![]() | ||||||
| ||||||
AUGUST 1999
| FEATURES
ALSO THIS MONTH
LAST MONTH
|
![]()
TIM CLIFTON
Stanley Kubrick's swan song work is a curious blend of star actors giving
solid performances, voyeurism, and dream - almost fugue like - imagery. "Eyes
Wide Shut" is a platypus of a movie - a strange and bizarre combination that is
at times riveting and exasperating. Movie goers expecting a "typical" Cruise
vehicle, whatever that is, will be disappointed. This film is an oddity in the
sense that no one except Kubrick made films like this, and so we will never see
the likes of it again (Kubrick died in
March of this year). Much like the contradictions that float through
Kubrick's films, this one has commercial stars and an art house mentality. The object of desire in this movie is Bill Hartford (Tom Cruise), a medical
doctor. And there's a neat little conceit here too, working on Cruise's movie
star status, because the audience is also a voyeur, much like all the characters
in the film are an audience to Cruise as a sexual object. Cruise is constantly
projected upon by strangers, men and women coveting his looks. And at first, he
appears to be oblivious to it. The story is precipitated by an argument between Hartford and his wife Alice
(Nicole Kidman) when they are stoned. Kidman is restless and talks about an
imagined affair which throws Cruise into a fit of jealousy. The apparent success
and tranquility of their marriage is suddenly unstable and fraught with doubt.
Cruise is happily married but is almost repressive at the same time, holding down
sexual fantasies that threaten their commitment and fidelity. So Cruise departs on a nighttime excursion that makes you think, at one time
or another, might be real, imagined, or a dream. He gains entrance to a sexual
masquerade party where he witnesses a smorgasbord of debauchery. This is also
the source of some controversy because of the digitally introduced figures to
mask sexual acts to achieve the desired R rating. This alteration is frustrating
because we don't get to see what the Cruise character is experiencing. Again, he
is a voyeur only, never a participant. There is the intimation of danger when he
is discovered, and this is where the movie is its most interesting - the sense
that things are going on behind the scenes, that danger lurks, that perhaps he
has set something in motion that will lead to disaster. Unfortunately, it turns out only to be Cruise's overactive imagination, and
all the perceived threats can be easily explained (including a death!), he
reconciles with his wife, and that, essentially is the film. And, simply, this
is the basic problem here, there is no story and the too long passages and
plodding pace are enervating. There is no payoff for the audience, the story has
no teeth. And like most Kubrick movies, it isn't obviously about the thing you
think it is (or should be) about. And sex, in particular, has always been the
object of jokes in Kubrick films. From copulating aircraft in "Dr. Strangelove"
to a comedy rape scene in "A Clockwork Orange". This movie plays on contradictions. The title alone evokes thoughts of
dreaming and wakefulness, fugue and alertness, safety and danger, the
subconscious and voluntary control and this is the heart of the conflict in the
movie. The contradictions are often subtle. Cruise at one point reads a
newspaper with a headline that reads "Lucky To Be Alive" while Mozart's Requiem
Mass plays in the background. But what is the message? That life is
unpredictable, unknowable? Life is what you make it? Maybe the point is that we,
as the audience, decide what path to take. While an interesting concept, it
doesn't make for an involving movie going experience. Cruise and Kidman are very effective in this film, and the anguish in their
relationship is well done, but they seem imprisoned by the lack of plot and
unusually grainy film (maybe I just saw a bad print). This film also doesn't have
the normal satirical bite one sees in Kubrick's best work. It makes you think
that if Kubrick had made this film twenty years ago it would have been much more
intense and dangerous. Kubrick hasn't made a great film since "A Clockwork Orange" in 1971. Since
then, he has been going out to pasture creatively - films that have wonderful
passages or moments are buried in usually static, antiseptic, or cliché
situations. For example, while the first half of "Full Metal Jacket" is intense
and overpowering, the transition to Vietnam is routine, cliché and
non-revelatory. "The Shining" just proved that Kubrick couldn't make a horror
film. And "Barry Lyndon", while beautifully shot, didn't have a strong enough
lead actor to pull it off. Kubrick was at his best when putting together the tension between different
objects, visuals and sound; and finding a new way to make an expression. One
excellent moment in "The Shining" is when Shelly Duvall discovers that her
husband, played by Jack Nicholson, is crazy - and it isn't the axe welding scene.
It's when Duvall looks at the novel that her husband has supposedly been working
on for months. She leafs vainly through hundreds of sheets of paper that just
read, over and over, "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy." It manages to
be scary and funny at the same time, and is the kind of intelligent revealing of
a story point of which Kubrick was a master. Kubrick also came up with the one
marriage of visuals and music that ad people still rip off in car ads, even to
this day: the use of waltz music and technology, as seen in the trip to the moon
in "2001". If you want to see Kubrick in top form, check out "Paths of Glory", "The
Killing", "Dr. Strangelove", "2001: A Space Odyssey", or "A Clockwork Orange".
These are the iconoclastic films that built Kubrick's enormous reputation. His
later films have flashes of brilliance but don't measure up to his early work.
And perhaps that is the last thing to say, that Kubrick was at the end of his
career, a man who set a very high bar as a director and technician for so many
years, who made films as a craftsman on his own time schedule and rules. You
have to take it all in: the unconventional plots, the wonderful visual imagery,
the contradictions, the at times simultaneously scintillating and dead dialog.
You often come out of his films marveling at his genius on the one hand and
wishing that you had been able to whisper suggestions to him on the other. TIM CLIFTON is Renaissance Online Magazine's staff movie reviewer. |
|||||
![]() |
||||||
Full Issue Contents | FEEDBACK | Questionnaire | Archive | Free Subscription |