Eyes Wide Shut

Rating:
Summary: A Ludricrous, Stifling Bore
Review: I won't attempt to add much to the conversation, other than to say than to say that I admire Kubrick, but don't admire anything about this film... the scenes with the masks, the dialog when cruise is asked to remove his clothes, is only one example of how poor this thing really is, and if it wasn't a Kubrick film I would have stopped watching right there....save your money

Rating:
Summary: Better than Average
Review: Most agree that this film was directed wonderfully, and I find it to be quite artistic. Everyone interested in film should see this movie just for the images.

The story had great potential, but the ending was almost an anti-climax. This movie has much in common with Magnolia; both look great, both are anti-climactic. This story is slightly better than Magnolia, and is obviously directed better. If you've seen Magnolia and you like it, you'll probably like this.

Rating:
Summary: A Delight For Eye And Mind
Review: Aesthetically, this is the most beautiful film I have experienced till now. »Eyes Wide Shut« is simply a delight for your eye - but as much for your mind. 'Cause the story comes around every dark corner of the human sexuality, without ever becoming moralizing flattening or going into klichés.

Tom Cruise was criticized for his acting in the film, and Nicole Kidman was highly praised. Strange. 'Cause Cruise plays the only real leading act - we follow him through nearly the entire film - and he does it brilliantly.

A beautiful, marvellous film. One of the very best in years!!

The short story that inspired the film, »A Dream Novel« by Arthur Schnitzler, as well as the soundtrack are highly recommendable as well.

Rating:
Summary: Rent it so you can say you saw it -- but that's all
Review: Plan 9 From Outer Space had a more comprehensible plot, and held my attention better, too.

Tom Cruise seemed very concerned about something through much of the movie -- probably that it took 2 years to shoot this baffling, meandering mess. Oh, I suppose the intelligentsia can sip double decaf espressos and ponder the deeper meaning of it all, but I'll take a Top Gun over this snoozer any day.

Rating:
Summary: Eyes Wide Shut When You See It
Review: A doctor (Tom Cruise) becomes obsessed with having a sexual encounter after his wife (Nicole Kidman) admits to having sexual fantasies about a man she met and chastising him for dishonesty in not admitting to his own fantasies. This sets him off into unfulfilled encounters with a dead patient's daughter and a hooker. But when he visits a nightclub, where a pianist friend Nick Nightingale (Todd Field) is playing, he learns about a secret sexual group and decides to attend one of their congregations. However, he quickly learns he is in well over his head and finds he and his family are threatened.

Rating:
Summary: iMEDIA
Review: people are ignorant when reviewing this film. keep on watching armageddon and twister(i like these on a different level) if you can't handle art in the form of moving pictures. there's plenty of traditional narrative high budget factory produced movies out there for you. its not a difference in intelligence its a different in priorities and film knowledge. so why come on here and trash a final film from a film-making hero who has inspired so many people to get into film-making and appreciate film for more than some kind of commercial eye-candy. eyes wide shut isn't for everyone and i'm pretty sure that was on purpose. your negative comments don't have any chance at all at swaying kubrick fans so again keep on watching your mall movies.

Rating:
Summary: Yeah, I get it, but who cares?
Review: Speaking as a HUGE Kubrick fan, my disappointment in this film is near total. "Is everything in the movie a dream? And if so, who is dreaming it at any given moment, and why?" You know what? I DON'T CARE! Sure, the film is hypnotic and dreamlike, but so what? Why am I supposed to automatically care about this wealthy somewhat annoying couple and what may (or may not) be the dream the good-looking but sort-of-creepy-and-controlling husband is having. Just because the film could be a dream doesn't mean the director has no obligation for narrative cohesion or interesting characters. It's just not compelling enough to justify 2 hours of Tom Cruise walking around looking intensely befuddled. I found a lot of reviewers working feverishly to try and read levels into this film that sadly just don't exist. There's simply no "there" there. I also don't buy the "if Kubrick had lived longer he might have cut the film into the masterpiece it truly is" argument. As far as I know he died AFTER delivering a cut that he was completely satisfied with to the studio. So it's just an odd, kind-of-boring misfire from a guy who is capable of genius. And this, by the way, in no manner dilutes the import of Kubrick as a filmmaker. It's an artists job to fail occasionally. And Kubrick fails magnificently.

Rating:
Summary: Why all the raves?
Review: I'm not sure about everyone else, but Stanley Kubrick has never been one of my favorite directors. Granted, I have not seen too many of his films, but those that I have had the "privilege" of seeing make me wonder if his other movies are even worth the time. For instance, "The Shining" was a complete hack as well as a far cry from the brilliance of the novel by Stephen King; there were so many things they changed which made no sense.

