22 PM (3 years ago) Bookmark

Black_vegeta (Hungry4Ass), Sunday, 24 June 2012 21:01 (seven years ago) link

cool post

Black_vegeta (Hungry4Ass), Sunday, 24 June 2012 21:01 (seven years ago) link

I wish that were the case! Like, "Eyes Wide Shut" is the world's most expensive PSA for venereal disease.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 24 June 2012 21:42 (seven years ago) link

I thought it was excellent, but then again I saw it on the big screen when it came out. It loses quite a bit on the small screen. Which is excuse enough to save up for a home theater!

Hootie Tootie O'Bootie (tootie and the blowfish), Sunday, 24 June 2012 22:48 (seven years ago) link

that scene with kidman and cruise stoned in pants and talking veeeery slooowly is brutal though.

i actually love this scene! (or remember loving this scene at the time). I think because it's the most Lynchian scene!

obliquity of the ecliptic (rrrobyn), Sunday, 24 June 2012 23:23 (seven years ago) link

My wife and I saw this movie on our honeymoon on a hot day in Hawaii. Actually, we saw a third of it before the projector broker. Then we kind of looked at each other, shrugged, and went out to dinner instead.

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 25 June 2012 05:23 (seven years ago) link

perhaps it's a film about how marriage attracts the mutually tasteless

Ward Fowler, Monday, 25 June 2012 08:12 (seven years ago) link

A man thinks he can open the door to infidelity and intrigue, but ends up opening the wrong door and just about gets himself killed due to his hubris

mh, Monday, 25 June 2012 11:15 (seven years ago) link

hubris doobee doo.

Mark G, Monday, 25 June 2012 11:22 (seven years ago) link

[that scene with kidman and cruise stoned in pants and talking veeeery slooowly is brutal though.

Yeah, easily one of the greatest of all Kubrick scenes.

old people are made of poop (Eric H.), Monday, 25 June 2012 17:15 (seven years ago) link

she is great in that scene

Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 25 June 2012 17:41 (seven years ago) link

I would have liked this movie a lot more had practically anyone but Tom Cruise played the lead male role

which apparently I said in a slightly different way 11 years ago, lol

Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Monday, 25 June 2012 17:56 (seven years ago) link

Marriage as sublimation, knowledge (or lack thereof) of the Other's desire (and the terrifying potential of that), the seduction of fantasy, the obscure relationship of Power to these mechanisms, etc.

...those thing are all more or less part of the text rather than subtext. But as I tried to say in a few posts upthread I def get the sense that it's about something else that it deliberately pulls back from, like pulling a curtain back only for it to snap back into place before you can make out what you saw. That's the source of my fascination anyway--the way it's constructed in such an elusive manner.

Like you hear reports that Kubrick deliberately sought to make the dialogue as banal as possible--and I think that sort of thing creates a weird stiltedness, a haziness that never quite conceals into people saying exactly what they mean.

― ryan, Sunday, June 24, 2012 (Yesterday)

^ OTM. What's fascinating to me is not what the film means, but how it creates the tantalizing sense of meaning seemingly offered but then withheld. Very similar to what I like about both David Lynch and Blue Oyster Cult. The audience goes through the same experience as Cruise's protagonist, but is ultimately left in doubt, which subverts the seemingly comforting happy ending.

contenderizer, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:06 (seven years ago) link

BOC?

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:07 (seven years ago) link

I think he meant Blue Velvet, lol

Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 25 June 2012 18:08 (seven years ago) link

I figured. You can't even blame that on autocorrect or predicative text!

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:12 (seven years ago) link

no, i really did blue oyster cult, silly as that may sound. it's a big leap, i know, but i talked on one of the BOC threads about the appeal in their music of the occult secret that is promised but never fully revealed.

contenderizer, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:15 (seven years ago) link

did mean blue oyster cult

contenderizer, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:16 (seven years ago) link

...

okay then, lol

Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 25 June 2012 18:18 (seven years ago) link

what withholding of meaning? Married people need to fuck. The End.

Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 25 June 2012 18:23 (seven years ago) link

what i was trying to get at about BOC, in mortifyingly purple prose:

Where most popular art is concerned, the "intricate detail on the skull" draws you toward the doorway, but the curtains part rather easily, and what you find on the other side is a kind of fantastical ordinariness, the sublime rendered mundane. BÖC's great trick is that they never fully usher you through the doorway. Instead, they leave you to peer in from the threshhold so that you're always an awed initiate, always the seeker reaching towards the chamber but never the adept arriving there.

― Little GTFO (contenderizer), Sunday, February 19, 2012 3:03 PM (4 months ago)

contenderizer, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:27 (seven years ago) link

^ really need to go back and edit that kind of shit before i post it

contenderizer, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:27 (seven years ago) link

I like that post!

Married people need to fuck. The End.

that's kinda the "joke" that pulls the curtain back down, imo. cut to black, etc.

ryan, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:32 (seven years ago) link

not to say that i disagree! but that sorta belies the 2 and a half hours we just spent watching Dr. Bill's odyssey in a very intriguing way.

ryan, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:33 (seven years ago) link

watching that movie it was kind of hard to believe they were a married couple and i guess they did, too. i kind of want to see this movie with katie holmes or mimi rogers in it by comparison.

Philip Nunez, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:34 (seven years ago) link

why on earth would you remove the one big positive of this movie and replace it with Katie Holmes

Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Monday, 25 June 2012 18:35 (seven years ago) link

would it be a fair trade if harvey keitel were reinstated?

Philip Nunez, Monday, 25 June 2012 18:43 (seven years ago) link

yeah katie holmes would make that unwatchable

Peppermint Patty Hearst (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 25 June 2012 18:44 (seven years ago) link

I keep meaning to rewatch on DVD since they put out the European version here, without the digital 'Austin Powers' masking of the nudity.

Pangborn to be Wilde (Dr Morbius), Monday, 25 June 2012 19:00 (seven years ago) link

mike myers in the lead would be interesting. he could probably do "I'm in over my head" more convincingly than cruise.

Philip Nunez, Monday, 25 June 2012 19:13 (seven years ago) link

i should really see this again

funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Monday, 25 June 2012 19:20 (seven years ago) link

wasn't steve martin originally who kubrick wanted for the lead? way back in the 80s iirc?

tylerw, Monday, 25 June 2012 19:50 (seven years ago) link

what was the deal with keitel? why do I remember something about someone cumming in kidman's hair? maybe that was my own dream.

akm, Monday, 25 June 2012 20:00 (seven years ago) link

it's apparently a myth, but a myth with explanatory power, like the anecdote about kubrick called up stephen king asking if he believed in god.

Philip Nunez, Monday, 25 June 2012 20:04 (seven years ago) link

This is showing in DC this summer for a Kubrick retrospective. Can't wait to see it on the big screen

Moreno, Monday, 25 June 2012 20:35 (seven years ago) link

havin a hard time not seeing bateman every time cruise pulls the charming face in this:

http://i203.photobucket.com/albums/aa295/slugbert/gamerecognizegame.jpg

slugbuggy, Thursday, 28 June 2012 08:06 (seven years ago) link

masks!!!

slugbuggy, Thursday, 28 June 2012 08:11 (seven years ago) link

two weeks pass...

Obviously they are very different films, but I kept getting these weird "Eyes Wide Shut" vibes when I was watching Argento's "Inferno" the other day. Something about the set design, and Keith Emerson's piano score, and the general mood. Admittedly, it's been a while since I've seen "EWS."

Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 12 July 2012 15:16 (seven years ago) link

three months pass...

Brief thoughts of Kidman:

People thought that making the film was the beginning of the end of my marriage -- but I don't really think it was. Tom and I were close then, and it was very much the three of us. Onscreen, the husband and wife are at odds, and Stanley wanted to use our marriage as a supposed reality. That was Stanley: He used the movie as provocation, pretending it was our sex life. Which we weren't oblivious to, but obviously it wasn't us. We both decided to dedicate ourselves to a great filmmaker and artist.

Stanley had to coax me into some of the sexuality in the film in the beginning, but we shot things that were a lot more extreme that didn't end up in the movie. I did feel safe -- I never felt it was exploitive or unintelligent. He was very different with women than he was with men. He has daughters, so he was very paternal with me.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/nicole-kidman-stanley-kubricks-lens-382186

crazy uncle in the attic (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:10 (six years ago) link

Paternalism resulted in her best performance ever.

Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:18 (six years ago) link

we shot things that were a lot more extreme that didn't end up in the movie

o_O

TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:45 (six years ago) link

I liked Slavoj Zizek's take, that a major theme of the film was that fantasy is destroyed the moment it's realized.

SongOfSam, Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:55 (six years ago) link

And all that's left after that is Christmas shopping.

Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:56 (six years ago) link

fantasy is destroyed the moment that... OH JESUS THIS ISN'T WHAT I WANTED AT ALL

ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 17:43 (six years ago) link

eyes wide shut uh http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0096.html

live or die merits of the button thread (wolves lacan), Wednesday, 24 October 2012 18:52 (six years ago) link

great essay, especially for the phrase "the groans of critical blueballs"

anyone else see Room 237 yet/ are ppl talking on another thread abt it?

