Is there anything specifically in or about in the movie that you most want answered by Kubrick? If he was still around and willing to speak of course.
I'll start. Why was Nick laughing when first seen at the piano?
I will keep this as brief as I can. Eyes Wide Shut is one of the most speculated about films ever made. Within Kubrick's filmography, only The Shining is comparable in that regard. Both films attract some of the most absurd theories imaginable, as well as borderline insane people.
I made a post a few days ago seeking out collaborators for a video about Eyes Wide Shut. I have spent the last 20+ years reading theories about this film ranging from Scottish Rite Pyramids to Astral projection to the Occult to Numerology, to MK Ultra to Classism to Traumnovelle etc.. Basically I've read or watched them all. They are pretty much all nonsense.
I have information and insight about this film that has never been posted online, at least to my knowledge. The thing about this film is that there are some people who have accurately speculated what it's about, but they've never substantiated their arguments with enough evidence.
While only Kubrick had all the details, I have enough, and I've thought about sharing them for a long time. However, seeing as how this film attracts absolute looney tunes characters who are seemingly immune to any modicum of rationality, I am not sure if attempting to inject any new perspective is worthwhile.
Partly due to personal circumstances, it would be a draining and exhaustive effort to make a video that finally reveals this film, and I am not sure how much of an audience even exists for it. I have no interest in the such a video going viral or amassing millions of views, especially when considering the types of inane content about this film that go viral.
I would be able to put an end to most of the hypothesizing about this film for any rational observer. Do enough of such people exist in this community or elsewhere is what I am contemplating. Or would I just be wasting my time?
I'm looking for an editor for a video analysis of Stanley Kubrick's final film, Eyes Wide Shut. This film has been speculated without end across the internet, and left viewers confounded for almost 30 years.
I possess information about this film that has never been released online or anywhere else to my knowledge. I want to tell the untold story of this film, so fans can finally understand the final vision of one of cinema's greatest artists.
I will write the script, compile clips from the film, select the music, and gather the other textual information. I figure there will be an intro, the analysis, and an outro. The goal is to keep it under 2 hours, because I realize the importance of brevity, despite there being a lot to cover since it's such a perplexing film. A teaser trailer will also need to be created.
Ultimately, the production quality of the video goes a long way in terms of delivering the message which is why I need help with that part so the $$ can be negotiated. Additionally, a narrator will eventually need to be hired to dictate the script. The completion date would be late October.
If you are a fan of Kubrick's films or have a experience with movie analysis videos, perhaps this is something that would interest you. You will have the opportunity to not only uncover the mysteries of one of the most enigmatic films ever made but help share it with others.
I've long wanted to help explain one of cinema's most enigmatic films, the film that Stanley Kubrick bragged was his greatest contribution to the history of cinema.
I realize that this film has attracted endless speculation for the last 27 years, believe me I've read or watched almost all of it. While there are some kernels of truth, it's all nonsense for the most part. Seeing as my health is failing, I'm unable to withhold the urge to make a video analysis that finally reveals what Kubrick's final masterpiece was really about. I don't want some of
The information that I have compiled regarding the film is pretty much unparalleled, and much of it has never been released online to my knowledge. Kubrick famously stated that having explaining the meaning of a film essentially cheapens it, but with a film like Eyes Wide Shut, I am convinced it will forever remain widely misunderstood unless something changes.
I am unable to narrate the video myself, and lack some expertise in video editing. I am not doing this for any commercial reasons, and don't plan on monetizing the video unless forced to. I am doing this so that fans of not just Kubrick but the art of cinema can more fully appreciate this masterpiece.
If you have knowledge or skill in narrating or editing videos, feel free to DM me. I don't think the video will be more than 2 hours in length. I intend to write the script and compile clips from the film, as well as help provide other images or necessary references from other sources. This isn't some wacky theory about numerology or secret societies or whatever. It's the real thing or else close as it gets anyway, and I'd like to share it before it's lost for good. You don't need to be a fan of Kubrick or the film in case you were wondering, but I guess it helps.
The goal is to have it completed before the end of the year, around when the Criterion Collection Kubrick box set is released. All I can do is let the video speak for itself, that is if I can end up getting it done.
5 more hours to go.
The Christmas gift that keeps on giving.
