I didn't get this movie at all!!!
Am I just stupid or what?
I mean, what was the point, besides seeing
Nicole Kidman naked?


------------------
No sense in going off half - cocked...

No, you're not stupid. Most people have a hard time understanding this film the first time they see. Unfortunately, these same people find it trendy to blast the movie with claims of "That was trash! Boring as hell!" and "That had no plot!" But the film is really about our sexual insecurities. After Nicole Kidman reveals her sexual fantasies to her husband concerning the naval officer, he sets out on a quest to find the link that's missing in his sex life. It is also something of an act of revenge. That's why he goes to the party with the mass orgies. It is out of curiosity, and attempt to find some type of fulfillment. The film is also about how we tend to deceive ourselves, though not always consciously. Hence the title: "Eyes Wide Shut." Although in the end, Cruise and Kidman reach a point of mutual understanding and finally recognize the problems that exist within their marriage.

monkey,

I think many people's problem with the film (including me) is that it is a little too slow-paced. I did not find it boring, however. My principal problem with the film is with the Tom Cruise (Dr. Wm. Harford) character. I believe the character lacked believability, and believability of the principal character is crucial for the film.

I certainly did not think Eyes Wide Shut was a bad film; I simply was disappointed because I know what Kubrick was capable of producing, and I didn't think it measured up to those expectations.

------------------
When asked by the reporters, "What brought you to Hollywood?", John Ford replied: "The Train"

It's a strange film, that's for sure. I don't think I had a problem with the Cruise character's believability so much as I had a problem with Kidman's acting, or lack thereof. The music was also really grating. Yes, it has to do with sexual insecurities, fidelity, lust, etc., but that is giving the film too much credit. It doesn't really examine any deep issues or provoke any thoughts that your average person hasn't had a thousand times in a thousand different conversations with girlfriends, wives, etc. In fact, if you haven't talked about these things (in significantly greater detail than in this film), I would have to wonder about you.

The film promises a lot (the first half of it is pretty good), but ultimately fails to deliver in either the thought department or the eroticism department. By the end, it has become completely ludicrous and pointless.

--Apparition

Not thought provoking??? I can't even remember the last time a film stimulated my thinking as much as Eyes Wide Shut. It engulfed my thinking centers for a good couple of days after I watched the movie as I replayed the events of the film in my mind to come up with the underlying aspects or the "point" of the whole thing. And after this considerable thought, I respect Kubrick's work here as much as in most of his other masterpieces.

EWS is a great movie. It wasn't Kubrick's best, but it sure hell was a great movie.

------------------
"THIS IS WHO WE ARE"

worst ending for a movie in 10 years. so much promise & so little delivery.

Eyes Wide Shut is the only way to see this flick. Man, what a disaster. What was Kubrick thinking?

Tom Cruise has all the acting range of Jean-Claude Van Damme, minus the accent. Kidman is not nearly as good an actor as her husband. The story ranges from banal to preposterous--I've seen after-school specials that were more believable. The orgy scene just left my jaw hanging open--straight out of a B movie. The "message" is about as subtle as getting hit over the head with a baseball bat (an aluminum one). You can see more subtlety in an Oliver Stone movie.

If this flick didn't have Kubrick's name on it, it would be long gone and forgotten. But a lot of people are convinced that because it is Kubrick's, it must be good, and are jumping out of their skin to find good things to say about it--"Eyes Wide Shut," indeed. Some people will find deep meaning and worthy performances in the "Pokemon" movie if told that Stanley directed it.

His worst film, and by a country mile. I think he died from the embarassement.

------------------
The gift that keeps on giving

I love most Kubrick films, but this damn thing was nothing more than a bloated near 3 hour episode of RED SHOE DIARIES(without the good parts)
I got the point to the film, I just did not feel that it was handled in a very convincing manner.

About the only saving grace of the film was Nicole Kidman http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/wink.gif, so you can imagine my irritation when She seemed to vanish from the last two hours of the film. She was reduced to nothing more than a charector who is is sometimes at the other end of a phone conversation.
About the only thing that I can really say good about this film is that it was beautifully photographed and the set design was magnificent.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by brianluvdvd:
worst ending for a movie in 10 years. so much promise & so little delivery.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What is so terrible about the ending?


------------------
"If it were all in the script, why make the film?"--Nicholas Ray

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Blip:
What is so terrible about the ending?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nothing. It's perfect if you understood the movie!

------------------
"THIS IS WHO WE ARE"

thx1138, i watched eyes wide shut. i followed it very closely & thought it was a decent movie for the most part. are you saying that just b/c i did not like the ending that i did not understand the movie? i really did not feel lost while watching it. i dont consider myself a dummy regarding film. i was just stating that the ending, in my opinion, sucked. it was something that a 15 year old could have written. nothing is wrapped up, & it is not a true ending (in the meaning of the word). it ended with me expecting a sequel. now i know that most people who love film like things to be abstract or arbitrary but that does not always mean it is good. cruise & kidman's characters go thru so much in the movie. there is the mystery still left of the sex cult, what is going to happen to cruise since he wont leave the cult alone (you know he wants to go back), the tension between him & his wife which never got truly resolved, etc. so kidman says "we need to ****" & the credits roll. that qualifies for a great ending? maybe you need to explain it to me since i am must be shallow & non-understanding. any others have opinions? maybe i am the only one that is way off. i know things cannot always be wrapped up in a neat little package but i personally was disappointed. i am starting to ramble. i look forward to others opinions.

i guess that the people who watched limbo and hated the ending also hated this endind....just a guess.

how about looking at a movie with leaving the knowledge that it has hollywood stamped on it. think about what i just said.

i'm sick of movies being pretentious(double jeopardy). i watch movies because i have to. if you are confused at this statement, i'll clarify. i have to watch movies cos i rent dvds in a rural setting. i am not going to rent eyes wide shut to a family viewing audience. i will indeed suggest this movie to grownups cos any zest injection is appreciated.

i think eyes wide shut drew me into the movie. if any movie does that drawing thing, then it should recieve thumbs up. this movie was niether pretty nor glitzy. i would catagorize this movie as 9 1/2 weeks-ish. another great movie that some would find offensive. anything that involves realism is greatly appreciated.......

hollywood go home.

"we have to f*ck!"(or whatever she said) I thought the end was totally lame-to me that line just cheapened the whole movie...overall I would put this one at the bottom of kubricks list.
Clockwork Orange is the one to beat for imagery and thought provoking!


------------------
I know you are but what am I?

[This message has been edited by Pee Wee (edited March 17, 2000).]

Again, I must reiterate that it is quite pointless to argue back and forth about this film (or really any film, in that case). Everyone has their own respective tastes and opinions; while I have no problem with someone openly stating their thoughts and explaining them, it does no one any good to say to that person, "Oh, you're dumb, you just didn't understand it." I loved this movie, but for those who disliked it or though it to be a piece of trash, more power to you. This is just my own personal rule of thumb.

P.S. I am not singling anyone out here.

http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/smile.gif

I only rented this movie, but I wish I would of bought it. I have a problem with insomnia which this movie would cure.

but monkey...what fun is an opinion if you dont get to argue it? http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/smile.gif