1290 Eyes Wide Shut

[The Fanciful Norwegian]

A bunch of it is just technical information that is only relevant to projectionists or historians thereof, but there are some interesting little details, like how West Side Story's overture (about the first 5 minutes of reel 1) was supposed to be played with the house lights up

This was the norm for 70mm roadshow screenings. West Side Story actually had visuals for its overture sequence, but I believe this was fairly unusual and the standard practice was to keep the curtains closed until the end of the overture. Von Trier tried to bring this back for Dancer in the Dark but was told that too many U.S. theaters had been automated to make it viable there, so the American release got the opening montage of Per Kirkeby paintings instead.

The above practice creates issues for certain analyses of 2001 that hinge in part on the black screen used for the overture on most video releases, though since that was presumably approved by Kubrick I guess you could still make an argument based upon it. (Rob Ager has a video somewhere where he claims the black screen represents the monolith.) Apparently original 70mm prints had clear film during the overture, so if it were projected the audience would just be looking at a blank white cinema screen.

[Black Hat]

This is an unusual film in the sense that its subject matter and quality exist on two different tracks. Does anyone know if JLG ever had anything to say about it? Would be very curious to hear what his thoughts were. The other thing that tv spot link (brought back memories of how great those were), I'd forgotten the film was a summer release, was how hot Nicole Kidman looked in that white lingerie set vs how sexless Tom Cruise is. I'm probably wrong about this, but I think it was the first time Kidman's sexuality was used in her career. Has she or the costume designer ever spoken about what she wore in the film? Beyond her and the white lingerie set I think the film's costumes are amazing and are its most memorable part. Even Sydney Pollack looks great. The European guy she almost slept with is wearing an incredible tux.

[Walter Kurtz]

How are you going to sleep at night with that release facing out at you in your bookcase... the glow in the dark mask visages of Nic and Tommy haunting your memories and EYES WIDE SHUT casting a blue glow in the room as if you were in the movie - still there - and now you close your eyes but can't sleep because your brain is still open.?

[hearthesilence]

John Turturro discusses Eyes Wide Shut and how he missed out on a role (the pianist) that Kubrick said was written for him.

[flyonthewall2983]

More than likely it would have meant his role in The Big Lebowski being recast. Even given that nothing he does as Jesus moves the plot forward I cannot imagine that movie without him.

Speaking of which I wonder if Criterion will put out an edition of that, feels like it could be a possibility given the proliferation of Coen Bros. titles.

[FlickeringWindow]

A bunch of it is just technical information that is only relevant to projectionists or historians thereof, but there are some interesting little details, like how West Side Story's overture (about the first 5 minutes of reel 1) was supposed to be played with the house lights up

This was the norm for 70mm roadshow screenings. West Side Story actually had visuals for its overture sequence, but I believe this was fairly unusual and the standard practice was to keep the curtains closed until the end of the overture. Von Trier tried to bring this back for Dancer in the Dark but was told that too many U.S. theaters had been automated to make it viable there, so the American release got the opening montage of Per Kirkeby paintings instead.

The above practice creates issues for certain analyses of 2001 that hinge in part on the black screen used for the overture on most video releases, though since that was presumably approved by Kubrick I guess you could still make an argument based upon it. (Rob Ager has a video somewhere where he claims the black screen represents the monolith.) Apparently original 70mm prints had clear film during the overture, so if it were projected the audience would just be looking at a blank white cinema screen.

70mm (and 35mm) prints with overtures and other music-only sections would simply have black film besides the actual intermission title (and rare exceptions like My Fair Lady and The Brutalist).

[Matthew Fisher]

On the first weekend of the initial theatrical run, I saw the film twice (same print both times). I don't have the knowledge or vocabulary to give a careful description of what I saw, but I've read recollections in the decades since of what the 35mm prints looked - and look - like, and I join those who've talked about a noticeably grain-heavy image. That grain has been, together with the saturated colors, my strongest visual memory, which no home video release has gotten "right." I'm interested whether or to what extent the 4K disc will match my impressions from a quarter century ago.

[Guido]

Last year, on back channels, a 4K scan of a release print was shared and it was such a fascinating watch after years of seeing the same HD streaming copy. Ridiculous, I know, but I’d kind of love home releases that would include a warts-and-all scan of a distribution print for comparison. It really does feel like the closest thing to seeing a 35mm print at the cheap seats 30 years ago.

[dwk]

Last year, on back channels, a 4K scan of a release print was shared and it was such a fascinating watch after years of seeing the same HD streaming copy. Ridiculous, I know, but I’d kind of love home releases that would include a warts-and-all scan of a distribution print for comparison. It really does feel like the closest thing to seeing a 35mm print at the cheap seats 30 years ago.

