Most importantly, nine years later, the DVD allows for a fresh viewing. There is no marketing to mislead one into thinking this is a sex romp. The digital images used to censor the film have been eliminated to display Kubrick's intended shots. And the film now seems almost quaint. The lesson that Dr. Bill learns that marriage may be less exciting but at least it is safe, seems trite. The sexual peccadilloes he gets involved in seem naive, especially considering the setpieces are being proposed by a reclusive, happily-married, and elderly film director who lives on an estate in England.
What was once one of the film's selling points has now become one of its liabilities. Tom Cruise's performance seems flat and false. His line readings feel fake. Much of this may be attributed to the backlash he is now contending with in his career and personal life. It is hard to accept the couple in the film will work things out when we know that in life they broke up. The image of Cruise as a doctor is ironic given his outlandish medical claims in regards to the pitfalls of pharmaceuticals and psychological treatment he has discussed in the press recently.
This film should be revisited in the future, to see if this assessment of Cruise still holds up, if the spotlight on the actor's personal life ever dims.
![Full Metal Jacket (Deluxe Edition) [Blu-ray]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Q-rN%2Bw6QL._SL120_.jpg)
Article comments
1 - El Bicho
I enjoyed the film also and thought it had a lot of interesting things to say about marriage, sex, and the masks we wear. It certainly says more than marriage is safe.
The lights that streamed down the wall at the party were great as is the soundtrack. I should crack that out. Haven't listened to it in a while.
"It is hard to accept the couple in the film will work things out when we know that in life they broke up."
First, I don't see what leads you to believe the couple will work things out, but if you can't release the actors from their real life, I don't see how can you enjoy any movie with a known celebrity in it?
2 - Tony Dayoub
El Bicho,
"First, I don't see what leads you to believe the couple will work things out, but if you can't release the actors from their real life, I don't see how can you enjoy any movie with a known celebrity in it?"
IMHO, I think the reason this film is different is that Kubrick was most likely capitalizing on the actors' real=life relationship to inform the film's characters, and to substitute the use of exposition in viewer's minds as they saw the movie.
Now as to why I think things will work out, it is because Kubrick chose to end it when the family unit has been reunited and is out shopping instead of ending it earlier in the previous scene when Alice is in tears over finding out what Dr. Bill was up to all night.
Thanks for the comments.
3 - Michael Clayton
As an ardent supporter of Kubrick, I must admit it took a repeat viewing of the film before I came around and finally recognized the brilliance of Kubrick's vision of the film. Many of the elements of the film remind me of the Nathaniel Hawthorne short story "Young Goodman Brown"; I would venture to suggest this is probably the closest anyone has come to adapting that tale as a film.
4 - joe
Quote: "The DVD has been improved by the fact that it is the first release of the film in widescreen. The images are presented beautifully as Kubrick intended."
The first sentence is a matter of opinion. The second is simply INCORRECT; Kubrick intended it to be in 1.33:1 (aka 4:3 or academy ratio). He seems to have preferred it to "widescreen" for certain films. Perhaps, because this film shot mainly in intimate interiors, urban scenes, and other "vertical" environs; but this only conjecture. What is not conjecture, is the fact he intended the film to be presented in "academy" not "letterbox"; these are the facts. Research and fact checking are an important JOURNALISTIC RESPONSIBILITY.
5 - Tony Dayoub
Joe,
I appreciate your comments, and upon further research find that his longtime assistant, Leon Vitali asserts the same point you are trying to make in an interview with The Digital Bits on 5/4/01:
"Bill Hunt: ...And our understanding is that there were only three Kubrick films that were intended to be seen in a widescreen aspect ratio...
Leon Vitali: Correct. There was Spartacus and 2001. And then there was Lolita, which was 1.66. The important thing to know about Stanley, is that he wanted all of his films shown on video - anything that wasn't a theatrical presentation - in the original camera ratio that he shot it in. He wanted you to see the films exactly as he saw them when he looked through the camera lens and composed them on set. He was no fan of 1.85, because he felt that you were losing part of the image he composed. Now he knew that, with a film like The Shining or Full Metal Jacket, that they would have to be shown in theaters in 1.85 format. But for video, he could present the full frame as he composed it - that's what he wanted."
So my apologies for the misinformation, and I stand corrected.
6 - Stacy in NJ
I really don't think you have a complete understanding of the film. Stating that it's about the dangers of jealously in the modern world is simplistic. It's about the duality of personality, sexuality and marriage, really the tension at the center of civiliation vs. primitivism. How do we manage them and maintain our modern identity. What do we need to restrain, to subliminate, to call ourselves civilized? Kubrick very definately came down on the side of civilization and marriage. That's why the film is set during the Christmas season. That's why all the nude scenes are sterile and loveless. That's why the name of the film is Eyes Wide Shut.
7 - Tony Dayoub
Stacy,
I see what you're trying to get at, but I believe it is you that is oversimplifying.
Your point about civilization vs. primitivism is off. Victor's quiet way of handling the prostitute's OD at his Christmas party and the ritual Dr. Bill participates in at the mansion are both counter to monogamy and marriage, yet are both civilized in their manner of handling infidelity.
All the nude scenes are sterile and loveless, but that is in keeping with Kubrick's framing the action, as he does in all of his movies, in such a way as to make us intellectual and objective spectators.
And I really don't see how the Christmas setting bolsters your assertions.