Movie News

Moriarty Has His EYES WIDE SHUT!!!

Published at: March 10, 1999, 8:29 p.m. CST by staff

Well Geeks the professor did it! Moriarty slipped the web strung before him and attended the ShoWest presentation for EYES WIDE SHUT. Father Geek has just received his report and will past it on to you with little comment except to say that he uses words like: POWERFUL, PROVOCATIVE, REAL MENACE, VERY CLEARLY R-RATED, and lastly VINTAGE KUBRICK. Great work Doctor! And I will add to that GREAT WORK STANLEY!!! BRAVO!!! BRAVO!!! BRAVO!!!

Hey, Head Geek (and Father Geek)...

"Moriarty" here.

Well, they did it. Warner held true to their promise, and they actually showed the world the first EYES WIDE SHUT footage anywhere today during their giant lunchtime presentation. There's very little chance this will be showing up on ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT any time soon, so read up, everyone. Here's my impressions of what we were shown and how we were shown it.

Warner did their entire lunch without mentioning Kubrick's name once (the report on the whole thing is forthcoming, everyone, I promise), until after the very last trailer was shown.

At that point, a single light came on in the Event Center, and Terry Semel stepped back up to the mic. He began simply, "Before we show the footage from EYES WIDE SHUT, I'd like to clarify a few points about what you're going to see and what we've seen. Last week, Bob, Tom Cruise, Nicole, and myself were fortunate enough to view Stanley's final cut in New York. It is an extraordinary film. We feel very lucky to be able to release it this year." As he spoke, there was obvious emotion in his voice. This was not just business as usual for the man. He was deeply touched by the situation he found himself in. "A few things were obvious from this viewing. First, this is very clearly an R-rated film. Second, this is not just a great piece of cinema... it's a great story about a husband and a wife caught in the grips of sexual obsession. What you are about to see is a segment of a scene, not a trailer. This was specially prepared by Stanley for you, the ShoWest audience. Last Saturday morning, Stanley called me to rehearse exactly what I would say in describing the film. He was obviously excited, and I think it's safe to say that he died with a big grin on his face regarding this project. The world has not just lost a master filmmaker here. We've lost a very important member of the Warner Bros. family, a man I've spoken with constantly over the years. We had a wonderful experience together, and I'm sorry to see these 25 years end. With that in mind, please enjoy your first look at EYES WIDE SHUT."

The lights went down and there was a long moment of silence. Finally, the Warner Bros. logo came up. As it faded to black, the sounds of Chris Isaak's "Baby Done A Bad, Bad Thing" began to play, filling the auditorium. FADE IN on Nicole Kidman standing in front of a mirror, back to the camera. She is completely nude except for a pair of glasses. Thanks to the counter under the mirror, we get a reflected view of her from the waist up. She's dancing slightly, swaying, as she studies herself. One breast, then another comes into view. Tom Cruise steps in from frame right, also nude, shot from the waist up. He moves up close to Nicole, takes her in his arms, and begins to kiss her neck, touch her breasts.

There are three names flashed by suddenly, each against a black background. CRUISE in red. KIDMAN in yellow. KUBRICK in blue.

Back to the same scene. We're a little closer now, moving in on the couple. Tom seems to be passionate about the moment, into it, but Nicole seems removed. She turns so she can study herself in the mirror again, without Cruise being aware of her distraction. She takes off her glasses, her face totally impassive.

Against that black screen again, we see the three names flash by, quicker. CRUISE. KIDMAN. KUBRICK.

Back to the same scene, and we're much closer now to the two of them. Nicole's face almost fills the screen. Tom is just peripheral to the moment. She stays locked on her own eyes in the mirror as the Chris Isaaks song builds to a crescendo, her face a mask.

Suddenly the names flash by one last time, this time so fast they're almost subliminal, and are replaced by EYES WIDE SHUT written in yellow, followed by the date, July 16.

And that was it. What do I get from that? A very strong sense that what we're in for is nothing that American mainstream audiences have ever seen from a major A-list filmmaker with this kind of A-list cast. There's real menace in the image, in the cutting, in the way the song is used. It's powerful, provocative, and showed us absolutely nothing. It was all suggestion, and it was vintage Kubrick.

All in all, it lives up to his reputation and promises real greatness to come. The presentation was confident, brief, in control.

I am honored to have been in Las Vegas today. I deeply, deeply miss Stanley Kubrick already, but I am heartened beyond words at the thought of his last film. The fact that the final cut is what was screened makes me feel even better.

And on a personal note, I want to offer my heartfelt condolences to Kubrick's family and friends and to his professional colleagues past and present. I can only imagine the loss you must feel right now, and it's only compounded by the surge of public discussion of his last piece of work. It must be a very hard time, and I think it was incredibly generous of you to share this glimpse into the Master's last film with us under such circumstances.

I'll have more for you later. Until then...

"Moriarty" out.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • March 10, 1999, 8:40 p.m. CST

    Already on TV....

    by Pookers

    I saw the "teaser" on E! TV around six o'clock pacific time...bad ass...I agree with all stated earlier by Moriarty...it is supposed to be on the Channel 4 news (the same channel Access Hollywood is on) around 11 oclock again...cooL!

  • March 10, 1999, 8:41 p.m. CST

    wow

    by johnnythunder

    i got goose bumps from just reading this. this sounds so incredible. i think we should all be thankful that kubrick was able to leave us with one last completed masterwork. great report moriarty. your the man

  • March 10, 1999, 8:43 p.m. CST

    Saw it on e.t.

    by GLUTTONY

    Well typical to entertainment tonight they showe about 7 seconds and feigned shock of nicole and tom being naked but i was in awe of actuly seeing something by the master in his final work. Thank you for making me a cinema lover stanley thank you very much.

  • March 10, 1999, 8:44 p.m. CST

    This was just shown on the news!!!

    by Shotgun

    Caught it on two different stations in NYC. channel 9 showed the whole thing, blurring out Nicole's breasts, and Channel 11 showed a cut down, less sexy version (they talked over the whole thing too).

  • March 10, 1999, 8:47 p.m. CST

    This Sounds So Cool

    by Henry_Krinkle

    It's appropriate that EWS is ending the millennium, since it clearly has the potential to be truly and astonishingly great. The description of what was shown in Vegas certainly doesn't disappoint. Kudos, too, to Moriarty's superb delineation of the moment-by-moment elements of this teaser trailer.

  • March 10, 1999, 9:10 p.m. CST

    Don't over react

    by Taxman

    I wish people would stop saying this is so cool when it's basically nothing. I'm not expecting this film to be great. It may be, but don't get your hopes up. The main indication that has put me in this frame of mind is the casting. Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. Not to say anything against their acting ability, but this is an ad exec's dream. This teaser already show's what WB's marketing campaign will be like. 'Look, it's got Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, and they're naked!'. If that's the major selling point of the film then I'm sure it'll do well at the box office, but it doesn't indicate a classic film. And another thing, why did they claim this was a segment of scene. Is the whole film going to have CRUISE KIDMAN KUBRICK flashing through it? (just kidding). And why are the names in that order, surely it should just be KUBRICK. Do they feel Kidman is more important than Kubrick?

  • March 10, 1999, 9:15 p.m. CST

    Kidman OWNS the Kubrick stare

    by Maul99

    Man, this film is going to blow mainstream audiences away. Watching Kidman's aloof, detached demeanor was totally turning me on. She has mastered the "Kubrick Stare" perfectly. After July 16th, people are going to be talking about this movie for a long time.

  • March 10, 1999, 9:40 p.m. CST

    Read More Carefully, People!

    by mrbeaks

    For once, give Warner Bros. a break; the "preview" was prepared by Kubrick.

  • March 10, 1999, 10:39 p.m. CST

    Mr. Kubrick...

    by Nannnoo

    sigh......

