View Full Version : Eyes Wide Shut
thatcomedian
09-08-2005, 12:31 PM
Just saw it the other day. No third act. If I didn't know better, I would have thought Kubrick died during shooting.
Jake Schuster
09-08-2005, 12:41 PM
Surely the third act--and it's been a few years since I've seen it--comes after Tom returns home to Nicole and they're in the store together?
Pencey
09-08-2005, 01:22 PM
Yeah, that movie is a train wreck...and yet it's still watchable only because of Kubrick's directing. His writing though is what kills it.
There's not enough conflict and no build in tension to the story.
cluckyburger
09-08-2005, 01:31 PM
clearly none of you are married
TwoBitHack
09-08-2005, 02:18 PM
Decent spankability factor.
English Dave
09-08-2005, 02:30 PM
Decent spankability factor.
How can you reduce a cinematic masterpiece to a masturbation fest? Although she does have nice t1ts.
dclary
09-08-2005, 02:50 PM
Finally.
A topic Bit and I agree on.
There is hope for America.
TheKeenGuy
09-08-2005, 03:36 PM
lol, i liked this movie. i think there were rumors that the film was changed after k died. fascinating scenes.
False. Kubrick's original rough cut was released as the final version because everyone involved refused to make edits it... except, of course, to put in those retarded super-imposed figures to obscure the nudity.
whitenavel
09-08-2005, 04:01 PM
I love this film.
I want to attend a party like that. I have my mask and cassock ready to go. Now that would be a great idea for a DD get together.
kintnerboy
09-08-2005, 07:55 PM
This is my favorite Christmas film after Die Hard.
miles
09-08-2005, 08:56 PM
I think Kubrick just wasn't in good enough health to match his previous films. Speilberg noted how shocked he felt when he saw how ill Kubrick looked. I also felt that Kubrick seemed out of touch when I saw EWS. I didn't feel that he was up with the current times.
Biohazard
09-08-2005, 11:38 PM
I love everything Kubrick has done, including this. I think it's a really good movie, actually.
The White Album
09-09-2005, 12:41 AM
I think Kubrick just wasn't in good enough health to match his previous films. Speilberg noted how shocked he felt when he saw how ill Kubrick looked. I also felt that Kubrick seemed out of touch when I saw EWS. I didn't feel that he was up with the current times.
None of Kubrick's films were ever up with current times. They were ahead of their times, and many of them still are.
TwoBitHack
09-09-2005, 04:40 AM
Kubrick is the most overrated director of all time.
Hairy Lime
09-09-2005, 10:04 AM
TwoBit jumps the non-political shark.
Personally love this film along with Lolita, Barry Lyndon, and The Shining.
dclary
09-09-2005, 11:32 AM
I liked Full Metal Jacket, and can appreciate 2001. The rest of Kubrick is pretty meh.
Pencey
09-09-2005, 11:35 AM
Love Kubrick but his version of Lolita isn't nearly as good as Lyne's.
For one thing, the girl who played Lolita in Kubrick's version looks like she's 22...so I don't believe it when she's supposed to be 14 or whatever.
Also, Jeremy Irons makes a much better Humbert Humbert than that other guy.
Love Kubrick but his version of Lolita isn't nearly as good as Lyne's.
For one thing, the girl who played Lolita in Kubrick's version looks like she's 22...so I don't believe it when she's supposed to be 14 or whatever.
Also, Jeremy Irons makes a much better Humbert Humbert than that other guy.
James Mason. Respectfully disagree. Lolita is the probably Kubrick's best work involving sexuality. Sellers was brilliant. Mason was doing what Mason did best. And paraphrasing Robin Williams as a comedian: 'Kubrick on sex is like Gandhi on catering.' That EWS "mansion orgy" still reminds me of an Enya music video. Eyes Wide Shut was a sad ending to his career, imo.
Also, recommended Kubrick viewing: The Killing and Paths of Glory.
NoTalentAssClown
09-09-2005, 12:00 PM
I love both versions of Lolita, and Lynne's version is seriously overlooked, partly due to getting f'ed in the distribution dept.
Hairy Lime
09-09-2005, 12:07 PM
Love Kubrick but his version of Lolita isn't nearly as good as Lyne's.
For one thing, the girl who played Lolita in Kubrick's version looks like she's 22...so I don't believe it when she's supposed to be 14 or whatever.
Also, Jeremy Irons makes a much better Humbert Humbert than that other guy.Disresepectfully disagree.
I've read the novel, Nabokov's screenplay, and seen both versions of the film. Of the four, Kubrick's film shines above and beyond both Nabokov's script and Lyne's film and is on par with the novel.
Kubrick basically tossed Nabokov's screenplay and riffed his own take on the novel, improving on the novelist's own script interpretation of the book.
