Author Topic: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again  (Read 4375 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« on: December 08, 2007, 04:14:28 PM »
Tom Cruise is fucking sooooooo gay.  Nicole Kidman is like icy hot sexay in this movie.  Like woman sexy.  Not pedohigh school cute like that whore he's putting on a ruse with now. 

Like Nicole Kidman?  I could totally go straight for her.  She provides a solid balance of what appear to be brains, icy hot sexayness, and total cuteness when she's got those glasses on.  I could totall get it up, keep it up, and stick it in on that.
serge

Gay Boy

  • McAmnesty
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #1 on: December 08, 2007, 04:25:00 PM »
90's Nicole Kidman was good looking. She was hot in Batman Forever.
hib

Smooth Groove

  • Both teams played hard, my man
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #2 on: December 08, 2007, 04:28:04 PM »
See, TVC, you only went gay because you weren't with a hot woman.   I used to love Nicole but she was kinda ruined for me after she got with Kravitz.  I bet her cupcakes and taut butt look good in HD. 

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #3 on: December 08, 2007, 04:39:42 PM »
Look at how gay tom cruise is.  He could be seeing his hot wife ON THE TOILET and he doesn't even have the decency to face her.  WTF cigarillo?

serge

tnw lite

  • Junior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #4 on: December 08, 2007, 04:41:10 PM »
Tom cruise is pretty bad, but I've seen worse. Wonder how he feels about them banning Scientology in Germany?

DJ_Tet

  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #5 on: December 08, 2007, 04:45:46 PM »
*right click save as*
TIT

Smooth Groove

  • Both teams played hard, my man
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #6 on: December 08, 2007, 04:45:57 PM »
Well, in Tom's defense, I probably wouldn't look at my hot wife either when she's taking a dump or leek.  

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2007, 05:24:08 PM »
I'm telling you, Nicole Kidman could make PD straight.  THAT ASS!!!!!
serge

CajoleJuice

  • kill me
  • Icon
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2007, 05:27:13 PM »
I saw part of this movie once years ago. I was at a party that I can't even remember (probably friends of the family or something) and I was in a basement with a few other kids my age and we saw that Eyes Wide Shut was on. Of course, we knew that Nicole Kidman was naked in the movie. So naturally we leave it on. Right as she's naked putting on her bra in one scene, this black guy walks out of a bathroom and is like, "OH SHIT YOU KNOW NOT TO LET A BLACK MAN SEE A WHITE WOMAN LIKE THAT!! GODDAMN!"

It forged my stereotypical view of black men that I still hold to this day.
AMC

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2007, 05:31:43 PM »
It's funny.

Tom Cruise's terrible acting almost sullies the movie.  Nicole Kidman, though, who is only in like 5 scenes in the movie, totally fucking owns them, to the point that even though she isn't in the movie a whole lot, she really does earn that top billing.  Bitch can act.  Even when she be on the toilet.
serge

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2007, 05:43:56 PM »
Look at how gay tom cruise is.  He could be seeing his hot wife ON THE TOILET and he doesn't even have the decency to face her.  WTF cigarillo?

(Image removed from quote.)

 :lol :lol
IYKYK

abrader

  • Bomb-A-Daeus
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2007, 06:35:37 PM »
i havent seen this movie yet - but scientology ruined cruise.


Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2007, 07:18:47 PM »
I saw part of this movie once years ago. I was at a party that I can't even remember (probably friends of the family or something) and I was in a basement with a few other kids my age and we saw that Eyes Wide Shut was on. Of course, we knew that Nicole Kidman was naked in the movie. So naturally we leave it on. Right as she's naked putting on her bra in one scene, this black guy walks out of a bathroom and is like, "OH SHIT YOU KNOW NOT TO LET A BLACK MAN SEE A WHITE WOMAN LIKE THAT!! GODDAMN!"

It forged my stereotypical view of black men that I still hold to this day.

