Eyes Wide Shut

From the director behind influential masterpieces like The Killing, Paths of Glory, Spartacus, Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining & Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut marks the final entry in the decades-spanning, unprecedented & extraordinary filmmaking career of Stanley Kubrick. And just like all of his reappraised works, is a classic that unveils more of its intricate layers on multiple viewings.

Set in New York City, Eyes Wide Shut tells the story of Dr. William "Bill" Harford whose life spirals out of control when his wife tells him about an erotic fantasy she had about another man which shatters his faith in her. Unable to get the image of his wife & the other man out of his head, he embarks on a night-long adventure during which he comes extremely close to cheating on his wife & also infiltrates a quasi-religious sexual ritual at a country mansion after learning about it from a friend.

Co-written, produced & directed by Stanley Kubrick, Eyes Wide Shut is a film about sexual desires that's jam-packed with symbolism & metaphorical elements. The entire film exhibits a sexually charged atmosphere and every single character inhabiting it has nothing but sex on his or her mind. Kubrick's direction makes efficient use of all his trademarks and just like before, he manages to push forward the existing boundaries of the medium while adding a few innovative tricks into the filmmaking manual in the process.

The screenplay smears the plot with multitudes of themes & insinuations, the story unfolds in a slow, methodical manner, the leading characters have an in-depth complexity which is wonderfully illustrated by the master storyteller, each sequence is meticulously detailed & technically refined, and it has a lot to say about sex, infidelity, physical relations, desires & fantasies. However, dialogue isn't one of its strengths for every time anyone says anything, the other character repeats the same as a question which becomes annoying after a while.

The technical aspects always score very high marks in Kubrick films and Eyes Wide Shut is no exception. The set pieces are gorgeously rendered, extensively detailed & beautifully lit. Cinematography encapsulates the entire picture with a bizarre, dream-like ambiance which goes on to further amplify the overall experience while also intensifying its erotic attributes. The use of colours is noteworthy while lighting here is a work of perfection. Its 159 minutes of runtime & deliberately slow pace may feel like a challenging ordeal but it never becomes an issue once the drama sets in.

The incorporation of classical songs to compliment the unfolding drama continues in Eyes Wide Shut and all the musical arrangements are wisely chosen & carefully infused into the storyline. Coming to the performances, the cast comprises of Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman, Sydney Pollack, Marie Richardson & Todd Field. Even though both Cruise & Kidman put in commendable effort into their respective roles of Mr. & Mrs. Harford, it's actually their on- spot chemistry that makes them click so well, and while there are no definite stand-outs, the contribution by its entire cast only works in the film's favour.

On an overall scale, Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut may not be as pathbreaking as most of his masterpieces but it's nonetheless a deeply fascinating meditation on sexual relations and despite its cynical tone, manages to be an erotic, enthralling & engaging thriller. While the plot is heavy & explicit in sexual content, approaching it as a sex-romp cinema won't do enough justice for Kubrick digs much deeper into the primordial aspects of human nature to put up an exquisite looking tale that's aesthetic, artistic & unlike anything before or since. It may not be Kubrick's greatest, but it's still a genre masterpiece. Thoroughly recommended. Multiple viewings advised.

I remember when Kubrick passed away. I read it in the morning newspaper, and was struck with deep sadness I couldn't explain. Mind you, I was not even 12 years old at the time and had barely seen any of his films.

So I went to see "Eyes Wide Shut" (1999) at the cinema. I credit it, along with Terrence Malick's "The Thin Red Line" (1998), as an experience that ignited my interest in film, since they were both films like I had never seen before. Sure, there's that one reason why a young lad might be interested in this, but I was so struck by its atmosphere and narrative flow that I had to read Schnitzler's "Traumnovelle". And how disappointed I was in how unalike they were. The film was in a world of its own that had a sense of time that was its own, a sense of colour that was its own, a sense of light that was its own. Every movement was languid, every word deliberate.

I never really thought about the connection between this and Malick's film until now, but really, they both move in the realm of dreams and memories and projected, subjective realities – between something that did happen (to someone) and something that might have happened. There's ellipsis, ambiguity, metaphor. Both work their magic in visual terms. I'm soaked in that light from the ball even by recalling the images in my mind as I'm writing this.

Fidelio – enter.

