Kubrick on Eyes Wide Shut
DjArcadian
3,633 Posts
I'm a bigger movie buff than record collector and this really surprised me. http://imdb.com/news/sb/2006-10-05/#4"R. Lee Ermey, the actor who played the menacing drill instructor in Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket (1987), says that two weeks before his death, Kubrick phoned him to express his despondency over Eyes Wide Shut, starring Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, which reportedly had taken longer than any film in history to film and which was only in a rough-cut state. "He told me it was a piece of s**t," Ermey said in an interview with the online Radar magazine, "and that he was disgusted with it and that the critics were going to have him for lunch. He said Cruise and Kidman had their way with him -- exactly the words he used." Ermey did not explain what he thought Kubrick may have meant by the expression, except to remark, "He was kind of a shy little timid guy. He wasn't real forceful. That's why he didn't appreciate working with big, high-powered actors. ... He would lose control."
Comments
I dont think the cut we saw was really the final cut. He was notorious for cutting his movies up until the premier, and I think one more short round of cuts would have made the film that much better. Also, I think the guy he got to write the screnplay, Frederick raphael, is kind of a pedantic hack.
But seriously, I just watched this a few weeks ago, and i was blown away again. Its an incredibly good love story set in this kafkaesque world. Weird mix, but it works. And the visuals. I think Tom Cruise actually gives his best performance. He's an actor pretending to be a doctor whos not really a doctor and is pretending to be a doctor, yet being a doctor is what gives him access to the whole world he uncovers. And cruise plays it brilliantly.
knew who liked it at the time. Kubrick always acheives this other worldly
surreal creepiness that is unrivaled....
Add me to this list as well. I am a big Kubrick fan, and have been amazed by his work again and again. Eyes Wide Shut was simply pathetic. Compared to his other works, it had practically no artistic value.
It's a film that for me, warrants more repeated viewings than either Full Metal Jacket or The Shining.
There's just too much to see in every scene.
Then again, I put Barry Lyndon on the top of my favorite Kubrick films (next to Lolita), a film even most Kubrick fans hold with some disdain.
So what do I know.
cosign and thank god we have a clue that he agreed. I was stunned when i saw this film - how could he let this happen? I hoped it was a case of things werent going well on set, he didnt have the movie he wanted, and then dies before he could salvage it somehow. this little article gives me some hope to cling to - at least he knew it was bad!
its an interesting *idea* for a film, it has some intense *visuals*, but it a total mess in soooo many ways. cruise has had a run of better stuff of late (collateral comes to mind) but this was a lifeless performance. and i was laughing at their so called relationship/marriage - how on earth could they - a married couple (in real life) play a pair that has zero chemistry of any kind? It makes you wonder what was really going on there. yuck on multi levels.
2001, dr strangelove, clockwork, shining.. come on, this one isnt even in the same league, let alone ballpark.
Crazy talk!
Yeah I'm with most Kubrick fans in that I just found Barry Lyndon dull. Very pretty but totally unengaging.
Enjoyed Eyes Wide Shut more than that but again felt like it had lost it's purpose somewhere down the line. As a fanboy I'm still gutted that he never had the chance to make A.I.
Lolita on the other hand, despite censorship and changes to the original text, is a great great film.
Barry Lyndon, like most Kubrick films, takes it's sweet time to get where it's going.
It also had Ryan O'Neal going against it - which, in many ways is far, far worse than any Tom Cruise.
Not to mention the title character being a total, unlikable asshole (which, now that I think about it, may help explain Stanley's decision in casting O'Neal).
You keep thinking throught the film, is it possible for this man to fuck up his life any more than he already has?!
That said, I thought Kubrick managed to make a fascinating, completely engaging work.
And yes, the fact that it was probably the most beautiful film ever shot does help.
The candlelit scenes are breathtaking (there's an interesting bit in that Kubrick doc that talks about how Stanley cheated Warners out of two of only about a dozen or so existing specific Zeiss camera lenses which he proceeded to custom mount on his film camera in order to achieve the desired lighting effect).
Not to mention the costumes (deservedly won an oscar) or the brilliant Ken Adams set design.
Sorry (and call me blasphemous), but if you want dull Kubrick, look no further than 2001.
While on the subject of Barry Lyndon (while I think about it, is probably on my top 10 films list), I can't resist this passage between a green O'Neal, just setting off for the world as a young man, getting stuck by a notorious bandit and his son.
My favorite bit of dialogue in any Kubrick film...
Memorable Quotes from
Barry Lyndon (1975)
[Redmond Barry sees a lone figure down the road, his back facing him]
Redmond Barry: Excuse me, sir!
[Man turns around aiming dual pistols at Barry]
Captain Feeny: Good morning again, young sir!