 :lol :lol :lol
010

bud

  • a smudge of excrement on a tissue surging out to sea with a million tons of raw sewage
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2007, 07:19:51 PM »
cajole  :lol :lol :lol
zzz

ferrarimanf355

  • I have the cutest car on The Bore
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #14 on: December 09, 2007, 12:05:09 AM »
90's Nicole Kidman was good looking. She was hot in Batman Forever.
Hey, she was pretty good in Days of Thunder, too.  :-*
500

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2007, 05:13:14 AM »
I just picked up my watch from earlier today (I had to take a nap, I have been somewhat ill), and this movie is just unfuckingbelievably good.

It doesn't have outer space, or the near future, or the Overlook, but ever shot is framed in a really classy, eye-catching, but not whore-y in-your-face kind of way.  It's a great looking movie that's not about showing off.

This is the second time I have watched it recently, and it lends itself to repeat viewings.  It wasn't that obvious on my first recent viewing, but the notorious orgy scene kind of mirrors the party at the beginning.  It seems really obvious--maybe it is--but the way it is pulled off is impressive in its subtlety.

I'm trying to pay attention to audio.  The soundtrack was clearly carefully put together, as opposed to the soundtracks of FMJ and The Shining.  Not that they had bad soundtracks, but they clearly weren't the masterworks that other Kubrick soundtracks are.  Well, The Shining does have some great moments, but overall, it's not a soundtracky movie.

I'd be lying if I didn't say that Kubrick is the reason I am into classical at the moment, and more specifically, Kubrick guided my hand when picking which composers to check out.  Even though it's 2001 and EWS that got me to check out Ligeti, that familiarized me with his more iconic works, his music and how it is used still send chills up my spine.  The fact that Kubrick uses Ligeti's Musica Ricercata II as something of a leitmotif is a neat little contrast to the Monolith-esque role it plays in 2001.  Eerie fuckin' music.  And if you read about it, you learn that it's not just eerie sounding, it's musically and mathematically weird, too.  It's totally legit!

I remember when this movie first came out, and it was a huge deal.  The media was in an uproar because Kubrick just died.  Tom and Nicole.  The controversy over the orgy scene got people thinking of classic Kubrick controversies.  To put it bluntly, people were expecting Kubrick to deliver a classic.  Like most Kubrick movies, critical reception (and public reception) was lukewarm.  But looking backwards, with expectations fully in check, knowing that the older and wiser Kubrick of 1999 was not the ideological hellraiser he was as a youth, he totally did deliver a classic.

Teenagers might not flock to it like ACO.  Scifi geeks and stoners may not cling to it like 2001.  Horror fans won't love it like The Shining.  The whole movie is a little older and a little wiser, and there's nothing wrong with that.  Kubrick moved beyond using genres, and I think the negative critical response had something to do with that.  Kubrick always made iconic looking movies, but in the age of CG and special effects, he chose to tell a much more human story.

The movie can have some fair criticism put against it.  I may have exaggerated a bit, but Tom Cruise doesn't do the movie any favors.  He does the dialogue bits fine, but there's a lot more to the movie than dialogue.  Kubrick, always a fan of exaggerated pregnant pauses in dialogue goes a little overboard on this one, too.  During some of those dialogue scenes, if Kubrick cut the excess silence, he probably could have shaved several minutes off the running time.  No big deal; it does add to the tension and the atmosphere, it's just a lengthy movie.  The movie also has a late game bout of Exposition-O-Rama, too.  I don't want to seem too forgiving of the mistakes of the movie, but this was a thematically odd duck, and Tom Cruise's inability to actually emote made things probably more labyrinthine than they needed to be, so I can see why some would think that a bit of exposition was needed.  But heck, I was hard on the Prestige for this shit, so it's only fair that I'm hard on the master.  Just a little bit.

If you haven't seen the movie lately, give it another chance, with realistic expectations this time.  Kubrick just had people looking to the rafters for a home run when he actually scored a solid double by hitting the ball between your legs.
serge

Ichirou

  • Merry Christmas
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2007, 05:16:39 AM »
Do you think the piano player and the girl who saved Cruise were killed, or do you think the Sydney Pollack character was telling the truth?
PS4

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2007, 05:20:13 AM »
Do you think the piano player and the girl who saved Cruise were killed, or do you think the Sydney Pollack character was telling the truth?