To be fair, this video has a few nuggets of insight, and I dig these looney tunes theories as much as the next person, but isn't it time for some real analysis to be done on this film and crack it wide open?
They are like parodies at this point, and I find myself embarrassed sometimes calling myself a fan of the film.
I've been wanting to make a video about Eyes Wide Shut for a while now. While I'm entertained by the endless amount of theory/analysis videos about the film on youtube, including ones about freemasonry, numerology, the illuminati, trafficking rings, wiccans, the occult, and shapeshifting aliens, barely any of them even remotely hint at what the film is really about. I've probably watched hundreds of videos on youtube about the film, and only one video I've ever come across revealed the truth or parts of it at least.
The Criterion Collection Kubrick boxset is likely being released this Winter, discussion around Eyes Wide Shut will once more be revitalized online, especially considering the holiday season. This might be one of the last times much attention is ever brought towards the film, so to celebrate the release of the boxset, I wanted to give some Kubrick fanatics and "cinephiles" the chance to finally understand what the hell this movie is.
I don't have any experience or skill making such videos on youtube, and don't want to rely on AI voice generators or such tools to make the video. All I can guarantee you that the information provided for the video will be the most accurate and in-depth Eyes Wide Shut analysis ever posted online. The purpose of the video is to leave viewers little to no doubt about what is going on in the film.
We are approaching the 27 year anniversary of the film's release, and yet it is still remains a total enigma to almost everyone who has ever watched it. I want to give passionate Kubrick fans the opportunity to finally decode the film that he considered his greatest contribution to the art of cinema.
This is not a bluff. It's the real thing or as real as it gets. While only Kubrick knows 100% of everything about the film, I can promise you that anyone who sees this video will walk away knowing all that is necessary. Most of the information and analysis cannot be found anywhere online to my knowledge. I lurk this subreddit and other Kubrick sites every now and then, and feel that it's time to throw my hat into the ring.
If you know anyone who has youtube channel dedicated to Kubrick or talent for making film analysis videos, then feel free to message me on reddit. I figure the video need be finished in time for the Criterion Kubrick boxset release which is still many months away. I'm guessing the video would be around 2 hours in length to cover everything, but maybe it could be split up into a few segment if that's optimal. I would provide the script and assist with the direction.
The alternative is that this movie remains an unsolved mystery. But hell maybe it's better that way.
"If you really want to communicate something... the least effective and least enjoyable way is directly... But if you can get people to the point where they have to think a moment what it is you’re getting at, and then discover it, the thrill of discovery goes right through the heart."
Yeah well.. the discoveries never really happened Stanley. It's been 27 years.
I've been wanting to make a video about Eyes Wide Shut for a while now. While I'm entertained by the endless amount of theory/analysis videos about the film on youtube, including ones about freemasonry, numerology, the illuminati, trafficking rings, wiccans, the occult, and shapeshifting aliens, barely any of them even remotely hint at what the film is really about. I've probably watched hundreds of videos on youtube about the film, and only one video I've ever come across revealed the truth or parts of it at least.
The Criterion Collection Kubrick boxset is likely being released this Winter, discussion around Eyes Wide Shut will once more be revitalized online, especially considering the holiday season. This might be one of the last times much attention is ever brought towards the film, so to celebrate the release of the boxset, I wanted to give some Kubrick fanatics and "cinephiles" the chance to finally understand what the hell this movie is.
I don't have any experience or skill making such videos on youtube, and don't want to rely on AI voice generators or such tools to make the video. All I can guarantee you that the information provided for the video will be the most accurate and in-depth Eyes Wide Shut analysis ever posted online. The purpose of the video is to leave viewers little to no doubt about what is going on in the film.
We are approaching the 27 year anniversary of the film's release, and yet it is still remains a total enigma to almost everyone who has ever watched it. I want to give passionate Kubrick fans the opportunity to finally decode the film that he considered his greatest contribution to the art of cinema.
This is not a bluff. It's the real thing or as real as it gets. While only Kubrick knows 100% of everything about the film, I can promise you that anyone who sees this video will walk away knowing all that is necessary. Most of the information and analysis cannot be found anywhere online to my knowledge. I lurk this subreddit and other Kubrick sites every now and then, and feel that it's time to throw my hat into the ring.