Sue Lyon was 14 when filming on Lolita began - she was 16 years, 3 days old when it was released in the US. And she looks every bit of 14.
James Mason is a fantastic actor being directed by a fantastic director. Irons, while an excellent actor himself, really can't hope to hold a candle to Mason's performance.
Kubrick is the most overrated director of all time.
I'll second that and face the wrath, too, TwoBit....
Hairy Lime
09-09-2005, 12:14 PM
Cecil B. DeMille anybody?
billythrilly7
09-09-2005, 12:14 PM
This movie is a classic and everytime it comes on I can't help but watch the entire thing.
Cecil B. DeMille anybody?
Okay, so it's a tie for first place.
cluckyburger
09-09-2005, 12:59 PM
What about Mozart? I mean, you guys don't want to leave
out Mozart, I mean, while you're trashing people.
I'm not trashing people. I'm stating an opinion that Kubrick is a terribly overrated director. One or two people might agree with me...many, many more will not. So what?
And for the record, I don't consider Mozart overrated. Thanks for playing, clucky. Come back real soon, y'hear?
dclary
09-09-2005, 02:20 PM
What about Van Damme? Overrated?
kintnerboy
09-09-2005, 02:51 PM
Kubrick is the most overrated director of all time.
Yes!
Finally, someone has the guts to tell the truth!
I mean it's not like the guy made one of the greatest sci-fi films ever, and one of the greatest horror films ever, and one of the greatest comedies ever, and one of the best war films ever, and one or two of the greatest crime films ever, and two or three of the greatest dramas ever.....I mean lots of directors master every single genre on the first try, right?
You sir, are an idiot. And the fact that you relish your idiocy makes you a retarded idiot.
I would like to know what's overrated about Kubrick (Eyes Wide Shut aside.) Has he been a critic's favorite, sure, but overrated? He's got a pretty formidable oeuvre spanning spanning over five decades. Maybe it's because he worked in B&W. Maybe it's because his movies are like the distant professor father who never gave you a hug. Not enough warm close-ups and bow-tied endings. Does someone need a hug?
Ah, on second thought, y'know, you're right. He is just a fad.
NoTalentAssClown
09-09-2005, 03:14 PM
What about Van Damme? Overrated?
I had a dream last night that I was inside a movie starring Steven Seagal and Van Damme. The villian wore a Stay Puff Marshmellow Man costume.
I mean it's not like the guy made one of the greatest sci-fi films ever, and one of the greatest horror films ever, and one of the greatest comedies ever, and one of the best war films ever, and one or two of the greatest crime films ever, and two or three of the greatest dramas ever.....I mean lots of directors master every single genre on the first try, right?
You sir, are an idiot. And the fact that you relish your idiocy makes you a retarded idiot.
I love how people on these boards use their personal opinions to attack the personal opinions of others...and then top it all off with a personal insult.
We got ourselves a bunch of class acts running around these parts. :rolleyes:
kintnerboy
09-09-2005, 04:59 PM
I love how people on these boards use their personal opinions to attack the personal opinions of others...and then top it all off with a personal insult.
We got ourselves a bunch of class acts running around these parts. :rolleyes:
Oh, I'm sorry you misunderstood my post. I will try and explain it to you in simple terms.
It was not using my opinion to attack yours, I was stating a fact. There are many, many "greatest film" lists kept by many different organizations. Some, like the American Film Institute or Sight and Sound magazine, are made up of professional reviewers and people that work in the industry.
Others, like the Imdb lists, are voted on by simple fans, like you and I.
My point was, it doesn't matter who's list you use as a reference, you will find a Kubrick film near the top of every single list in every single genre by every single organization.
Other than that, you really seem to know a lot about films.....
dclary
09-09-2005, 05:26 PM
My point was, it doesn't matter who's list you use as a reference, you will find a Kubrick film near the top of every single list in every single genre by every single organization.
Dude, don't set yourself up for a fall like that. There's no Kubrick in the top 20 films of all time, according to Box-Office-Mojo, wherein the criteria is "best = brought in the most $$"
kintnerboy
09-09-2005, 05:29 PM
Oh, snap.
You got me.
Someday I hope to either be as smart as you, or at least have as many posts.
Oh, I'm sorry you misunderstood my post. I will try and explain it to you in simple terms.
It was not using my opinion to attack yours, I was stating a fact. There are many, many "greatest film" lists kept by many different organizations. Some, like the American Film Institute or Sight and Sound magazine, are made up of professional reviewers and people that work in the industry.
Others, like the Imdb lists, are voted on by simple fans, like you and I.
My point was, it doesn't matter who's list you use as a reference, you will find a Kubrick film near the top of every single list in every single genre by every single organization.
Other than that, you really seem to know a lot about films.....