I guess it's impossible to know for sure.  We don't even know the true nature of the group that Tom infiltrated; whether they were just a Saturday Night Rich People Orgy Club or The Illuminati.

I guess we would know for sure if the movie went on for one more day :p

I am tempted to get the novel it is loosely based off of, though it sounds pretty different, even on a thematic level.  As far as plot goes, it doesn't appear to directly map onto the movie either.

I have a pre-shooting script for EWS.  After this watching, I want to dive into it to see if I can't learn anything else.
serge

Ichirou

  • Merry Christmas
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2007, 05:21:41 AM »
Did you also think that Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's character (and maybe their kid) will eventually get killed off by this group?  Because that's what I thought of the ending, that it was the calm before the storm.
PS4

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2007, 05:30:42 AM »
Did you also think that Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman's character (and maybe their kid) will eventually get killed off by this group?  Because that's what I thought of the ending, that it was the calm before the storm.

I think personally, I lean towards the "it was all an act" thing.  I think it goes more with the dreamy feel of the movie.  The secret group was composed mainly of rich socialites. . .fucking.  I don't think they were a dangerous group.  I thnk they were just a group of wealthy folks enjoying their station in life anonymously.  So I lean on the artifice side of things.

The way Sydney Pollack acts is REALLY our only close insight into the group.  We know he is friends with Tom despite being outside of his circle, a fact that somewhat confuses Tom and Nicole.  Why they are friends is never directly addressed, although we can assume there have been other Mandy-esque episodes with drugs or hookers or whatever.  Tom does say his housecalls are why he gets invited to the Christmas party.

For how serious Pollack tries to paint things in the long, expositiony scene, he seems quick to backpedal and slightly change his story when Tom reveals the things he knows.  This makes me think that Pollack's Ziegler is lying on the fly, which makes me think that either the danger is a lie, or the danger is of a completely different nature.  Personally, I think these are just harmless rich people that like to anonymously fuck.

So I think the group is ultimately harmless.  They just don't want this young turk poking his nose in their shit.  Maybe if he continues to do so, there will be trouble, but I do not think Tom is in immediate danger.
serge

Ichirou

  • Merry Christmas
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2007, 05:33:19 AM »
Let me know if the annotated screenplay reveals anything more.  I always leaned more on the opposite side - that this orgy club was composed of wealthy and powerful people in society and that they'd pretty much kill anyone who showed even the slightest risk of fucking up their sweet orgy scene due to the scandals/ignominy it might cause.
PS4

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2007, 05:36:30 AM »
Well, what sort of scandal could Tom Cruise really cause?  He knows the identity of one member, and it is one of his close friends.  Everyone else is anonymous.  Unless there is a nudie police line up.

The rich sex people have done a good job of protecting themselves.  Tom Cruise wasn't in a position to reveal them if he wanted to.  Maybe if he continued investigating he would find something, but as of the end of the movie?  He's harmless.

At worst, maybe one of those rich members of society would ruin Cruise's business or something.
serge

Christopher

  • Justin Timberlake's #1 Fan
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #22 on: December 09, 2007, 05:39:27 AM »
Is she just "sitting" on the toliet in that scene or is she really on the toliet...if so then wow.

Anyway she's not like model hot, but she's woman hot like sort of an old school kind of sexy.

Ichirou

  • Merry Christmas
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #23 on: December 09, 2007, 05:39:41 AM »
I don't expect people who have secret orgy clubs and wear weird venetian masks to think things through that logically.  The fact remains that he might be a risk to them.  I dunno, it all depends on what you think that group is in the first place, I suppose.
PS4

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #24 on: December 09, 2007, 05:56:27 AM »
Is she just "sitting" on the toliet in that scene or is she really on the toliet...if so then wow.