If you know anyone who has youtube channel dedicated to Kubrick or talent for making film analysis videos, then feel free to message me on reddit. I figure the video need be finished in time for the Criterion Kubrick boxset release which is still many months away. I'm guessing the video would be around 2 hours in length to cover everything, but maybe it could be split up into a few segment if that's optimal. I would provide the script and assist with the direction.
The alternative is that this movie remains an unsolved mystery. But hell maybe it's better that way.
"If you really want to communicate something... the least effective and least enjoyable way is directly... But if you can get people to the point where they have to think a moment what it is you’re getting at, and then discover it, the thrill of discovery goes right through the heart."
Yeah well.. the discoveries never really happened Stanley. It's been 27 years.
Mandibil on youtube has new video discussing aspect ratios of Kubrick's films:
The video includes information about someone who saw The Shining during it's opening weekend, and recalls the curtains being drawn in to show the film in 1:1.33.
The first screenshot which is of the elevator shows the difference between the 4:3 DVD and 1.78 Bluray.
The rest of the screenshots compare the compositions of the open matte full frame to the 1.78.
While it is possible that some exterior outdoor shots in the film were primarily composed for 1.85, it is obvious that many scenes were deliberately framed by Kubrick for 1.33
An interesting example is the full shot of the maze diorama which can only be seen in full frame. It gets cropped out in 1.78 and 1.85.
Criterion is planning on including The Shining in their upcoming box set, and since it's been 25 years since the last proper home release of the film, they should strongly consider offering the 4:3 version of the film. Kubrick only ever approved The Shining to be seen in 4:3 outside of theaters, and he personally oversaw all home release versions of the film while he was around.
Leon Vitali and Jan Harlan who both worked on The Shining, and basically hung out with Stanley Kubrick almost everyday insist that he preferred the 1.33 aspect ratio for the film.
Mandibil on youtube has a new video discussing aspect ratios of Kubrick's films:
The video includes information about someone who saw The Shining during it's opening weekend, and recalls the curtains being drawn in to show the film in 1:1.33.
The first screenshot which is of the elevator shows the difference between the 4:3 DVD and 1.78 Bluray.
The rest of the screenshots compare the compositions of the open matte full frame to the 1.78.
While it is possible that some exterior outdoor shots in the film were primarily composed for 1.85, it is obvious that many scenes were deliberately framed by Kubrick for 1.33
An interesting example is the full shot of the maze diorama which can only be seen in full frame. It gets cropped out in 1.78 and 1.85.
Criterion is planning on including The Shining in their upcoming box set, and since it's been 25 years since the last proper home release of the film, they should strongly consider offering the 4:3 version of the film. Kubrick only ever approved The Shining to be seen in 4:3 outside of theaters, and he personally oversaw all home release versions of the film while he was around.
Leon Vitali and Jan Harlan who both worked on The Shining, and basically hung out with Stanley Kubrick almost everyday insist that he preferred the 1.33 aspect ratio for the film.
Criterion needs to do their part and include the 1.33 version of The Shining in the box set.
Another user left an anecdote on r/TheShining about the earliest screenings:
"I was there at Grauman’s Chinese too that day but was not approached by Sydney Blau. The screen did appear to look like 1:33. Very square as I recall. And yes, I saw the ending that was cut the next day. No big loss."
Was he really being serious? If so, why the heck would he have thought such a thing?
Most people tend to rank the film somewhere in the middle or bottom of the pack of his films. Seems a bit hyperbolic of him to call it his "best film" considering he made 2001, Clockwork, Shining, Strangelove, Barry Lyndon etc..
What could Kubrick have been so proud of about it? Critics and even diehard Kubrick fans found it boring and innocuous back when it was released, and pretty much continue to do so.
A lot of them blame the acting, the dialogue etc.. but it also in some way doesn't look as grandiose or spectacular as his other films.
It's like Kubrick saw something or liked something about it that only he was aware of. I actually don't think the film works that well as an adaptation of the Traumnovelle book anyway.
They didn't include any clips from Eyes Wide Shut but they included footage from All the Right Moves.
How strange. Somehow Warner Brothers forgot to include Stanley Kubrick's magnum opus that had Tom Cruise in almost every scene.
I'll preface this by saying that I do appreciate some of Spielberg's collaborations with Janus Kaminsky, especially Catch Me If You Can.
