Logo

Cool News

Moriarty has more to say about EYES WIDE SHUT plus where to see the footage... yourself

Published at:  Mar 12, 1999 5:44:49 AM CST

Here's Moriarty with some clarification on the EYES WIDE SHUT ShoWest piece that was shown. Plus over at Countingdown.com they have thirty seconds of the footage in MPEG file format... Yes, there are naked Nicole Kidman shots here... Go... Enjoy... Oh... and look, there's a lampshade too!




Hey, Head Geek...

"Moriarty" here.

Just wanted to clarify something, since there seems to be a lot (and I
mean a L O T ) of inaccurate reporting about this. People are calling
the EYES WIDE SHUT footage that was shown at ShoWest a teaser trailer.
Dark Horizons is saying it's going to be attached to TRUE CRIME.
Other sites are also telling people to look for it in theaters.

That's all wrong.

Terry Semel was incredibly clear in his opening speech. This is not a
trailer. This was part of a scene, edited especially for ShoWest by
Kubrick. There is a real teaser ready, but this wasn't it. It will
be totally different. This was a glimpse, and that's all.

I think it's important that people realize that they won't see this
particular footage in the theater until it's in the movie on July 16,
just so they don't get their hopes up.

I think that should make things clear. Hope people start correcting
themselves soon. Until then...

"Moriarty" out.



    + Expand All

    Readers Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 6:23:36 AM CST

    Got It At Last

    by john shaft

    But where can I get the full 90 second version? I haven't seen it yet, so we shall see what it is like.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 7:12:10 AM CST

    Gimme a break.

    by pope buck 1

    I saw the clip last night on CNN Newsstand -- or about 30 seconds of it, all from the shoulders up. This was followed by a coy "And that's just what we could show you on TELEVISION!!!" Yeah, there must just be HORDES of impressionable youngsters watching CNN at 11pm Eastern Time, hoping for a glimpse of breast. Give me a f***ing break. When will TV start treating its adult viewers like adults?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 7:14:52 AM CST

    Yeah, Pope, know what you mean...

    by lynnbracken

    I agree. I watched Newstand (a program I enjoyed all the way through) until they got to the EWS. What the hell was that? I think it was less than 30 seconds even! Sheesh. I've pretty much given up seeing anything until I actually go see the movie. Oh well.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 8:15:28 AM CST

    Talking through it

    by vincent vega

    All the news programs who showed it, Entertainment Tonight Access Hollywood, Today Show etc. talked through it, I was just like 'what the hell? I don't give a shit about what you have to say just show me the teaser.'

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 8:59:59 AM CST

    be calm, people

    by pete23

    The clip was shown in the UK on Newsnight yesterday (a serious current affairs show) and though they faded it out towards the end, it was uncut and no-one spoke over it. And it wasn't particularly special, unless you knew it was from Mr K's last film. I'm sure the Trailer will be **an event** but this clip just doesn't live up to the hype everyone seems to be giving it (unless you REALLY like N. Kidman).

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 10:22:51 AM CST

    subliminals

    by akambe

    Deuce, you're absolutely right--I can verify this phenomenon. A flash of naked ladies, but on my screen it's a whole grid of them that's visible (about 5 wide by 3 high), every time I switch back to countingdown.com on Navigator from any other application. I must say, however, that it's not anywhere NEAR as exhillarating as the subliminal "Rescuers" footage...

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 10:22:53 AM CST

    Teaser/trailer/edited scene thing on TV

    by neuracnu

    Well, not all of it, anyway. CNN Newstand had the Star Wars trailer on last night, so I popped a tape in to make sure to catch it. Oh joyous day, for they also showed (what they could) of the teaser Mr. Moriarty speaks of. It doesn't say much... I believe the majority of the viewing public who aren't famaliar with Kubrick's work will see this as an ad for some chinsy porn flic. The fact that it has Cruise and Kidman will have 'em packing the theaters.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 11:37:56 AM CST

    Hey Eternal! Lighten up!

    by xyling

    How can you make an opinion like that based on that small clip of one scene? Would more explosions or some catchphrase line like "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH" make it look like a great movie?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 11:57:42 AM CST

    no thanks

    by l'auteur

    Much like Trailer B, I have no interest in seeing this or any other footage. I'm saving all of my orgasmic excitement for May 19th and July 16th. Then, when I see these movies, I'll explode in a supernova of joyous jism unlike everyone else who spoiled it for themselves by creating expectations. God damn hype. It ruins the theatrical experience. OH HAPPY DAYS!!! STAR WARS AND KUBRICK IN A TWO MONTH SPAN!!!!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 12:29:54 PM CST

    Expect natural children

    by haunted

    Great!. Kubrick teaching Cruise and Kidman how to have sex. Could this mean they'll have their own children now that they know how to do them?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 12:36:04 PM CST

    Is that a great body?

    by haunted

    Everybody talks about how beautiful is Kidman's body. Just for info, I'm a male and have bigger tits.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 12:56:19 PM CST

