I think Gene would have liked it. Probably would have had a few issues with it but Tom and Nicole were excellent. The cinematography was mesmerizing. One of the reviewers here was exactly right. This movie is much more appreciated on the second and third viewings.
@@September2004#2, actually. Roger's review is so infamous, one of Tony DiNozzo's bucket-list items was to ask Roger about it. I say _Full Metal Jacket_ is a masterpiece 🙌🏻
This is wonderful to watch now so many years later. We all needed time to let that movie age and grow. I remember when it first came out, no one liked it and the fame of Tom and Nicole over shadowed it. I love this movie.
01. Day Of The Fight (1951) short 02. Flying Padre (1951) short 03. The Seafarers (1953) short 04. Fear And Desire (1953) 05. Killer's Kiss (1955) 06. The Killing (1956) 07. Paths Of Glory (1957) 08. Spartacus (1960) 09. Lolita (1962) 10. Dr. Strangelove (1964) 11. 2001 A Space Odyssey (1968) 12. A Clockwork Orange (1971) 13. Barry Lyndon (1975) 14. The Shining (1980) 15. Full Metal Jacket (1987) 16. Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
@@kevinkeels6845 James Cameron has the best film resume of all time, never made a flop, and virtually every film he’s made is a landmark in cinema. Cameron > Kubrick any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
These guys are not real movie critics...why are they wearing suits and not t-shirts with superhero logos? Also, no Funko pops, no Hot Toys, no Marvel props displayed randomly, no Star Wars posters in the background 🤔🤔🤔 #cinemaisdead
There are practically no more real critics worth their salt. My University offered a Masters in criticism. Most people hired these days are 17 year old kids with no knowledge whatsoever.
@@threeminuteshateI had an obsession with the late 90s, early 2000s this past winter. WWF Raw is War, woodstock 99, Jack-as$... Something about that era had me thinking about it for weeks straight, like intrusive thoughts. I was only 9 years old in 1999 but it just seemed like a simpler time
I had the impression here that Ebert and the production company were auditioning a replacement for poor Gene Siskel. Do you think these other 4 wouldn't be thinking that? "Oh boy, if I get a job with Roger Ebert, I'm set for life! This is my big chance!" My favorite, by the way, is "A Clockwork Orange."
That was fun. For me 2001 was a life changing experience. The epic scope and visual beauty just amazes me. Aesthetics always plays an important role in all these films. All of them were events at the theater. Art Kubrick style at the cinema. I have quibbles here and there but vastly more moments of real cinema joy. I wish Cruise had taken off his clothes as directed.... I never saw the fuzzed scenes they talk about. I guess the version I saw was just edited out.
cant name my favorite. he made his movies his way yes but spartacus is a film he directed, in his own words, for someone else. while not a true kubrick movie, it is a great achievement. watch the docu about the failure to complete hollywoods first epic film "i claudius". i think he made spartacus as a kind of favor for hollywood and to prove that, because he was such a talented leader, a seemingly jinxed project that risked falling into the footsteps of failure managed to instead sprout wings.
My favorite part of EWS is the scene when he argues with his wife. He does a WTF-is-wrong-with-you so well it just cracks me up. I'd love to see him haranguing people on set when he makes movies. I wonder if he was channeling his impatience with Stanley in his performance. Hmmm..
Eyes Wide Shut us one of Kubrick's best movies . I bought the unrated version of the movie on DVD and couldn't believe why it originally got the NC-17 rating . As it was pointed out in the documentary , This Film Is Not Yet Rated , the unrated version has some pelvic thrusting from the male performers in the secret sex meeting . It was literally about maybe 5 seconds of film footage .
His independent freedom would have meant zero, if there wasn’t commercial value in his name. In the end, that’s what matters the most, to get a film any traction. You still have to be able to make the studio money whether through the prestige route, or commercial.