She gets up and wipes!  It's not like you hear any gross noises or anything, but she is clearly supposed to be on the can doing her thang.

Quote
Anyway she's not like model hot, but she's woman hot like sort of an old school kind of sexy.

Nicole Kidman circa turn of the millenium was like the hottest classy chick evar.  And you see her ass and titties soooo much in EWS.
serge

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #25 on: December 09, 2007, 06:03:38 AM »
I don't expect people who have secret orgy clubs and wear weird venetian masks to think things through that logically.  The fact remains that he might be a risk to them.  I dunno, it all depends on what you think that group is in the first place, I suppose.

These are just the rich and privileged and kinky.  The way they get their swerve on, in secret, masked orgies is classy, artsy, and clandestine.  If Tom went public, nobody would get busted; heck nobody would believe him.

I don't think they are a group of murderous power brokers.  We all know secret societies are bullshit.  I mean, they are Power Brokers, but only because they are rich.  They are only in their little secret society because they like to fuck. They were just trying to put the scarin' on Tom.  Like I said, maybe if the scarin' doesn't take, his business or life will be ruined, but murder?  Well, maybe.  But the point stands, that is worst case scenario, and they were far from that.
serge

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2007, 03:37:14 AM »
I did some watching and skipping around.  Rewatching some bits and comparing them to other parts of the movie.  I've rewatched the masked ball several times, and here is the sequence of events AS THEY HAPPEN IN THE MOVIE, followed by my current opinion on the situation.  I will let you know when I switch from Objective (it happened definitely in the movie) to Subjective (my interpretation of events; what they mean in the big picture).

The Masked Ball (just the facts)

1. Tom Cruise arrives at compound. He leaves his "stuff" in the taxi (I am assuming stuff like his man purse, although it is never shown on camera.  He mentions it to the driver).  He gives the password at the gate and enters the house.

2. In the house, he gives the password again when prompted, hands over his coat to the doormen, and puts on his mask.  Note that he does not put the mask on until he is in the house, and his face has been seen by the masked doormen.

3. During the "benediction" scene, two figures on the balcony look at, and acknowledge Tom Cruise.  The one with the slanted jaw, mouthless mask is Sydney Pollack.  Note that nods are exchanged between Pollack and Cruise, with Pollack initiating.

4.  Following the "benediction," the girl with the headdress takes Tom Cruise.  This is Mandy, the hooker from Sydney Pollack's office that ODed on speedballs at the beginning of the movie, who was saved by Tom Cruise.

5.  Mandy issues a warning to Tom Cruise, telling him to leave.  After giving him the warning, they are interrupted by a man in a flesh-colored mask.  He takes Mandy upstairs.

6. Tom Cruise walks around the mansion and sees a lot of freaky deaky sex.

7.  After wandering through a few rooms, Sydney Pollack and a masked woman are seen watching Tom Cruise from a slight distance.  Note that it is not the woman that was with Pollack earlier on the balcony.  Pollack says something to the woman, and then he leaves the room.

8. I forget what 8 was for.

9.  The masked woman approaches Tom Cruise, and asks if he would like to go somewhere more private (an odd request, what with all the public freaky sex). Before he can leave, Headdress Woman/Mandy returns, quickly into the room, and takes Tom Cruise away.  She says she will bring him right back.

10.  Mandy again warns Tom Cruise.  During the warning, a man with a gold mask (as worn by the doormen, indicating he was an usher of sorts) approaches Tom Cruise and tells him his taxi driver, waiting outside, needs to speak to him.  The doormen then takes Cruise to the red-robed master, or whatever.

11.  Yada Yada, we see Sydney in the crowd, not in a prominent place, along with the woman that asked Tom to go somewhere private.  The master does his thing, and then Mandy shows up on the balcony, and does her thing, apparently exchanging herself so that Cruise can be saved.

12.  After her offer is taken, and Cruise is given his warning not to meddle by the master, the next scene is in Cruise's apartment.  We do not see his exit, not the taxi ride home.

