ONLY READ IF YOU'VE SEEN THE FILM

Rating: Null/10 (11 August 1999)

I feel especially compelled to comment on Eyes Wide Shut because I have noticed a huge disparity between the reviews for this film (mostly negative or middle-of-the-road) and those for The Blair Witch Project (beyond enthusiastic). Others have commented on the latter being evidence of the critics' pack mentality, but it seems also to be a form of envy.
Kubrick had no use for the press. Never gave interviews. Wouldn't give sneak details that would allow others to hype his work in advance (I can't understand those that felt this was hyped to be a big sex flick...hyped by who exactly? Unless being silent is your idea of hyping something). Therefore, one of the greatest filmmakers of all time was, except for a short period surrounding his death, the most criticized. His work is cold. His work has no human element. In recent years we've had to endure remakes (or "new versions") of Lolita and The Shining because the new filmmakers felt Kubrick's original was in so many ways lacking. Am I insane to wonder if there is a connection between his lack of communication with these critics and their own willingness to dismiss him?
One critique in particular has been everywhere and seems to be the new critical catch phrase "________ is more erotic than all of Eyes Wide Shut". You see this everywhere, fill in the blank -- "Rene Russo is more erotic in one scene of Thomas Crown than...", "American Pie is sexier and more fun than...". Again I ask, who promised you erotic and sexy? Kubrick? Did he ever say, "Hey I got this amazing orgy scene where people are naked everywhere and it's guaranteed to get you hot!" or anything even similar to that. No, of course not. And, one would have to reaching to suggest that this was ever his intent. So, then how can you criticize someone for failing to do something that he never meant to do.
Instead, many things about this film continue to remain with me. There are few subjects more interesting to me than watching a character take a walk on the wild side and have no comprehension of just how wild that side might be. Tom Cruise's character clearly thinks he's going to go to this costume party orgy where he'll be able to get off and indulge his burgeoning sexual adventurousness. Then he arrives to discover some kind of bizarro, Venetian-styled, rich guys-and-hookers secret society, which might be so secret that to sneak in is a death warrant. I loved everything about what took place in that mansion. It's grand theatricality, the unexpected sense of ritual. It was so much unlike anything I expected to see or feel. It is amazing to me that this has been one of the most criticized parts of the film.
I must admit to some disappointment at the film's end, some feeling that perhaps everything was too tidy. [I felt the same way at the end of "Go", which also explored the walk on the wild side to great affect.] But the fact that this work has been so ravaged, while "The Blair Witch Project" -- a film that every critic must imagine that they could have created themselves -- is hailed as the "future of cinema", makes me wonder about the state of the art of film criticism.
Eyes Wide Shut is a film that will be watched and talked about for years to come.