uolevivittu

Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut has been hailed by some as a masterpiece of eroticism and psychological depth. In reality, it's a pretentious, sluggish mess masquerading as profound art. The film spends nearly three agonizing hours saying very little while being maddeningly convinced of its own importance.

The real mystery of Eyes Wide Shut isn't in the film itself-it's why so many critics and self-proclaimed intellectuals bend over backward to defend it. Let's be honest: if this weren't a Stanley Kubrick film, it would've been laughed out of the theater for being a pretentious, bloated mess. But slap the Kubrick name on it, and suddenly critics are too terrified to call it out, lest they be ostracized from the critic community. Meanwhile, wannabe-intellectuals at parties trip over themselves to praise its "subtext" and "layers," hoping no one notices they fell asleep halfway through. It's less a masterpiece and more a litmus test for how far people will go to sound smart about absolutely nothing.

Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, despite their undeniable star power, sleepwalk through roles that feel more like hollow archetypes than actual people. Cruise's Dr. Bill Harford is a charisma-free cipher, stumbling through a bizarre odyssey with all the emotional depth of a plank of wood. Kidman fares slightly better, which isn't a high bar to beat.

The much-discussed orgy scenes, which were touted as scandalous and groundbreaking, are shockingly dull. Kubrick's trademark meticulousness is evident, but in service of what? A plot that feels like a long-winded setup for a lukewarm payoff.

Visually, the film is undoubtedly striking, with its dreamlike lighting and painstaking composition. But beautiful cinematography can't mask the lack of substance at the film's core. The dialogue is stilted, the pacing glacial, and the themes of desire, jealousy, and trust are explored in the most surface-level, redundant way imaginable.

Ultimately, Eyes Wide Shut is a case study in directorial hubris. Kubrick's reputation as a genius allowed him to craft a film that feels more like a self-indulgent experiment than a coherent piece of storytelling. It's less an exploration of eroticism and the human condition, and more an exercise in tedium that leaves viewers baffled, bored, and yearning for an editor with the guts to cut it down to size.

Avoid at all costs, and save yourself 2 hours 39 minutes.

Terminator 1-2 and Aliens are among my Top 10 favourite movies. T2 and Aliens are probably the two best sequels ever made.

The blue people aren't really working for me. Yes the graphics are amazing. But it's not enough. I just don't care enough or feel for these blue characters enough. The world is too weird to care about. Everything feels like an excuse to show another groundbreaking CGI effect. I don't care about this world or it's lore.

It's sad that Cameron became obsessed with simplistic morality tale about "Save the planet". Yes I understand it's preaching about important things, like stopping climate change, protecting the diversity of species, forests and all that. But it's just not very intelligent cinema. One movie made the point already.

Actually I didn't even finish this, the blue people started to get on my nerves around mid-way. Around the time they started to learn to swim. I simply didn't care about their fates. And yes I care about our planet.