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Thursday, 25 October 2012 05:00 (six years ago) link

The Shining

Bobby Ken Doll (Eric H.), Thursday, 25 October 2012 05:04 (six years ago) link

of course

❏❐❑❒ (gr8080), Thursday, 25 October 2012 05:09 (six years ago) link

just now:

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (237 of them)

well done, ilx

slugbuggy, Thursday, 25 October 2012 07:19 (six years ago) link

dunno why i was impressed w/ unremarkable coincidences. 237th post discussing the room 237 doc abt the shining while watching the south park episode parodying the shining. i r dumb that way.

at the same time that you were more dear to me than ever, i would have given everything -- everything -- for just one moment with him

― Surmounter, Tuesday, July 1, 2008 8:09 PM (4 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this seems crucial somehow wrt the zizek piece, i think. dr. bill's odyssey isn't about the fulfillment of fantasy; he doesn't even have one of his own. he's just wandering around trying on what he thinks fantasy is supposed to look like. in the taxi scene where he's imagining alice with the naval officer, i think as much as he's haunted by hurt and jealousy towards his wife he's equally or more so envious of her having a fantasy that consuming and destructive.

slugbuggy, Friday, 26 October 2012 07:10 (six years ago) link

i have to award points on the "destructive" part, tho, he did accomplished that much ok.

slugbuggy, Friday, 26 October 2012 07:18 (six years ago) link

three months pass...

that's marvellous

Ismael Klata, Sunday, 10 February 2013 20:01 (six years ago) link

one month passes...

hey, the Village set doesn't make sense

http://www.scoutingny.com/?p=6434

Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:30 (six years ago) link

never noticed the walking in front of rear projection before!

turds (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:44 (six years ago) link

My humble take on it is that Kidman was at the party if not in person, in spirit. Consider:

- Opening shot of the film, where she drops her dress the same way as the masked women during the ritual

- The upsetting dream she has, which is close to the events that Cruise witnessed at the house

- The final line of the film, spoken by her, in repsonse to Cruise asking what they should do : "Fuck"

calstars, Thursday, 28 March 2013 02:35 (six years ago) link

Also, striking use of red:

- Hallway as Cruise descends into the Sonata cafe

- Domino's front door

- Pool table that Pollack leans over towards the end of the film

calstars, Thursday, 28 March 2013 02:40 (six years ago) link

Also the color of the robe of the master of ceremonies at the ritual

calstars, Thursday, 28 March 2013 02:40 (six years ago) link

never noticed the walking in front of rear projection before!

― turds (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, March 26, 2013 5:44 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i totally noticed it but was never sure if it was meant to be noticed or not.

la noche de la vaca (latebloomer), Thursday, 28 March 2013 03:12 (six years ago) link

three weeks pass...

'Dream Story' is a quick read for anyone who enjoyed the movie. I knew the movie was based on the story, but was surprised how closely the film followed it. Almost all of the elements of the film - even the minor scenes - have some basis in the story.

calstars, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 01:52 (six years ago) link

yep, I was surprised when I saw EWS, having read the book when I knew that SK was adapting it.

Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 01:55 (six years ago) link

I have an edition squirreled away in a box somewhere of the novel + the screenplay. never got around to actually reading it unfortunately.

ryan, Wednesday, 24 April 2013 02:17 (six years ago) link

http://i.imgur.com/8LD3XAC.jpg

Saw these chairs being delivered to the Masonic lodge in NYC this morning

calstars, Thursday, 2 May 2013 12:28 (six years ago) link

Let me try this agajn
http://i.imgur.com/8LD3XAC.jpg

calstars, Thursday, 2 May 2013 12:30 (six years ago) link

Oh fuck it

calstars, Thursday, 2 May 2013 12:30 (six years ago) link

we can see this pics.

sheer tip (how's life), Thursday, 2 May 2013 12:51 (six years ago) link

I've been in that lodge (not for an orgy).

Pope Rusty I (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 May 2013 15:23 (six years ago) link

a likely story

set the controls for the heart of the sun (VegemiteGrrl), Thursday, 2 May 2013 16:36 (six years ago) link

ha, i've been in there too. for, um, a fashion show.

tylerw, Thursday, 2 May 2013 21:54 (six years ago) link

likely story

akm, Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:01 (six years ago) link

those chairs are perfect

Chris S, Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:06 (six years ago) link

noting weird happened at the fashion show, look, here's a photo I took:
http://lightmasterstudios.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Eyes-Wide-Shut-Keyboards.jpg
just another night in new york city, you know?

tylerw, Thursday, 2 May 2013 22:16 (six years ago) link

six months pass...

well *i* still like it. so there.

piscesx, Tuesday, 19 November 2013 00:02 (five years ago) link

two months pass...

this puts it under the microscope

http://somerton.tumblr.com/

images of war violence and historical smoking (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 12 February 2014 01:56 (five years ago) link

five months pass...

A case for EWS (out 15 years ago yesterday) as SK's most personal film:

The final deep resonance regarding Eyes Wide Shut has to do with it being Stanley Kubrick’s last film. It was never intended to be a swan song. Fans of Kubrick would rather have had him sign off with AI or his long abandoned Napoleon, or maybe even his holocaust film Aryan Papers. But thinking deeply about Eyes Wide Shut, and feeling even more deeply about it, I believe that it may be as appropriate a final work for a filmmaker as A Prairie Home Companion was for Robert Altman and The Dead was for John Huston. I believe that this was Stanley Kubrick’s most personal film. The art on the Harfords’ apartment is mostly by Christiane Harlan Kubrick, and Alice is an artist; Nicole Kidman even kind of looks like Mrs. Kubrick. Kubrick’s father was a medical doctor, like Bill Harford. And as I implied earlier, there is a kind of concern for Helena, the Harfords’ daughter, who will grow up in a world where beautiful Barbie-doll women are sexualized, “get their brains fucked out,” and are then promptly discarded. Kubrick had three daughters, and there is an underlying concern of a father, quick to a civilization abounding with male privilege, for his daughter in the tapestry of this film.

http://www.letoilemagazine.com/2014/07/16/the-niles-files-its-old-fashioned/

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 17 July 2014 19:54 (five years ago) link

I see that guy at screenings fairly often. Sky's the limit for him imo.

You are exactly why people root for the apes (Eric H.), Thursday, 17 July 2014 19:56 (five years ago) link

film criticism "sky" being what it is.

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 17 July 2014 21:23 (five years ago) link

Bearing in mind it's what he *wants* to do.

You are exactly why people root for the apes (Eric H.), Thursday, 17 July 2014 22:06 (five years ago) link

hmmmm anything he wants to do is OK with me

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2TVMxnrSCKY/S0kpzdDPCPI/AAAAAAAAGz8/AhDHDP0UuUY/s1600-h/nilesschwartz.jpg

son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Friday, 18 July 2014 01:51 (five years ago) link

[redacted]

You are exactly why people root for the apes (Eric H.), Friday, 18 July 2014 04:59 (five years ago) link

wish that someone would corroborate the apocryphal story of kidman and harvey keitel humping her hair

akm, Friday, 18 July 2014 21:58 (five years ago) link

http://www.letoilemagazine.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Eyes-59-300x168.jpg

ha i took this exact still (from the piece morbs linked) as a desktop background a couple years ago. can't have been a frame off.

difficult listening hour, Friday, 18 July 2014 23:44 (five years ago) link

two weeks pass...

I wanted to strangle Larry Smith by the end of this

, Wednesday, 6 August 2014 20:30 (five years ago) link

two years pass...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z22kV6t7TI

We will whisk you away from New York City to a secluded estate in the woods for an Illuminati rite of passage. Join us and discover the light of scientific truth.
A luxury limousine bus will pick up thirty Illuminati candidates at a secret Manhattan location. They will be transported to a stately hunting lodge located on a secluded lake peninsula one hour outside of Manhattan. Champagne will be sipped en route.
Our Surrealist soirée includes intricate cocktails, mouthwatering delicacies, inspiring music, devilish dances and esoteric rituals. The first course will be eaten blindfolded to better appreciate the nuance of the food.
Many of the dates will feature a special guest performance by Prodigy of Mobb Deep.
Attendees must fill out an online application and be accepted in order to purchase tickets.
Apply Now

thrusted pelvis-first back (ulysses), Friday, 2 September 2016 18:49 (three years ago) link

So basically a hip hop concert with some random people wearing masks?

calstars, Friday, 2 September 2016 20:29 (three years ago) link

more like cirque de foreplay plus prodigy i think

thrusted pelvis-first back (ulysses), Friday, 2 September 2016 22:01 (three years ago) link

more like fidelino

pinkhushpuppies (rip van wanko), Friday, 2 September 2016 22:17 (three years ago) link

love this movie so much, second only to the shining, miss SK so much

calstars, Saturday, 3 September 2016 01:55 (three years ago) link

"a secluded lake peninsula one hour outside of Manhatta" hmm where could this be ?