    What happened to her spectacles?

    by hollygolightly

    She had 'em on in the full-body shots (waist up) but was not wearing them in the head shots. I'm sure it was simply editing one scene onto another, but still a weirtd continuity error for a trailer. Especially when the trailer looked like they were showing a single scene.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 12:57:54 PM CST

    Natural Children?? How natural can they get...

    by hollygolightly

    ...when they will be born to a couple of freaking Scientologists?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 1:19:16 PM CST

    Nirvana song for EWS?

    by jimmer72

    Seeing as how Kubrick was "mainstream" enough to include a Chris Isaak song in his EWS promo, I hope and pray he was made aware of Nirvana's cover of "Where Did You Sleep Last Night" that closes out their "Live in NYC" disc. This song would be a fantastic choice to play over the EWS end credits. If you listen to the lyrics, they mesh perfectly with Kubrick's description of EWS as a tale of "obsession and jealousy." If anyone out there owns the CD, play the song, close your eyes, and imagine Cobain warbling while Kubrick's trademark white on black title cards flash by. The song itself gives me the chills, but the thought of a Nirvana/Kubrick pairing freezes my blood. Anyone agree?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 1:44:39 PM CST

    EWS in England

    by llololloy

    I don't know the validity of this for sure, but one of the british tabloids reported today that Eyes Wide Shut would be censored by the BBFC (ie, certain sexual and explicit scened would be cut from the final release version of the film in the UK).
    If anyone else knows info about this, I would be grateful.
    I would hate for the well known BBFC to go and butcher this film.
    I for one, want to see Kubricks final film how it was meant to be seen.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 1:47:22 PM CST

    Kidman's spetacles.

    by movie guy

    If you look closely you can see that she has them folded up in her hand.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 2:02:19 PM CST

    NC-17 or R

    by da_mexican

    If Cruise will be good in the film is not a factor in my opinion. He showed he has talent in Jerry M. The only bug I have with the film itself though, is now that the films god-like creator has passed, will the studio execs butcher the film if a NC-17 rating gets slapped on it. I read over at Cinescape.com that some Suit swore it would be rated "R". Well being that Stanley guarded his films up until the release prior to his demise, who will stand by the original cut to protect it?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 3:24:50 PM CST

    Lane (no other forum)

    by nether

    Has Lane ever liked ANYTHING? I see his name on every post board and it always has something diminutive or malicious to say. This strikes me as odd because if he didn't have an interest, he wouldn't ever visit. I know this isn't the right forum, but seriously, he never has a nice word for anything. He bashes Star Wars and its fans, he slaughters "Strange World", he hates all. Just out of curiosity, has he ever been kind to something or someone or is there some girl in his past that scarred him for life and he feels it necessary that he never be civil again. Wondering even further, has he ever posted without cursing. I myself am a professed sailor of the highest order, but really, sometimes too much makes me desensitized and his anger therefore carries no weight? ANYONE HAVE ANSWERS?!?

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 4:16:41 PM CST

    I can't give you answers...

    by lynnbracken

    but I can speculate. By the way, I didn't know Lane posted over on the CoAx side. I'll have to check it out. I think he might possibly be a frustrated writer. Everyone probably envisions him as a vein-bulging, eye popping heart-attack-waiting to happen, but he probably looks like a normal, regular guy. I think he likes stuff but likes ragging on it even better. I, for one, am highly entertained, and enjoy his rampages, and the responses to them by other posters. He sure pushes some people's buttons. On a slowish news day, it breaks the monotany (I just forgot how to spell.) Anyway, I enjoyed the diatribes about the people in the rain. If you missed his review of Cruel Intentions - it was hysterical. Prime Lane. As I said, the above is mere speculation. But I felt like responding.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 5:41:26 PM CST

    The Nirvana song idea

    by glitterstar180

    Definitely sounds wonderful. Great idea!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 12, 1999 10:14:57 PM CST

    Disappointment

    by mr_ripley

    With the death of Stanley Kubrick, I mourn the loss of his making "A/I", his sci-fi film he had been developing for years. It was reported that it would be his next film after he finished "Eyes Wide Shut". I am saddened to know that we will never see a new sci-fi masterpiece from Kubrick. I know it could never live up to "2001", but I wanted to see it. Instead we have a nudie romp through marital mind games. Am I excited to see Kubrick's last? I guess so, but I fear this could be another Roman Polanski-style disappointment, where kink replaces content.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 12:00:35 AM CST

    Nirvana cover?

    by tavis bickle

    Can someone please tell me who's the original musician? thanks

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 9:58:49 AM CST

    the nirvana cover

    by alex fugazi

    the original artist of "where did you sleep last night" that nirvana covered on their unplugged special was none other than the great huddie "leadbelly" leadbetter. leadbelly is one of the great, GREAT original guitarists from long ago. on Nirvana's Unplugged live in NYC CD you can hear them mention that leadbelly is one of their faves and kurt talking about trying to buy one of leadbelly's guitars....ok, thanks. stanley kubrick is a god!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 12:18:05 PM CST

