For me the problem with the movie was that Kubrick took the book, written in 19th century Austria, and set it in modern day New York, but failed to update any of the cultural symbols and motifs. For example, in 19th century Europe the ultimate symbol of masculinity was the naval officer. Which is why Nicole Kidman’s character has that fantasy of bedding the man in uniform. But in today’s society, some associate a man in a clean white naval uniform with just the opposite! (I.e. Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas in the movie PHILEDELPHIA.)
Another example is Lee lee Sobieski’s Slavic father, as well as the seductive Hungarian man dancing with Nicole Kidman in the opening scene. In 19th century Europe, the eastern European men were stereotypically seen as mysterious, sexual deviants who could corrupt western European women, and men. Again, this association just doesn’t fit with the social and cultural stereotypes of today, much less American stereotypes.
So my question is, if the book was a commentary on social and cultural associations of 19th century Europe, what the heck was Kubrick’s movie suppose to be a commentary on?
It’s my impression that movie actors generally don’t show up at a set on a day when they don’t have any scenes to shoot. Thus, if Kidman and Keitel never had any scenes together, it would be unlikely for them to get the opportunity to fuck around (and I mean that figuratively) “backstage.”
I’ve seen most of Kubrick’s movies, but am certainly no expert on his motivations. Could it be that he didn’t intend any specific commentary on anything, but simply wanted to make an entertaining, mysterious film?
EWS was released July 16, 1999, exactly 30 years after Apollo 11
why?
they have the same destination
Over the Moon, Alice!
The Eye opening shot is the revealing of Isis, Egyptian goddess of the moon
Alice=Isis=Eyesis
Eyes wide closed=eyes wide clothed
clothes mask our whole being.
In the orgy there are more people clothed than naked.
He might have revealed too many symbols.
The ermine reference I have to believe is a reference to Davinci’s the Lady with an Ermine. Leelee looks cast according to this painting of the girl, Cecilia Gallerani, who was the mistress of Leonardo’s employer. she was about 16 at the time of the painting, Leelee was 16 at the release of EWS. The ermine is a short tailed weasel whose white coat was a traditional symbol of purity. I think she knows where he’s going and knows he isn’t a deviant, he’s pure of heart. note the building next to rainbow fashions is a freemasonic lodge. the movie is about the elite’s tools of mind control to give everyone else anxiety about sex by relating it to death, over the rainbow symbolizes entering beyond spectral light into the realm of spirit, which is why he stops in his tracks when she says that.
Not having any scenes together =never being on the sets at the same time, especially if both of you have scenes that day. Not saying that rumors were true, just that not having scenes together would not preclude them.
It’s not guarantees of course but it is unlikely,especially for big names. Generally in big Hollywood productions they try to minimize the time that stars spend on set and they don’t schedule a huge number of scenes in a day. And if someone isn’t in a lot of scenes, they try to schedule it so no highly paid cast member is waiting around. So even though it’s theoretically possible if two stars like them had no scenes together it’s very unlikely they got much opportunity to hang around during production.
I liked the movie, liked Cruise in it. Rewatching it last time (a couple years ago) I thought Kidman was not right for her role. The scene where she relates her encounter with the naval officer was a little cringe-worthy for me.
Well, I don’t feel that it’s just tin foil hat folly. Kubrick was an absolute genius filmmaker. So much so that it’s almost impossible to read ‘too much’ into his movies. Everything, and I mean everything that was in a Kubrick film was there for a reason. With its release on Blu-ray there are websites that have found dozens of previously unnoticed details about *2001 *some 40+ years later.
“That’s right, sir! [Fidelio] is the password… for admittance. But may I ask, what is the password… for the house?”
Maybe a better question is why let him into the party at all if he didn’t have the password?
But he couldn’t be certain since their voices would be muffled by the masks. What’s he going to say? “I was at this gangbang out on Long Island and I think I recognized Elliot Spitzer’s voice under his Mardi Gras mask?”
The whole point is to intimidate cruise since he is exposed to all but doesn’t know who any of them are.
Yeah, how did he know not to show up in a stormtrooper costume or something?
Funny story. My SO and I were shopping around wedding venues in Manhattan and one of them was this old mansion / social club place. While we were there they happened to be tuning a piano in another room, which made that “BING…BING…BING BING” sound, similar to the soundtrack. I’m like “I don’t know if we will do our wedding at this place, but I would definitely host an Eyes Wide Shut gangbang!”
I’ve been to a couple of parties where “Eyes Wide Shut” was the theme. The mask and cape were worn by the people participating in the ceremony. It was at a vacation resort where such theme nights were part of the atmosphere. However, only a small number (6-8 couples) of guests were participating.
I’ve got a funny story to goes with this. We met another couple there on “Eyes Wide Shut” night. The male half of the couple was very large - say 300 lbs and about four feet across the shoulders. He was a prison guard and had some interesting tattoos. He and his wife were sitting around drinking and telling stories after dinner when the ceremony started. Since we (and they) would never be mistaken as “pretty people”, we weren’t invited to participate.
The participants entered in their robes and mask and formed a circle. The staff starting playing the solemn Gregorian chant music. The participants started their ritual disrobing in their circle. Everyone, participants and voyeurs, are silent and serious. Mr. Prison Guard, in a loud, melodic voice, "You put your left foot in, you put your left foot out … "
I almost fell off the chair laughing. I don’t think everyone else found it as humorous as I did.
The movie is interesting to me because it contains the theme that “Rich People don’t have to follow the rules. They do secret things that the rest of us aren’t allowed to know.” This theme shows up literature and movies from time to time.
Several quirks about the movie bug me, though. If you going to have these super-secret parties in super-secret locations, why hire some nightclub piano player out of a club to play the organ. Why not just a good player a member of your circle? Their was nothing challenging or special about the music. Why not just play recorded music?
Why the ominous threats of dire consequences if you leaked their secrets? They weren’t doing anything illegal except for the drugs. They were doing the drugs at the ‘public’ Christmas party. I could imagine some of those involved would have their social standing improved if everyone knew they were involved in the high-end orgies. I guess there would be a real risk of getting tangled in a high-profile prostitution bust, because there is not much chance that the ladies walking around naked in the country manor weren’t highly-paid pros.
One scene I always liked, and I’m going from memory here, is when he has escaped the orgy/party at the mansion and decides to return (during the day) for some reason. He drives up to the closed gate and some people speed up to the gate and hand him a note addressed to him personally. Were they observing him and knew he was coming? Did they just assume he would return at some point?