First of all, thank you for the sarcasm. It appears as though you can't construct an argument in your favor without demeaning your opponent in the process.
Secondly, I don't care how many of Kubrick's films are on any of these lists you mention. There is no scientific gauge for a "good movie" or a "bad movie." IT'S ALL BASED ON PERSONAL PREFERENCE.
(Did I state that clearly enough for you?)
Thirdly, I think DR. STRANGELOVE and FULL METAL JACKET are wonderful films...but that still doesn't negate my PERSONAL OPINION that Kubrick is overrated.
Why does this have to become an issue of "right" or "wrong"? I've made my point and you've made yours. Let's let it go, okay?
clearly none of you are married
Totally agree.
cluckyburger
09-09-2005, 06:47 PM
I'm not trashing people. I'm stating an opinion that Kubrick is a terribly overrated director. One or two people might agree with me...many, many more will not. So what?
And for the record, I don't consider Mozart overrated. Thanks for playing, clucky. Come back real soon, y'hear?
macg
i was quoting from MANHATTAN, wherein mary and yale run down a list from their 'academy of the overrated'. woody counters with the mozart line. it seemed germane since kubrick's genius is pretty much acknowledged. of course, that doesn't mean you have to like him.
people can toss words like antiseptic or cold at kubrick and whatever, maybe they're right but he's a giant of cinema, a complete original...we're talking about a man who invented a camera lens so he could shoot BARRY LYNDON by candlelight.
My apologies then, clucky.
Clearly I need to brush up on my Woody Allen!
Hairy Lime
09-09-2005, 07:11 PM
we're talking about a man who invented a camera lens so he could shoot BARRY LYNDON by candlelight.He borrowed it from NASA, but yeah ... genius.
Pencey
09-09-2005, 07:14 PM
Yes!
Finally, someone has the guts to tell the truth!
I mean it's not like the guy made one of the greatest sci-fi films ever, and one of the greatest horror films ever, and one of the greatest comedies ever, and one of the best war films ever, and one or two of the greatest crime films ever, and two or three of the greatest dramas ever...
And one of the greatest "period pieces" ever in Barry Lyndon, which is my 2nd favorite film of his.
miles
09-09-2005, 10:29 PM
None of Kubrick's films were ever up with current times. They were ahead of their times, and many of them still are.
True, but EWS wasn't one of them. But I'm fascinated with his films, though.
Cheese
09-12-2005, 03:16 PM
I find Kubrick's work to be visually stunning, while his sense of narrative is a little more hit and miss with me. With EWS, I found myself thinking, "I'm not all that zipped about the story here, but man, this is one beautiful film."
And no, not beautiful because it had a bunch of naked chicks in it.
Hairy Lime
09-12-2005, 03:27 PM
And no, not beautiful because it had a bunch of naked chicks in it.You preferred the naked dudes?
Hewlett
09-12-2005, 06:29 PM
Clearly I need to brush up on my Woody Allen!
Don't bother. He's overrated.
Biohazard
09-12-2005, 11:06 PM
we're talking about a man who invented a camera lens so he could shoot BARRY LYNDON by candlelight.
We're talking about Carl Zeiss?
miles
09-12-2005, 11:12 PM
It's a terrible shame that Kubrick didn't do more films.
cluckyburger
09-13-2005, 12:32 PM
We're talking about Carl Zeiss?
very clever.
i should have been more clear. zeiss invented it for NASA for astro-photography. kubrick had it modified for motion picture photography. my point was more along the lines of 'wow, name another director who would do that'.
Biohazard
09-14-2005, 12:55 AM
very clever.
i should have been more clear. zeiss invented it for NASA for astro-photography. kubrick had it modified for motion picture photography. my point was more along the lines of 'wow, name another director who would do that'.
I don't believe ever hearing that he modified the lens at all. There was a little part on the Kubrick: A Life In Pictures documentary, but I haven't seen that in a while and I don't rememeber exactly what happened. I know Kubrick used special cameras with the Zeiss lens, but I'm pretty certain that there was no mention of modification.
Pencey
09-14-2005, 01:42 AM
It's true. He had someone at the studio or whatever rip apart special cameras that were no longer used by the studio because they were the only cameras who could support these NASA lenses he was going to use for the film.
razerfish
09-14-2005, 02:56 AM
The movie sucked. Genius or not, the movie stunk on ice.
Erehwon
09-14-2005, 10:42 AM
horrible film for a great director to go out on.
cluckyburger
09-14-2005, 01:17 PM
[QUOTE=Biohazard]I don't believe ever hearing that he modified the lens at all. QUOTE]
there's some info here, though it skews to the technical
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm
the Zeiss lens f/0.7
http://www.stanleykubrick.de/res/img/newsletter/07/TN-mitchell.jpg
vBulletin v3.6.2, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.