    EWS: it's a trailer; its not a trailer

    by gnl

    Notwithstanding what Terry Semel said, the confusion arises from the fact that the scene is cut like a trailer. The Cruise, Kidman, Kubrick title cards certainly won't be in the finished film. It may not be THE trailer, but it's more like a trailer than a scene excerpt.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 12:55:23 PM CST

    Nirvana and Pink Floyd

    by l'auteur

    Nirvana's Unplugged is my favorite CD of the 90s but i think hoping that Kubrick uses Where Did You Sleep Last Night (argueably the best rack on the CD) is overly wishful thinking. He almost used Pink Floyd in 2001 and A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. If you play Pink Floyd's "Echos" (off MEDDLE) to JUPITER AND BEYOND THE INFINITE, it fits PERFECTLY!!! start the track at the "Jupiter" title card and watch it end EXACTLY when the losing credits begin! the song was written for the movie but Kubrick nixed it at the last minute!!!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 2:21:59 PM CST

    Reasons for Nirvana song/end credits

    by jimmer72

    Well, obviously it's wishful thinking, but let me (hopefully briefly) explain some more. 1) Thematically: it's in keeping with past song choices for closing credits in that it would be by a well-known artist or group (like the Stones' "Paint It, Black") and, "Sleep" being a live tune, has the sound of audience applause at the end (a'la "Moonlight, the Stars & You" from THE SHINING). 2) Source material: According to some reports I've read, including Baxter's Kubrick biography, EWS is based in part on F. Raphael's novella "Where Did You Sleep Last Night"... well, that may not be the exact title, but I believe it's pretty damn close (I don't have the biography with me to check). And 3) Because the live track has extended applause at the end, it would double as a nice, final touch to Kubrick's coda, as in, it could be the sound of all of Kubrick's admirers and peers giving him one last hurrah. I realize I'm in love with my own idea, but I just listened to the song about an hour ago and damn if it didn't sound downright perfect. Of course it's too late to get the idea out to the Kubrick camp, but it's fun to dream once in a while. Ah, well.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 2:27:26 PM CST

    Mr. Ripley: good contentions

    by hal9000

    AI would've reinvigorated the science fiction genre if Kubrick would've lived to see the vision realized on screen. I too am agonizing over the fact that Stan the man never got the chance to get the project in development due to his untimely demise. Damn good point about how everyone's expectations could be shattered over the kinky content (ala Polanski). I still can't believe that on July 16 I'll have the pleasure of bearing witness to a brand spanking new Kubrick film. I'm sure that the film will earn upwards of 100 million, regardless of the rating. The film has manifested so much hoopla over the excessive shooting schedule, the last minute reshoots, and ultimately Kubricks death that speculation and curiosity is inevitable.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 2:36:56 PM CST

    gnl's got the right idea

    by sardonicus

    You're right, gnl, it's not a trailer or even a teaser that was shown at ShoWest (and I think Moriarty said that, too). Studios usually put together a clip reel to show the theater owners. If a trailer is available, that's shown, but Terry Semel said this was a clip Kubrick selected to show specifically at ShoWest. I'd like to know if an actual trailer is coming, but I don't expect one, since Full Metal Jacket seemed to come out of nowhere. I don't remember a trailer for that at all. It's likely Kubrick had the belief that trailers give away too much. In any case, the clip is minimal in content, but rich in subtext. The two characters are obviously not the shy, introverted type, despite Nicole's granny glasses. The bedroom seems well-appointed, suggesting they're well-off, and Nicole's character is distracted toward the end of the clip, there's something more she'd like. Anyone who thinks the clip doesn't show anything should consider this. That's gonna be some flick.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 13, 1999 4:13:22 PM CST

    WOW!

    by tom416

    I watched the 30 second teaser, and was amazed. I can't wait for this movie! I felt the teaser was very erotic, I hope the rest of the movie is not a let down.

    Reply to Talkback

  • Mar 16, 1999 3:26:50 PM CST

    Britain's censors and Eyes Wide Shut

    by garypainter

    I wouldn't worry about the British Board of Film Classification cutting a Kubrick film. Firstly, it's Kubrick, and they traditionally treat directors of his standard more leniently than others (would the violence in Casino have been cut if it was in a straight-to-video actioner??).

    Secondly, the BBFC are not so much concerned with sex - it is violence that grinds their gears more these days. Put it this way - Lars Von Triers The Idiots has just been passed uncut for British cinems, and I can't see Eyes Wide Shut being any more explicit than that, no matter how bonkers the dearly departed Mr Kubrick was!

    Reply to Talkback

  • Jul 12, 2006 7:52:24 AM CDT

    I say, old chap, there is rather a lot of bush in this.

    by wolfpack

User Login

Forgot password? Retrieve it here

or register as new user

Quick Talkback Form

Please login to post talkback