  • March 10, 1999, 11:19 p.m. CST

    What about the phone?

    by Edward Peregrine

    Does this mean the 20 second yellow phone teaser that was discussed the last couple days is NOT the EYES WIDE SHUT teaser? Anybody know? Will anybody talk (besides the illustrious Mr. Moriarty)?

  • March 10, 1999, 11:59 p.m. CST

    change of plan

    by DiceDano

    fuck Star Wars, bring on Eyes Wide Shut

  • March 11, 1999, 12:43 a.m. CST

    Coincidence?

    by SkinFLute

    Im sorry, its just too perfect, if Stanley had died a week earlier the film would have been forever "unfinished." If he had died a week earlier the 18 months put into this film would have been wasted. If he'd died earlier, EWS wouldn't have gotten nearly this much press this early. How come no one else is as conspiracy-minded as me? Good work M.

  • March 11, 1999, 1:40 a.m. CST

    EWS slogan: You'll believe....

    by MRE

    "You'll believe that Tom Cruise is not gay." I personally think they're ripping off the Superman:the movie slogan "You'll believe a man can fly." But Kubrick can make you believe this it would be his greatest achievement.

  • March 11, 1999, 2:32 a.m. CST

    Hopes and Fears

    by breakdown

    I've been a Kubrick fan since I was ten. He is probably the biggest reason I wound up in film school and in Hollywood. But I just saw that clip and I have to say, I think we could all be in for a very big disappointment. My biggest fear is that Kubrick attempted a subject that is far beyond his grasp -- sexuality. The images that have Moriarty and others enthralled, leave me limp. See Tom. See Tom stand on an orange crate so that he looks like he's the same height as his wife when he's really dwarfed by her. See Tom have sex with his wife. Probably the only time he ever has or ever will. I have this creeping sense of dread that this is Kubrick's last ditch effort at commerciality. The biggest stars in a sex film with all the attendant publicity that that can muster. It all seems too adolescent. Like we're all still in junior high and the idea of movie stars doing the humpty is a giggle fest, and it gets us stiff or wet in the undies. Did the future arrive and reveal that Stanley was a true internet porno downloading geek at heart? I mean, when you start chumming it up with guys like Bob Daly and Terry Semel, just how hip and creative can you be? Not VERY! I could be dead wrong and I hope I am. But I have this bad feeling. I think Kubrick finally figured out two things: 1) what studio executives think makes a great film 2) what mainstream audiences will go pay to see for three weeks and then forget about. Say it ain't so, Joe!

  • March 11, 1999, 4:44 a.m. CST

    The Big Breakfast

    by Morph

    The Big Breakfast showed part of this trailer for EWS this morning at about 7:ooam. The Star Wars trailer is a definite for tomorrow.(FRI)

  • March 11, 1999, 5:13 a.m. CST

    No....

    by LOS GORDOS

    The names Cruise and Kidman do not make me think this will be a classic or stunning film -- but the name KUBRICK does. I have watched and re-watched many of master K's films throughout my 25 years. But as I re-viewed many of them over the last few months in anticipation and preparation for EYES WIDE SHUT, I have come to one conclusion : even his so-callled minor or flawed works (Barry Lyndon; Full Metal Jacket) are films which push and sometimes break the boundaries of the film language of their time from their pre-defined limits. Think about it people, and STOP taking it for GRANTED, film has barely been around for a hundred years, yes FILM the medium which defines our culture and in many ways and most probably it defines YOU more than you'd care to admit -- and within the realm of this medium Kubrick is up there in the stars with the monolithic figures who helped define it. Yeah EWS might "suck" or maybe it will "rock" but phrases like that can never begin to cover or describe the lifetime achievment of a man who lived for film and re-defining what it meant to human civiliziation. Even with the extra hype that is sure to be generated by Kubrick's death, his last film. just like all his others, is one that probably won't be truly understood and appreciated until many years after it's release.

  • March 11, 1999, 7 a.m. CST

    Just saw it on TV...

    by howsannie

    Already this looks fantastic, steamy, tasteful, powerful. Mmmmm... Nicole. As the old saying goes, "All good things come from Australia"

  • March 11, 1999, 9:07 a.m. CST

    EYES RIGHT, EYES LEFT, "Lovely party, isn't it?" Nope.

    by bob g

    Folks! Let's not forget, one shot, even if it's got boobs and attitude, and even if it took sixty-seven takes (average Kubrick behavior) does not a movie make! An example - "torrents of blood issue from the elevator" - and THE SHINING was still a big, beautiful mess, a virtual yawn, except for the manic energy of Jack Nicholson. Let's hold on to reality a WEE bit.

  • March 11, 1999, 9:16 a.m. CST

    To Edward Peregrine - re phone thing...

    by lynnbracken

    There was a post a couple of days ago from someone named Embo - who said it was a film trailer regarding a movie called something like "Old Yellow Phone" about a phone in a dorm and the various people who use it and their lives - set in the 70s and starring a bunch of WB actors. EMBO said Joel Schumacher was attached in some way. I don't know if it's true or not - that's just what he said. Sounded like he knew from whence he spaketh. Go figure. RE: EWS - I don't know if it's going to be a just a big bunch of eye candy or something really fabulous - but I can't wait!

  • March 11, 1999, 9:28 a.m. CST

    Please update

    by Marco99

    on this forum when you find out if it will be shown on Access Hollywood or ET or any other national show. I'm real curious to see what it's going to look like. As for the person who said ther was no reason to think this film would be great, how bout the fact that Kubrick has yet to make a film which wasn't great (I agree that even his least respected works qualify for greatness, I absolutely love FMJ and Barry Lyndon) probably his worst films are Lolita and Spartacus but they definitely qualify as classics. Anybody here seen Killers Kiss? Another classic which broke boundaries untouched in cinema (a dream sequence very similar to the end of 2001, reverse film and all).Combine that with the fact that Kubrick may have said this would be his greatest film ever and it's almost certain that EWS is going to be the years best film. Let me pose this question to many of you, though, If you had to see either this or the star wars new movie but were definitely going to never see the other one which one would it be? I'd choose EWS. Something tells me I'm in the minority on this one.

  • March 11, 1999, 10:44 a.m. CST

    Congrats . . .

    by The Graduate

    Bravo to Kubrick for putting together such a tantalizing peek at his new movie, bravo to Moriarty for describing it so vividly, and bravo to Warners (when was the last time any of us said that?) for having the balls to show it in such an important venue and for implying that they will stick with Kubrick's "final cut." Stay on them, everyone! Incidentally, any chance this sneak-peak will show up on the Net? (It's clearly not "the trailer" because of the content, so I don't expect to see it in the theater.)

  • March 11, 1999, 11:10 a.m. CST

    A Very Typical Backlash

    by mrbeaks

    For those of you who doubt Kubrick's "independence," read his biography, and learn otherwise. Besides, doesn't it make sense to be at least a little "chummy" with the folks who distribute your films worldwide, as well as grant you complete autonomy over your projects? Please understand that, by and large, studios are not evil entities. They can be infuriating, but they certainly aren't the creativity-squashing beasts many of you believe them to be.

  • March 11, 1999, 11:12 a.m. CST

    KUBRICK IS GOD

    by L'Auteur

    tweaking tweaking tweaking tweaking tweaking! I AM TWEAKING! STAR WARS is my all time fave movie but i have to admit, im worried about how well Lucas will deliver. Kubrick on the other hand is GOD. Therefore, I KNOW this movie will kicketh ass! Oh My God I cannot wait anymore. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

  • March 11, 1999, 11:16 a.m. CST

    THIS IS GOING TO BE HOT!!!!!!!!

    by Niks977

    There couldn't be a better way to end the decade. I was looking so forward to this movie, no I really can't wait for July 16, 1999. I was watching the Fox5 10:00 News last night here in New York and they showed a teaser with a part of that scene with a subtitle Sizzlin on the bottom and I knew that I had to see it. The excitement that went through my body was amazing. Kubrick's done it again. A great end to a great life. You guys are right, Nicole has that stare down. She did that so well. This movie is going to be great. I'll be the first person in line

  • March 11, 1999, 12:03 p.m. CST

    The trailer

    by Uncapie

    Hmmmm, interesting....

