check this out, from www.**************.com

"SA'S MINI-REVIEW OF "EYES WIDE SHUT": Tom Cruise is married to Nicole Kidman. They're both rich and affluent (NOTE: as far as I can tell, the term "affluent" means "really rich") thanks to Tom Cruise being the world's best doctor. In fact, he's such an incredible doctor that he manages to stay both rich AND affluent despite the fact that he only spends 20 seconds a day working. The remaining 23 hours and 59 minutes of his day are used to think about sex, watch people have sex, and think about watching people have sex. I assume he's paid by the hour and not by the amount of patients he services, unless the term "services" is used very broadly in his contract.
Picture from the horribly un-erotic orgy scene in "Eyes Wide Shut." This alone made me despise sex in all forms.

They both attend a party thrown by some affluent person who doesn't mind spending millions of dollars on garish lighting bills. While Cruise goes off to flirt with two supermodels and play an exciting party game entitled "Revive the Hooker", Kidman gets drunk and is hit on by an old man. After failing to have sex with any living creatures at the party, they both go home so Kidman can get stoned and become frighteningly obnoxious. Kidman reveals that she almost had an affair with somebody and Cruise reveals that he's supposed to be playing a sensitive character. Since he's so sensitive and emotional, Cruise leaves for his mandatory 20 seconds of work, then goes to purchase a hooker (which is obviously covered under his insurance policy). Unfortunately he doesn't get a chance to "do the dirty deed" with the hooker because his wife calls and reminds him that despite this being a film about sex, Kubrick doesn't want any of the main characters to actually HAVE sex. They can allude to it and watch other people do it, but under no circumstances should they actually partake in it. Having sex might actually make this film somewhat entertaining or watchable, and Kubrick obviously didn't want to be a jerk and wake up the audience at any point throughout this movie.

Cruise eventually meets up with his old friend, a piano-playing guy who is the first character to be introduced without a truckload of over-the-top sexual references. Luckily it takes him only a few minutes to reveal he's being paid to play the piano for an orgy in a few hours. This piques the interest of Cruise, who has been instructed by Kubrick to "not have sex in as many fake New York locations as possible." Since this film was supposed to be about the dehumanization of sex or the lack of commitment to marriage or how critics will give a positive review to any movie they think is supposed to be "artsy", Cruise has to purchase a face mask and cape for the orgy. I'm not sure, but by all conventional standards, one would think that the inability to use one's mouth during an orgy might severely hinder the erotic possibilities. My guess turned out to be correct, and the orgy ends up having the raw erotic power of a Home Depot newspaper insert.

The mystery and danger really starts to pile up at this point, although I'm not quite sure why. Everything ends up being drowned out by the atrocious film score, which was composed by a drunk parrot repeatedly hopping on three piano keys. Some people die, some other people have sex (never with Cruise or Kidman), and the film ends a few days later.

Kubrick was extremely secretive while making this film. He claimed he didn't want the "plot" to be leaked, but that's obviously bullcrap. "Eyes Wide Shut" didn't have a plot. It was about two people who don't have sex, and the rest of the world that has too much sex. I think Kubrick was just afraid people would find out that despite his talent to light rooms and use camera filters, the film he wanted to pass off as "artsy" wasn't really much more than Tom Cruise acting constipated and walking across the same 50 feet of street repeatedly while anti-erotic sexual acts are performed in the background. If "Eyes Wide Shut" accurately portrays the whole "sex party world", I guess I should be thankful I haven't been invited to one yet. Plus I just can't afford a pelican mask and cape, so it all works out."

that pretty much covers it.

Tuan Jim


------------------
"Think of the Internet as a pub at chucking out time. Act like a prick and you'll get a glass in your face. Act nice... and you'll probably still get a glass in your face. It's just a question of how big the glass is and how hard someone hits you with it." - Andy
(www.**************.com)

There are alot of obvious errors in this movie. One of the ones that gets me is the girl in the coffee shop next to the cafe the piano guy is playing at. Cruise is asking her where the guy lives and her accent changes from New York to British halfway through the conversation. You can also clearly see the coffee shop is right across the street from the custume shop. It's reflection is in the glass door when Cruise is talking to the old guy who runs the place.

IMO, that is a really lame review of a really good movie. (although somewhat amusing from a certain perspective, I'll admit...)

It's possible to write a 'review' like that for ANY movie, good or bad. I would type up an example right now if I wasn't at work....maybe later.

Did anyone else think it was ridiculous how Cruise kept flashing his doctor's i.d. like he was in the FBI? He tells the hotel employee he's a doctor, flashes some card & the guy starts talking. He did this quite a few times- apparently if your a doctor people will open their stores in the middle of the night. This was definitely one of the worst wastes of talent I've ever seen. The dialogue was horrible and the characters were totally unbelievable.

The person that wrote that review clearly had a picture in mind when they went to watch EWS. Unfortunately (for the reviewer) it was not EWS. So he then proceeds to write a review about the movie he did not see instead of EWS.

EWS is a movie about the love and relationship between a husband and wife. About the different worlds that exist at the same time and how easy it would be to move from one to the other and how different our lives would be.

Mike

Kubrick was god, and EWS was a masterpiece.

