Eyes Wide Shut

Started by Teddy, April 27, 2003, 09:46:02 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Weak2ndAct

Barry Lyndon is my easily my favorite Kubrick film, but that article is so well-written, so studied... man, I feel like a boob.  Is EWS really that brilliant?  Is he reading too much into it?  Lord, who knows.  I need to watch that movie again.  Like now.

Ghostboy

Quote from: Weak2ndActIs EWS really that brilliant?  

Yes!

QuoteIs he reading too much into it?.

In comparison to the BFI Modern Classics book on the film, in which the author posits that the film is a dream had by the male son of Cruise and Kidman's characters who was conceived the after the film itself ended - not at all.

Pubrick

Quote from: Weak2ndActIs EWS really that brilliant?
yeah pretty much. as i've said many times, everyone has to read everything on this site http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/

it's not even worth talking about kubrick with anyone who hasn't read, and thought about, those essays.
under the paving stones.

Gamblour.

Quote from: GhostboyI think there's enough of a reference to American Indians in The Shining to warrant the suggestion quoted in that article, which is quite a good read - thanks for linking to it.

Good post.

There is a reference to American Indians? I just saw this like three weeks ago (when I came up for my idea of an inspired film, where it consists entirely of Shelley Duvall's reaction shots in this movie, and that's it. think about being blazed and watching her jaw constantly shaking and hitting the floor, haha) and I did not notice anything remotely resembling a reference to Injuns. Someone around here mentioned the carpeting. Well, like Vivian Kubrick points out on the commentary of her doc on the dvd, the 70s were tacky and had horrible carpeting.

Quote from: GhostboyIn comparison to the BFI Modern Classics book on the film, in which the author posits that the film is a dream had by the male son of Cruise and Kidman's characters who was conceived the after the film itself ended - not at all.

My god....did someone actually write that? Here's my take, if it's not in the film, then it ain't what the film's about. You're just shooting yourself in the foot. I can't stand that kind of overblown anaylsis.

And P, I will give that site a read and think about it, too.
WWPTAD?

socketlevel

i love that carpeting

that son bullshit is an over-read "intellectual" with too much fucking time on his/her hands.  i couldn't agree more with your statement, if it's not there then it's not there.  they should spend that time on stuff that really matters.

-sl-
the one last hit that spent you...

Pubrick

woah, what i hate more than anything is ppl shutting down elaborate interpretations of kubrick movies without hearing them out. refer to my threads on his repertoire, there i linked this indian article like twice already, and made credible theories myself about all the nonsense. i'm not saying they're right, even if they think they are, but can u offer anything more interesting? the point of kubrick has always been that a million interpretations can be true, cos what he's talking about encompasses more than just "what's in the film". geez, how literal do u wanna be..

especially when he's clearly a master manipulator of symbols. EWS more than any other movie is ALL about symbols, appearances and unspoken truths.

here's a quote i partially referred to once in an obscure thread, i'll write the full thing this time:

Quote"Not that the incredulous person doesn't believe in anything. It's just that he doesn't believe in everything. Or he believes in one thing at a time. He believes in one thing only if it somehow follows from the first thing. He is near-sighted and methodical, avoiding the wide horizons. If two things don't fit, but you believe both of them, thinking that somehow, hidden,  there must be a third thing that connects them, that's credulity." - umberto eco, foucault's pendulum.

that's what's missing among kubrick arguments. i read that crazy dude's conspiracy theory cowboykurtis posted about EWS and MK-ULTRA. it was nuts, but it was passionate and had merits worthy of discussion. i never get to talk about MK-ULTRA but if referring to EWS is gonna help get the conversation started then i'm all for it.

there are a few things EWS and FMJ has made me think about which are probably taboo cos they don't mention anything explicitly in the stories pertaining to them. even one based on The Shining which i've been close to posting about for 2 years now just out of sheer novelty.

my point is, if ur gonna talk about kubrick movies, or rather hear ppl's theories about kurbick, u should at least be willing to accept that the person talking crazy BELIEVES that what he's saying is true, and is trying to make u understand the connection. otherwise there's no hope.
under the paving stones.

Gamblour.

Ok, I read that Indian article. Wow, what a crock of shit. The guy's argument is less examples from the movie than his own ideas extrapolated through the movie. I'm suprised he didn't go so far as to conclude that the final chase is in a maze.....and MAZE is a homophone with MAIZE, the Indian word for corn. WHOAAAAAAA.

