Just saw Eyes Wide Shut.
Kubrick went out with a whimper about a bang.
I fear that a piano giving me a one-note "plink plink
plink" ad nauseum will be giving me nightmares for weeks.
I knew I was in trouble when early on in the film Kidman says to
Cruise "you are saying that the only reason you didn't fuck
those two women was out of consideration for me", with clear
anger. (In the context of this exchange, "consideration for
me" means that he loves her, respects her, and is married to
her)
My reaction was "well, fucking duh!"
But I did like the first third of the film, and thought it
effectively dramatized the temptations which can potentially make
fidelity a difficult thing, and how fidelity can sometimes be
more a matter of dumb luck and opportunity (or lack thereof) than
it is a matter of strength of character.
The rest of it I will have to meditate on a bit. I'm not
convinced that there was anything really there worth the
agonizing amount of time spent on it, but something may dawn on
me.
Response to Review:
500. Cellar Door - 9/25/99 10:37:45
PM
What about that Bundt cake?
501. Raskolnikov - 9/25/99 11:15:29
PM
what Bundt cake?
502. pseudoerasmus - 9/25/99 11:16:03
PM
Did you read my review?
503. Raskolnikov - 9/25/99 11:31:43
PM
Pseudo: yes, I did. I think you make a great point about the lack
of dramatization of Kidman's fantasies.
But I'm not sure that the point of the film is that us that
"fidelity and infidelity are states of mind at least as much
as they are realised behaviours". While the final brief
scene in the toy store adds some support to that argument, when
Kidman talks about "their adventures, both real and imagined"
on an equivalent basis, I can't see how the bulk of the film
backs that up. I would be interested in what you have to say.
If anything, it seemed to me that the film was about the
precariousness of fidelity - when so many alternatives exist. The
central marriage is the only one we are introduced to in the film,
and their relationship seems to be portrayed as a rare thing. I'm
not putting my feet firmly on that interpretation yet. As I said,
I am still mulling the film over, but that is my hunch as to what
it is "about".
505. Cellar Door - 9/26/99 8:11:13
AM
Yes I read your review, Pseudo.
Cruise gives the hooker a Bundt cake on his second visit. This
salient fact has been discussed at length in the "Eyes Wide
Shut" thread in Table Talk. I think the Bundyt cake is a
reference to the slab in "2001."
506. JudithAtHome - 9/26/99 8:19:08
AM
Please read the article by Lee Siegel on Eyes Wide Shut in
the October Harpers; it is thought provoking and has a great
slant on the critical reaction to this film.
507. pseudoerasmus - 9/26/99 8:31:55
AM
Oooooooo, the Bundt cake a reference to the monolith in 2001.
Ooooo, how deep.
Cellardweller, I was asking the lover of Sonya whether he had
read the review.
508. pseudoerasmus - 9/26/99 8:34:46
AM
Raskolnikov, I don't see why your interpretation and mine are
necessarily mutually exclusive.
My interpretation is backed up by the fact that Cruise spends the
whole film attempting to commit infidelity but never manages it,
while Kidman, in effect, has succeeded at it.
509. pseudoerasmus - 9/26/99 8:39:23
AM
"...when Kidman talks about 'their adventures, both real and
imagined' on an equivalent basis, I can't see how the bulk of the
film backs that up."
I don't understand this sentence. You can't see how the bulk of
the film backs up Kidman's statement, or my interpretation?
Kidman's statement seems to bear out my interpretation.
Anyway, the film is mediocre. Kubrick was mediocre. After Dr
Strangelove, the lecher didn't make any film which was not a
preening, hermetic exercise in lighting and framing.
510. Cellar Door - 9/26/99 11:07:10
AM
I'm not one to turn up my nose at lighting and framing, Pseudo.
Especially in "Barry Lyndon." Love the last scene:
writing checks. That's more obscene than full-frontal nudity in
this culture.Imagine actually SHOWING it.
511. Cellar Door - 9/26/99
11:10:50 AM
What's interesting is that Kidman's confession of desiring an
adulterous affair obsesses Cruise. Had she done it -- say with
the Hungarian -- I would imagine he could negotiate it. The
Hungarian is silly beyond belief. The naval officer, however, who
we never really see, is the embodiment of passion unleashed.
Have you read the piece in the new "Brill's Content" on
how Pat Kingsley's "Grestest sex movie of all time"
sell backfired on "EWS"? Very, very funny.
512. pseudoerasmus - 9/26/99 11:18:46
AM
I'm not one to turn up my nose at lighting and framing, Pseudo.
I wasn't turning up my nose at lighting and framing. Those are
vital things. I was turning up my nose at mere lighting
and framing.
516. Raskolnikov - 9/26/99 2:25:44
PM
Pseudo:
"I don't understand this sentence. You can't see how the
bulk of the film backs up Kidman's statement, or my
interpretation? Kidman's statement seems to bear out my
interpretation."
I was agreeing that Kidman's comment bears out your statement. I
was saying that I didn't see much else which did. Your expanded
comments cleared things up a bit.
"Anyway, the film is mediocre. Kubrick was mediocre. After
Dr Strangelove, the lecher didn't make any film which was not a
preening, hermetic exercise in lighting and framing."
Change this to "after Clockwork Orange", and I will
agree. Clockwork, while not perfect, has other things of interest,
and I am a big defender of 2001. But the world would not be worse
place if Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, and EWS
disappeared from it.
517. Cellar Door - 9/26/99 3:07:05
PM
Woooo! Heavyosity there Rask!
Needless to say, I disagree.
518. CalGal - 9/26/99 3:15:11 PM
Oh, I agree with Rask. Although I loathe and despise 2001, the
most tedious great movie ever made, I can't imagine a world in
which we didn't have HAL and "Daisy" and the ape
sequence at the beginning. So it passes. As does Clockwork Orange,
a novel that should rightly have been considered unfilmable--yet
Kubrick does amazing things with it.
But after that? An objective consideration of Kubrick's work from
Lyndon on would rate him a middling director at best.
521. pseudoerasmus - 9/26/99 5:00:43
PM
Clockwork Orange was an intellectually puerile exercise in,
again, lighting and framing, as well as leering.
When it comes to movies, I think of Raskolnikov as a male version
of Pauline Kael.
522. CalGal - 9/26/99 5:06:08 PM
Hey, no nasty remarks to participants.
Clockwork Orange was a very 70s film, and parts of it are a pain.
But it was more than lighting and framing. It was a tough book to
film, and he captured it far better than anyone would expect.
526. EricCartman - 9/26/99 9:42:48
PM
I don't know why "Full Metal Jacket" seems to always
get such a bad rap; it's a very well-made movie, with some
intense performances. Maybe not an all-time classic, but damned
good nonetheless.
561. Raskolnikov - 9/27/99 12:55:18
AM
Pseudo:
"Clockwork Orange was an intellectually puerile exercise in,
again, lighting and framing, as well as leering."
I think it has an interesting POV on the role of violence in
society, and, of course, makes an interesting argument about free
will. I don't think the movie is a masterpiece, by any stretch of
the imagination (I would much rather defend 2001), but I think
there is more to it than you attribute.
"When it comes to movies, I think of Raskolnikov as a male
version of Pauline Kael."
Come now. I differ from her in writing style, and taste (Kael
hated 2001), I never make unnecessary references to Antonioni,
and I am much taller.