Spielberg's most popular films were all B-level concepts that involved sharks, dinosaurs, evil spirits, and aliens. The music of Williams, performances by Dreyfus and Attenborough, and special effects from Winston and Rambaldi, all helped elevate these low grade concepts into masterpieces.
However, perhaps nothing was more essential than the cinematography that Bill Butler, Douglas Slocombe Allen Daviau, Dean Cundey, and Vilmos Zsigmond provided. The visuals shots by these men are what made these fantastical ideas believable, and enabled us to lose ourselves inside Spielberg's imagination.
Nothing that Spielberg made after Jurassic Park in 1993 captivated audiences in the same way. There is very little plausible or logical about E.T., Jurassic Park, or Jaws, but the images crafted by these cinematographers brought sharks, dinosaurs, and aliens to life in ways never seen before or since.
These men were illustrators of not just the visions of Spielberg but Lucas, Crichton, Benchley, and many others.
I can't really name any films nowadays that are shot as well as what these men achieved with Spielberg. They played such a vital and unsung role in the magic, and it's a shame that Spielberg didn't continue to work with them.
Today, Criterion announced the release date of the "Complete" Kubrick collection. But apparently they forgot to additionally include Kubrick's final three films in the only aspect ratio that Kubrick approved for home release which is 1.33. Hopefully, they will remedy this in time before release, especially since many of us have been waiting 25 years for his final three films to be remastered in the proper aspect ratio.
Screenshot #1: The 1.85 theatrical aspect ratio from the Criterion 4K is overlaid onto the 1.33 aspect ratio of the DVD. The 1.85 crops the circle of masked guests. The most iconic shot in the entire film that was deliberately framed by Kubrick is incomplete.
Screenshot #2: The 1.33 aspect ratio from the DVD shows the full circle.
Screenshot #3: The 1.85 aspect ratio from the 4K that crops roughly 25% from the DVD and breaks the circle.
Screenshot #4: The Magic Circle seen later in the film.
Kubrick primarily composed the film for 1.33, and shot the film in 1.37. If that screencap doesn't make that obvious enough, well there are more examples.
Screenshot #5: This screencap is from the 1.33. There is a tub of I Can't Believe It's Not Butter on Domino's Kitchen table.
Screenshot #6: This screencap is from the 1.85. The tub is cropped out. It's not in the frame.
Screenshot #7: In both 1.33 and 1.85 we can see a tub of I Can't Believe It's Not Butter on the kitchen table next to Alice.
Kubrick deliberately placed this tub of butter on both kitchen tables, but you would have no idea if you only saw the 1.85 aspect ratio Criterion 4K. The tub of I Can't Believe It's Not is one of many examples of doubling in the film, and in this case symbolic of Alice being substituted for Domino. It also brings into question the dreamstate of the scene with Domino. Is the tub of I Can't Believe It's Not Butter that is on Domino's kitchen table a clue that Bill is in a dream and borrowing things he's seen in real life, such as the tub of butter on his own kitchen table?
This may seem like a minor grievance, but there are many other similar ones, including easter eggs that are cropped out in the 1.85 aspect ratio of the Criterion 4K.
Kubrick was very deliberate with how he framed the scenes in Eyes Wide Shut, and he composed them primarily for the eventual 1.33 home release. All we are asking is that Criterion include the 1.33 aspect ratios of Kubrick's final three films.
Here is a quote from Leon Vitali shortly after the release of Eyes Wide Shut:
"The original video release of Full Metal Jacket was in the supervised hands and owned by Stanley. The thing about Stanley, he was a photographer. That's how he started. He had a still photographer's eye. So when he composed a picture through the camera, he was setting up for what he saw through the camera - the full picture. That was very important to him. It really was. It was an instinct that never ever left him. What he wanted the videos to reflect was how he shot the film through the camera, what was on the original neg and what his composition when he was shooting it was. That's why Full Metal Jacket is in full frame. If people looked, okay? What you get on the video that you didn't get in the theatrical because of the 185 masking, was what Stanley was invisioning. You assume these soldiers in the world that they're in. And he uses wide angle uses to shoot. I mean an 18 millimeter lens was the commonest one. He used 24 sometimes. Wide angle lenses. It was important to him the relationship between things. You can see in Full Metal Jacket how small the people were in relation to this huge landscape.