Perhaps the most confusing film of 1999, and of Kubrick's career, "Eyes Wide Shut" is nothing short of a complete and utter failure. While most critics see past the confusion and read into the hidden themes, I myself found it quite idiotic to place such a great message within a whirlwind of plot twists, sexually charged scenes that make no sense to the overall plot, and the patented Kubrick filming techniques of tracking shots, brilliant colors and pacing.

Real-life couple Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman play William and Alice Harford, a wealthy New York couple who enjoy the lavish surroundings of William's occupation as a doctor. One night at a party thrown by a friend and colleague, both William and Alice are put into compromising situations, yet both of them are shown to have enough self-control not to submit to advances from others. The next night, a marijuana trip leads to Alice's admissions of past sexual longings for another man, which sends William into a cavalcade of fear, doubt, and near-infidelity. This includes a near-tryst with a hooker, long walks in the streets and rides in taxis, all the while thinking of his wife with another man, and an invitation to a party of nothing but orgies where each guest must where a mask.

Sound lucid? Think again. The movie makes the fault of setting itself up to be something really interesting, then flatlines into confusion and insanity. William is seen in so many different situations, yet we never really understand why he feeling so down. Is it because he is angry with his wife for her admissions, or because he has had those same feelings and wishes to act on them, later regretting the thought?

Then there are the very unnecessary scenes of sexually explicit acts which add nothing but an R-rating to the film. The party that William attends is nothing but orgie after disgusting orgie, most of which are computer-generated to keep the rating low. I did pick up on Kubrick's evocation of the feeling that William is seeing this and wanting to take part in it, but ultimately deciding against it. But was it really necessary to have to see every last person getting themselves off?

There's just something about "Eyes Wide Shut" that leaves you grumbling and unpleasant. Maybe its the more-than-confusing plot, or the fact that the movie is 158 minutes too long, or that it just seems like a big waste of time. For me, it was all of these factors, and more, which make this one of those movies that remains at the bottom of the barrel.

Rating:
Summary: What defines a marriage?
Review: From the reviews I have read, it seems that this movie is supposed to have a moral or a meaning, since Kubrick is such a great director. I don't know if I agree he is that good, but this movie to me had a clear meaning and message. Eyes Wide Shut attempts to explore the fact of how fragile marriege vows are.

I haven't decided if Kubrick takes a stand, or if he just presents this movie as a statement of fact, or a warning to be careful in a marriage, because it doesn't take too much to ruin. Nor have I figured out a meaning to the last scene in the toy store. But after watching the movie I came away with an overall message.

First, this movie has nudity, but like another reviewer said, it is not erotic. It is however tragic. The movie's message to me was this. There is sex everywhere in society and you can get sex any time you want it. Beautiful men and women are everywhere and society thinks nothing of you if you submit to sex outside of marriage. So what holds marriages together? Without getting religious or preachy, it is the commentment of the man and woman to each other. The marriage vow can be broken by thought, such as when Alice confesses not just that she thought another man was cute, but that she would have given up everything for a night with him.

This devestates Bill, who in his mind sees Alice breaking part of the marriage vow. He goes out for a night on the town and I think would have had sex if the circumstances were right. He was willing to get revenge on his wife by doing something much worse that she did.

In the end, Alice and Bill are both equally hurt by the relevations of the other. I think this movie is saying how easy it is to ruin a marriage through lust or adultery and that it takes a conscious effort by both parties to make a marriage work.

Or Kubrick could be saying if you are going to cheat or lust over other people, keep your freaking mouth shut.

I thought this was an intriguing movie because I found myself rooting for the better side of each person's character to come through, and at the end it did, I guess. I don't know really.

Rating:
Summary: Don't buy this DVD.
Review: What can I say? The beginning of the movie went just fine and started to build questions and expectations as to how everything was going to resolve at the end. Tom Cruise gets involved in a very complex situation that would probably require some creative solution.

And what happened at the end? The end of the movie really sucks. They do nothing at the end. All the interest that you have build during the movie brings you frustration at the end.

Maybe Stanley Kubrick didn't get a chance to finish the movie himself and someone else got to do the end of the movie. If this was the case, then it makes sense why end of the movie stinks.

My suggestion: Don't buy this DVD. If you are really curious just rent it and you'll see what I'm talking about.

PS: I don't know if I should dump this DVD in the trash.