calstars, Saturday, 3 September 2016 02:05 (three years ago) link

I wanted to strangle Larry Smith by the end of this

― 龜, Wednesday, August 6, 2014 1:30 PM (two years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hah i love the lightning and shit in the movie.

brimstead, Saturday, 3 September 2016 04:39 (three years ago) link

lightning = lighting

brimstead, Saturday, 3 September 2016 04:39 (three years ago) link

eight months pass...

god good i just saw EWS for the first time and it was incredible, i'm absolutely floored. easily my favorite Kubrick - A Clockwork Orange and especially 2001 are a bit worn out for me.

flappy bird, Thursday, 11 May 2017 04:11 (two years ago) link

it's so strange knowing of of a movie for many years, familiar with its basic premise and iconography, and then finally seeing it and having your preconceptions obliterated. i thought the movie was about Cruise & Kidman going to these mask parties together, at least twice. the way that ryan talks about the "elusive" construction up thread is so otm - it makes it so much more disturbing and creepy having a brief glimpse of that world and no retribution, as opposed to having Cruise killed or whatever. and yes one of the best looking movies i've ever seen.

flappy bird, Thursday, 11 May 2017 04:21 (two years ago) link

i saw it on small screen maybe ten years ago and being a bit 'whatevs' at the time, but I've felt like that about every Kubrick film I've seen until I got to see it at the cinema. His films really need to be seen on a large screen to be properly appreciated.

Shat Parp (dog latin), Thursday, 11 May 2017 13:08 (two years ago) link

Stevie D just watched it.

insidious assymetrical weapons (Eric H.), Thursday, 11 May 2017 13:13 (two years ago) link

nine months pass...

I watched it last night. Not seen it since about 2006. Really enjoyed it, although I'm still trying to decipher a lot of it. Lots more to chew on than I first remembered. I'm sure there are a thousand critical analyses online I could read but it's quite a ride. The climax of the film, the orgy/ceremony with THAT music and chanting is so creepy and evocative. I love it. I started reading something yesterday that argues that the film isn't so much about sex as lucre, and yes I guess it is, and this film resonates even more in the Trump era than it did in 1999.
But it's also definitely about sex, and infidelity and fear. Cruise's character, on more than one occasion, is presented with the opportunity to practice inFIDELity (and it appears he would) but somehow never gets to. Meanwhile, his wife is very open about her own fantasies of sleeping with other people and indeed has vivid Old Testament dreams about this, which she admits to using against her husband. It's that last line, 'we have to fuck' that closes the film and kind of neatly-but-not-so-neatly wraps it up. This couple who've been arguing, accusing of cheating on each other (but mostly) in their minds, who've been getting increasingly sucked into this sordid demimonde of money, masks and murder, could easily wake up from the dream if they'd only rediscover each other... Still the conclusion tells us nothing about the cult, about what really happened to Mandy, about why they'd be willing to kill someone to protect their secrets... And what's happening with the Rainbow outfitters? How many people already knew about the society -does the shop owner know? Do the two models who say they're going to take Bill to 'the end of the Rainbow' know? Does all this even matter to the protagonists in the story?
Cruise's character's goal isn't to bring down the secret society or to bring justice to the dead sex-worker. He infiltrates the ceremony for the same reason he decides to go back to Domino's house - intrigue, boredom, frustration, anger perhaps. He's curious, and he could just as easily go home back to his wife and daughter. Even the next day, even after he's told to back off and discontinue his enquiries, he persists, despite a perceived threat to his life.
I'd really like to understand more about the scene with his friend who says 'it was all staged' and who brushes off Mandy's death as being unrelated. This is pure Kubrick, and a very much Lynchian trope too. The kind that makes you want to come back to the film for a second and third time.

Badgers (dog latin), Monday, 19 February 2018 11:26 (one year ago) link

Some things never change

Moo Vaughn, Monday, 19 February 2018 13:44 (one year ago) link

Good in-depth essay from Jonathan Rosenbaum:

It’s one of the movie’s many indications that the unclear separations of imagination and reality include many rhyme effects between Alice’s dreams and fantasies and Bill’s reality as well as rhymes between her fantasies and his (such as her having sex with the naval officer). In fact, though the film initially appears to be mainly about Bill because it follows him around more than Alice, Alice’s confession and dream are just as important as anything that happens to him; in some respects, thanks to Kubrick’s (and Schnitzler’s) careful calibrations in the storytelling, she makes an even stronger impression than he does, especially because she seems more in touch with her fantasy life than he is with his own.

... (Eazy), Monday, 19 February 2018 14:02 (one year ago) link

Yeah I watched this a few months ago and was blown away. Totally forgot about the Christmas motif, and the rainbow-colored Christmas lights hanging in so many scenes.

I read it mostly as a commentary on class and how deep-rooted power is. Even though Cruise is a successful doctor, he's unable to buy his way into society's walled-off top tier (he spends his night throwing money around, offering everybody hundred dollar bills; his name is Bill, etc., but the old money power players see right through him).

Evan R, Monday, 19 February 2018 14:32 (one year ago) link

I watched it two Sundays ago, first full viewing since 1999, thoroughly underwhelmed and still laughable in places.

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 19 February 2018 14:52 (one year ago) link

as in, "Do smart Americans like Kubrick and Raphael really have so shallow a conception of infidelity and perversion?"

morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 19 February 2018 14:53 (one year ago) link

hmmm, taken in a literary sense from Schnitzler

infidelity of the mind

I'm convinced most of it "doesn't happen"

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 February 2018 15:02 (one year ago) link

Laughable in places i.e. every time they play the music

El Tomboto, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:06 (one year ago) link

it's no far and away that's for sure

NEW CHIMP THREAT (bizarro gazzara), Monday, 19 February 2018 15:07 (one year ago) link

as in, "Do smart Americans like Kubrick and Raphael really have so shallow a conception of infidelity and perversion?"

― morning wood truancy (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, February 19, 2018 2:53 PM (seventeen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Really?

Moo Vaughn, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:12 (one year ago) link

Imagine this would be a good double feature with Risky Business.

... (Eazy), Monday, 19 February 2018 15:13 (one year ago) link

(The Ligeti piece, in case it wasn’t obvious what I was referring to)

El Tomboto, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:14 (one year ago) link

A case for EWS (out 15 years ago yesterday) as SK's most personal film:

The final deep resonance regarding Eyes Wide Shut has to do with it being Stanley Kubrick’s last film. It was never intended to be a swan song. Fans of Kubrick would rather have had him sign off with AI or his long abandoned Napoleon, or maybe even his holocaust film Aryan Papers. But thinking deeply about Eyes Wide Shut, and feeling even more deeply about it, I believe that it may be as appropriate a final work for a filmmaker as A Prairie Home Companion was for Robert Altman and The Dead was for John Huston. I believe that this was Stanley Kubrick’s most personal film. The art on the Harfords’ apartment is mostly by Christiane Harlan Kubrick, and Alice is an artist; Nicole Kidman even kind of looks like Mrs. Kubrick. Kubrick’s father was a medical doctor, like Bill Harford. And as I implied earlier, there is a kind of concern for Helena, the Harfords’ daughter, who will grow up in a world where beautiful Barbie-doll women are sexualized, “get their brains fucked out,” and are then promptly discarded. Kubrick had three daughters, and there is an underlying concern of a father, quick to a civilization abounding with male privilege, for his daughter in the tapestry of this film.

http://www.letoilemagazine.com/2014/07/16/the-niles-files-its-old-fashioned/

― son of a lewd monk (Dr Morbius), Thursday, July 17, 2014 7:54 PM (three years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I didn't catch the latter concern, perhaps as a non-parent, but I nevertheless already regarded as his most personal and perhaps of a piece with at least one of the other two personal favorites.

Moo Vaughn, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:15 (one year ago) link

(raphael was born in chicago but emigrated to the UK when he was seven: i think he probably mostly imbibed his shallowness of concept over here, if anywhere)

mark s, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:17 (one year ago) link

I thought Cruise and Kidman's acting was atrocious in places, especially Kilman acting stoned, all staggering around like a drunk antelope and talking really reaaaaallllly slowww. Cruise out-Batemanning Patrick Bateman actually worked in his favour in that it made everything feel even more uncanny

Badgers (dog latin), Monday, 19 February 2018 15:20 (one year ago) link

Imagine this would be a good double feature with Risky Business.

As long as you watch Risky Business, the better, smarter and definitely more enjoyable film, second.