When Tarantino was going to have a Blu-ray line of titles from Sony's catalog he wanted them to scan release prints for the masters. It seems that that line isn't happening.

[Matt]

Last year, on back channels, a 4K scan of a release print was shared and it was such a fascinating watch after years of seeing the same HD streaming copy. Ridiculous, I know, but I’d kind of love home releases that would include a warts-and-all scan of a distribution print for comparison. It really does feel like the closest thing to seeing a 35mm print at the cheap seats 30 years ago.

I wrote a little about watching that scan here. I don't expect the UHD will be anything like it given that the release print would have been several steps away from the original camera negative, and I assume Criterion's transfer will be from that negative. But the clip and stills on Criterion's page do look wonderfully grainy, more detailed, and less contrasty. Another fun thing about the scan of the release print was the unrestored sound from the optical track.

4K scan of release print:



Criterion still (not identical frame):



I expect some online reviewers will be complaining about orange-and-teal bias (see this still from Criterion's page), but no, it really did look like that! The film had a pronounced warm, golden hue due to all the incandescent lighting, but nighttime light filtering through the windows was royal blue. It will probably be a little less extreme in Criterion's transfer.

4K scan of release print:

[Matthew Fisher]

Matt, Guido: I appreciate the comments. To repeat: the grain was, in the summer of '99, so very noticeable to my twenty year-old eyes that I never forgot it. I did read descriptions of the release print scan when it appeared - including yours, Matt - and found them, and the stills, intriguing.

In 1977 Pauline Kael wrote a full review of Close Encounters. When the Special Edition was released in 1980, she wrote a short review in which she praised some aspects while criticizing others. She was unhappy about certain moments from the original cut having been deleted - moments which, while not having been essential to the narrative, she had looked forward to seeing again. I've always remembered the last line, to wit: "It can feel like your memories have been mugged." Regarding EWS, I don't know that I'd go that far. Still, it's always an odd experience to be made to wonder whether the presentation, or your memory, is faulty.

[Matthew Fisher]

dwk: On Tarantino's and Roger Avary's podcast, I recall the both of them expressing disappointment that Blu-Ray presentations didn't retain the imperfections - the physical history - of a 35mm print. Four years ago when I listened while walking my dog, their argument seemed perfectly rational, but I'm not sure what I'd think about it now.

[MichaelB]

To repeat: the grain was, in the summer of '99, so very noticeable to my twenty year-old eyes that I never forgot it. I did read descriptions of the release print scan when it appeared - including yours, Matt - and found them, and the stills, intriguing.

I can confirm first-hand that it looked exceptionally grainy at Warner Bros' main showcase venue in London's West End - so I assume they showed it as intended! I vividly remember being struck by how grainy it looked compared with the 35mm norm.

In 1977 Pauline Kael wrote a full review of Close Encounters. When the Special Edition was released in 1980, she wrote a short review in which she praised some aspects while criticizing others. She was unhappy about certain moments from the original cut having been deleted - moments which, while not having been essential to the narrative, she had looked forward to seeing again. I've always remembered the last line, to wit: "It can feel like your memories have been mugged." Regarding EWS, I don't know that I'd go that far. Still, it's always an odd experience to be made to wonder whether the presentation, or your memory, is faulty.

I would certainly go that far with In the Mood for Love, when I finally managed to persuade my wife to go and see it. It was the revisionist version, and it just didn't feel right - I'd got so used to the original editing and scoring choices that even minor differences just felt plain wrong.

[The Fanciful Norwegian]

Kubrick wanted to shoot Eyes Wide Shut as much as possible with practical lighting (e.g. from lamps and light fixtures and such rather than dedicated film lighting equipment) and even toyed with using his Zeiss f/0.7 lenses from Barry Lyndon. Instead he used more practical lenses with a fast 500 ASA film stock that he could push by two stops during processing while still providing what he considered acceptable results; the entire film (including bright daytime sequences) was then subjected to the same push-processing for the sake of consistency. Pushing fine-grained film like that, especially exposed under low-light conditions, will absolutely produce a very grainy image, although the UHD will likely show it more than a release print that's been through additional generation loss. The stock Kubrick used was also tungsten-balanced, meaning it was designed to compensate for the lack of blue in tungsten lighting—this leads to a blue cast when filming in natural light (including moonlight), and the effect was recreated and exaggerated in the nighttime interiors using blue gels. The American Cinematographer article on the film goes into more detail on all this and is definitely worth a read.