Eyes Wide Shut is a movie like Casablanca or The Wizard of Oz (which is subtly referenced in the film) in that the more times you view it, the more you get out of it. (I imagine at some point you would wring out all the meaning, but that would take scores of viewings.) One infamous scene is so over-the-top it is easy to miss all the subtle references in the film, which necessitates multiple viewings. Fair warning--the more times you watch it, the more you go down the rabbit hole Kubrick digs (a reference to Alice in Wonderland, also evoked in Eyes Wide Shut).

Eyes Wide Shut was inspired by an Austrian novella called "Traumnovelle." The film is indeed dreamlike. Kubrick recreated Greenwich Village on a sound stage in London, which, like a dream, is slightly off from the real thing and contains no superfluous elements. This evokes the perfect atmosphere for the movie as we accompany Dr. Bill Harford (Tom Cruise) on his all-night, humiliating, surreal odyssey.

To me, the title of the movie, Eyes Wide Shut, implies willful naivete, particularly Dr. Bill's, and by extension the viewers', which seems to be (one of) the theme(s) Kubrick intends to highlight. Even the movie's poster seems to imply this: a mirror image of Nicole Kidman's character (Alice, as in Through the Looking Glass), looking right through the mirror in what appears to be an Illuminati image, while Dr. Bill has his eyes closed. In fact, all the shots of Alice looking in the mirror started to creep me out on subsequent viewings.

The movie then indulges in conspiracy-theory dog whistles to anyone whose eyes aren't wide shut. The Harfords are a WASPy family living in a luxurious apartment in Central Part West, which may be out of reach for a doctor (basically, a highly paid member of the working class) whose wife doesn't work. Furthermore, Dr. Bill Harford (whose name sounds like "Dollar Bill Harrison Ford") throws around money like it's no object. Which raises the question of how he really makes his money--apparently by making house calls to the ridiculously wealthy who can afford to avoid hospital waiting rooms. Dr. Bill seems to aspire to rub shoulders with these people, but he is spectacularly naive to the realities of the world he is tangentially involved in and his actual role in it. It seems to me the reason he was invited to the Victor's (as in an economic "victor's") luxurious party at the beginning is because it is a house-call in disguise in case of something like the OD that indeed occurs at one point. I determined this by reading between the lines when the two models hit on him, and he seems oblivious to their allusions of taking him "to where the rainbow ends" (more on that below) and when he is taken away at Victor's call, they exchange looks that seem to say they had mistaken him for one of the elites, not a working-class schlub.

FULL-ON CONSPIRACY THEORIES BELOW.

If Dr. Bill's eyes are wide shut, then Alice's are partly open. This is implied in the very first dialogue exchange in the movie, when Alice knows exactly where Dr. Bill had left his wallet, while he had forgotten, and he doesn't remember the name of the babysitter, which was mentioned like 30 seconds earlier. This comes to the fore when he simply can't imagine Alice being unfaithful to him because women don't think like men, and she falls to the floor laughing and divulges a depressing sexual fantasy. Alice looks in the mirror a lot, most memorably when she stares in the mirror as Dr. Bill begins kissing her. Is Kubrick implying Alice is a former sex slave who is going "through the looking glass"--the mental space sex slaves go to mentally block their abuse? Is that why Alice is constantly grooming their daughter, Helena? Is she subconsciously grooming her daughter for a similar fate? Is that why in the final scene, when Alice and Dr. Bill are wrapped up in their conversation at the toy store, Helena can be seen running away in the direction of two men in the background, who had also been in the background at Victor's party? Among the strange toys at said toy store are stuffed tigers and a game called "Magic Circle"--resembling the imagery at the secret society's ritual/party Dr. Bill crashed and apparently a prop created for the movie. The stuffed tigers are identical to one on Domino's bed, a streetwalker Dr. Bill meets in Greenwich Village. Is Kubrick implying Domino is a sex slave, having undergone "Beta Kitten" programming, and the juxtaposition of the same toy with Helena in a toy store implying the girl's fate as well as the creepy conditioning the elites are subjecting the masses to?

Then there are the references to "rainbows," as in "Somewhere Over the Rainbow," another reference to sex slave conditioning, similar to "through the looking glass." The two models at Victor's party offer to take Dr. Bill "to where the rainbow ends"--where they go mentally when they're having sex. Then there is the costume shop "Rainbow" where Dr. Bill obtains the cloak for the secret society's party and where the proprietor's daughter prostitutes herself. The girl runs from her enraged father, gets behind Dr. Bill for protection, then whispers something inaudible into his ear. The version of the movie I own has Japanese subtitles that translate what she said: She tells him which cloak to choose. Does she infer where he is going with that cloak and does she have knowledge of what goes on there? That would seem to connect her with the rainbow image in the store's name.

