EYES WIDE SHUT
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule: What starts as an exploration of
sexual mores takes a turn for the bizarre, then
becomes a paranoia suspense thriller with an
unexpected nod to 18th century European history.
This film is probably not as erotic as people might
be expecting, nor is it a deep self-contemplative
piece, but it still is a surprisingly rewarding
film. Rating: 7 (0 to 10), low +2 (-4 to +4).
SPOILER WARNING: Following the review (and a
spoiler warning) I have a historical note relevant
to the plot of this film.
The way to become rich in the American entertainment industry is to give the public what it wants. Evidently what the public wants is to see Nicole Kidman nude. Last season Broadway offered NICOLE KIDMAN NUDE: THE PLAY, officially titled THE BLUE ROOM. The draw of this play was apparently from all the publicity that one got with the price of a ticket a quick look at Nicole Kidman starkers. And free with the look you got a reputedly mediocre play about sexual mores.
But most of the country could not get to Broadway to see this theatrical indelicacy. Now no less a filmmaker than the late Stanley Kubrick brings to the screen NICOLE KIDMAN NUDE: THE MOTION PICTURE, officially titles EYES WIDE SHUT. The film is not based on THE BLUE ROOM--it just happens to be another story about sexual mores. Kubrick himself is no stranger to the act of bringing heavenly bodies to the motion picture screen. But I do not remember another film that has so titillated the audience into wanting to see the body of a major character since GODZILLA. And in fact, Kidman does show off her body so frequently and so gratuitously in the early part of this film we can only conclude that she has decided she likes doing it. The irony is that her character's nudity and even her sexuality is only tangential to the main line of the plot. Most of the scenes of nudity, the first one being a good 60 seconds into the film, are added totally gratuitously.
As the film opens successful young physician William Harford (Tom Cruise) and his wife Alice (his wife Kidman), a stylish and wealthy New York couple, are preparing to go out for the evening. They are going to a Christmas party at the palatial home of the well-connected Victor Ziegler (Sydney Pollack). When they get to the party both Harfords find themselves being seduced by other guests. William is set upon by two young models, Alice by a somewhat older Hungarian Lothario (Sky Dumont) who quotes Oscar Wilde as if the wit was his own. The Harfords each resist, but the tension later causes a rift in their marriage that has them each questioning their relationship. But that disagreement is only the background for the central action, a bizarre chain of incidents sparked by a chance meeting at the party.
That evening the Harfords have a sort of sophomoric argument on sexuality that does little more than show that both William and Alice are each in their own ways naive about sex. Kubrick allows the argument, and much that follows it, to go on way too long. With 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY Kubrick started pacing his film more slowly. Going counter to the trend of films moving faster, Kubrick has made the pacing of his films more deliberate and occasionally more textured. In this pacing some points get really belabored. A few of his sequences seem to go on much too long and his storytelling is characterized by foot-dragging.
EYES WIDE SHUT is not in all ways a well-directed film in spite of the Kubrick name. Cruise's acting style seems limited to facial expression. There is little emotional impact in his performance. Kidman goes through a wider emotional range more believably, but still there is nothing impressive done here. Ironically Spartacus and Varinia in SPARTACUS make a more compelling couple than William and Alice played by an actual husband and wife in EYES WIDE SHUT. Stanley Kubrick's final film surprises the viewer with an engaging thriller plot involving a sinister forces having their roots in history. There are some surprising problems with the film but it is not without its moments of delight. I rate it a 7 on the 0 to 10 scale and a low +2 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler...
The society that we see portrayed in this film is almost certainly based on one that did exist, though the original probably died out in the middle 18th century. The original is popularly called the Hellfire Club (though members called themselves "The Monks of Medmenham") and it was for a time an important force in European, and particularly British, politics. Like the society that Kubrick shows us here it was a secret society; even most members may not have known who the other members were. The secret society combined satanic mysticism--either real or feigned, probably some of both--and orgies.
The founder and leader of the secret society was Sir Francis Dashwood, an influential Member of Parliament and eventually Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is not known with any sureness who else was a "monk." One person who it is strongly rumored was a member or perhaps only an honorary member but a repeated guest was Benjamin Franklin. The Earl of Sandwich was certainly also a member. (As an aside, if his name sounds a little funny the latter was not surprisingly also an avid gambler. His unwillingness to leave the gaming table to eat caused him to invent a food concoction more portable than a plate of food. He would grasp a piece of meat in the hand between two slices of bread. And that's the origin of the "sandwich" and of its name.)
Other members of the Hellfire Club included painter William Hogarth and politician John Wilkes. The club met and had their orgies and their strange ceremonies at Medmenham Abbey. Meeting at the chapel of the abbey and at the West Wycombe caves near the Dashwood estate, the club held strange ceremonies and orgies very much like the ones we saw in the film. For more information, read http://www.blather.net/archives3/issue3no1.html.
Mark R. Leeper
mleeper@lucent.com
Copyright 1999 Mark R. Leeper
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews