Today marks the 10th anniversary of the US theatrical release of Stanley Kubrick’s “Eyes Wide Shut.” It was, of course, to be his final film, the last statement from what so many agree to be the finest filmmaker to ever try his hand at the trade. It was daring, it was unique…it was a Kubrick film through and through. It was a 20-month-long shoot that had film enthusiasts chomping at the bit for nearly two years, and when it finally landed, the reaction was, again, classic Kubrick: divisiveness.
I touched upon the film and its impact back in March on the anniversary of Kubrick’s untimely passing, so I’ll leave it at that from my end. But Jamie Stuart over at The Mutiny Company has re-published his 2002 essay on the film to mark the occasion. It is a thorough, passionate, committed dissection of the film, paying particular attention to aesthetic choices and the director’s color palette. It’s fascinating stuff for Kubrick and film buffs the world over and deserves a glance.
Here’s a taste:
With Eyes Wide Shut, Stanley Kubrick created a film so layered with latent meaning that it perfectly encapsulated a modern society so overloaded with conflicting and referenced culture that it’s lost its meaning. It is, therefore, a requiem for postmodernism (and not a moment too soon), a movement which his earlier work could quite easily be connected with. This film dramatizes the ultimate effects that postmodernism has had on our culture, and its reception perfectly illustrated this. We’ve degenerated from a culture which embraced intellectual adventurism and new ideas, making not only critical, but commercial successes out of films like 2001: A Space Odyssey and A Clockwork Orange, to one which criticizes films for being adult and dark, as Jeffery Lyons did to the Kubrick/Spielberg collaboration A.I.: Artificial Intelligence. We no longer make choices based on quality but aesthetics. Our current culture is disposable. And time will render it as such.
I would offer up more from the piece but it’s better to dig into those details as part of the whole rather than as a separate sample, I think. Great read. Here’s the inherently creepy, borderline terrifying masked ball sequence:
Comments
14 responses to “Kubrick’s ‘Eyes Wide Shut,’ 10 years on”
I remember sitting in the now closed Kingsway theater in Brooklyn NY and watching it. I thought it was a fasinating journey the Tom Cruise character took. Really captured the underbelly of the city late at night. Fasinating is the word I would use.
chuck
Great, great, great film. I’m so glad it seems to be gaining critical standing with time.
Of course, Guy. That seemed to be the fate of almost every Kubrick film.
i remember the best trailer of the 20 last years! if only the movie was like the trailer !
but there was very good things(light,Kidman,tha atmosphere)
Thanks for this piece! This features perhaps my favorite acting by an actress in the last 20 years. Loved Kidman in this. Her stoned talk with Cruise was legendary stuff. A great, haunting film.
The Rake
http://thefilmnest.com
An amazing film. Kubrick is why I love film so much and he didn’t disappoint with his last film. EWS is an amazing and haunting (no doubt his death added to that) film. While it’s not my favorite Kubrick film, in many ways, it is the ultimate Kubrick film.
From the orgy scene, to the billiard room chat with Pollack, to the stalker in the streets over the amazingly creepy Ligeti score; EWS is a great film and a fitting end to the career of the greatest filmmaker.
It’s a shame it was so divisive upon release, but Kubrick’s last film gave us perhaps one of the great final lines in any film. Kidman was magnificent.
“Her stoned talk with Cruise was legendary stuff.”
I actually disagree with this. I thought Cruise nailed that scene but Kidman had no real understanding of how to handle it. Cliched, really. Otherwise, though, I thought she was fantastic.
I thought Kidman was brilliant, and her “stoned” scene was absolutely magnificent. One of her best performances.
Such a great movie and it IS great to see more and more people becoming a fan of it. Although it wouldn’t have been Kubrickian to have everybody love it when it was released.
Agreed that Kidman is excellent here.
This is truly a great one, but Barry Lyndon still remains his ultimate masterpiece in my opinion
Kidman killed in that one. Her scene with the Hungarian guy is great, and that monologue ? She nailed it, she deserved more accoloades than the few she got.
And that body ? Oh my
was she lead or support in the film?
I suppose an argument could be made for both, given that Cruise shoulders major stretches of the film on his own, but I’d say lead. Why?