Quite so. Oliver Stone always underlined the emphatically Money-Driven side of Hollywood, notably in his fascinating Q & A at the Oxford Union in 2016 (on You Tube, 61 mins)
It's true, for all of his reputation and the high art of his films - the vast majority made money for the studios. Even "Barry Lyndon" and "The Shining", which are commonly thought of as "disappointments", theatrically, really weren't. Even "Barry Lyndon" made 3 times its budget, theatrically. Same for "The Shining" - both films were considered "flops", but only because they didn't hit what they were EXPECTED to hit - but they still made money for the studios. In fact, the only film that didn't do well at the box office was "Paths of Glory" and even that earned back its budget, plus some. So for all of his reputation as a time-consuming filmmaker - his budgets never got out of control and he always made them money, even if it wasn't "Star Wars"-level money. He knew how to entertain an audience while making masterpieces for adults at the same time. That's extremely rare. He never made anything that was a "blockbuster" but when you look at the *budgets* he had, they were often low - and his box office, 9 times out of 10, was usually about 3 times his budget. He was able to keep doing what he did because he never asked the studio for too much money and they always knew they'd get it back.
At what point did the mask disappear? Tom takes it off, and is holding on to it. So how did those creeps get a hold of it? How did it end up in their hands?
I've wondered for years why Kubrick paired Shelley Duvall with Jack Nicholson that is, why such an actress playing a dull character against a dynamic actor playing a complicated character. Made me think about Kier Dullea's dull astronaut vs the star of 2001, HAL. It wasn't until I saw Eyes Wide Shut that I was certain something was going on. But why did Kubrick do that? Why did he purposely use low energy actors (one could say second rate) juxtaposed with a talented actor?
8:46 - "...to a secret, private orgy..." I've always found it strange that critics called it an "orgy." It sure doesn't look as if anyone is having fun. That isn't an orgy; it's a ritual, and something seems to have drawn the good doctor into it. From the moment he leaves his apartment, the laws of probability go crazy on his ass. Every encounter he has is sexually-charged. There's no less a supernatural element to Eyes Wide Shut than there is to The Shining.
What do you think it wouldve been like if Kubrick got to work with Leonardo DiCaprio? I think Kubrick wouldve had very little patience with Leo's more bratty personality tropes. But I think the end result wouldve been really interesting. I mean, I never thought he would work with Tom Cruise and look how that turned out
I need to get this on DVD 📀, the film that is. Honourable mention to Sydney Pollack who is riveting in the movie. The only weakness is Nicole Kidman who isn’t up to scratch for a film of this calibre
I never saw this movie and after hearing from these critics how Tom Cruise (is that his real name?) was a shallow participant, It makes me speculate that Scientology David Miskovich had a role whose power exceeded Kubrick's. And I ran across this: The brilliant director Stanley Kubrick died of a heart attack on 9 March 1999 at his English estate near Hertfordshire, according to the official version. Kubrick's death is still a mystery plaguing major European tabloids. The director died four days after the end of the editing period of his latest and most enigmatic film Eyes Wide Shut, starring then-weds Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. The film follows the sexually charged adventures of Dr. Bill Harford, who is shocked when his wife, Alice, reveals that she had contemplated having an affair a year earlier. It was Kidman in July 2002's interview with the American newspaper National Enquirer who transparently hinted that Kubrick passed away not by choice. According to the actress, the director called her two hours before the official time of his sudden death. He asked her not to come to Hertfordshire where, as he put it, "we will all be poisoned so fast that we do not have time to even sneeze." After Kidman's revelations in the European press, there was speculation that Kubrick could have been poisoned by the secret societies, which include members of the Western economic, political and cultural elite. Or the Scientologists? Cruise filed for divorce from Kidman in 2001 at the urging or command of the society. Kidman was pregnant at the time and miscarried at the news In Eyes Wide Shut, the centerpiece of the film is a colossal ritual at a fashionable estate near New York City. Kubrick wanted to show that the secret societies rule the Western world today. National Association of Theater Owners in the US withheld permission to distribute the picture for almost four months. Since Kubrick was no longer alive, the orgy scene was edited out. The public was fooled by information that the argument was over the openness of the erotic scenes. So what do we think about that?
I e seen both versions and the difference can be so stupidly subtle y your point of view . It was just a couple shots that added some standing people to obstruct natural thrusting of the men in the simulated sex scenes . I think the bad reviews were propaganda to protect the evil corporate rulers and their evil wrongdoing . I actually love the movie and NOT because of the sexual content . I love watching his camera work .
Completely untrue clap trap. I don’t know where you got that stuff from but the version Kubrick sent to the studio was the version your seeing now. There was no editing.
@@michaelsims1160 in the documentary This Film is Not Rated , they showed 2 different clips of the orgy scene . One clip shows the pelvic thrusting from a male to the female . In the "edited" clip they added some people standing in front of the two "lovers" to obscure the thrusting . So , there was SOME editing .