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:33 (one year ago) link

Brilliant movie

flappy bird, Monday, 19 February 2018 15:46 (one year ago) link

How does it rank against The Emoji Film

El Tomboto, Monday, 19 February 2018 16:11 (one year ago) link

it's better

flappy bird, Monday, 19 February 2018 17:11 (one year ago) link

fp'd JiC

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 February 2018 17:32 (one year ago) link

Oh I just did that with like four people just now, including Alfred

"Minneapolis" (barf) (Eric H.), Monday, 19 February 2018 18:26 (one year ago) link

no orgies for them

ice cream social justice (Dr Morbius), Monday, 19 February 2018 18:30 (one year ago) link

it's hard to get an orgy of beautiful people going

if you can manage 50% beautiful people in the orgy it's pretty much a miracle

but probably 2/3 will be sub 5s

basically the more people participate the less likely you'll get hot people in it

only reason i bring this up is because you try keeping your dick hard with people you don't find attractive

F# A# (∞), Monday, 19 February 2018 18:35 (one year ago) link

unless the actors are being paid to participate

F# A# (∞), Monday, 19 February 2018 18:36 (one year ago) link

They've dicked around with the aspect on recent Blus supposedly. Bad cropping and suchlike compared to some older versions on DVD.

http://cdn.avsforum.com/f/f1/f1f4ac2a_vbattach236931.jpeg

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/150-blu-ray-software/928408-eyes-wide-shut-review-up-hdd-3-stars-pq-3.html

piscesx, Monday, 19 February 2018 18:40 (one year ago) link

holy shit

glad i got to see it for the first time in a theater last year

flappy bird, Monday, 19 February 2018 18:56 (one year ago) link

four months pass...

i have now seen the uncensored orgy scenes

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 24 June 2018 19:00 (one year ago) link

i still find Kidman's laughing fit in the pot scene a riot

had forgotten almost the entire Marie Richardson lascivious grieving episode

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 24 June 2018 19:03 (one year ago) link

that whole scene is incredible. those curtains...

are the uncensored scenes on the blu ray or did you see a screening? how much more explicit is it really? like someone said upthread (i think), part of what's funny/interesting/scary about the orgy is how stiff and non-erotic it is.

flappy bird, Sunday, 24 June 2018 21:32 (one year ago) link

I'm talking about the fact that the US release obscured the pelvic areas of the orgiasts with CG onlookers -- "the Austin Powers version," as Roger Ebert called it. Just a reminder that American culture was infantilized even before the Orange Grifter showed up.

Even unobscured, the sex is mechanical and non-erotic, as Kubrick intended.

there are at least 3 brilliant "character" roles filled here:

- the aforementioned Marie Richardson

- Rade Serbedzija as the costume shop owner who ultimately pimps out his daughter

- Alan Cumming as the hotel desk clerk, one of the funniest 3-minute performances in cinema annals (Franklin Pangborn would be proud)

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Monday, 25 June 2018 01:31 (one year ago) link

Sydney Pollack for me. No one did smarmy gravitas so well. It's a shame he never made a Phil Jackson biopic.

dinnerboat, Monday, 25 June 2018 21:25 (one year ago) link

are the CGI onlookers still present in versions sold in the US now?

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Monday, 25 June 2018 21:31 (one year ago) link

you can gifs of the differences here: https://decider.com/2015/01/30/eyes-wide-shut-uncensored-hbo-go/

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Monday, 25 June 2018 21:33 (one year ago) link

you don't get to see TC on his knees with a cock in his mouth or anything.

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Monday, 25 June 2018 21:34 (one year ago) link

well hope springs eternal

flappy bird, Monday, 25 June 2018 21:49 (one year ago) link

I've come around to really admiring this film. No to the Alan Cumming reception scene, though. I think he comes across as some sort of grotesque gay stereotype - maybe that's the point I guess what with "Are we in the good doctor's head? " and all. Must rewatch.

An Uphill Battle For Legumes (Capitaine Jay Vee), Monday, 25 June 2018 22:43 (one year ago) link

yeah i loathe Cumming and that scene

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Monday, 25 June 2018 23:09 (one year ago) link

the Alan Cummings scene is amazing

flappy bird, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 01:02 (one year ago) link

ly bad

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 01:16 (one year ago) link

I probably should have had some reasonable sexual encounters in my life before seeing this film

mh, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 01:41 (one year ago) link

are the CGI onlookers still present in versions sold in the US now?

They were up until the 2007 release, which is what i just watched.

hey guess what, for a lot of hotel desk clerks that gay stereotype is true.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 03:40 (one year ago) link

btw there is a bar/showplace in NYC now called Club Cumming which he has a stake in

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 03:42 (one year ago) link

that still above makes it clear why SK originally considered Steve Martin to play Dr Bill

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 03:43 (one year ago) link

It would never have occurred to me that this was the case:

“In some of the scenes, the backgrounds were rear-projection plates,” the cinematographer reveals. “Generally, when Tom’s facing the camera, the backgrounds are rear-projected; anything that shows him from a side view was done on the streets of London. We had the plates shot in New York by a second unit [that included cinematographers Patrick Turley, Malik Sayeed and Arthur Jafa]. Once the plates were sent to us, we had them force-developed and balanced to the necessary levels. We’d then go onto our street sets and shoot Tom walking on a treadmill. After setting the treadmill to a certain speed, we’d put some lighting effects on him to simulate the glow from the various storefronts that were passing by in the plates. We spent a few weeks on those shots.”

Alan Cumming scene is great.

Eliza D., Tuesday, 26 June 2018 13:25 (one year ago) link

The whole thing definitely had the feel of being shot on sets. The couple of b-roll shots (maybe a freeway exit or such?) felt really out of place. The rest of it feels kind of like an 80s video.

... (Eazy), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 13:40 (one year ago) link

you can tell if you're looking out for it. it's one of my favorite things about the movie xp

flamenco blorf (BradNelson), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 13:41 (one year ago) link

I probably should have had some reasonable sexual encounters in my life before seeing this film

― mh, Monday, June 25, 2018 9:41 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol

marcos, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 13:54 (one year ago) link

yeah that's otm for me

flamenco blorf (BradNelson), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 14:09 (one year ago) link

there aren't many reasonable encounters in this film! mostly at the mechanical orgy.

Cumming said they shot his scene for a week, and that Kubrick laughed a lot.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 14:51 (one year ago) link

if you know downtown Manhattan well, and that Cruise was never on those streets because Kubrick wasn't, you could surmise that something like that projection process was done.

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 14:55 (one year ago) link

The rest of it feels kind of like an 80s video.

yes. specifically this one that has the same plot as EWS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miGUnKWcYeo

i'm always posting about this ha.

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:02 (one year ago) link

I admire this movie and how it was made a lot more than I like it. Probably my least favourite Kubrick

mind how you go (Ross), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:13 (one year ago) link

Was just with a friend the other day who has been to Sir Ivan's Hamptons Castle on several occasions, including one of the big orgy nights. Fascinating stories.

Joe Gargan (dandydonweiner), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:43 (one year ago) link

Go on...

flappy bird, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:52 (one year ago) link

You make my eyes
You make my eyes wide shut
You make my eyes
You make my eyes wide shut

Woah-oh-OH
Woah-OH-oh

... (Eazy), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:58 (one year ago) link

is this movie good yet

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:58 (one year ago) link

To my eternal regret, I've only ever attended one of their minor orgy nights.

Alba, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 16:59 (one year ago) link

okay now I refuse to believe EWS wasn't Schnitzler's plot filtered through a Laura Branigan video

rehab hot (rip van wanko), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 17:07 (one year ago) link

right?

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 17:24 (one year ago) link

That LB's video was directed by William Friedkin and Crusing is also basically about a civil servant's journey into nyc sexual underworld while not getting any bodily-fluid action

tonga, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 18:22 (one year ago) link

orgies are for savages irrc

stoker (Ross), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 18:24 (one year ago) link

that's great info, tonga. is cruising any good?

Britain's Sexiest Cow (jed_), Tuesday, 26 June 2018 18:41 (one year ago) link

well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR7y7g8h1y4

Οὖτις, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 18:45 (one year ago) link

its a neurotic, confused giallo. pacino seems weirdly lost

tonga, Tuesday, 26 June 2018 19:08 (one year ago) link

seven months pass...

I rewatch this every couple of years. I'm not sure how much it has to say--If I were married, maybe it would seem more profound to me. The good thing is, you can also look past all that and just enjoy it as bizarre, good-looking junk. One annoying tic that I really noticed this time is the way 37% of Tom Cruise's lines amount to him repeating what's just been said to him. ("Come inside with me. I just live over there." "Come inside with you?") Weirdness everywhere. When Cruise drops into Nick Nightengale's club for the first time, the waiter asks him if he wants a drink; Cruise asks for a beer, and the waiter goes off to get him a beer. There's no mention of what kind of beer--evidently this particular club only carries one generic beer. And the newspaper headline on the model's overdose: "Ex-beauty queen in hotel drugs overdose." Is that even remotely grammatical?

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 15:48 (eight months ago) link

Cruise asks for a beer, and the waiter goes off to get him a beer. There's no mention of what kind of beer--evidently this particular club only carries one generic beer.

This is pretty common though no? Feel like there’s a studious avoidance of brand names in film and tv, which I rarely notice except when characters say, “I’ll have a beer” and the server of courses understands immediately.

omar little, Saturday, 9 February 2019 15:55 (eight months ago) link

xp Hmmm... headlines tend to go for brevity rather than strict grammar. And people rarely ask for a specific type of beer in films and TV, so I'm not sure there's much to read into those. I do really like this film a lot though

frame casual (dog latin), Saturday, 9 February 2019 15:56 (eight months ago) link

I've watched it three times waiting for its profundities to reveal themselves, so I've said the hell with it and enjoy it as chic junk.