[a young man on horseback approaches and holds Barry up from behind with a pistol]
Captain Feeny: Don't even think about it. Get down off that horse. Raise your hands high above your head, please. Come forward... stop. How do you do? I'm Captain Feeny.
Redmond Barry: Captain Feeny?
Captain Feeny: Captain Feeny at your service.
Redmond Barry: THE Captain Feeny?
Captain Feeny: None other. May I introduce you to my son, Seamus.
Seamus: How do you do?
Redmond Barry: How do you do?
Captain Feeny: To whom have I the honor of speaking?
Redmond Barry: My name's Redmond Barry.
Captain Feeny: How do you do Mr. Barry? And now I'm afraid we must get on to the more regrettable stage of our brief acquaintance. Turn around, and keep your hands high above your head, please.
[Seamus frisks Barry and finds a pouch full of money]
Seamus: There must be 20 guineas in gold here, father!
Captain Feeny: Well, well, well. You seem to be a very well set up young gentleman, sir!
Redmond Barry: Captain Feeny, that's all the money my mother had in the world. Mightn't I be allowed to keep it? I'm just one step ahead of the law myself. I killed and English officer in a duel, and I'm on my way to Dublin until things cool down.
Captain Feeny: Mr. Barry, in my profession we hear many such stories. Yours is one of the most intriguing and touching I've heard in many weeks. Nevertheless, I'm afraid I cannot grant your request. But I'll tell you what I will do. I'll allow you to keep those fine pair of boots which in normal circumstances I would have for myself. The next town is only 5 miles away, and I suggest you now start walking.
Redmond Barry: Mightn't I be allowed to keep my horse?
Captain Feeny: I should like to oblige you, but with people like us, we must be able to travel faster than our clients. Good day, young sir.
[Barry soon is a few paces ahead of the robbers]
Captain Feeny: You can put down your hands now, Mr. Barry!
Blasphemous!!![/b]
ha ha, just kidding. I think it's a beautiful and fascinating film, but it doesn't do much entertaining. It has a lot of appeal for us nerds.
I sense a new graemlin!
If not Sutherland, then what about that freak human-faced dog??
DO IT
My other favorite bit of Kubrick dialogue, is (naturally) from my other favorite Kubrick film, Lolita...
Charlotte (Shelley Winters) to Humbert:
"Hum, you just touch me and I--I go as limp as a noodle. It scares me."
Humbert (James Mason) to Charlotte:
"Yes, I know the feeling."
...and for 1962?!
maybe im allergic to kubrick... although i thought dr. strangelove was by far his best work, but i think it had more to do with peter sellers collabaration with kubrick, rather than soley kubrik. most of sellers performance was improv or at elast he wrote most of his lines.
hilariously awful. tom cruise and kidman trying to act stoned was priceless. people........don't........talk.......one......syll..a...ble....per...minute....when....they......are.....
high.
"FIDELIO"
scary
No. But I love how she called Leone's "Once Upon a Time In America" the "worst film of the year" (after viewing the truncated, linearly edited version), then a year or so later called it one of the "best films of the decade" (after viewing the properly edited, Leone version).
What a difference an edit can make.
Agreed.
In one of my film classes last year our professor asked us what film has brought you to tears, overwhelmingly the men in class answered Paths of Glory. That final scene with the German Girl singing will truly determine whether you have a soul or not
It's a damn shame what they did to Once Upon a Time in America. I love how they thought they could make the movie more approachable for American audiences by making it make less[/b] sense. More egregious, have you ever seen the TV edit of the Big Lebowski?
this ones going out to Paul Nice:
Leone has always been a victim of studio editing. Once Upon A Time in the West is a major offender. I have a German version somewhere that's slightly more extended. You get to see little snips here-and-there the studio made to cut down the running time. The film is far more lush and exciting with this edited bits in tact and the continuity makes a lot more sense. I always have a feeling that the opening shot with the door opening was supposed to be preceded by something else. It's simply not typical of how Leone would begin a film. Also, the unsynced credits at the beginning are revealing of a hack being put in charge of the cuts.
I just read it, man was that awful. She has a good point about the use of powerful music throughout the movie deadening its impact in the "re-education" scenes. But the rest hooey. As is the case with most critic's of his work, there is a strange animosity towards Kubrick throughout the piece, which I've never understood. She critiques his film as though it were merely another movie. She judges it by what it isn't and how it doesnt live up to the expectations set up by both the book and other films. She sees the film as a morality tale gone bad. While the book is something of a morality tale, the film is not and makes no pretensions to be one. It is a piece of art about what is to be a human living in a decaying world.
I dont think one can really say anything intelligent about Kubrick's films unil one has seen them several times over a span of several years.