What is it with you people? You are CONSTANTLY looking for conspiracy theories. The vast majority of the time, they don't exist. Are you a troll? Just bored?
Dann Gire comes off as so overly-rehearsed and very stiff. This was a great episode. Even though I disagreed with him often, I really miss Siskel's perspective on this movie.
I've seen EWS three or four times, and my feeling is that if anyone but Kubrick directed it, it would be a 2.5 stars out of 4 movie. Their adoration for Kubrick deeply clouds their appreciation for this movie.
I love Kubrick films, but EWS is unwatchable, I just don't get it. The only good part is the scenes with LeeLee Sobieski because it has Kubrick's wicked sense of humor. Of course the cinematography is gorgeous.
One of the reason this film takes multiple viewings is the tragic casting of Tom Cruise as...well, an adult...he's not even convincing as the husband of his real life wife (who wipes the floor with him). By the second or third viewing the fatal flaw is baked into the cake- similiar to Barry Lyndon- and you can move on to the what the film is about. We are only left to imagine what a great actor would have done with the role.
All these guys are talking about making the film, not what you saw in the theatre. You saw the final result. They are talking about the influences of why this film was made. Stretch and yaaaaawwwwn.
OMG. Eyes Wide Shut is a great film...but let's be honest, it's Kubrick following the path so many other directors have done when they reach their later years: They become 'dirty old men'. Kubrick just really wanted to see as much skin as possible, this was his chance...he made a nudie film and passed it off as 'high art'.
It's Kubrick's worst film and I can't help thinking it was because of his age and health and was also close to his death. Casting Cruise was the biggest problem, he's not an actor, he's a movie star.
And your reasoning is? Not counting the first two features which were basically student films and Spartacus which had long stretches directed by someone else, Kubrick only made 10 features. All ten are iconic in some way.
Some films are more about the payoff, the conclusion, and others are more about the journey. EWS is definitely the latter IMO. The conclusion is quite abrupt and seemingly frivolous, but I think it makes sense given what came before. The events/journey of the Harford character are more interesting and powerful than any conclusion could be, also IMO.
You need to look at it from the right angle. Then it makes sense. Not everything you see happened in the real world. Most Kubrick movies are panned the first 5 years because they don’t follow a standard narrative. Then they get re evaluated over the next decade until people realize what they were watching was actually a masterpiece. Kubrick responded to criticism of his movies by saying “I spend a decade thinking about these things and making them. The critics and audiences spend 2 hrs watching it. Is it a real surprise they miss the point”. Kubrick movies definitely need and deserve more then one viewing.
When a man puts a piece of celluloid and his ego as a master director above the mental health and safety of the actors that make his films succeed, as he did with Shelley Duvall, I have ZERO respect or admiration for the man or his products.
Shame Roger didn't do this all that much - it would be interesting to have more round-table discussions on a major topic.
Nah. He's trash
I really wish Siskel had lived to see this film. He was a life-long Kubrick fan. One wonders what he would've made of it.
Who cares? Siskel sucked anyway.
I think Gene would have liked it. Probably would have had a few issues with it but Tom and Nicole were excellent. The cinematography was mesmerizing. One of the reviewers here was exactly right. This movie is much more appreciated on the second and third viewings.
He ranked Full Metal Jacket the best film of ‘87 while Ebert gave it a thumbs down.
I have no opinion on that film.
@@September2004#2, actually. Roger's review is so infamous, one of Tony DiNozzo's bucket-list items was to ask Roger about it. I say _Full Metal Jacket_ is a masterpiece 🙌🏻
@@dnasty312 That’s right. Last Emperor was #1.
Like all Kubrick films, multiple viewings are necessary to see let alone understand the layers of his films.
You can say that for many master directors and their work
Kubrick was a master Director. 😎 All his movies are masterpieces.
I agree. However, I'll say everything from 1957 onward are masterpieces. With the exception of Spartacus. I didn't like that one.
@maxxxmodelz4061 It's the only film Kubrick did "for hire".
@@maxxxmodelz4061 The Killing is as well
One of my favorite Kubrick films.
i just saw eyes wide shut tonight in nyc, so glad to find this
This is wonderful to watch now so many years later. We all needed time to let that movie age and grow. I remember when it first came out, no one liked it and the fame of Tom and Nicole over shadowed it. I love this movie.