Details (these are pretty much objective)

-Cruise's walk through the mansion is reminiscent of his walk through the party.  The way that it is filmed and even in the way the mansion is decorated.

-When Mandy takes Cruise away from Sydney's woman, she says that she will bring him right back when she is done.  In the beginning of the movie, when the usher takes Cruise away from his model babes at Sydney's party, Cruise remarks that he will be right back.  In both cases, he does not return.  In both cases, Cruise was being taken from temptations he was considering.

-When Cruise is being confronted by the master, in the same room as the benediction, the camera goes the opposite direction as it did during the benediction when it is circling the action.  I just thought that was a nice detail.

-At Pollack's party, Cruise warns Mandy.  At the masked ball, Mandy warns Cruise.

-The only identifiable people in the masked ball are
     1. Tom Cruise (duh)
     2. Sydney Pollack - Mask with slanted jaw.  Identifiable by his eyes.
     3. Mandy - Girl in headdress. Identifiable by her, well, large and distinctive titties that you see earlier in the movie when she is ODed and naked.

-There are several interesting side details about the party.  Between all the scenes that Cruise views when walking through the mansion, there appears to be some sort of hierarchy amongst the party-goers.  There are women that are clothed, women in thongs (otherwise naked), and completely naked women.  Men are either clothed or naked.  Seeing the groupings, there appear to be some "rules" that can be assembled, but I am not watching the masked ball scene another 4 times to figure things out!

My opinions (here be the subjective shit)

I stand by my original interpretation, and maybe I even think that more of the party was a ruse than just Mandy's "sacrifice." 

Look at it this way:  Cruise's identity was compromised before he even entered the party.  His shit was in the taxi (the only taxi there, waiting conspicuously outside the gate--it is later confirmed he had the only taxi there), the people at the gate saw his face, and the doormen in the house saw his face.  If these parties are regular things, it stands to reason that the same doormen and guards are used (heck, they use the same blind-folded PIANO PLAYER), and that either they 1) know the regular attendees, or 2) maybe expect different mask-wearing behavour (for example, for something as anonymous as this, I'd expect the face to be covered before even entering the mansion grounds).  No matter which of those two was the expected behaviour, Cruise had already given himself away, and there could have been evidence to his identity amongst his "stuff" in the cab.

And even if there was no evidence with his stuff, Pollack later on confirms (during the big reveal scene later in the movie) that the doormen found a receipt from the costume store with Cruise's name on it.

Cruise spends quite a bit of time staring at the "benediction," giving plenty of time for his identity to propagate among whispers and the like.  It is not until late in the benediction that Pollack looks and nods at Cruise.  The woman with Pollack then also turns to look at Cruise, but she is unidentified.  I believe she was there so they could have the creepy visual effect of Pollack and her turning simultaneously to look at Cruise with their freaky masks.

After Mandy warns Cruise for the first time, the man with the flesh-y mask takes her upstairs.  Nobody else is going upstairs at this time, and the top of the staircase appears dark, making it, you know, not seem like a party area.  I think at this point, the flesh-y man took her upstairs, away, to some clandestine location where the "play" was set up, for when Cruise is confronted at the end of the ball.  To back this up, when Mandy returns to get Cruise from Pollack's woman, she seems to do so with a purpose.  She shows up again, pulls Cruise into the hallway, and that is where the usher shows up to lead Cruise away.  Mandy took him to that hallway, and the usher was there to pick him up.  In short, it was a setup.  After that, the whole little confrontation with Mandy's sacrifice, that was just a play, set up in advance to, as Pollack later says, scare the shit out of Cruise.

This leaves us with a few questions.  What about the woman that Pollack says something to, that then approaches Cruise and asks for privacy?  That was Sydney Pollack's way of trying to help Cruise.  His plan just never had time to work its magic, since Mandy interrupted it.  I expect that "privacy" to Sydney's girl meant "taking him the fuck away from the party."

