7857 replies to this topic

[Chaac]

Universal translator? I just thought he was speaking English...

[Alexcremers]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

[publicist]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

EYES WIDE SHUT is just brilliantly shot esoteric bullshit - an old man's folly - and if it wasn't for a deity like Kubrick, most studios rightly would have turned down the film on the ground that there is nothing remotely comprehensible about it.

[Stefancos]

Wow, Alex and his clone disagree!

[publicist]

Go back and feed on your STAR TREK movies, dutch boy.

[Stefancos]

Jawohl Mein Herr!

[publicist]

Abtreten.

[Quint]

Kubrick was just a man, he was no deity. He was however a master film maker.

Eyes Wide Shut incomprehensible? I personally can't see it is. Narratively, it's about as straight forward as your standard Hollywood thriller. But as with Kubrick, the devil is in the detail. And what detail! Is that what some viewers struggle with, perhaps?

[Stefancos]

People think 2001 is incomprehensible. i never thought that. It's a very linear story. Kubrick just doesn't tell the audience exactly whats going in in big letters on the screen!

[Koray Savas]

I saw this clip awhile back but couldn't remember his name. Found it now though and aside from the interesting theoretical outcomes of our species, he ties it all in to some science fiction films and might give some sense to 2001. I have yet to watch the film with his views in mind.

[Alexcremers]

Wow, Alex and his clone disagree!

Why do you say that, Steef? Me and pubs are nothing alike. Pubs has a strong social-political point of view. That's how he looks at things. I know nothing about that. It's not who I am. I'm only interested in art like music and film (and architecture, photography, ... expressions of beauty).

[Stefancos]

Is there in truth no beauty Alex?

[Alexcremers]

What do you mean?

[Stefancos]

Yes, what do I mean? Should I tell you, or do you want to ponder about it yourself?

[king mark]

Men in Black 3

Actually it was pretty decent

[Alexcremers]

Yes, what do I mean? Should I tell you, or do you want to ponder about it yourself?

Before I do that I want to make sure if I understand you correctly.

[publicist]

But Alex, for your interest in the art of filmmusic, you sure fail to mention it a lot. At least i seldom see you refer to it more than in a throwaway line in your posts.

[Stefancos]

Alex also rarely talks about John Williams.

[Alexcremers]

I guess that's because the big blockbuster scores of John Williams don't stimulate, titillate or inspire me and that's all he seems to be doing nowadays. Last week I listened to Stanley And Iris, and boy, do I miss the John Williams that did these smaller films and film scores. I also listened to Family Plot and I found myself enjoying it more than War Horse, Crystal Skull, Tintin, and what have you ...

@pubs: You mean I don't talk about film music in general? True, I'm not that into film music. I used to listen to it a lot more. There are still a few composers that I like such as John Willams, Sakamoto (not a very active film composer), and somehow I seem to have no problem with the work of Alexander Desplat (though I feel he's a little too reminiscent of composers that I already know). I also like Jonny Greenwood.

You didn't explain yourself, Steef, but I can already tell you I have a problem with your usage of the word "truth".





Alex

[publicist]

@pubs: You mean I don't talk about film music in general? True, I'm not that into film music. I used to listen to it a lot more. There are still a few composers that I like such as John Willams, Sakamoto (not a very active film composer), and somehow I seem to have no problem with the work of Alexander Desplat (though I feel he's a little too reminiscent of composers that I already know). I also like Jonny Greenwood.

I'd say you don't have any interest in film scores at all if your posts weren't attached to this very board (not that it matters, i just noticed). I, on the other hand, usually can watch a dud like THE SHADOW and just marvel at Goldsmith's rhythmic invention or a racist bore like MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA for Williams polished sheen. It's sometimes the only reason i watch a film.

[crocodile]

I guess that's because the big blockbuster scores of John Williams don't stimulate, titillate or inspire me and that's all he seems to be doing nowadays. Last week I listened to Stanley And Iris, and boy, do I miss the John Williams that did these smaller films and film scores. I also listened to Family Plot and I found myself enjoying it more than War Horse, Crystal Skull, Tintin, and what have you ...

@pubs: You mean I don't talk about film music in general? True, I'm not that into film music. I used to listen to it a lot more. There are still a few composers that I like such as John Willams, Sakamoto (not a very active film composer), and somehow I seem to have no problem with the work of Alexander Desplat (though I feel he's a little too reminiscent of composers that I already know). I also like Jonny Greenwood.

You didn't explain yourself, Steef, but I can already tell you I have a problem with your usage of the word "truth".





Alex

I like Family Plot CD more than the three or four La-La Land Wiliams releases in the past two years. It is something else.

Karol

[Alexcremers]

Crazy as it sounds, but sometimes Family Plot sounds like the prequel to CE3K.

[Incanus]

Crazy as it sounds, but sometimes Family Plot sound like the prequel to CE3K.

Well it contains elements which can be heard in both SW and CEO3K and even later scores quite distinctly developed. And it is a terrific score btw.

[Joey]

I don't think of Warhorse as a blockbuster film or score. That was never it's intention or purpose. I think it's a grand score.
Comparing Family Plot to Warhorse is bizarre. they are 36 years apart and two films of completely different genres.

[Jason LeBlanc]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

Really? 1999 was the year of American Beauty, Magnolia, Fight Club, The Insider, The Matrix, The Green Mile, The Iron Giant, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Snow Falling On Cedars, All About My Mother, Being John Malkovich, The CIder House Rules, Election...etc. Great year for cinema. Eyes Wide Shut kinda got lost in the shuffle, I always felt.

[Chaac]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

Really? 1999 was the year of American Beauty, Magnolia, Fight Club, The Insider, The Matrix, The Green Mile, The Iron Giant, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Snow Falling On Cedars, All About My Mother, Being John Malkovich, The CIder House Rules, Election...etc. Great year for cinema. Eyes Wide Shut kinda got lost in the shuffle, I always felt.

Toy Story 2, The Sixth Sense, Lola rennt, and more...

[Jason LeBlanc]

Oh yea, 1999 was huge.

[Stefancos]

It wasn't that huge.

[Alexcremers]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

Really? 1999 was the year of American Beauty, Magnolia, Fight Club, The Insider, The Matrix, The Green Mile, The Iron Giant, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Snow Falling On Cedars, All About My Mother, Being John Malkovich, The CIder House Rules, Election...etc. Great year for cinema. Eyes Wide Shut kinda got lost in the shuffle, I always felt.

But I don't see the logic behind your reasoning. If your theory is true, then it must be true for every one of these movies. A great year for cinema is subjective, BTW. For instance, nobody talks about The Ciderhouse Rules anymore. Snow Falling On Cedars? Really? So, in your opinion, that's one of the films that made critics to less appreciate EWS? I have to be harsh and say it's the film itself that is responsible. EWS isn't the first Kubrick film where people needed more time and more viewings before they could appreciate its true value.


Alex

[Stefancos]

Did people really miss Eyes Wide Shut because The Iron Giant was playing?

Election? All About My Mother? What?

[Joey]

I think a big reason it (Eyes Wide Shut) didn't get as much acclaim as expected is because of the sheer wealth of other terrific movies that came out in 1999.....

I find that hard to believe.

Really? 1999 was the year of American Beauty, Magnolia, Fight Club, The Insider, The Matrix, The Green Mile, The Iron Giant, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Snow Falling On Cedars, All About My Mother, Being John Malkovich, The CIder House Rules, Election...etc. Great year for cinema. Eyes Wide Shut kinda got lost in the shuffle, I always felt.

American Beauty, overrated but enjoyable, Magnolia, overrated, Fight Club, piece of shit, The Insider, unmemorable, The Matrix, overrated but okay, The Green Mile, underrated, Iron Giant, okay but sweet, The Talented Mr. Ripley, zero rewatchability. Snow Falling on Cedar, would put an insomniac to sleep. All About My Mother, never saw it, Being John Malkaovich, weird, for groupies only. Cider house rules, rules for Portman's score, Election, fun but lite fare.

Overall 1999 was okay. Michael Caine won best supporting actor but no one remembers his performance like they do H. Joel Osment

[Quint]

Have people forgotten that a lot of people and most Star Wars fans still thought The Phantom Menace was great in 1999? The truth of it didn't set in really till well over a year later.

[Stefancos]

Honestly 1999 was all Star Wars and The Matrix!

[Joey]

And seeing dead people.

[Jason LeBlanc]

How we personally feel about all those movies isn't the point here. Nor is the box office take. The point is that awards could only be given to so many films. For example, the nominees for best director that year were American Beauty, Being John Malkovich, Cider House Rules, The Insider, and The Sixth Sense. If those 5 films had come out in 1998 or 2000 I'm sure Eyes Wide Shut would have earned a spot. The nominees for best supporting actress that year were Angelina Jolie, Catherine Keener, Chloe Sevigny, Toni Collette, Samantha Morton. Nicole Kidman could have grabbed a nom otherwise - etc.