01. Day Of The Fight (1951) short
02. Flying Padre (1951) short
03. The Seafarers (1953) short
04. Fear And Desire (1953)
05. Killer's Kiss (1955)
06. The Killing (1956)
07. Paths Of Glory (1957)
08. Spartacus (1960)
09. Lolita (1962)
10. Dr. Strangelove (1964)
11. 2001 A Space Odyssey (1968)
12. A Clockwork Orange (1971)
13. Barry Lyndon (1975)
14. The Shining (1980)
15. Full Metal Jacket (1987)
16. Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
No other director has kept their winning streak intact to the end the way Kubrick did. This is why Tarantino says he will stop after 10 films.
@@kevinkeels6845 James Cameron has the best film resume of all time, never made a flop, and virtually every film he’s made is a landmark in cinema.
Cameron > Kubrick any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
@@offspringfan1288 🤣
@@offspringfan1288 no
@@offspringfan1288I like titanic but no he’s not better than Kubrick
I saw it 5 times when it came out and loved it. The lesson is... Don't tell your married spouse your sexual fantasies.
Why
More like, don't marry someone you're not sexually compatible with.
Nice to see the boys bro down at the lunch table.
That was VERY very very. rehearsed ! Thank God for podcasts....
Ah, so it wasn’t just me.
Rehearsed but you can tell they seemed nervous on camera
Thank you for posting. I know it was posted a year ago but I’m just seeing it now. I’m always finding buried treasure on your channel.
Paths of glory where kirk Douglas realizes how obscene the general is and says " and you can go to HELL before i apologize to you now or ever again".
That's actually a weak part of the film. Kirk Douglas insisted on his Star moments. It's cringey
Thanks for sharing.
Cool roundtable show.
These guys are not real movie critics...why are they wearing suits and not t-shirts with superhero logos? Also, no Funko pops, no Hot Toys, no Marvel props displayed randomly, no Star Wars posters in the background 🤔🤔🤔 #cinemaisdead
You where suits if you work for the newspaper or magazine that isn't Rolling Stone
I mean, these guys are alright, but they don’t give the cutting-edge deep analysis that you see on The Nerd Crew.
@@Y-two-K Lol!
There are practically no more real critics worth their salt. My University offered a Masters in criticism. Most people hired these days are 17 year old kids with no knowledge whatsoever.
@@michaelsims1160 Tarantino wannabees
God, I miss the late 90s. It was a beautiful time.
I talk about this a lot. It was full of so much optimism. Took a single day to make it all evaporate.
@@threeminuteshateI had an obsession with the late 90s, early 2000s this past winter. WWF Raw is War, woodstock 99, Jack-as$... Something about that era had me thinking about it for weeks straight, like intrusive thoughts. I was only 9 years old in 1999 but it just seemed like a simpler time
Wuhan Lab. @@threeminuteshate
2020.
I had the impression here that Ebert and the production company were auditioning a replacement for poor Gene Siskel. Do you think these other 4 wouldn't be thinking that? "Oh boy, if I get a job with Roger Ebert, I'm set for life! This is my big chance!"
My favorite, by the way, is "A Clockwork Orange."
They actually auditioned people for quite some time in the form of guest hosts, including even Bill Clinton.
This film was much deeper than the critics let on
What? Who cares what critics say?
That was fun. For me 2001 was a life changing experience. The epic scope and visual beauty just amazes me. Aesthetics always plays an important role in all these films. All of them were events at the theater. Art Kubrick style at the cinema. I have quibbles here and there but vastly more moments of real cinema joy.
I wish Cruise had taken off his clothes as directed....
I never saw the fuzzed scenes they talk about. I guess the version I saw was just edited out.
Dan was played by a young Stephen Colbert.
I wonder if Roger selected "Dr. Strangelove" because it was Gene's favorite film.
It would have been a nice tribute 🙌🏻
Valid thought. On Ebert's Top 10 favorite movies he included 2001 from the Kubrick canon. I think you're correct.
I Wonder How Many of Those NewsPapers Are Still Being Printed in Chicago?...🤔
Me too.
Other than Roger, Michael Wilmington was the best critic in this circle. IMO, he should have been Gene Siskel’s permanent replacement after his death.
cant name my favorite. he made his movies his way yes but spartacus is a film he directed, in his own words, for someone else. while not a true kubrick movie, it is a great achievement. watch the docu about the failure to complete hollywoods first epic film "i claudius". i think he made spartacus as a kind of favor for hollywood and to prove that, because he was such a talented leader, a seemingly jinxed project that risked falling into the footsteps of failure managed to instead sprout wings.
