Are You With Us?:
Eyes Wide Shut
By Ryan Mazie
July 29, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
In the age of camera-phones, Internet, and prevalent paparazzi, it was amazing that Kubrick was able to keep Eyes Wide Shut from the prying eyes of the public during its famously long 400 day shoot (even James Cameron managed to keep his shooting schedule for Titanic under a year) on top of another year of post-production. I check this site and industry favorites like deadline.com to be spoiled with images and details of the latest buzz-worthy productions. While no one was really sure what the film was about, the studio kept the public puzzled even with the trailer – a dialogue-less display of sensual images of the stars over the Chris Isaak guitar-strumming “Baby Did a Bad Bad Thing,” which was surprisingly effective.
The buzz for the film only increased after Kubrick’s death a supposed four days after delivering the final cut to Warner Bros. However, a leak about the intense sexual nature of the film and of a prolonged orgy sequence wrongly placed the film into the category of erotic thriller. I would classify the film as a psychological drama. To compare to some of my favorites, the film borrows the adventurous sense of mystery and deceit from the Kubrick-esque Chinatown, mixed in with the serious marriage-reevaluation of Revolutionary Road, peppered with a bit of the sexiness and surreal nature of Mulholland Dr.
Eyes Wide Shut tells the almost coldly serious story of a professionally and socially successful sexy young married couple, on-and-off-screen, Dr. William "Bill" (Cruise) and Alice Hartford (Kidman). Nine years of marriage and a seven-year-old daughter (Madison Eginton) later, they are bored and find themselves in a weed-induced battle-of-the-sexes conversation over love and sex from both genders' points of view. During the long scene, Alice reveals a hidden year-old fantasy of her giving everything up for a Naval Officer she had briefly encountered on a trip to Cape May. The stinging surprise crushes Bill’s ego, sending him on a downward-spiraling sexual awakening throughout a surreal New York City where every girl he encounters willingly spreads her legs open for him.
Mr. and Mrs. Cruise’s third and final (since they got divorced almost exactly two years later) pairing was their least financially successful, but most masterful. When I see the name Tom Cruise attached to a project, even if it looks sub-par (I’m looking at you Knight and Day), means that it will at least be an emotionally satisfying experience whether he is trying to make you laugh while dancing around in his underwear, make your knuckles-white while defusing a bomb, cry while chasing the girl who he had all along at “hello”, or making you think about marriage, love and fidelity. While in the back of your mind Tom Cruise onscreen will always be Tom Cruise - especially nowadays after his couch-jumping scientology media fiasco he has found himself in - he certainly was doing some Oscar fishing in 1999. Coming off of five films in a row that grossed over $100 million, Cruise broke the streak with Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia, which was the film that ultimately garnered him the nomination for Best Supporting Actor. However, I feel he truly shines here, leading almost every scene, portraying crushing defeat and testosterone-filled exhilaration just in longing glances, one of my favorite Kubrick trademarks that is in full swing here. Cruise embodies Bill, who acts on his compulsions, in stark opposition to Kidman’s character who thinks about infidelity but never acts on it, at least not on film. Yet, in an almost comical moment, as soon as he is about to have sex with another woman, he is interrupted. Cruise balances the surreal nature of the long night’s events in New York City and its surroundings with the grounded, emotional foundation of marriage for the film.
Kubrick asks if love, trust, promises, and marriage equal fidelity. Is there a difference between desire so intense that if the opportunity arose you would take it and the actual act itself? And is staying committed really just done out of consideration for the other? Strangely, the most lucid argucission (a new word I just made to describe how almost every conversation is an insightful argument and discussion) occurs when Bill and Alice are high on pot. In this scene, Kidman truly highlights her acting chops. Her stare is almost as biting as her words. Not getting a Leading Actress nomination from the Academy was truly a huge snub on her behalf, not to mention Kubrick missing out on a chance for Best Director (something he was nominated four times prior, but shockingly never won).
At a long two hours and 39 minutes, a movie that could have been drudging is set at a perfect pace to keep the dream-like aspect of the film (hey, girls always said that Tom is dreamy). Each long scene can be a movie itself with a dramatic arc, making the brief interludes feel somewhat out of place. And even though this is truly Cruise’s and Kidman’s film, Kubrick, like any director, draws great performances from his supporting cast. Famed director Sydney Pollack, who directed Cruise in The Firm, makes one of his less-common acting appearances as the power elite Dr. Victor Ziegler (Harvey Keitel was originally cast and even shot scenes but dropped out due to other project obligations), whose twisting of the truth makes him either a hero trying to be redeemed, or for my money one of film’s most underrated villains. Todd Field, another Academy-approved director (Little Children, a little seen gem), who makes an acting appearance as Bill’s old Med-school-dropout-turned-piano-player friend, kicks the movie to the next level, introducing Bill to a party that turns out to be a gigantic orgy – one of the most controversial aspects of the film.