Your sweetie-pie-coo-coo I love ya (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:04 (eight months ago) link

But "drugs overdose"? Who calls a drug overdose a drugs overdose? I've never heard that before...Okay, I guess the beer thing makes sense in terms of avoiding product placement.

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:04 (eight months ago) link

I think it's just an issue of expediency in films. No one asks for beer or whiskey by name, just like one says goodbye before they hang up the phone. Though it would be funny if every movie that featured a character asking for a beer involves asking what's on draft, hemming and hawing for a couple of minutes, and then eventually just asking the bartender for a Budweiser or whatever.

But yeah, it's also an issue of brands and rights. My wife works in advertising, and whenever we watch any movie or TV show she always comments on what brands are visible and what brands are not visible. She does work for a couple of beer brands in particular, and always notices when a TV bar is branded with, say, Miller products. Miller, for example, is the official beer brand of the FX Network, iirc, so any show you see on FX will likely feature Miller beer. We watched an episode of Russian Doll last night and she was surprised the show was Netflix and not FX, for all the Miller products.

Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:07 (eight months ago) link

"Drugs overdose' ... is that a British thing, like "maths?"

Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:08 (eight months ago) link

xpost should say "no one says goodbye"

Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:08 (eight months ago) link

The scene where Kidman gets high and they argue--great scene--maybe that has important things to say about men and woman, although the observations seem pretty standard. It's most profound observation (I'm going to be really male here, sorry) might be the dynamic Cruise brings up: you're determined to have any argument here, right, and you're going to find any old pretext to have one?

(I meant the oddity of the waiter not asking Cruise what kind of beer, not Cruise simply asking for a beer--that's normal.)

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:11 (eight months ago) link

"an argument"

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:13 (eight months ago) link

I think "a beer" and "drugs overdose" is perfectly in line with the simulacrum of reality the movie intentionally tries to present. Much has been said about how the movie presents a New York City that is "like" NYC, but somehow off, or genericized

calumy (rip van wanko), Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:16 (eight months ago) link

yep, EWS fails the realism test. How un-Kubrickian.

The stagebound NYC is Schnitzler's Vienna in drag.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:25 (eight months ago) link

"junk" is a ludicrous noun to associate with Kubrick. I feel he was slumming with The Shining, but I wouldn't even use that word there.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:27 (eight months ago) link

You're splitting hairs here. You've criticized Eyes Wide Shut and The Shining more than anyone here (I actually like both films, so saying I'm not-liking parts of one of them in the wrong way is weird). Treating Kubrick like a sainted artist incapable of prurient junk is much more ludicrous to me.

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:35 (eight months ago) link

He was capable of lumbering, flawed films. Not junk.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:42 (eight months ago) link

And for what it's worth, I'm not someone who's hung up on realism--the beer and the headline jumped out at me as weird, but EWS's weirdness is, for me, it's primary appeal. Kubrick could sometimes get hung up on realism, though; isn't Barry Lyndon, like Heaven's Gate, infamous for the director's maniacal insistence on getting every last historical detail right?

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 16:50 (eight months ago) link

The commitment to decor and other surface detail intensifies the otherwordliness (see Balzac).

Your sweetie-pie-coo-coo I love ya (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 9 February 2019 17:21 (eight months ago) link

EWS completely pulls me in every time and scares me deeply. Dream logic obviously fake sets blah blah yeah, but that only gets you so far- there’s something about this movie that actually does make me feel like descending into a nightmare only to be jolted awake by that final “Fuck.”

“Drugs overdose” always scanned as Brit English to me.

flappy bird, Saturday, 9 February 2019 17:44 (eight months ago) link

yes "drugs overdose" v standard British

illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 9 February 2019 18:35 (eight months ago) link

Point taken--just not something I knew.

The scariest moment in the film for me--or at least the creepiest--is that Cheney-like guy who passes the note to Cruise when he comes back the morning after (with the memorable way he suddenly turns away from the gate after Cruise takes the note).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI0-u-1FYjY

clemenza, Saturday, 9 February 2019 18:36 (eight months ago) link

re uncanny britishisms note that the rolls there has a right-hand drive, and that the note is written in the diction of, like, charles augustus milverton

difficult listening hour, Saturday, 9 February 2019 18:58 (eight months ago) link

no doubt these are meaningless artifacts of production before they're anything else but they also happen to work well in a movie about tom cruise having a nightmare about the class system

difficult listening hour, Saturday, 9 February 2019 19:10 (eight months ago) link

The Rolls is not a right hand drive. You can see there is a driver in silhouette with a cap who turns around to reverse the car.

Badmotorfinger Debate Club (MFB), Sunday, 10 February 2019 02:33 (eight months ago) link

agh the zoom in on the note

i love this movie

jolene club remix (BradNelson), Sunday, 10 February 2019 03:49 (eight months ago) link

i was thinking of watching this tonight! if i get my work done early enough

flopson, Sunday, 10 February 2019 04:31 (eight months ago) link

may just watch sopranos instead though

flopson, Sunday, 10 February 2019 04:31 (eight months ago) link

it's 5am. I need to see this film again soon. it's only been a year or something..

frame casual (dog latin), Sunday, 10 February 2019 04:54 (eight months ago) link

if Cruise had ordered a Michelob Ultra, many theses would've been written about What It Meant

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 05:15 (eight months ago) link

Rewatched EWS just before the revive (the blu was cheap).

I still love the gleaming backgrounds and camera work, and still like seeing Cruise repeatedly emasculated. There's some attempted Heart of Glass hypnosis going on during Kidman's baked monologue, and it doesn't work any better for me here. This viewing I noticed just how many monetary transactions are detailed during Dr. Harford's evening odyssey, and found myself keeping a mental tally.

Shining aside, most Kubrick tackles "bigger" issues than the sexual jealousy that underpins this. Sure, the Bilderberg conspiracy orgy comments on social class, but this theme isn't really central. EWS is all escalating symbolic castrations, maybe cosmic correction, maybe karma for Dr. Harford's contemplated infidelity.

I've read Kubrick attempted to adapt Traumnovelle before Barry Lyndon. The perplexing thing for me is that for a passion project, it all seems pretty slight.

tabloid/petromonarchy alliance (Sanpaku), Sunday, 10 February 2019 05:46 (eight months ago) link

One thing I remember enjoying was trying to match the colours used to the wealth and status of the people depicted - from red, wealthy, through to violet, poor. It doesn’t really hold up but it’s fun.

Coming up to TWENTY YEARS in July, my god.

an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Sunday, 10 February 2019 06:10 (eight months ago) link

this film is much more purposefully funny than people give it credit for

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 06:29 (eight months ago) link

I don't think it's "about" sexual jealousy at all. love, death, pain, identity, the whole damn thing.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 06:30 (eight months ago) link

yeah he really had a lot of fun playing with the Cruise/Kidman public persona & even rumors about his sexuality

sanpaku otm though I disagree that it's slight, I think going down a rabbit hole from garden variety male insecurity w/r/t fidelity --> parties and a type of society or club that Kubrick definitely knew about, where the common thread is sexual rituals that seem completely sexless or sterile and dispassionate.... is pretty nuts. totally disorienting and scary. its connection to or lack thereof to actual secret society stuff is irrelevant, it's just one of the best dream/nightmare movies ever. you can look at the orgy as a thinly veiled whoever reference, or a variant on the "I'm naked and I have to give a speech in class" dream. and like a dream, it's full of loose ends and concludes suddenly, unresolved.

flappy bird, Sunday, 10 February 2019 06:41 (eight months ago) link

it's a dumb movie, but I'll keep watching!

