Rating: 
Summary: This would have been a ten star film
Review: were it not for the presence of Tom Cruise. Cruise is not the right actor for the character of Bill Hartford, you can't picture Cruise being seized by the kind of sexual and existential doubts that Hartford fallls into when he finds out that his wife has had sexual fanttasies that don't involve him and the sensual enticements he finds himself tempted to realize. Perhaps John Cusack or someone else in Cruise's age range could have done better with Kidman.
Rating: 
Summary: Only good thing about the movie is ....
Review: Nicole Kidman nude. She has a very firm and toned butt, a flat stomach, and a beautiful body. There are some other sexy nude women in the movie too. That's the only reason it deserves two stars -- for the erotic element. But there are too many negative things about the movie: no plot, no reasonable ending for the suspense generated, scenes hanging loose without explanation...you get the idea. The entire movie is surrrealistic. Be warned: if you watch the movie expecting a sexy thriller, you WILL be disappointed. It's way too long (2Hrs:39Mins) to waste. I can compare it to "Random hearts" as one of the worst mainstream movies ever made.
Rating: 
Summary: Simply Astonishing
Review: I found this film to be one of the very greatest I have EVER seen. I sat there mezmerized throughout its length. The pacing is simply fantastic. It's slow enough to keep you on the edge of your seat (yes, im serious), yet not to the point where it annoys you. It has that usual Kubrick style, and is VERY arty. Full of many shocking and startling images (not macabre or gross, merely unexpected) including the nude Nicole Kidman standing with her back to the camera a few moments into the film, juxtaposed with the simplistic opening credits. Simply a PERFECT movie. Kubrick strived hard to acheive this perfection (explaining the record setting 18 month shoot), and he certainly was successful. Seeing the film made me only miss that wonderful director all the more. He was truly one of the greatest directors in history. The film was beautiful and mystifying at times as well, obviously dream-like, yet not a sugar-coated kind. It was as if everything was very familiar, yet so bizarre at the same time. This effect made the film quite unsettling, and all the more powerful. Hats of to exquisite score, perfect for the film, including Shostakovich, Grygory Leti, and Bob Dylan, also hats off to Nicole Kidman, who gave a fantastic and underrated performance as Alice. Nicole is not one of my favorite actresses, yet this performance I found WONDERFUL, and it makes me see her as a much better actress, I hope it wasnt the performance of her career, I hope she outdoes this tour-de-force. This film is ART. Every frame is like a painting, every motion is choreography, every line of dialogue is poetry. Everyone has made this film notorious because of its sexual nature (although it really is NOT all that sexual), which makes me sad, for people don't show enough appretiation for this fantastic swan song of Kubrick's. This film is wonderful, see it and be amazed. After all, how can you possibly go wrong with a film whose last word of dialogue is "f**k"
Rating:
Summary: Kubrick's Legacy!
Review: So who doesn't get it from this film? Tom thinks he's straight because of Scientology. More than anything, this film exhibits how our thought's about things distort our image about ourselves. It's no mystery that Tom and Nicole divorced after making this movie. Leave it to Stanley to sneak one in on Tom!
Rating: 
Summary: Eyes Wide Open
Review: I have to admit this movie wasnt the greatest that Kubrick ever made but I found it really good. I like the way Kubrick makes movies that takes things for granted. As in Eyes Wide Shut he takes a husband who takes his life, wife, and little girl for granted. And then he throws bizarre things at the charecter. I thought this was a great movie. It also shows that marriages are a hard thing to have. After watching this movie my eyes are wide open to people that are married and how hard it must be sometimes.
Rating:
Summary: Shut Wide Up!
Review: All you stupid little "Cruise/Kidman" fans are the most pathetic, stupid, brainless creatures ever. This is not Jerry Maguire. This is not Days of Thunder. This is NOT Moulin Rouge, you stupid rednecks! This is art. This is film. This is cinema. TRUE cinema. I bet you morons all have You've Got Mail and every Freddie Prinze Jr. movie ever made sitting on your shelf. Oh how you smile with masturbatory glee when you look upon your commercialized Hollywood junk. Stay away from intelligent movies like Eyes Wide Shut. You brain-dead zombies obviously lack any sense of perspective and feeling. You Hollywood brainwashed ret@rds.
Rating:
Summary: Not bad...despite Cruise and Kidman
Review: I realize this is supposed to be dream, etc but is it inappropriate to judge the perfromances as if they were real people, who actually exist? That said, its a good story. Tom Cruise is his usual phony self, as in his second meeting with Sydney Pollack (who's outstanding, BTW). Tom "emotes" by covering his face, rubbing his eyes and doing the hand clapping thing he's been doing since Risky Business. Its Tom Cruise in a brilliant portrayal of...Tom Cruise. Nicole Kidman can act, but is playing herself as well (ice-cold). It DOES make the other women in the movie seem that much more attractive. I suppose this forshadowed what happened to them in real life. Still, its an interesting story and if they're gonna spend as much money as they spend making Matrix or Hulk, might as well get a story to go along with it.
Rating: 
Summary: Where's the Plot?
Review: I am a Kidman & Cruise fan. But, this film? What a stinker! Where was the plot? The suspence? Any sign of life would have helped. It was just a continous parade of bare boobs. You didn't care that people were threatened. You didn't care that they may have been murdered. The lines could have been read of off a teleprompter! What trash. What a disapointment!
I've seen boxes of facial tissue that were more interesting.
What a waste of time. Wow! I think I'll go stare at the screen saver on my DVD player! That's got to be more interesting!
Rating:
Summary: A movie about nothing - not that there's anything wrong w/it
Review: Actually, it's about ironic personalities and expecting the unexpected. It's also about whether two people in a marriage can ever truly trust each other. In the scene with Domino as a hooker that lures Dr. Harford to her apartment, one does not ever buy that she is a prostitute. She's way too sweet and doesn't even want Harford's money when he offers it even without her services. The white bread college kids as homophobic tough guys is completely incongruous. And Milich casually offering his daughter's services is surreal and disturbing. Expect the unexpected. The characters are typical Kubrick and are three dimensional and real. The casting was brilliant as was the acting. And the irony's so thick you can cut it with a knife. Dr. and Mrs. Harford's marital insecurities strike a raw nerve. I think we've all been there. And it's all the more painful to watch because the characters are brutally honest in expressing their considerations of infidelity toward the other. But it's entirely enthralling. This is a great Kubrick film. It does him justice as his last.
Rating:
Summary: I agree
Review: They should have filmed this movie, but, putting a tape in the camera to record it was completely unnecessary.
| 