Seeing the orgy scene on the recently released unrated Blu-ray version of the film was an unexpected jaw-dropper. Finely balancing the levels of sensual and disturbing at the same time like only a master can, Kubrick leads Cruise through a mansion of desire where the only thing worn is a masquerade mask. Re-watching the scene in its theatrically released version where computer-generated objects cover some of the more obscene acts (Roger Ebert lashed out about this, calling it the “Austin Powers-version”), is still almost as effective since I doubt Kubrick’s intention was to shock, but to have the audience become absorbed.
The computer-generated objects were placed since without them, the film would have been slapped with the dreaded NC-17 rating, which would ban it from most theaters. Also, by contract, Kubrick was obliged to deliver an R-rating. Kubrick, no stranger to the ratings system after having crafted A Clockwork Orange, a masterful psychological discussion-starter, and Full Metal Jacket, the first Kubrick film I have seen and loved, watched the skin-filled Showgirls, Fatal Attraction, and Basic Instinct to know how to edit the sexual scenes and still get an R-rating (which he did with the help of CGI).
While still shocking, today one can see the same intense nudity and sex instantly on the Internet just one click away (it's not safe for work, but just go to Google Images and type in Eyes Wide Shut). Plus with cable TV, just turn on HBO and watch one of my favorite shows, the blood sucking and boiling True Blood, where skin and blood are as almost as important as plot and dialogue. So while the themes are still in play to some 110 million married people in America alone, I must admit that this film is not with us even though it should still be seen.
Opening strangely on a hot July 16th, 1999, a date that Kubrick hand-picked himself, instead of during the cold months of Oscar season, Eyes Wide Shut was seen by a fair number of eyes. With a large $21.7 million opening weekend, unusually steep drop-offs were in store, and it wound up with $55.7 million (or about $87 million adjusted). While this seemed like a great number for a darkly-themed movie, it was granted a blockbuster budget of $60 million. However, strong overseas numbers to the tune of $106.4 million resulted in probable profit. Eyes Wide Shut still ranks as the number six all-time grossing erotic thriller, a genre that saw brief success in the late-'80s and early-'90s, only getting knocked down a spot last year by the schlocky but sexy fun Obsessed.
The movie polarized critics and audiences. Although the majority of critics gave it positive regards, some considered it glorified pornography. And while Kidman may spend less time acting and more time writhing, I never got the sense that Kubrick was out to make the audience horny rather than talk about marital problems and the expected responsibilities one has as a high-ranking member of society (Cruise gave me a laugh as he waves his license to be a doctor around as if it were a police badge). I must side with the cheerers and not the jeerers, who applauded the film’s in-depth look into serious material that most big studios wouldn’t even touch from a mile away. Kubrick displays the sexual acts in a meaningful context that is more art than obscene. Pornography does not teach morals, but Eyes Wide Shut shows the consequences of well-mannered people in immoral situations where responsibility is thrown out the window. However, there are some times when I wanted to jump into the film and tape Nicole’s mouth shut so she didn’t tell anymore empty alcohol/marijuana-fueled secrets or smack some sense into Tom, telling him that he has a wife hotter than most of the naked ladies in the film – waiting and ready in bed throughout the movie.
The rift between critics and the box office fizzle probably affected its Oscar chances in the year where another marriage-in-crisis nudity-filled drama, American Beauty, a film I found beautiful but overrated, swept the awards. And while Kubrick cited this as “his greatest contribution to the art of cinema” according to the film’s executive producer and Kubrick’s brother-in-law Jan Harlan, controversy arose once R. Lee Ermey, one of the stars of Full Metal Jacket, said Kubrick confided in him calling it “a piece of shit” and that “Kidman and Cruise had their way with him.” Maybe these are the reasons why the conservative Academy shied away, giving the film zero nominations (however, it did receive a Golden Globe nom for the brilliantly haunting score by Jocelyn Pook).
Today, a film like this one, without a PG-13 rating or McDonald toy tie-ins, probably would never have received a wide release, or even the budget to be made, but Eyes Wide Shut is still talked about with its ambiguous resolutions and one of Kubrick’s rare happy endings, but again, that is up for “argucission”. With the intense themes still prevalent, but rarely seen in such a raw presentation, the way Kubrick delivers them just does not have the same impact. Although it still packs a wallop, I feel 11 years ago it gave a knock-out punch. As times change and couples divorce and star power fades, one thing still stands: Kubrick is a master visionary whose work deserves to be seen with eyes wide open.
Verdict: Not With Us
Three and a Half Stars out of Four but Overly Dated