Why is it called 'Eyes Wide Shut'? It is the best way to view it.

Rating: 2/10 (19 July 1999)

Don't buy the hype. Too much drama in too little film.
#1-The film is impeccable visually, but I could've gotten that in a postcard.
#2- Neither Kidman nor Cruise can act. (note Kidman's one word per hour rate of hyper-drama ranting, her annoying "stoned" monologue, and Cruise's emotionless, "I'll tell you everything" weep.)
#3- You cannot make a DEEP movie about SHALLOW characters. Before you dismiss me as not understanding the art, or the symbolism, let me say that I got it... all too clear. The artsiness and high drama were unwarranted, slow, ornate, blatant, and overdone. A good half of the people in my theatre laughed out loud in several "high tension" scenes, due to the ludicrous overproduction. The film mocks itself.
#4- Three reasons for the hype: -Kubrick's last film... how do you spit on his grave and say this film was weak?? - Nicole and Tom's relationship... extra naughty since we're peering into their lives?? - It is pretty racy... legitimized porn sells.
In a nutshell, the film had a simple message, which was told through transparent, yet extranneous vehicles. There was nothing behind the jumbled mass of art (or as one reviewer stated well... nothing beneath the mask).
P.S. If I'd have had to sit through that God-awful piano track ONE more time...