Eyes Wide Shut

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (600 of them)
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 (twenty-four years ago)

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 (twenty-four years ago)

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 (twenty-four years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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

mark s, Tuesday, 25 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

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

anthony, Tuesday, 25 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

Kubrick = no-where nr a great filmmaker.

david h(owie), Sunday, 30 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

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

RickyT, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

But 2001 has APES!

Andrew L, Monday, 1 July 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

ews = kubrick's closest to realized potential

boxcubed (boxcubed), Tuesday, 12 November 2002 01:44 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-three years ago)

(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 (twenty-three years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

A dreadful film.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:52 (twenty-one years ago)

i pretty much agree.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh...good.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 21:56 (twenty-one years ago)

we have to, after all.

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Talk To Her

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:04 (twenty-one years ago)

:_(

jed_ (jed), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:07 (twenty-one years ago)

no this film is so misunderstood. It is amazing.

kyle (akmonday), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Jed, do you like Morvern Callar? Kyle does.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:12 (twenty-one years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

good. very good.

adam. (nordicskilla), Friday, 22 October 2004 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

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

morris pavilion (samjeff), Friday, 22 October 2004 23:36 (twenty-one years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

Eyes Wide Shut and Morvern Callar are both brilliant.

milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:34 (twenty-one years ago)

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

jed_ (jed), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:43 (twenty-one years ago)

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

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 16:45 (twenty-one years ago)

what?

RJG (RJG), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:09 (twenty-one years ago)

I think the word is 'cipher'.

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:13 (twenty-one years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

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

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:19 (twenty-one years ago)

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

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)

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 (twenty-one years ago)

That's what's great about it!

MindInRewind (Barry Bruner), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:22 (twenty-one years ago)

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

BONNNNNGGG

Alba (Alba), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:24 (twenty-one years ago)

which Cypress Hill tune is that?

Riot Gear! (Gear!), Saturday, 23 October 2004 17:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Her delivery has definitely gotten more arch and affected over the years, to the point that if you’re not highly invested in the content, it’s practically unlistenable

Dwigt Rortugal (Eric H.), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 13:06 (two years ago)

She used to get criticised a lot online for not ennunciating properly and has overcorrected. Can't win.

Daniel_Rf, Wednesday, 18 October 2023 13:10 (two years ago)

The podcast is a treasure obviously but I forgot how Longworth hits all her “t”s “EroTic eighTies” .. frankly it’s not just that, her whole Chef John intonation drives me to distraction. but i will listen for the info :)


Omg this

calstars, Wednesday, 18 October 2023 13:19 (two years ago)

It's close enough to an incantatory delivery that I look forward to listening

Dwigt Rortugal (Eric H.), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 13:37 (two years ago)

(Which means it'll be a good match for Kubrick)

Dwigt Rortugal (Eric H.), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 13:37 (two years ago)

Roffle. I roll with it, it's fine! Met her years ago well before the podcast started, she's a good sort.

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 18 October 2023 15:34 (two years ago)

If you join her patreon you can get transcripts, for those of you here who find it so horrible TO HEAR A WOMAN SPEAK.

Daniel_Rf, Wednesday, 18 October 2023 15:36 (two years ago)

I've always liked her delivery. She also has a very wry sense of humor.

immodesty blaise (jimbeaux), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 15:39 (two years ago)

I haven't given her podcast the attention it deserves. I'm streaming the sex, lies and videotape ep.

hat trick of trashiness (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 15:41 (two years ago)

The series she did on Polly Platt and the one on Dead Blondes were especially good.

immodesty blaise (jimbeaux), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 15:43 (two years ago)

two weeks pass...

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:

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

― jed_, Wednesday, 2 July 2008 01:31

lmao otm

Humanitarian Pause (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 4 November 2023 23:11 (two years ago)

five months pass...

Saw this for the first time today and it was much more watchable and good than I was led to believe, although there were several false notes.

Cruise has taken a beating itt for his acting but Kidman is worse, consistently too mannered. I guess pot smoking was new at the time of this film, because it wasn't portrayed at all believably.

Can I just complain about the "West Village" set - why do studios trying to recreate NYC always show a street that ends by running into a cross street, thereby forming a T-shape? That is not a configuration that really exists in NYC with possibly a few exceptions. Many old Hollywood films use a "NYC" backlot set with the same configuration - MGM maybe? Definitely the Universal lot was like this. You see it in TV shows right through the 1970s.

Nevertheless, the mystery and the surrealism of the film were overall quite captivating.

Josefa, Sunday, 28 April 2024 00:39 (two years ago)

https://i.imgur.com/YWdTpPo.jpeg

calstars, Sunday, 28 April 2024 00:46 (two years ago)

why do studios trying to recreate NYC always show a street that ends by running into a cross street, thereby forming a T-shape?

because otherwise you have to build four more blocks of street frontage going off into the distance!

assert (matttkkkk), Sunday, 28 April 2024 01:54 (two years ago)

Unacceptable. Just shoot in NYC ffs. But they couldn’t in this case because Kubrick was too afraid of flying there.