The thing with Eyes Wide Shut, it was how he saw the thing through the camera and how he set it up. That's what he wanted to reflect in his videos. He did not like 1.85:1. You lose 27% of the picture on 1.85. Stanley was a purist. This was one of the ways it was manifested."
Kubrick would be heartbroken.
Anyway. So as many of you I am sure already know, Criterion is gonna release a full Kubrick set. You never know, but this could be the last complete set of his films ever released, so they need to get it as right as possible.
Kubrick composed and shot his last three films The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, and Eyes Wide Shut in a 1.37 aspect ratio. The 1999 DVD releases for The Shining and Full Metal Jacket had Kubrick's intended home release aspect ratios of 1.33. The Eyes Wide Shut DVD also had a 1.33 aspect ratio, and included a disclaimer confirming that is how Kubrick wanted it to be seen.
Now, a lot has changed in terms of televisions in the last 25 or so years, and while Kubrick didn't live to comment on how he would format his films for 16:9 widescreen televisions, what we do know is that he demanded that his last three films be seen in a 4:3 aspect ratio. I get that there are some people who want their widescreen TVs filled, therefore Criterion is releasing these three films in their theatrical 1.85 aspect ratios. However, they need to include an alternate version that has the correct 4:3 aspect ratios. Back in the 80's and 90's, Kubrick couldn't exert as much control over how his films were matted in theaters, so the 1.85 aspect ratio was basically just a compromise since he knew he could use his intended aspect ratio of 4:3 for home releases. You lose about 25% of the image in 1.85 versus 1.33 aspect ratios, which is why Kubrick preferred 1.33 for these home releases.
The screenshot above of Bill at the ritual is only available on the 4:3 DVD and VHS, because it is cropped on the current 1.85 Criterion 4K release. Kubrick deliberately framed that shot to show the full circle, and it can only be seen at a 1.33 aspect ratio. He wanted the audience to see this, despite being unable to show it in theaters. The top and bottom of the frames in these films include essential information like shown above which unfortunately gets cropped out at wider aspect ratios. Criterion would be doing a huge disservice to Kubrick fans by not including the 4:3 versions of his final three films. We shouldn't have to be stuck with our 25+ year old DVDs to observe Kubrick's vision. If enough people make noise about this, then maybe Criterion will take notice and do the right thing.
Anyway. So as many of you I am sure already know, Criterion is gonna release a full Kubrick set. You never know, but this could be the last complete set of his films ever released, so they need to get it as right as possible.
Kubrick composed and shot his last three films The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, and Eyes Wide Shut in a 1.37 aspect ratio. The 1999 DVD releases for The Shining and Full Metal Jacket had Kubrick's intended home release aspect ratios of 1.33. The Eyes Wide Shut DVD also had a 1.33 aspect ratio, and included a disclaimer confirming that is how Kubrick wanted it to be seen.
Now, a lot has changed in terms of televisions in the last 25 or so years, and while Kubrick didn't live to comment on how he would format his films for 16:9 widescreen televisions, what we do know is that he demanded that his last three films be seen in a 4:3 aspect ratio. I get that there are some people who want their widescreen TVs filled, therefore Criterion is releasing these three films in their theatrical 1.85 aspect ratios. However, they need to include an alternate version that has the correct 4:3 aspect ratios. Back in the 80's and 90's, Kubrick couldn't exert as much control over how his films were matted in theaters, so the 1.85 aspect ratio was basically just a compromise since he knew he could use his intended aspect ratio of 4:3 for home releases. You lose about 25% of the image in 1.85 versus 1.33 aspect ratios, which is why Kubrick preferred 1.33 for these home releases.
The screenshot above of Bill in the circle at the ritual is only available on the 4:3 DVD and VHS. It is cropped on the current 1.85 Criterion 4K release. Kubrick deliberately framed that shot to show the full circle, and it can only be seen in a 1.33 aspect ratio. He wanted the audience to see this, despite being unable to show it in theaters. The top and bottom of the frames in these films include essential information like shown above which unfortunately gets cropped out at wider aspect ratios. Criterion would be doing a huge disservice to Kubrick fans by not including the 4:3 versions of his final three films. We shouldn't have to be stuck with our 25+ year old DVDs to observe Kubrick's vision. If enough people make noise about this, then maybe Criterion will take notice and do the right thing.