Finally, I question how accurate Kubrick's depiction of the elite's secret society is. It seems to be a hodgepodge of hellfire club, Bohemian Grove, Illuminati/Freemason, O.T.O. imagery. Are there elite cadres involved in these types of ritual debauchery? I'd guess Kubrick was close enough to these people he probably saw a lot and knew enough to guess at the rest (such as the sort of parties the Rothschilds threw--the exterior of the house of the party was one of the Rothschilds' residences). There are disturbing parallels with Eyes Wide Shut in the Jeffrey Epstein case and his "suicide." I'm guessing it is true in broad strokes. I think Kubrick was telling us society's elites engage in depravities that would frighten and disgust the masses if we knew about them, and therefore we shouldn't be so naive to grant the economic victors any moral authority.

I managed to swallow my expectations before the film, setting myself to judge it on its own without judging it as a Kubrick film. No need, no need! This film IS a Kubrick film, without any doubt, and as all Kubrick films are it was absolutely stunning. Absolutely. Visually it is brilliant, though I should warn that this isn't quite as visual a film as most other Kubrick works. A lot of the film focuses on the characters, on human interaction, something rather new to this director. Of course, all the Kubrick trademarks are there, cold analytical gazes, sharp introspection. Tom Cruise seems like Jack Nicholson in 'The Shining' and even Malcolm MacDowell in 'A Clockwork Orange' at times, a rather striking fact considering that this is Tom Cruise. The performances were excellent all around, even from places not expected. Again, this is typical for Kubrick. He wasn't much of a people director, but he still knew how to direct people.

Almost every moment of this film was flawless, perfect and pristine. The dialog is predictable, but in some solemn and holy fateful sort of way, as though the words and the moments are matched so essentially that nothing else could possibly fit. Beyond that the sounds and images all fit together beautifully, creating an almost unblemished whole. The only part that didn't seem right was the sequence that had been digitally altered. While the alterations were not nearly so obtrusive as I had feared (not knowing about them one probably wouldn't notice them) they do grow a bit noticeable for redundancy (you see a lot more backs than you'd expect, and always in the same places). Unfortunately these came right in the middle of one of the most visually amazing pieces of the film (one of the most amazing pieces of cinema as a whole, in my opinion), a very unwelcome distraction.

Is this movie about sex? Yes, it is, but more importantly it is about people. The sex part is simply a product thereof. This is one of the most disturbingly honest portraits of human behavior and motivations ever made. The most honest I've ever seen, at least. To be put simply: It is about sex because people are about sex.

I'm still trying to sort through this movie. It's been a good twelve hours since I saw it, and I can still feel it, hard and definite, rotating in my stomach. The film itself seems mostly void of opinion (not entirely, but mostly), serving more as a general statement and commentary than any specific moral warning, but the questions it inspires are very strong indeed. The film, being objective, provides no answers, no justification for humanity. There is no redemption, either, none whatsoever. The film's final word sums it (it being the film and humanity) up pretty well, for better or for worse. I guess that depends on you.

A common thread in Kubrick's films since 2001 has been the contemplation and examination of human intentions, the essence of human behavior. Motivations. He's shown us violence and madness and everything else, all tracking the path back to the dawn of man. I think he finally figured it out with this film, however anticlimactic the discovery might have been. At least he did finally figure it out. That's something.

I am one of many. I never had the privilege to know Stanley Kubrick. I don't even know that privilege is the right word. I do know his films, though, and while I am in no position to say that I will miss him as a person, I can say, without doubt or hesitation, that I will miss him as a filmmaker.

Initially was at a loss for words with this one. I can't necessarily explain the feelings this film brings out, but I can say they feel real personal and there's just something so off yet so painfully real about (most of) this movie and it is just really undervalued in Kubrick's filmography, I think. Besides being one of my favorite looking movies ever, the midpoint turn is one of the scariest heading down rabbit hole reveals I've really encountered in a film and it just disturbed me for the entire time (you know the point) and after as it continued provocatively building to the disturbing and bizarrely cathartic ending, which haunts me as the final scene in a Kubrick film. It's perfect in it's imperfectness and I get an insane level of both joy and sadness watching this movie.