"Stanley Kubrick made one film too many..."

Rating: 2/10 (9 February 2012)

Sayeth the sandwich maker who worked at the corner deli run by Koreans. And you know what? Dude was right.
I don't get affairs. Nor ritualized sex. And apparently neither did Kubrick when he made this film. To me this film is one made by a man who had too much cinematic power, and was probably trying to stay on top of the burgeoning "adult video" market that was becoming more accessible to mainstream America by virtue of net commerce.
It's well shot, of that there is no doubt. Technical marks all hit their cues, and are right on target. But the story itself? Wow. Pretty vapid stuff if you ask me.
I think the problem here is that the question of why do people have affairs is pretty straight forward. People have sexual interests in one another, and sometimes if they're married they're willing to take their chances on breaking a legal bond with their spouse. There's not much more to it than that. It's part of why women put men through so many test during courtship.
I think Kubrick, and perhaps a good portion of cuckolds or non-sexually active society are tantalized and interested in sex, so this movie was made.
Me, I haven't laughed so hard at certain points in the film since "Used Cars". I just truly think this is a ridiculous film on a number of levels, and it's not something I would ever make nor watch again. A couple that has fallen off the beaten track either has an abusive situation going on, or one of them lacks character. Again, it's pretty simple stuff. No film can really capture the "magic" of an affair, because affairs aren't magical to begin with. They're acts of betrayal.
Like I said, it's not a film I'll ever see again, nor would I like to work on this kind of project (paycheque depending). Hell, if I were forced to shoot something like this, I'd end it with a bunch of special forces men rappelling down from helicopters during the orgy scene and raiding the place. Just me *insert smile here*.
Not everyone can have a really good looking spouse, nor have steamy conjugal relations on a regular basis. So the urge is repressed, and when someone mentions the idea to another person, these stupid, cult like, "religious" swingers societies develop. And I imagine people get hurt. I don't really know as I've no experience in that matter.
But, Kubrick wants us to look at his version of a couple "gone swinging"; one that has sexual exploration in mind. To me it's more of a comedy than anything else. I used to love seeing a Kubirck film because of his static yet compelling cinematography. The shots and assemblage of images from a former photo-journalist are supreme in execution. And yet, even so, even though Stanley Kubrick has been elevated to legendary status among industry and cine-files alike, he was, after all, only mortal. As is evident by this film.
Skip this one. If you need to see sex on the screen, then hit one of the adult websites of your choice.
Watch at your own risk.
p.s. you don't betray the one you love. Ever.
p.p.s. the other theme here is keeping interest in the one you love. Don't lose interest.
*EDIT* Final edit here; the thrust of this film was to get the husband to rekindle interest in his wife. Her concern may have been since he lost interest in other women by actively suppressing his desire, he thus lost interest in her. It became her objective to reinvigorate his desire for her. Kubrick tried to make a noire "adult film", but, and maybe it's because I'm not married, I just couldn't connect with it. Still, it was well shot. See it for that alone.