  • March 11, 1999, 1:01 p.m. CST

    reply to lynnbracken

    by Edward Peregrine

    Sorry, I don't buy your response. Haven't you figured out by now any time the words "Joel Schumacher" pop up on this page they are used in ridicule and vehalance? That post was obviously not meant to be taken seriously. Does anyone have a REAL answer to my question?

  • March 11, 1999, 1:43 p.m. CST

    Saw it last night

    by xyling

    Document Contains No Data Document Contains No Data Document Contains No Data FIX IT! The short was on the news last night in LA with digital blurring of course. I didn't get much of an impression from it, except Nicole Kidman looks as good as ever. The lighting was VERY bright, the skin was very washed out looking- I don't know if that was a transfer to TV thing or if the movie is going to have some unique lighting like this. The titles were very cool- big blocks of color "Cruise Kidman Kubrick" Can't wait. Kubrick was a god among directors, for those who think he was average or mediocre, you don't understand art.

  • March 11, 1999, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Saw it last night

    by xyling

    Document Contains No Data Document Contains No Data Document Contains No Data FIX IT! One more thing... What was that music that went with the clip? Anybody recognize it?

  • March 11, 1999, 1:52 p.m. CST

    Also was shown on french TV

    by Equi

    French TV Canal+ showed the clip tonight. I wonder how your prude American are going to reac to something like that...

  • March 11, 1999, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Lucky spanish geeks....

    by JRRR

    We could see the trailer in Spain. It has been showed in the news at 3:00 PM. Enterely. No cuts. Sometimes I really love my country

  • March 11, 1999, 2:50 p.m. CST

    Uh Oh

    by Taxman

    Ok, I've seen the clip for myself now, in it's entirety. Am I the only one who's thinking soft-porn film here? The set-up sounds like classic late night cable: Psychiatrists having affairs with their clients and decending into deeper debauchery, this seems to be the extent of the known plot (to me anyway). And that clip. What was with that lighting? The naked 'stars' awash in an erotic golden glow that seems to come from no where. Soft porn film. I'd just like to point out to people that whatever greatness Kubrick has done in the past (god bless his soul), there is nothing inherently artistic about this scene. It's just two naked people. I have the most absurd feeling that Kubrick is playing a huge joke, a big trick. He's turned out a soft porn film as the last deed of an insane genius maverick director with Cruise and Kidman his perhaps unwitting accomplices. I mean why not? What's he got to lose? Is that the real reason Keitel left? Was he onto Kubricks plan? Maybe it is no joke and Kubrick was just a dirty old man enjoying his chance to see Nicole and Tom make out, take-after-take-after-take-after-take. Now I'm half joking here, but I believe in taking each film on it's own merits. You people seem to have already decided you like this film because it's directed by Kubrick. Apart from that, there is absolutely nothing to say that this film will be great, certainly not the short scene that was shown. The only people who have seen the whole film are warners execs, and I'm sure they said Batman and Robin was a great film too, so I hardly think they can be trusted... Just thought I'd add a little pessimism to the overflowing optimism about this film.

  • March 11, 1999, 3:14 p.m. CST

    This is going to be sooooo cool!

    by W. Leach

    Any scrap of information I can get on EYES WIDE SHUT makes my day. Imagine my delight when I read the above!! I cannot wait for this masterpiece to be released. I'll be there opening day (and several times after I would imagine), just to savor this last piece of film from the greatest director of all time. Thank you, Mr. Kubrick for thirteen wonderful films.

  • March 11, 1999, 4:03 p.m. CST

    Check out the official site

    by Kefrif

    The official site has changed from the white background thing. Check it out - http://www.eyeswideshut.com Fitting....

  • March 11, 1999, 4:04 p.m. CST

    exploitation flick as swan song?

    by Tavis Bickle

    Kubrick making a stag movie? What balls! What a sense of humor!

