- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Eyes Wide Shut: Masterpiece; flawed, but intriguing; or overrated shite
Posted on 5/15/19 at 6:56 pm
Posted on 5/15/19 at 6:56 pm
I go back and and forth on this one...I'm a Kubrick-a-holic, but, to me, there are parts that are up there with Barry Lyndon and basically anything else he's ever done, and then there are parts that I think are meandering crap -- specifically the 20 minute bedroom scene that is so fricking ackward and boring and seemingly forced between a couple that, although were married at the time, have absolute no chemistry at all.
But, on the other hand, the dancing scene at the beginning with Kidman and the Hungarian, the hooker scene with Cruise, and obviously the mansion ritual shite...and basically every other scene when cruise is away from Kidman, are so compelling and beautifully shot, nothing else really exists like them.
Yes, the dreamlike lighting and vibe of the film is intentional, but so is every other little detail and bit of dialogue. In total, I think about an hour of the film is not good at all....but I think the remaining almost 2 hours are incredible. It just hypnotizes you.
I think it's also notable how cruise has chemistry with basically everyone else in the movie, both male and female, but not with Kidman at all. I think Kubrick really exposes his gayness or asexuallness, whatever, or he either made the scenes intentionally cringeworthy between the husband and wife on purpose. No idea, but isn't this movie that took like 3 yrs to make basically what ended their marriage?
But, on the other hand, the dancing scene at the beginning with Kidman and the Hungarian, the hooker scene with Cruise, and obviously the mansion ritual shite...and basically every other scene when cruise is away from Kidman, are so compelling and beautifully shot, nothing else really exists like them.
Yes, the dreamlike lighting and vibe of the film is intentional, but so is every other little detail and bit of dialogue. In total, I think about an hour of the film is not good at all....but I think the remaining almost 2 hours are incredible. It just hypnotizes you.
I think it's also notable how cruise has chemistry with basically everyone else in the movie, both male and female, but not with Kidman at all. I think Kubrick really exposes his gayness or asexuallness, whatever, or he either made the scenes intentionally cringeworthy between the husband and wife on purpose. No idea, but isn't this movie that took like 3 yrs to make basically what ended their marriage?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:02 pm to Jack Ruby
From all the shite I heard about this movie before watching it, I was kind of disappointed. Not nearly as weird or crazy as people made it out to be.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:13 pm to ElectricWizard0
quote:
From all the shite I heard about this movie before watching it, I was kind of disappointed. Not nearly as weird or crazy as people made it out to be.
This.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:39 pm to Jack Ruby
I would like to see the film as Kubrick intended.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:42 pm to Jack Ruby
I like it but I think the Eyes Wide Cut version is an improvement.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:43 pm to ElectricWizard0
I agree I loved the performances but I was left a little disappointed. Still a great film though.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 7:51 pm to dnm3305
quote:
Tits, I like them.
and bush.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 8:01 pm to Jack Ruby
Who was the lady who saved him when he took off his mask?
Posted on 5/15/19 at 8:04 pm to Jack Ruby
Guilty pleasure for me. I recognize the flaws but watch it once a year.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 8:13 pm to hsfolk
Cruise's performance is just so bizarre on the entirety of the film. I think it's probably his worst acting job in his career.
I think he was so beaten down by Kubrick, he had no idea what he was supposed to be doing. He was obviously trying to tamp down the trademark Cruise charisma, but I thought he was really exposed there.
Kubrick though is well known for getting wooden, cold perofmances out of actors. It's evident throughout his career. It's why Robert Duvall always said he didn't care for his pictures, no matter how wonderfully technical they were, he thought he was very bad with actors, and for Duvall, that was always paramount, a la how Coppola handled his actors, giving them freedom and emotional room.
I think he was so beaten down by Kubrick, he had no idea what he was supposed to be doing. He was obviously trying to tamp down the trademark Cruise charisma, but I thought he was really exposed there.
Kubrick though is well known for getting wooden, cold perofmances out of actors. It's evident throughout his career. It's why Robert Duvall always said he didn't care for his pictures, no matter how wonderfully technical they were, he thought he was very bad with actors, and for Duvall, that was always paramount, a la how Coppola handled his actors, giving them freedom and emotional room.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 8:13 pm to hsfolk
quote:
Who was the lady who saved him when he took off his mask?
The girl who was killed later. She traded her life for his.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 8:53 pm to Brosef Stalin
I’ll put it in the masterpiece category, no regrats.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 9:24 pm to 1999
quote:
Guilty pleasure for me. I recognize the flaws but watch it once a year.
Probably best describes my view of it as well. Appreciate it for its artwork, but know it's spotty at times.
I will say though, I enjoy all the conspiracy theories and deep-dive YouTube analyses more than any othe Kubrick movie.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 9:32 pm to Jack Ruby
I watched in on the sly because I was a pent up Christian kid like 18 years ago and my church friends and family were telling me it was the devil.
I didn't get it and thought it was shite. Couldn't even find a scene worth rubbing one out to (which was my original goal).
I haven't revisited it.
I didn't get it and thought it was shite. Couldn't even find a scene worth rubbing one out to (which was my original goal).
I haven't revisited it.
This post was edited on 5/15/19 at 9:33 pm
Posted on 5/15/19 at 9:38 pm to Jack Ruby
Put it this way, there was no better way for Kubrick to go out than to make a movie that still polarizes and downright confuses audiences to this day.
Posted on 5/15/19 at 9:44 pm to pevetohead
I think it's far more polarizing even than something like 2001, which, if you do enough research and watch it enough, is actually pretty straight forward...just muted and a little cryptic.
Eyes wide shut, though. Is a total fricking mystery still. You can convince yourself that nearly every single line of dialogue means something else.
Eyes wide shut, though. Is a total fricking mystery still. You can convince yourself that nearly every single line of dialogue means something else.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News