Your sweetie-pie-coo-coo I love ya (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 10 February 2019 06:59 (eight months ago) link

flappy otm and I agree that the meta casting angle shouldn't be overlooked or underappreciated

bhad bundy (Simon H.), Sunday, 10 February 2019 07:11 (eight months ago) link

it’s why he’s Bill Harford - “bill” for money, and a portmanteau of Harrison-Ford

an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Sunday, 10 February 2019 09:35 (eight months ago) link

haven't watched the film since it first came out, haven't really had the desire to watch it again. at the time thought it was really thin gruel. the stunt casting really emphasizes the degree to which i do not like the lead characters. the whole thing came off to me as a boring and tedious slog with no emotional stakes. but also i'm not really motivated by sexual desire or sexual jealousy so the movie was never going to connect with me.

the scientology of mountains (rushomancy), Sunday, 10 February 2019 12:11 (eight months ago) link

tbqh I think Warners let Kubrick know he needed big stars for this, just as for Barry Lyndon they TOLD him it had to be Ryan O'Neal or Robert Redford.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 14:03 (eight months ago) link

I think I have only seen this movie in its entirety once, but I recall it being possibly the weirdest and most surreal approach to the most boring and mundane of material. I have no doubt he needed Cruise and Kidman to get the thing made, but then I thought, why this movie? Why did he want to tell this story? Because there's really not much there, and what's there is kind of facile, iirc.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 10 February 2019 14:24 (eight months ago) link

To be more generous, maybe the movie is ahead of its time? Maybe the movie Kubrick wanted to make couldn't be made then? I could totally imagine if he were alive him making a better version of it today, or another filmmaker making a much more effective version of it today.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 10 February 2019 14:25 (eight months ago) link

i like the idea of the clash of form and content, but frankly lynch's "dune" is a far more interesting failure on those grounds (though dune is at least a legitimately good story).

the scientology of mountains (rushomancy), Sunday, 10 February 2019 15:08 (eight months ago) link

y’all are wrong and should see it again

jolene club remix (BradNelson), Sunday, 10 February 2019 15:11 (eight months ago) link

i mean the relative thinness of the plot seems almost beside the point to me

jolene club remix (BradNelson), Sunday, 10 February 2019 15:11 (eight months ago) link

amazing y'all don't complain about the most idiotic plot Kubrick ever used, but then you've always been the caretaker

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 15:16 (eight months ago) link

I know I've mentioned before that Traumnovelle was made for German TV in 1969 (it's on YouTube)

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Sunday, 10 February 2019 15:19 (eight months ago) link

regarding the movie feeling "slight," or never seeming to amount to much...I've come around to the idea this was intentional in some way...and the whole pollack scene at the end is so brilliant in the ways that it both posits some ultimate conspiratorial meaning to the whole thing and then draws the curtain down on any possibility of finding out what that is. "life goes on...until it doesn't." I think the movie is less a psychoanalytic allegory than it is about the impossibility of ever finding your way out into something like allegorical meaning, like the way the dreams slip away as you begin to wake up.

I also think James Hillman's "Dreams and the Underworld" is a really good text to read alongside this movie!

ryan, Sunday, 10 February 2019 17:45 (eight months ago) link

That Pollack scene is what I find unsatisfying about the film. The actors' rhythms are off, the scene awkwardly edited, and it goes on for too long.

Your sweetie-pie-coo-coo I love ya (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 10 February 2019 18:03 (eight months ago) link

I like Sydney Pollack as an actor, but he's basically himself no matter the character--he seems to have parachuted in from Tootsie. I can envision Harvey Keitel in that role.

clemenza, Sunday, 10 February 2019 18:12 (eight months ago) link

About 90 percent of the posts in this revive have been infuriating, but it was all worth it for Morbs to admit The Shining isn't junk.

zama roma ding dong (Eric H.), Sunday, 10 February 2019 18:40 (eight months ago) link

this film is much more purposefully funny than people give it credit for
― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius)

urgent and key point to the enjoyment of EWS in my opinion

Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Sunday, 10 February 2019 19:55 (eight months ago) link

^^^

“I’m a doctor” *flashes ID like a cop*

gray say nah to me (wins), Sunday, 10 February 2019 20:07 (eight months ago) link

I don't think the film's humor was totally overlooked, considering its legacy may ultimately be ornate masked orgies as comedy punchline. Fidelio! But really the movie should have been funnier, weirder and/or more suspenseful, something that left you scratching your head in a good way. And Cruise and Kidman are terribly miscast.

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 10 February 2019 20:20 (eight months ago) link

i dunno, i think Kidman's punchline to the entire movie suggests they're perfectly (if stunt) cast

Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Sunday, 10 February 2019 20:31 (eight months ago) link

Alice Harford: I do love you and you know there is something very important we need to do as soon as possible.
Dr. Bill Harford: What's that?
Alice Harford: Fuck the NRA

zama roma ding dong (Eric H.), Sunday, 10 February 2019 20:34 (eight months ago) link

That would have left people scratching their head for sure!

Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 10 February 2019 20:36 (eight months ago) link

FIDELIO

calstars, Monday, 11 February 2019 01:22 (eight months ago) link

Succumbing to the trolls here, but I don’t understand how anyone could not find something to love here especially in light of all the trash that’s put out weekly. Tough crowd

calstars, Monday, 11 February 2019 01:24 (eight months ago) link

There's a lot to love, or at least appreciate. Just not the movie itself, imo.

Josh in Chicago, Monday, 11 February 2019 04:05 (eight months ago) link

This film was far from universally praised when it came it out.

http://newrepublic.com/article/131189/kubrick-sadness
http://slate.com/culture/1999/07/the-naked-and-the-dead.html
http://www.salon.com/1999/07/16/eyes/
http://scrapsfromtheloft.com/2017/12/12/eyes-wide-shut-1999-review-by-andrew-sarris/

Was there some point between then and now where treating it as something less than great art became "trolling"?

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 04:06 (eight months ago) link

most of kubrick's films post-strangelove received mixed reviews when they were first released, though, didn't they? 2001's early reviews were notoriously bad and clockwork orange struck a lot of critics as a morally repellent movie. i was reading some of the original reviews of the shining a while back and "kubrick is slumming" seemed to be the general consensus.

i remember reading that salon review of EWS when it came out. charles taylor has always seemed like such an insufferable crank to me -- i don't think i've ever read a piece of his, even a rave about something i liked, that didn't make me cringe at some point.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Monday, 11 February 2019 04:17 (eight months ago) link

a lot of it, I think, is the chasm between what people expected from Kubrick at a given time, and what they got.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 11 February 2019 04:33 (eight months ago) link

(xpost) Don't disagree with any of that--he was a polarizing filmmaker. So, re the "trolling" comment above (sorry, I hate the word and the concept, and I have to use the quotation marks), I don't know why, 20 years later, anything would change with Eyes Wide Shut. Some people love it, some don't--there's no ulterior motive in expressing reservations about it.

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 04:38 (eight months ago) link

Most people who like it have reservations, me included. Tom Cruise crying is never a good thing.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 11 February 2019 04:45 (eight months ago) link

I know I'm not the first person to say this, but the best joke in the film goes back to Bogart in The Big Sleep: the way everyone who comes into contact with Cruise wants to climb all over him.

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 04:52 (eight months ago) link

well I've never understood why exactly, but he was considered sexy in '99

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 11 February 2019 04:56 (eight months ago) link

This movie is better than your lives.

zama roma ding dong (Eric H.), Monday, 11 February 2019 05:37 (eight months ago) link

Well, a lot of things are better than your lives, let's be honest.

zama roma ding dong (Eric H.), Monday, 11 February 2019 05:38 (eight months ago) link

You may be betraying more than you intend there.

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 06:25 (eight months ago) link

a lot of it, I think, is the chasm between what people expected from Kubrick at a given time, and what they got.

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius)

otm, he took so much time between movies and made relatively few. and it's obviously easier and less disorienting to go through an artist's body of work when it's finished.

Janet Maslin got it right when EWS came out. I'll see if it's still on youtube, Charlie Rose had a panel of critics on to talk about it.

flappy bird, Monday, 11 February 2019 06:26 (eight months ago) link

I posted this mind-boggling shot-by-shot analysis of EWS on the general Kubrick thread, it's well worth a read (but very long):

http://idyllopuspress.com/idyllopus/film/ews_toc.htm

One of the most disturbing things it mentions is that in the toy shop at the very end, the daughter appears to be led away by three men who were earlier seen at the party.

the word dog doesn't bark (anagram), Monday, 11 February 2019 09:09 (eight months ago) link

JD: I read that Charles Taylor review and found the tone and the objections he raised pretty straightforward. I don't know about his reviews in general--I used to read him now and again, but it's been a while.

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 12:44 (eight months ago) link

sometimes I feel like this film has more of a Lynch feel than a Kubrick feel

frame casual (dog latin), Monday, 11 February 2019 13:16 (eight months ago) link

Are people really unaware of the generic movie trope of characters just ordering "a beer" or "a whiskey" or whatever? I literally can't think of a single movie aside from Blue Velvet where a character orders a beer by name.

Plinka Trinka Banga Tink (Eliza D.), Monday, 11 February 2019 14:47 (eight months ago) link

The Deer Hunter--Rolling Rock! There are probably others, but now that I think about it, you're right.

clemenza, Monday, 11 February 2019 15:32 (eight months ago) link

I trust that somewhere there's a senior thesis comparing Bill Harford to Cruise's other sex-obsessed (sort of) character in 1999, Magnolia's Frank T.J. Mackey.

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 01:54 (eight months ago) link

I've never seen Vanilla Sky, but for some reason I thought that would be a similar character.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 02:09 (eight months ago) link

I don't think so, from what I remember...Ships passing in the night: Kubrick's last film, P.T. Anderson's third. If you had to single out one director today who's closer to Kubrick than any other, I think it'd be Anderson. Not a perfect fit, but I can't think of a better match.