  • March 11, 1999, 5:59 p.m. CST

    Conspiracy

    by Benjamin Raspiel

    Maybe it's just the Oliver Stone in me that believes that SkinFlute's suspicion (viz., that the timing of Kubrick's death was, don't you think, awfully convenient, seeing as how the film was "just shown" the "week before") has some validity and merit. Is it possible that Kubrick's people (in conjunction with WB brass, and like-minded individuals) are pulling a Linda McCartney-esque fast one on us? In other words, did Kubrick die this past weekend, or was it a month ago? The only reason I mention it is, I vividly recall a talkback posting, here on AICN (it was a report about a possible TINTIN movie, actually) in which somebody reported something they heard (allegedly from the BBC) vis-a-vis Kubrick's death. This was about a month or so ago. The reports were relegated to "rumor" status the following day. But if Kubrick DID die weeks ago, and there was concern that the public wouldn't go see EWS unless it received the final stamp of approval by the master, perhaps a delay in announcing the man's unfortunate passing (a la what Paul did with Linda) was implemented. Just wondering. (It's certainly a sad day for cinema, regardless of the actual timing of the man's passing.)

  • March 11, 1999, 8:54 p.m. CST

    Eyes Wide Shut and A Clockwork Orange

    by darius25

    For any one who doubts Kubrick's latest film, just go rent A Clockwork Orange and watch it again. Anyway, for those who havent seen the trailer for this movie, relax and be patient. Some edited scenes were ON ET tonight but they might also be on Access Hollywood. Also, go checkout the trailer for A Clockwork Orange. It is absolutely amazing. P.S. This is a stupid question but can someone please explain the title of A Clockwork Orange. What does this mean ? Thanks.

  • March 11, 1999, 11:48 p.m. CST

    Hey TAXMAN

    by Palmer Eldritch

    Don't you wanna be playing outside, pulling the wings off flys or something?

  • March 12, 1999, 5:39 a.m. CST

    I hope this will be a great film

    by Hyperion

    What is so special about this trailer? You see two famous stars naked! Is this really such great thing for americans? When you see a trailer where they shoot people you do not even mention it, but when you see two naked people, you make a great discussion. Why are you so prude? Is a murder more 'normal' than a sex scene? But now for the film: I hope that this movie will be great, but I don't want to see a soft porno. I want to see great scenes, great feelings and a great plot. But I'm not really concerned, because if Kubrick's film is the same like his older works, than it will be a big hit and a great film.

  • March 12, 1999, 5:42 a.m. CST

    Blue Movie

    by Dandini

    I can't believe that with all this umming and ahhing over whether or not the late, great Stanley has made a porno nobody has mentioned the fact that one of his pet projects - as long ago as Dr. Strangelove - was to make the world's first commercial, major-studio-backed porno movie. It was originally called Blue Movie and came about when he was watching 8mm porno reels (I think, feel free to correct my history as I'm quoting from memory). Couldn't Eyes Wide Shut be the culmination of this wish? Having said that, I can't think of anyone more sexless than Tom Cruise. I hope they prove me wrong, but on-screen pairings played by real life couples have traditionally been a bit cack. Still, here's hoping...

  • March 12, 1999, 8:41 a.m. CST

    music for Kubrick clip

    by PoldenHike

    That music is Chris Issak's "Baby did a Bad Bad Thing". ET did run (parts) of the clip last night, as I'm sure many of you know by now, as well as the newest PHANTOM MENACE trailer in it's entireity. Kubrick, Kubrick, Kubrick. Happy, Happy, Happy (and Nicole does look GREAT naked - wow).

  • March 16, 1999, 3:24 a.m. CST

    Masterpiece?

    by Jez

    I'm not doubting that Kubrick is a master of the cinema. What really matters is what the artist and their audience appreciate. The preview I saw of EWS, however, reeks of Tommy Lee and Pamela Anderson. I will be curious to see this movie in its entirety so I can draw my final conclusions.

  • July 11, 2006, 11:35 a.m. CST

    He mustn't have liked the movie, then.

    by Wolfpack