Stanley Kubrick was a nouvelle vague master that gave a modern look to the american cinema
Nothing would be the same without him
I've never watched an SK movie alll the way except eye wide shut.
My favorite part of EWS is the scene when he argues with his wife. He does a WTF-is-wrong-with-you so well it just cracks me up. I'd love to see him haranguing people on set when he makes movies. I wonder if he was channeling his impatience with Stanley in his performance. Hmmm..
Tom Cruise can't act and plays essentially the same character over and over. He always repeats his lines in lieu of emotion.
@@ritabook7601 Hmmm. Yeah not a lot of range but he certainly can act. Rain Man, Born on 4th of July, Jerry Maguire?
@@ritabook7601 Which is perfect for Kubrick's method, but guess you never saw _Risky Business._
Vanilla Sky another good one from Cruise. Plus War of the Worlds
To lose Gene in February and to lose Stanley Kubrick just 1 month must have been really hard on Roger.
Eyes Wide Shut us one of Kubrick's best movies . I bought the unrated version of the movie on DVD and couldn't believe why it originally got the NC-17 rating . As it was pointed out in the documentary , This Film Is Not Yet Rated , the unrated version has some pelvic thrusting from the male performers in the secret sex meeting . It was literally about maybe 5 seconds of film footage .
His independent freedom would have meant zero, if there wasn’t commercial value in his name. In the end, that’s what matters the most, to get a film any traction. You still have to be able to make the studio money whether through the prestige route, or commercial.
Quite so. Oliver Stone always underlined the emphatically Money-Driven side of Hollywood, notably in his fascinating Q & A at the Oxford Union in 2016 (on You Tube, 61 mins)
It's true, for all of his reputation and the high art of his films - the vast majority made money for the studios. Even "Barry Lyndon" and "The Shining", which are commonly thought of as "disappointments", theatrically, really weren't. Even "Barry Lyndon" made 3 times its budget, theatrically. Same for "The Shining" - both films were considered "flops", but only because they didn't hit what they were EXPECTED to hit - but they still made money for the studios. In fact, the only film that didn't do well at the box office was "Paths of Glory" and even that earned back its budget, plus some. So for all of his reputation as a time-consuming filmmaker - his budgets never got out of control and he always made them money, even if it wasn't "Star Wars"-level money. He knew how to entertain an audience while making masterpieces for adults at the same time. That's extremely rare. He never made anything that was a "blockbuster" but when you look at the *budgets* he had, they were often low - and his box office, 9 times out of 10, was usually about 3 times his budget. He was able to keep doing what he did because he never asked the studio for too much money and they always knew they'd get it back.
True True badass film and evreybody in it especially sidney pollack
I’m w the guy who says “the Beautiful Blue Danube in 2001”. The masterful
3:04 😳😳😳
Heard that music and was shocked to learn that Kubrick had something to do with PINK FLAMINGOS. Yikes. And whew!
A song being in both pink flamingos and full metal jacket doesnt mean that kubrick had anything to do with the former movie does it
At what point did the mask disappear? Tom takes it off, and is holding on to it. So how did those creeps get a hold of it? How did it end up in their hands?
Hey, my junior high D&D group got back together!
Had I Known 'Dr.StrangeLove' was a Kubrick Film, I Woulda Watched it on TurnerClassicMovies Yesterday Evening! (8-30-22)
Oh I caught that. It was still the same :)
I saw it last night! Wonderful movie
Megyn looking like a casual mom on aSunday. Looks good!
I swear he says everybody fucking knows about the bird 😂 but it’s everybody’s talking now about the bird.
I bet a few years later these guys all would recommend Barry Lyndon.
Barry Lyndon shares the same fatal casting flaw as this film. You must overcome it to get at the treasure.
I've wondered for years why Kubrick
paired Shelley Duvall with Jack Nicholson
that is, why such an actress playing a dull character
against a dynamic actor playing a complicated character.
Made me think about Kier Dullea's dull astronaut vs
the star of 2001, HAL.
It wasn't until I saw Eyes Wide Shut that I was certain something
was going on. But why did Kubrick do that? Why
did he purposely use low energy actors (one could say second rate)
juxtaposed with a talented actor?