[Matt C]

Phantom of the Opera (2004)

Most of the song-and-dance numbers are entertaining, if inconsistent ("Masquerade" is the showstopper by far, compared to the sedate title song montage). The rest of the film is a slog to get through... Joel Schumacher and Andrew Lloyd Webber should've cut more of the less popular songs and/or streamlined the narrative (like eliminating more of Minnie Driver's Carlotta or the Phantom's backstory). There's no reason this film couldn't be more entertaining in two hours or less... not two hours and 21 minutes.

That said, whenever the actors start singing (especially Emmy Rossum) -- the movie gets better. I'd wish they'd had Gerald Butler visit a vocal coach 3-4 months before filming started, because his singing gets amateurish and rough in places. But he's not bad in the role... just needed some more singing lessons.

If you loved the Broadway musical, you'll be head-over-heels in love with every minute of it. Everyone else should just skip right to the songs and call it a day.

[KK.]

I couldn't stand that film...

[publicist]

Michael Caine won best supporting actor but no one remembers his performance like they do H. Joel Osment

Michael Caine could've gotten an Oscar for JAWS - THE REVENGE and it would be OK by me. He deserves every award he gets.

Did people really miss Eyes Wide Shut because The Iron Giant was playing?

EWS was, at its core, a stilted and superficial exercise. I could not figure out (and in the end, didn't care) what Kubrick wanted to tell me and from what i could gather, many other people had the same reaction. And it wasn't a WTF feeling like with LOST HIGHWAY (2 years earlier?) were some of the cineplex-proles were angered how Lynch pulled one on them but mostly, it clicked with people, they were trying to figure it out - that never happened with EWS.

EWS isn't as bad as VANILLA SKY, but it feels as empty.

[Alexcremers]

EWS was, at its core, a stilted and superficial exercise. I could not figure out (and in the end, didn't care) what Kubrick wanted to tell me and from what i could gather, many other people had the same reaction.

And yet there are countless of interpretations of what the film is about, but I stay away from those because, personally, I love it when certain things remain undefined. I also like it when I get the feeling the director isn't desperately trying to tell me something. It keeps revisiting is more rewarding. In fact, it stimulates me to watch a film more than once. I didn't really like EWS the first couple of times, but the last time I saw it was one of my best film viewing experiences of the last 10 years. I think what changed my position is that during the last time I stopped questioning what it was about, I just 'experienced' it. After that, I got a better sense of some of the themes. The quote below is exactly why I suddenly had such a great 'experience' with the film:

A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. - Stanley Kubrick

And it wasn't a WTF feeling like with LOST HIGHWAY (2 years earlier?) were some of the cineplex-proles were angered how Lynch pulled one on them but mostly, it clicked with people, they were trying to figure it out - that never happened with EWS.

That depends on who is watching. In any case, trying to figure things out is a lot more mandatory in Lost Highway or Mulholland Drive than it is in Eyes Wide Shut. Its questions and mysteries reside in the plot and are therefore a lot more prominent.

EWS isn't as bad as VANILLA SKY, but it feels as empty.

I like Vanilla Sky too but only up to the point where the explainer arrives to explain everything. But still, a far more interesting film than most other Tom Cruise pictures.

[publicist]

EWS was, at its core, a stilted and superficial exercise. I could not figure out (and in the end, didn't care) what Kubrick wanted to tell me and from what i could gather, many other people had the same reaction.

And yet there are countless of interpretations of what the film is about, but I stay away from those because, personally, I love it when certain things remain undefined. I also like it when I get the feeling the director isn't desperately trying to tell me something. It keeps revisiting is more rewarding. In fact, it stimulates me to watch a film more than once. I didn't really like EWS the first couple of times, but the last time I saw it was one of my best film viewing experiences of the last 10 years.

That sums up our different approach - i never would watch a film i initially didn't like multiple times again (what for? Because it's Kubrick? Nah...) So you get my initial reaction - an ultimately empty tale, blown up in scope by production values - basically a perfumed smokescreen with fancy flashes coming out.

I tried several times with A. I., a film so many found a profound experience, but i remained unconvinced by the same things which bothered me on first viewing.