Another question is how Mandy knew it was Cruise under the mask.  She was taking part in the benediction, wrapped up in the ceremony, so it is unlikely that she heard whispers about the infiltration.  The only explanation for this is that Cruise's identity was compromised at the front gate, not the door, since that would have given the group time to plan before the benediction even started, before Cruise entered the house.  Maybe they didn't know who he was until later, maybe when they had the coat, but when Mandy first approached him, it was a known, definite fact that he did not belong there.

But why then, did Mandy warn him that first time?  Up until now, we assumed that her warning was a "thank you" for saving her life from an OD.  Well, it turns out that's WRONG.  She was warning him because it was a setup from the beginning, and that was what she was told to do.  To show that she was not warning Cruise as a "thank you," look at it this way:  she died of a drug overdose after the masked ball.  A likely coincidence, but this is a fact that comes from Pollack, Cruise's friend.  He says it was just a coincidence, and I mean, we do know she was a junkie hooker. 

So that's that, Ichirou, the little play, all of Mandy's behaviour at the masked ball, that was all a ruse.  Mandy was never trying to help Cruise there, not for a minute.  She probably didn't even know that Cruise was the person that had earlier saved her life.  We know she was not good with drugs (she ODed once before during/after a party, why not a second time), and as a hooker, we know her loyalty can be bought.  We also know that Pollack was loyal to Cruise.  He invited him to Christmas parties that were apparently several levels above Cruise's caste, and he offered to buy him a case of 25 year old scotch, which would be super expensive (also note that he offers to buy the scotch during the big exposition scene.  I doubt he would buy a fuckton of very very expensive scotch for someone whose days were numbered).

So that's that.  I've dotted my 'i's and crossed my 't's; that's what happened, and Cruise was in no danger, he was just being freaked out.

I win at Kubrick movies!

And FUCK, I forgot Ichirou was banned :(  FUCK MODS, thanks for wasting my text!  He'd better be back.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 05:49:29 AM by TVC 15 »
serge

Smooth Groove

  • Both teams played hard, my man
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2007, 03:58:50 AM »
Ichi is banned?  Wtf happened? 

TVC, I'll read that long ass post if you give me some Nicole nudies in HD.  Get that HD-DVD asap.

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2007, 04:01:42 AM »
Don't bother to read it if you aren't familiar with the movie.  I glossed over some important details (namely, the content of Sydney Pollack's exposition at the end, which I am assuming was at least mostly true) that you probably won't recall if you haven't watched the movie lately.
serge

hyp

  • Casual Gamer™
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2007, 09:22:33 PM »
i absolutely love this movie.  i think tom cruise gets bagged on just because he's tom cruise.  for the most part, i thought his performance was excellent -- kubrick tends to challenge actors to their breaking point and it was pretty obvious that both kidman and cruise were on another level by the intensity of their acting.  i'm not surprised tvc would turn straight for kidman either after watching eyes wide shut.  she was smoking fucking hot in every scene. 
pyh

Gay Boy

  • McAmnesty
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #30 on: December 11, 2007, 09:33:58 PM »
I still say Nicole looked better in batman than eyes


hib

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #31 on: December 11, 2007, 10:53:13 PM »
i absolutely love this movie.  i think tom cruise gets bagged on just because he's tom cruise.  for the most part, i thought his performance was excellent -- kubrick tends to challenge actors to their breaking point and it was pretty obvious that both kidman and cruise were on another level by the intensity of their acting.  i'm not surprised tvc would turn straight for kidman either after watching eyes wide shut.  she was smoking fucking hot in every scene. 


I've watched the movie a number of times over the past few weeks (probably about 4 if you count my pieced together viewings over the past 2 days), and I feel a bit different about Cruise's performance every time I watch it.  Let me try to put some of these feelings into words.

-I think Cruise delivers his dialogue very well.  This leves a good first impression since the movie is kind of top-loaded with important dialogue.