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 02:13 (eight months ago) link

Christopher Nolan is jumping up and down in his seat with his hand raised

an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 02:43 (eight months ago) link

ugh, NEXT

flappy bird, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 03:44 (eight months ago) link

I agree that PTA is the closest analogue to Kubrick today (at least in America).

flappy bird, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 03:44 (eight months ago) link

Not US, but I'd argue for Jonathan Glazer as being closest to inheriting the Kubrick mantle. Similar framing, camera movement, themes, hollow characters, use of music. Less so in Glazer's debut Sexy Beast than in his Kidman feature Birth and in Under the Skin. As Kubrick had planned for decades, Glazer is presently filming a Holocaust film.

Nolan is another formalist, but working more in time/editing clockwork than in meticulous production design. He has none of Kubrick's cynicism, and relies heavily on screenwriting kludges that Kubrick would find risible. PTA genuinely seems to love his characters and his films are suffused with humanity. In some ways he's an anti-Kubrick.

no expense was incurred (Sanpaku), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 09:22 (eight months ago) link

ilx in a laughable heretic mood

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 11:53 (eight months ago) link

Glazer's Kubrickian tendencies are, yeah, I think more formalist and self-conscious. Though Under the Skin is an example of a movie I could have totally seen Kubrick making had he come along a couple of decades later. Same thing with The Master or Phantom Thread. Maybe even There Will Be Blood.

Not Nolan.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 13:00 (eight months ago) link

Nolan is a waste of celluloid, but Glazer and Anderson RULE and are pretty distinct from SK to me. Anderson's films are always about love, for starters. Glazer might be a better counterpart, in that respect.

an incoherent crustacean (MatthewK), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 13:19 (eight months ago) link

I'm not really thinking about what Kubrick's films are about, per se. I really don't see a thematic through line.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 14:22 (eight months ago) link

I think Kubrick was trying to suggest something about the duality of man.

tylerw, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 14:50 (eight months ago) link

here or always?

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 15:17 (eight months ago) link

Haha just a little joke — paraphrase from full metal jacket.

tylerw, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 15:25 (eight months ago) link

When I compared PTA to Kubrick, I was also--maybe mostly--thinking about stature. I think Anderson, among English-language directors, is the guy whose films are most anticipated right now and most automatic for acclaim, end-of-year lists, etc.

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 15:30 (eight months ago) link

He's, especially lately, the guy with big ideas, long takes, formidable (but no longer flashy) directing chops, etc.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:00 (eight months ago) link

Kubrick ... I'm too young to remember, but at the time did The Shining or Full Metal Jacket generate much in the way of significant acclaim/year-end praise, let alone anticipation?

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:01 (eight months ago) link

full metal jacket very much so on both points; i'm too young to remember as far as shining is concerned

Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:04 (eight months ago) link

Was it? Not the the Oscars is *the* measure but it is *a* measure, and it was only nominated for best adapted screenplay (which it lost).

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:06 (eight months ago) link

i was a kid and even i was aware that it was much admired and anticipated.

Fuck the NRA (ulysses), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:09 (eight months ago) link

yep

illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:14 (eight months ago) link

This interview around the time of Full Metal Jacket addresses the question of Kubrick and critical acclaim:

Initial reviews of most of your films are sometimes inexplicably hostile. Then there’s a reevaluation. Critics seem to like you better in retrospect.

That’s true. The first reviews of 2001 were insulting, let alone bad. An important Los Angeles critic faulted Paths of Glory because the actors didn’t speak with French accents. When Dr. Strangelove came out, a New York paper ran a review under the head Moscow could not buy more harm to America. Something like that. But critical opinion on my films has always been salvaged by what I would call subsequent critical opinion. Which is why I think audiences are more reliable than critics, at least initially. Audiences tend not to bring all that critical baggage with them to each film.

And I really think that a few critics come to my films expecting to see the last film. They’re waiting to see something that never happens. I imagine it must be something like standing in the batter’s box waiting for a fast ball, and the pitcher throws a change-up. The batter swings and misses. He thinks, “Shit, he threw me the wrong pitch.” I think this accounts for some of the initial hostility.

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-news/the-rolling-stone-interview-stanley-kubrick-in-1987-90904/

Ward Fowler, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:23 (eight months ago) link

I totally agree that many (all?) of his films have grown or at least changed in estimation over the years. Or at least are frequently reassessed. That's something else.

I wasn't that much of a kid, old enough to remember when it came out, and I mostly remember Full Metal received as yet another Vietnam film (Hamburger Hill, Platoon, etc.) and that it was not considered one of Kubrick's best movies, tbh. Can't speak to its anticipation the way I can to that of EWS which of course followed decades of radio silence (as opposed to Full Metal, which followed only 6 or 7 years off), and arrived as a Big Deal.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:26 (eight months ago) link

I recall Full Metal Jacket being a big deal, but 1) still pre-internet, so a big deal then wasn't as big a big deal as now, and, as you point out, 2) it landed in the middle of a bunch of Vietnam films all at once. Triggered by what, I don't know--it was the second Vietnam cluster after Deer Hunter/Coming Home/Apocalypse Now, only this one involved twice as many films. (The best of which, for me, had the bad luck to be released last: Casualties of War.)

clemenza, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 17:23 (eight months ago) link

Same year as Born on the 4th of July iirc. And yeah, talk about a film (Casualties) that's been reassessed.

Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 17:38 (eight months ago) link

When I compared PTA to Kubrick, I was also--maybe mostly--thinking about stature. I think Anderson, among English-language directors, is the guy whose films are most anticipated right now and most automatic for acclaim, end-of-year lists, etc.

― clemenza, Tuesday, February 12, 2019 10:30 AM (two hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yeah this is where I see the similarity, also in how it takes a few years for PTA's films to be reevaluated - The Master & Inherent Vice specifically, which I remember left a lot of people scratching their heads. Though I suppose that's where the comparison ends, everything prior was well received and Phantom Thread pulled almost everyone that was alienated by the past two or three films back in. He's also taking less time now than he was post-PDL.

flappy bird, Tuesday, 12 February 2019 18:07 (eight months ago) link

four months pass...

Abigail Good (the Mysterious Woman): They took this space which is now a really beautiful hotel in St. Pancras. A very grand building with a big staircase. It was all very surreal because we were doing these weird ceremonial movements for months. We would meet and rehearse and come up with ideas. And every day, Leon would record it and come back with feedback from Stanley.

Julienne Davis (Mandy): Stanley said, “It’s not gonna be any of this,” and he made a thrusting gesture. Instead, he said it would be more a kind of modern dance with the inference of sex.

Russell Trigg (dancer): Yolande’s practice involves lots of contact work and improvisation, so that guided the rehearsal. It’s a deliberate kind of movement. She was trying to get a more kind of sensual approach to it. One time, I was working with somebody else, and we had to move along a wall and against each other. There was another scene on beds or sofas. The pressure and resistance of bodies against bodies, bodies against tables or walls or other kinds of props.

Yolande Snaith (choreographer): I’m not sure that Stanley knew entirely what he wanted. It felt like a sort of research period, with me playing around with ideas and presenting them to him, and him looking at them and feeding back. Jocelyn Pook was a composer I knew, [who had a piece called] “Backwards Priests.” I was using that in the rehearsal studio because it felt very appropriate. When Stanley was looking at the tapes of rehearsal, he asked, “What is that music?”

Jocelyn Pook (composer): Stanley said, “I’ve heard this piece from your album. I’d love to hear more stuff.” I remember a car came within a few hours to collect the little cassette I made. And the next day, the car returned to pick me up, and I went to see him in Pinewood studio. He was really excited about some music he was listening to, and he talked me through the section he wanted me to work on. Of course, it was a very intimidating situation to be in, because I hadn’t ever scored a film before. At the beginning, he just asked me to try some ideas for the masked-ball scene and the orgy scene. I was asked later to do the rest of the original music.

Leon Vitali: We were taking so long that sometimes the leases ran out on where we could rehearse. I was having trouble holding on to some of the girls I’d found because they had other obligations and jobs. And then we had to find some more because we realized we didn’t have enough. It was all very Stanley.

YS: I think his vision of the orgy scene over the course of the time we worked on it became much more of a literal orgy. There was a problem because the models would have to be paid a lot more to do that, and some of them didn’t want to do it.

AG: Leon came back one day with pictures from the Kama Sutra and said, “Stanley would like you to draw inspiration from these images,” at which point we were all sort of like, “Okay, that’s not really what we signed up for.” But we knew each other very well at this point, so taking on more of a sexual nature was not so shocking.

https://www.vulture.com/2019/06/eyes-wide-shut-orgy-scene-oral-history.html

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 1 July 2019 15:37 (three months ago) link

Yolande Snaith is an anagram for Handy Toenails.

two weeks pass...

Opened 20 years ago today.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 July 2019 23:53 (three months ago) link

I will now observe the occasion by watching Swing Time.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 July 2019 23:54 (three months ago) link

Lol

Ask Heavy Manners (James Redd and the Blecchs), Tuesday, 16 July 2019 23:58 (three months ago) link

Nick Nightingale sounds like an Astaire character

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 00:23 (three months ago) link

I will observe not knowing what date Swing Time opened by not watching Swing Time.