Josefa, Sunday, 28 April 2024 02:10 (two years ago)

I don't think his fear of flying wouldn't have changed anything. With the way he worked, he wouldn't have shot on location, it would have to be in a 100% controlled environment like a soundstage.

I never bought the criticism against his decision to work this way. It reminds me of the story Truffaut told in the intro of his book on Hitchcock. “In the course of an interview during which I praised Rear Window to the skies, an American critic surprised me by commenting, ‘You love Rear Window because, as a stranger to New York, you know nothing about Greenwich Village.’ To this absurd statement I replied, ‘Rear Window is not about Greenwich Village, it is a film about cinema, and I do know cinema!” He could've said something similar about Eyes Wide Shut. Shooting a fabrication of NYC ultimately works in favor of the dreamlike nature of the film - having the night time surroundings feel unreal rather than allowing a documentary element to flow in was the right call.

birdistheword, Sunday, 28 April 2024 03:42 (two years ago)

Yeah, exactly. It’s a film about constructed reality on many levels.

assert (matttkkkk), Sunday, 28 April 2024 07:47 (two years ago)

I can buy that. Because at the same time they did get a lot of detail correct in their street set - specific lettering on signs, decals on newspaper stands etc. - which contributes an uncanny aspect to those scenes.

Parts of the film reminded me very much of Scorsese's After Hours. I wonder if that was an influence.

Josefa, Sunday, 28 April 2024 08:31 (two years ago)

This New York has the same dream quality as the european(?) city in the unconsoled by Ishiguro imo.

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Sunday, 28 April 2024 16:22 (two years ago)

Here’s a real corner you could see in this movie though tbf

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Kk3oZ2NYeTxaxphE7?g_st=ic

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Sunday, 28 April 2024 16:24 (two years ago)

He was nothing if not consistently deliberate in details that seem wrong (ie the impossible interior layout of the Overlook Hotel in The Shining). One detail in EWS that signals to me that we’re in a fantasy/imagined NYC is that the buildings are numbered sequentially on the same side of a street (36, 37, 38).

avoid boring people, Monday, 29 April 2024 03:40 (two years ago)

blog post on exactly this https://www.scoutingny.com/stanley-kubrick-the-shining-new-york-city-the-filming-locations-of-eyes-wide-shut/

𝔠𝔞𝔢𝔨 (caek), Monday, 29 April 2024 13:31 (two years ago)

Interesting. Between the blog post and the comments it looks like they're covering all the ways to look at this. Seems as if Kubrick and his sets are kind of like Hitchcock and his green screens - it's difficult to nail down their exact intentions, if any.

(Aside: someone online said the costume shop in EWS was based on the facade of Trash and Vaudeville in the the East Village and I thought "no it's not, it looks just like a particular storefront on West 8th St. - I've shopped there!")... and someone in the blog comments supports my take.

Josefa, Monday, 29 April 2024 14:21 (two years ago)

one year passes...

Getting the full-on Criterion overview:

https://www.criterion.com/films/34534-eyes-wide-shut

Ned Raggett, Monday, 18 August 2025 17:17 (nine months ago)

maybe finally time for me to get a 4k player

ryan, Monday, 18 August 2025 17:20 (nine months ago)

seems like there's quite a bit of controversy about the transfer! I'll withhold judgment until I see it, but some of the still images look great to me, with suitable grain and not overly crisp lights...so we'll see.

ryan, Monday, 18 August 2025 23:37 (nine months ago)

A Discord I'm on with some heavy film geeks were going on about the aspect ratio.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 18 August 2025 23:39 (nine months ago)

Good grain and nice colours to my eyes. Not as nice as the 35mm print that's been doing the rounds but you can't have everything.

EYES WIDE SHUT (1999) 35mm scan. 4K, one 5.1 audio track and 19 subtitle options. More info below.
Link: https://t.co/gqA10wQX8W pic.twitter.com/Nvggqf27x6

— kalasevsky (@kalasevsky) May 2, 2024

piscesx, Tuesday, 19 August 2025 00:25 (nine months ago)

Él gets the Criterion nod.

https://www.criterion.com/films/33695-el

― Ned Raggett, Monday, August 18, 2025 1:30 PM (seven hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

about time!

― hungover beet poo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, August 18, 2025 2:05 PM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

Seeing way more chatter about it than Criterion releasing Eyes Wide Shut as well, that's for sure.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, August 18, 2025 3:14 PM (five hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

An Eyes Wide Shut directed by Don Luis would've been a keeper.

― hungover beet poo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, August 18, 2025 3:32 PM

hungover beet poo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 19 August 2025 00:39 (nine months ago)

I got a panasonic and ordered this, Sorcerer, and Barry Lyndon today. RIP my wallet but I think it's gonna be well worth it.

ryan, Tuesday, 19 August 2025 02:59 (nine months ago)

Even tho I doubt my eyes can muster full 4K resolution these days, the UHD discs often pay much more attention to dynamic range etc, a much more film like experience for me. The 4K of ALIEN is particularly great.

assert (matttkkkk), Tuesday, 19 August 2025 03:17 (nine months ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.