-I think his physical acting is bad in comparison to the leads of previous Kubrick movies.  In the Shining and ACO, the respective leads can sell moods and emotions with their faces, without saying a word.  Shelley Duvall could say an entire frickin paragraph with her face in The Shining. Cruise, well, he doesn't come from a school of acting that emphasizes things like realistic, meaningful facial reactions.  When he tries to do a facial reaction, to say something with his face, it comes out either exaggerated, or even worse, he mugs, with that terrible Tom Cruise smirk.  Not as bad, but still bad, are his bodily physical reactions, which are similarly exaggerated and fakey.

To put it bluntly, the man does not move naturally.  In contrast, watch the "benediction" portion of the orgy scene, and see how FLUIDLY everyone moves, even the butt naked chicks.  Every movement of their bodies is so amazingly fluid and effective, conveying the feeling that every god damned arm movement, every head turn, in that scene, was brilliantly calculated--animated by a higher power.  Cruise does not convey this feeling in any of his physical acting.

-I have to nick Kubrick for the direction of the acting.  I have said before that the pausing is too much, but that's not the whole problem.  Cruise, Pollack, and Kidman, all very experienced actors, all give a stiff or wooden dialogue performance at one point or another during the movie.  Since these are 3 generally high thought of actors, all the blame in the acting cannot lie at their feet; there must have been an issue with the direction, or something.  Do not get me wrong, the acting is fine most of the time.  As a matter of fact, I think each of the 3 really only has one problematic scene, but that's enough to make it an issue.

serge

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #32 on: December 11, 2007, 10:56:03 PM »
yeah, tom's performance was kinda weak, just for the reasons you said. he always delivers dialogue well, but he's like a wooden indian when it comes to ancillary body movement.

i rewatched glengarry glenross this morning (thanks to cajole's clip) and FUCK jack lemmon and al pacino are dynamite physical actors. even without dialogue, you can FEEL the shift in tension and the conversational exchanges just by watching their body reactions.
duc

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #33 on: December 11, 2007, 11:01:35 PM »
George C. Scott's performance in Dr. Strangelove kills me from a physical perspective.  It's so ludicrous and over the top, from his tripping and running around to his facial movements, but he sells it so fucking well.  A lesser actor and it would have seemed like shitty slapstick or something, but he made you buy it.
serge

Gay Boy

  • McAmnesty
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #34 on: December 11, 2007, 11:32:14 PM »
When I was younger I thought George C Scott's character was yet another Peter Sellers role.
hib

hyp

  • Casual Gamer™
  • Senior Member
Re: I am watching Eyes Wide Shut again
« Reply #35 on: December 12, 2007, 02:06:37 PM »
To put it bluntly, the man does not move naturally.  In contrast, watch the "benediction" portion of the orgy scene, and see how FLUIDLY everyone moves, even the butt naked chicks.  Every movement of their bodies is so amazingly fluid and effective, conveying the feeling that every god damned arm movement, every head turn, in that scene, was brilliantly calculated--animated by a higher power.  Cruise does not convey this feeling in any of his physical acting.

 :lol  :lol

-I have to nick Kubrick for the direction of the acting.  I have said before that the pausing is too much, but that's not the whole problem.  Cruise, Pollack, and Kidman, all very experienced actors, all give a stiff or wooden dialogue performance at one point or another during the movie.  Since these are 3 generally high thought of actors, all the blame in the acting cannot lie at their feet; there must have been an issue with the direction, or something.  Do not get me wrong, the acting is fine most of the time.  As a matter of fact, I think each of the 3 really only has one problematic scene, but that's enough to make it an issue.

the pausing didn't bug me that much.  for me it adds that air of uncomfortable silence that fits well with the vibe of the movie.  i'm assuming it was left in there intentionally and could have easily been remedied with a bit of editing.  it'd be interesting to know why he chose the takes he did, as there were probably a vast amount to choose from (isn't he like a 20+ take kind of director?).  nonetheless i value what he created  and i'm pretty sure most of his directorial choices were intentional, even some of the stiff acting you mention.  if the point was to make the viewer internalize much of the awkwardness and tension of every situation, then i'd say the job was exceptional. 

my love for this movie is very personal though.  i was in a similar situation as the main character some years back so many of the feelings and questions it evokes feel very real to me.
pyh