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 00:32 (three months ago) link

Thought this bump was going to be related to the Laura Branigan thread.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 00:38 (three months ago) link

haha

Funky Isolations (jed_), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 00:55 (three months ago) link

so happy to have played a part in making that a thing.

Funky Isolations (jed_), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 00:56 (three months ago) link

From a 2002 profile of Jeffrey Epstein:

All the speculation and mystery has proved fertile ground for some alternative Jeffrey Epstein stories – the most bizarre of which has him playing the piano (he is classically trained) for high rollers in a Manhattan piano bar in the mid-eighties.

... (Eazy), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 02:34 (three months ago) link

This is great:

https://www.vulture.com/2019/06/eyes-wide-shut-orgy-scene-oral-history.html

xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 09:51 (three months ago) link

as posted on July 1

I wasn't trying to dis EWS, I rewatched it last year

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 11:15 (three months ago) link

Ah cool

xyzzzz__, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 11:19 (three months ago) link

What happened to Todd Field? He's made a whopping two films, both with tons of attention and award nominations, but Little Children was back in 2006 and nothing since then. Even his acting has been next to nothing.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 12:52 (three months ago) link

There were too many Todds at the time--Haynes, Solondz, Holland--so one of them had to go.

clemenza, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:01 (three months ago) link

I still think this is an extraordinary film

akm, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:04 (three months ago) link

The most.

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:04 (three months ago) link

todd Holland?

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:05 (three months ago) link

Directed most of the Larry Sanders episodes.

clemenza, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:09 (three months ago) link

What a weird oral history. These two things jumped out at me:

One of the problems was that they had to be totally natural. No Botox, no breast enhancements, anything like that. I made it very clear to everybody who came and their agents.

And that was because Stanley wanted this very particular body type, a sort of Barbie-doll type.

So everyone had to be "totally natural," but Kubrick wanted "Barbie-doll" types? OK. That whole scene is so dumb, and would have been better had it been more surreal or whatever word they kept throwing around. Like, I dunno, the sequence at the end of Gaspar Noe's "Love" or something. Because what hurts that whole scene in EWS is that, from memory, it is so cheesy Red Shoes Diaries or whatever. So ... mission accomplished? And failed?

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:16 (three months ago) link

My wife and I saw this movie on our honeymoon on a hot day in Hawaii. Actually, we saw a third of it before the projector broker. Then we kind of looked at each other, shrugged, and went out to dinner instead.
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, June 25, 2012 12:23 AM (seven years ago)

perhaps it's a film about how marriage attracts the mutually tasteless
― Ward Fowler, Monday, June 25, 2012 3:12 AM (seven years ago)

It still plays beautifully.

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:25 (three months ago) link

Eh, you know what? Fuck all y'all.

Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:38 (three months ago) link

I'll never marry, which makes sense because I don't understand the appeal of this movie even after three viewings.

TikTok to the (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:38 (three months ago) link

It's tantamount to understanding the appeal of ILX after 16 years tbh.

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:39 (three months ago) link

borad 7 is where the bad silly and boring orgies take place

mark s, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 13:44 (three months ago) link

Tantamount Pictures Presents

ILX Wide Shut

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 17 July 2019 14:14 (three months ago) link

By far his scariest movie

flappy bird, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 16:46 (three months ago) link

Thought this bump was going to be related to the Laura Branigan thread.

same here

breastcrawl, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 16:47 (three months ago) link

I saw this 4 times in the theater in 99. The last time (this was back when movies would play for a while) was probably in late summer in the Angelika in downtown Houston with just me and an elderly couple. I wonder what they made of it.

ryan, Wednesday, 17 July 2019 18:35 (three months ago) link

one month passes...

In Eyes Wide Shut (1999), Tom Cruise gives us a complete, devastatingly accurate catalog of the crumbling defensive postures that a nude or semi-nude man can take while trying to retain a tone of "level-headed" condescension during a boudoir argument with their partner or spouse. pic.twitter.com/VQ3DBvYorz

— ℑ 𝔇𝔬𝔫'𝔱 𝔅𝔩𝔞𝔪𝔢 𝔜𝔬𝔲 (@NickPinkerton) September 7, 2019

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 01:19 (one month ago) link

rethinking some of the plot elements now that we've revived the thread yet again

I'm not sure Dr. Bill's sexual jealousy is as much about the fear of his wife's infidelity as much as it is a realization he's incapable of imagining his own sexual fantasy scenarios. Alice's is both visceral and straightforward. He stumbles into this effete circle of elites who have concocted an elaborate ritual that has the trappings of eroticism but ends in what Morbs correctly described as mechanical, non-erotic sex

there's a sideline in the current HBO series Succession about people who are born moneyed being unable to participate in, or at least find joy in, a myriad of human experiences -- but they try to compensate by spending lots of money or going off script

untuned mass damper (mh), Monday, 9 September 2019 15:28 (one month ago) link

if they could just buy an ice cream cone and have it mean something

j., Monday, 9 September 2019 15:31 (one month ago) link

buying an ice cream company and feeling a half second of ennui

untuned mass damper (mh), Monday, 9 September 2019 15:33 (one month ago) link

I assume this movie is just on a loop at Morbz' house

Οὖτις, Monday, 9 September 2019 15:36 (one month ago) link

Give up your inquiries which are completely useless, and consider
these words a second warning. We hope, for your own good, that
this will be sufficient.

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 16:06 (one month ago) link

the irritation in "which are completely useless" is palpable

untuned mass damper (mh), Monday, 9 September 2019 16:09 (one month ago) link

orgies plausibly run by Trump

Shakey, it's at best my 6th-favorite Kubrick film, ya doof

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 16:10 (one month ago) link

*bangs staff*

flappy bird, Monday, 9 September 2019 16:59 (one month ago) link

this would make a great double feature with Three Days of the Condor

flappy bird, Monday, 9 September 2019 17:00 (one month ago) link

Interesting that it seems to have had some critical rehab in these last few years

https://filmschoolrejects.com/best-movies-1990s/9/

piscesx, Monday, 9 September 2019 17:04 (one month ago) link

it's been several years since I've seen it, but does EWS ever get compared to Vanilla Sky (itself an adaptation of a 1997 film called open Your Eyes)?

frame casual (dog latin), Monday, 9 September 2019 17:49 (one month ago) link

I was going to rewatch that the other night, was one of my favorites as a kid. yeah, I never thought about it really but there's tons of stuff in common: the mask, male insecurity/impotence, an ordinary powerful man in extraordinary circumstances, marital/spousal anxiety, forces beyond our control/out of sight, mysterious organizations...

flappy bird, Monday, 9 September 2019 18:05 (one month ago) link

I was somewhat enthusiastic about that movie for a moment when it was released, but once you get past the surface it's Cameron Crowe doing the same shit about relationship dynamics, who gets to be trustworthy in what ways, with his record collection playing a little too loudly over the sountrack

untuned mass damper (mh), Monday, 9 September 2019 18:14 (one month ago) link

it's been several years since I've seen it, but does EWS ever get compared to Vanilla Sky (itself an adaptation of a 1997 film called open Your Eyes)?

at the time quite a lot, iirc.

ryan, Monday, 9 September 2019 18:28 (one month ago) link

Shakey, it's at best my 6th-favorite Kubrick film, ya doof

Who's calling whom the doof here?

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Monday, 9 September 2019 18:57 (one month ago) link

well i know you dont like Strangelove cuz it's funny, honeybunch

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:09 (one month ago) link

Given that and 2001 aren't allowed to NOT be in the top 5, that still leaves three whole slots and aside from Eyes Wide Shut, The Shining and Barry Lyndon, what else is there?

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:50 (one month ago) link

Nothing, that's what.

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:51 (one month ago) link

Paths of Glory and The Killing, wisenheimer

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:52 (one month ago) link

there's a reason Welles said Kubrick was "a giant" in the early '60s

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:53 (one month ago) link

I'm glad we all agree that this is Kubrick's shittiest movie

Οὖτις, Monday, 9 September 2019 19:55 (one month ago) link

you have always been the caretaker, Mr Collier

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 19:56 (one month ago) link

this is prob my favorite kubrick movie bc i'm a dumbass. barry lyndon #2

american bradass (BradNelson), Monday, 9 September 2019 20:34 (one month ago) link

my boring opinion is that kubrick's films are all at least good

i mean, even fear and desire isn't really that bad for what it is

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Monday, 9 September 2019 21:02 (one month ago) link

I’m with Brad

Pauline Male (Eric H.), Monday, 9 September 2019 21:19 (one month ago) link

'fraid so

a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Monday, 9 September 2019 21:30 (one month ago) link

one month passes...

infilitrating one of those eyes wide shut secret masked sex parties but just for the music

— ▀▀▀▀▀▀ (@immolations) October 17, 2019

What a ridiculous clusterfuck of totally uncool jokers (jed_), Thursday, 17 October 2019 01:47 (four hours ago) link

lol "no you don't understand, I only go to those parties to see Nick Nightingale play"

flappy bird, Thursday, 17 October 2019 04:07 (two hours ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.