Because opposites attract and in theory makes it a more dynamic movie
Eyes Wide Shut took 400 days to shoot! a world record
Filming Began Two Months Before the Year 1997 Onwards Before Wrapping Up Filming Shortly Before 1998
8:46 - "...to a secret, private orgy..." I've always found it strange that critics called it an "orgy." It sure doesn't look as if anyone is having fun. That isn't an orgy; it's a ritual, and something seems to have drawn the good doctor into it. From the moment he leaves his apartment, the laws of probability go crazy on his ass. Every encounter he has is sexually-charged. There's no less a supernatural element to Eyes Wide Shut than there is to The Shining.
The lamestream media with all their "orgy" talk.
What do you think it wouldve been like if Kubrick got to work with Leonardo DiCaprio? I think Kubrick wouldve had very little patience with Leo's more bratty personality tropes. But I think the end result wouldve been really interesting.
I mean, I never thought he would work with Tom Cruise and look how that turned out
Just keep cranking em out and never mind
I need to get this on DVD 📀, the film that is. Honourable mention to Sydney Pollack who is riveting in the movie. The only weakness is Nicole Kidman who isn’t up to scratch for a film of this calibre
Go for the uncensored blu ray version
Always said they named thus movie wrong they misspelled shut substitute the u with an i yeah that’s the ticket
I never saw this movie and after hearing from these critics how Tom Cruise (is that his real name?) was a shallow participant, It makes me speculate that Scientology David Miskovich had a role whose power exceeded Kubrick's.
And I ran across this:
The brilliant director Stanley Kubrick died of a heart attack on 9 March 1999 at his English estate near Hertfordshire, according to the official version. Kubrick's death is still a mystery plaguing major European tabloids. The director died four days after the end of the editing period of his latest and most enigmatic film Eyes Wide Shut, starring then-weds Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. The film follows the sexually charged adventures of Dr. Bill Harford, who is shocked when his wife, Alice, reveals that she had contemplated having an affair a year earlier.
It was Kidman in July 2002's interview with the American newspaper National Enquirer who transparently hinted that Kubrick passed away not by choice. According to the actress, the director called her two hours before the official time of his sudden death. He asked her not to come to Hertfordshire where, as he put it, "we will all be poisoned so fast that we do not have time to even sneeze."
After Kidman's revelations in the European press, there was speculation that Kubrick could have been poisoned by the secret societies, which include members of the Western economic, political and cultural elite.
Or the Scientologists? Cruise filed for divorce from Kidman in 2001 at the urging or command of the society. Kidman was pregnant at the time and miscarried at the news
In Eyes Wide Shut, the centerpiece of the film is a colossal ritual at a fashionable estate near New York City. Kubrick wanted to show that the secret societies rule the Western world today. National Association of Theater Owners in the US withheld permission to distribute the picture for almost four months. Since Kubrick was no longer alive, the orgy scene was edited out. The public was fooled by information that the argument was over the openness of the erotic scenes.
So what do we think about that?
I e seen both versions and the difference can be so stupidly subtle y your point of view . It was just a couple shots that added some standing people to obstruct natural thrusting of the men in the simulated sex scenes . I think the bad reviews were propaganda to protect the evil corporate rulers and their evil wrongdoing . I actually love the movie and NOT because of the sexual content . I love watching his camera work .
Completely untrue clap trap. I don’t know where you got that stuff from but the version Kubrick sent to the studio was the version your seeing now. There was no editing.
@@michaelsims1160 in the documentary This Film is Not Rated , they showed 2 different clips of the orgy scene . One clip shows the pelvic thrusting from a male to the female . In the "edited" clip they added some people standing in front of the two "lovers" to obscure the thrusting . So , there was SOME editing .
What is it with you people? You are CONSTANTLY looking for conspiracy theories. The vast majority of the time, they don't exist. Are you a troll? Just bored?
Is there an online link to the Kidman newspaper interview? Can't find it anywhere
Dann Gire comes off as so overly-rehearsed and very stiff. This was a great episode. Even though I disagreed with him often, I really miss Siskel's perspective on this movie.
Exspermental?
I've seen EWS three or four times, and my feeling is that if anyone but Kubrick directed it, it would be a 2.5 stars out of 4 movie. Their adoration for Kubrick deeply clouds their appreciation for this movie.
I love Kubrick films, but EWS is unwatchable, I just don't get it. The only good part is the scenes with LeeLee Sobieski because it has Kubrick's wicked sense of humor. Of course the cinematography is gorgeous.