I also read that article I said I wouldn't read, and it was actually really good. Like really really good. His mentioning of the two sirens seducing Dr. Bill at the beginning and how the allude to the "end of the rainbow" and how that ties in with the Rainbow costume shop, that was really impressive and well put together.
WWPTAD?

socketlevel

Quote from: Pubrickmy point is, if ur gonna talk about kubrick movies, or rather hear ppl's theories about kurbick, u should at least be willing to accept that the person talking crazy BELIEVES that what he's saying is true, and is trying to make u understand the connection. otherwise there's no hope.

true, maybe it sounded so crazy that the natural reaction is an explosive one, lashing out.  

i just don't think there is any evidence of that in eyes wide shut, at all.  so i will not be able to take that seriously, in any respect.

but i'm all about the theories, and i've read the ones that you linked to and others on this site.  mainly because i fucking love kubrick.  within these theories, some are cool, maybe a little out there, but cool concepts none the less.  While others are lame.  that one is just lame.

-sl-
the one last hit that spent you...

cowboykurtis

I've been perplexed about this for a while...

The body in the morgue. We're led to believe that she is the hooker that overdosed at Ziegler's party, as well as the masked hooker at the orgy, who "sacrificed herself" for Bill.

Now, within the film's text, this makes sense - Regardless of the mystery of how she actually died.

However, when freezing the high angle shot her in the morgue, I could swear that the corpse lying dead is Domino the prostitute.  

Does anyone else agree with this? Could have very well been something Kubrick did to disorient the audience. Or my mind could just be playing tricks on me. i can't figure it out. The shot happens so quickly. Now, both Domino and the prostitute in the bathroom have somewhat similar bone structure in their face and body types. But I even remember upon my first viewing in the theaters thinking, wait a minute...
...your excuses are your own...

cowboykurtis

another interesting element is the ambiguity behind the mask left on his pillow. from the first viewing my mind has been stuck on the explanation that his wife found it and left it there as an accusation.

upon reading a an article recently the author posed the possiblitly that the mask was left by the people from the orgy as a final warning.

and when we cut to his wife's tear soaked eyes the next morning she very well could be crying from the thought of the danger Bill put their family in instead of the thought of the unfaithful journey he embarked on that night.

im curious, upon first viewing, which way did your mind go with this ambiguity?
...your excuses are your own...

Gamblour.

I definitely think the body in the morgue is Mandy, the orgy savior. We have no reason to think it's Domino, because she's only been condemned for death with her HIV test coming back positive. I think it says something, though, that you confused the two. Perhaps Kubrick wanted them to all represent the same faceless prostitute.

As for the mask, I've always thought Alice left it there. He sees, feels incredible guilt, and says "I'll tell you everything." Then, cut to Alice crying, I honestly thought they had decided to split, they'd obviously had an emotional conversation. I figured they called it quits, but then the next scene contradicts that by showing them together still. Alice says "Helena will be disappointed, she wanted to go Christmas shopping." This leads me to believe they have decided to divorce, but I can't be too sure. Any other thoughts?
WWPTAD?

cowboykurtis

Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkWe have no reason to think it's Domino, because she's only been condemned for death with her HIV test coming back positive.

i didnt say that within the text of the film we're led to believe its domino. i think its supposed to be the hooker from zieglers. however i think Kubrick may have used the actress that played domino in that scene - as an attempt to confuse.
...your excuses are your own...

Fernando

Quote from: cowboykurtiswhen freezing the high angle shot her in the morgue, I could swear that the corpse lying dead is Domino the prostitute

Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkI definitely think the body in the morgue is Mandy, the orgy savior.

Quote from: cowboykurtisi think Kubrick may have used the actress that played domino in that scene - as an attempt to confuse.

Both wrong, the body in the morgue is.........Laura Palmer!  :shock:

Seriously, it's the actress that played Mandy, there's a set photo of SK, Cruise and her in that morgue, did a search and I can't find right now but I'm possitive she's the same, also IIRC Domino was way shorter than Mandy and Mandy had a model like body whereas Domino was more 'curvy', hope I made sense.

Edit: Photo it's here.



cowboykurtis

well, i guess that's that
...your excuses are your own...

Fernando

Quote from: cowboykurtiswell, i guess that's that

Didn't mean to discourage you, any discussion about EWS has to be very welcome, as P said, there are many interpretations and so it's always great/fun to read them, even the ones that seem off the wall.

Unfortunately I suck at analyzing films but what I make of EWS is:

1. I don't see it as a dream, although it has a dream like quality.
2. Ziegler is full of shit, I disagree with anyone who says that he cleared things up in the billiard room.
4. I still stand by my opinion that the final scene ('there is something very important we need to do as soon as possible' 'Fuck') sounded more like a threat than a happy solution of the past days events.
5. Nobody has ever photographed better Kidman's body.
6. Why nobody ever acknowledged that EWS is one of the most beautiful photographed films ever.
7. The Morgue scene is amazing. (music, camera movement, etc.)


Things that still puzzle me:

1. The guy that nods Bill at the orgy.
2. Mr. Milich (Rainbow fashions owner) involment in the whole thing, I don't think he was at the party but he might know about it.
3. What would happen to Bill had Mandy not 'saved' him.