Got this in an email reply:
"Sorry if you missed the theme, but Cruise kept flashing his doctor's id because he was unsure of himself. being able to throw around his credentials everytime he ran into a problem was a way of saying (for him) that he was someone important. this is also illustrated in the beginning of the film when he mentions he can't find his wallet, another reference to the fact that he is unsure of his own identity. if you want any more symbolic references in EWS, let me know, I got 96 pages worth of them, it was was definitely one of hte deepest movies in the 90's and this document helps clear upa a lot of Kubrick's hidden meanings"
I'll buy that he was insecure & liked to feel important, but I don't buy the reaction of everyone when seeing that he's a doctor. The waitress & hotel guy tell him everything he wants to know because he's a doctor? In New York? Yeah right, they'd say big ****ing deal you idiot. And as far as being a movie about love & relationships? Is anyone who liked this movie married or been in a relationship? All of the dialogue was ridiculous and had no ring-of-truth to it. Even my wife kept laughing and saying "yeah, right" the whole movie. Afterwards, she said that it was probably the worst movie she's ever seen. I can see why most of the decent actors dropped out and had to be replaced. And you can't say it was because of the long shoot, the character Jennifer Jason Leigh was supposed to play was only in one scene. And Harvey Keitel's character was in maybe 3. So the people that liked it, you thought it was an accurate movie about relationships & totally believable?

I enjoyed Juan Tim's review. It only proves that you can enjoy or not the movie at different levels.

I just felt that Kubrick was expressing a frustration about seeing too much sex in this world and not experiencing enough of it.

Simplistic, but that's how I saw it. I don't bother with digging too deep into the characters. I watch X-Men for that!

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

------------------
Sleeper - dreaming life away -

Speaking of Jennifer Leigh, does anyone else hate the acting style of the lady who replaced her? Her acting in that confession scene is so hammy.

This movie I think is more for people who like symbolism over interesting characters and plot development. I don't think you should have to look so intensely into a film to enjoy it. I mean, looking into the meaning of "where's my wallet" is a bit much. Symbolism is nice but it's not going to save the story or characters unless they are interesting themselves.

What do the christmas trees that pop up in each scene by doorways mean? Does it have something to do with renewing your faith and commitment? That's kind of what Christmas is about so I guessed that's what they stand for.

Yes, this is a very interesting review for those who have absolutely no clue what EWS is actually about. Kudos to the brilliant author. http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/rolleyes.gif

i saw the movie on opening day, and after seeing it have only glanced over reviews of it, like the one posted here. i walked out of the film thinking that what Kubrick was trying to convey was a dreamlike state in witch eveything is slightly off kilter, and shifting in mood, and so on. That accounts for all the things that people complained about like the lapses in logic, stilted dialouge, and changes in tone. i think people were going into it expecting a far more rational film, and every bad review i've read seems to stem from this assumtion. Its like people walking out of Lost Highway wanting answers instead of forming thier own, or just accepting that Lynch intends the film to be a mystery without solutions, a film deviod of narrative logic. People are reactionary and usually automatically bash anything that isnt straightforward/conventional and they dont understand.

[This message has been edited by iaido (edited November 04, 2000).]

A perfect example of how easy it is to make a web site and call yourself a movie critic.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrBEAViS:
Kubrick was god, and EWS was a masterpiece.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I couldn't have said it any better.

I can imagine their review of "Waiting For Godot":

"Two guys stand around talking about another guy who never shows up."

lol.....critics? hardly. I thought EWS was a very good movie. alot of you on here are way off base and arent making any sense. maybe a couple of you should watch it a second time.

I see the rest of you got the film.

If your reading this I would like the 96 pages of analysis on EWS.

thanks

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Birdcell:
I can imagine their review of "Waiting For Godot":

"Two guys stand around talking about another guy who never shows up."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ROFL!!! http://talk.dvdtalk.com/ubb/cool.gif

Re: Finally, an interesting review of "Eyes Wide Shut"
 

I saw this during its theatrical run and walked out wondering, "Just what the hell was the big deal about that, anyway?" Months later, I couldn't sleep one night so I rented it on Pay-Per-View. Knowing what it was, and no longer waiting for it to meet the expectations that the marketing hype had created, left me much freer to simply get into the film. I found it much more interesting, as I have on every subsequent viewing.

One thing I noticed in repeat viewings was the use of colors, primarily blue and red. Each appears in prominent ways in key scenes. For instance, the door of the apartment building where the prostitutes live is bold red. Blues are used in lighting and in set coloring in a lot of scenes involving Alice (Nicole Kidman).

Another thing I found interesting was that, in the beginning, Bill asks the two models walking with him just where they're going and one responds, "Where the rainbow ends." The name of the costume rental store he visits later is, Rainbow Costumes. It's subtle, but it seems that Bill was headed toward the private party all along, whether he realized it or not.

As for an earlier poster's question about whether married people like the movie, I can speak only for myself. When I first saw this film, I wasn't quite 21. The intensity of Alice's confession of lust was little more than a story impetus to me. I am now much more experienced and happily married (we just celebrated our fourth wedding anniversary). The first time my wife ever saw the film was a year or so ago, and I hadn't seen it in several years by then. It struck me just how masterful Cruise's performance really is, because I can't imagine having to comprehend such an admission. I mean, she outright says that the guy whose name she didn't even know only had to say the word and she would have gladly walked away from him, their marriage, their daughter, everything. I think you have to have had a very deep, meaningful relationship in order to fully register the nuances of this film.

Re: Finally, an interesting review of "Eyes Wide Shut"
 

A 10 year bump? WOW!

Re: Finally, an interesting review of "Eyes Wide Shut"
 

What can I say? I recently bought it on Blu-ray and have been thinking about it lately.

Re: Finally, an interesting review of "Eyes Wide Shut"
 

Great film. Just surprised to see a 10 year resurrection!