EWS is monumental.
The whole first half of the film is "oooooh, we are seeing Nicole Kidman's body..."
I found it mostly boring.
I still think "Barry Lyndon" is his best film.
One of the reason this film takes multiple viewings is the tragic casting of Tom Cruise as...well, an adult...he's not even convincing as the husband of his real life wife (who wipes the floor with him). By the second or third viewing the fatal flaw is baked into the cake- similiar to Barry Lyndon- and you can move on to the what the film is about. We are only left to imagine what a great actor would have done with the role.
The Critics Legion of Doom 😂
what a way to shortchange Barry Lyndon
an NC-17 would worked for a movie like this WB and Disney Touchstone wouldn’t do it Fox would have
Eye’s wide shut is Cruise’s best film in my opinion. And Kubrick’s
Agreed
Cocktail?
That’s crazy talk. One of Kubrick’s worst and it doesn’t even crack top 5 movies with Cruise
I think Cruise's best performance was Born on The Fourth of July.
I think Kubrick was trying to tell us something about the upper crust of society.
Fidelio
imagine if tarantino had made it.
Gunfire every twenty minutes, with soundtracks taken from other films, then a final gun battle.
These four guests are way out on their criticism.
All these guys are talking about making the film, not what you saw in the theatre. You saw the final result. They are talking about the influences of why this film was made. Stretch and yaaaaawwwwn.
OMG. Eyes Wide Shut is a great film...but let's be honest, it's Kubrick following the path so many other directors have done when they reach their later years: They become 'dirty old men'.
Kubrick just really wanted to see as much skin as possible, this was his chance...he made a nudie film and passed it off as 'high art'.
There wasn't much "titillation" in it. You could say the same thing about A Clockwork Orange couldn't you?
Nymphet? I believe you mean a child!
That's the word Nabokov used.
It's Kubrick's worst film and I can't help thinking it was because of his age and health and was also close to his death. Casting Cruise was the biggest problem, he's not an actor, he's a movie star.
Pretty funny that Kubrick fanboys have talked themselves into calling this a masterpiece 😂😂. It’s not even good❌
It looks better with every passing year. There's a reason its rep has gone up.
Over-rated. But 2001 and Barry Lyndon were great films.
It was not well reviewed in 1999
Trash movie by creepy director and reviewed by creeps. No wonder Cruise and kidmon divorced right after they made it.
How many accounts do you have? Stick to Marvel
Why don’t you just say your dumb and didn’t get it David?
As Roger went through the list of films, my only thought is how incredibly overrated Kubrick was as a director.
Hmm
And your reasoning is? Not counting the first two features which were basically student films and Spartacus which had long stretches directed by someone else, Kubrick only made 10 features. All ten are iconic in some way.
This was Kubrick’s worst movie, mostly because of the casting.
Worse than the first two features?
Kubrick's worst film by far. It all adds up to....nothing.
Pure Trash
Stick to Marvel
Some films are more about the payoff, the conclusion, and others are more about the journey. EWS is definitely the latter IMO. The conclusion is quite abrupt and seemingly frivolous, but I think it makes sense given what came before. The events/journey of the Harford character are more interesting and powerful than any conclusion could be, also IMO.
You need to look at it from the right angle. Then it makes sense. Not everything you see happened in the real world. Most Kubrick movies are panned the first 5 years because they don’t follow a standard narrative. Then they get re evaluated over the next decade until people realize what they were watching was actually a masterpiece. Kubrick responded to criticism of his movies by saying “I spend a decade thinking about these things and making them. The critics and audiences spend 2 hrs watching it. Is it a real surprise they miss the point”. Kubrick movies definitely need and deserve more then one viewing.
it had the highest second week drop in box office of any film that year....
What a bunch of nerds🤣
4l gasbags
When a man puts a piece of celluloid and his ego as a master director above the mental health and safety of the actors that make his films succeed, as he did with Shelley Duvall, I have ZERO respect or admiration for the man or his products.
Bad take
These actors had mental issues way before they work with Kubrick.
@@ronniebishop2496 ya... right...zzzzz
@@mattdeans9873 Especially Shelly Duvall, zzzzzzz snake 🐍
Shelley Duvall vehemently denied that Kubrick mistreated her in any way. It was a bogus story initiated by Dr Phil
Roger FOOLISHLY didn't like Full Metal Jacket.