[Roger Ryan]

I, too, recall the "grainier than normal for 35mm" look when seeing the film theatrically in 1999. Although, as has been often said in this forum, even first run 35mm prints can differ from one another. As I may have notated elsewhere on this forum, I attended a 35mm screening of Eyes Wide Shut in the fall of 2014 at the TIFF center in Toronto during it's big Kubrick retrospective (Christiane Kubrick and Jan Harlan introduced the screening). I was taken aback not only because the audio dropped out from the print for about twenty seconds right near the beginning the film but because every alternate reel looked completely different from the reel preceding it and following it. For twenty minutes, the image was beautiful and had a healthy grain structure, but for the next twenty minutes, the image was murky with way too much grain (almost like they were screening a 16mm dupe). Not the ideal way to watch this film and I could only imagine Kubrick's exasperation if he was alive to realize this is how the film was being screened in his honor!

[hearthesilence]

Same here. I saw this the summer it opened with grown-ups and it was very noticeable. One adult later commented to me about how grainy and diffuse it looked, which he loved, he was very impressed by the overall look. Last time I saw this in 35mm was at Metrograph at one of their holiday screenings (would've been in the last few years - signs of the pandemic were still everywhere) and it stood out then too.

[Beloved Aunt]

Eyes Wide Shut @ Beaver:
http://www.dvdbeaver.com/subsite/film1/ ... 4K_UHD.htm

I'm not really liking the look of the Criterion captures so far. But who knows.

[hearthesilence]

I do. It's a huge improvement and more like the print I saw, from the grain to the contrast that seemed diminished in the previous Blu-ray.

[Altair]

The scan of the 35mm print that there's been discussed earlier in the thread looks very similar to these caps - i.e. strong, saturated colours and a thick grain field. Maybe the colours in the Criterion have shifted a little (and an exhibition print is never going to be a faithful test of colours anyhow), but this looks very strong to me.

[MichaelB]

My memory of 35mm screenings in 1999 is certainly closer to the Criterion than the old Warner disc. The grain in particular looks very familiar - it really was an exceptionally grainy film for a mainstream release.

[mfunk9786]

My memory of 35mm screenings in 1999 is certainly closer to the Criterion than the old Warner disc. The grain in particular looks very familiar - it really was an exceptionally grainy film for a mainstream release.

I saw one of the original R-rated 35mm prints a couple years ago, and you're totally right. One of the most noticeable differences is much less of a pinkish hue and more of a white, grainy, aggressive level of blown out white light and grain. The film was made much warmer on this past blu-ray, but it's just not accurate. 2 stars from Dr. Svet incoming, in other words.

[MichaelB]

I can confirm that that's equally true of the unexpurgated version - "more of a white, grainy, aggressive level of blown-out white and grain" perfectly describes my own memories of it.

[Zot!]

Eyes Wide Shut @ Beaver:

You've sanitized the highly anticipated "Beaver Wide Shut"? Forshame.

[nicolas]

FIDELITY IN MOTION DID THE EWS ENCODE FOR CRITERION!

Eyes Wide Shut is presented in the aspect ratio of 1.85:1. Supervised and approved by director of photography Larry Smith, this new 4K restoration of the international cut of the film was created from the 35 mm original camera negative. A 35mm print provided by Warner Bros. was used as a color reference. The original theatrical 5.1 surround soundtrack was remastered from the 35mm magnetic track. The feature is presented in Dolby Vision HDR (high dynamic range) on the 4K Ultra HD disc.

In order to facilitate director Stanley Kubrick's shooting strategy, which required the picture's film stock to be force-developed by two stops at Deluxe in London, Smith conducted extensive photographic tests at the prep stage. Chester tyre, director of operations at Deluxe, noted in the October 1999 issue of American Cinematographer that Kubrick never limited himself to standard lab practices, particularly in the case of Eyes Wide Shut. "Stanley had his own ideas about what each picture should look like, and what he was trying to achieve with it. On Eyes Wide Shut, he told me he was going to rate the negative stock faster than the actual recommended speed, and that he wanted us to force-develop it two stops to bring it back to its original exposure level. That created several advantages for him: he could work with less light and obtain a particular mood. Force-developing in that way is very unusual, and it's normally done as a last resort if the filmmakers are losing their light and are desperate to get a shot. On this picture, though, it was a deliberate strategy that was designed to get a special look."

Mastering supervisors: Lee Kline, Giles Sherwood • Colorist: Greg Fisher, Company 3, London • Image restoration: Resillion, New York • Audio restoration: The Criterion Collection • Feature encoding: Fidelity in Motion • Disc authoring: NexSpec

[EddieLarkin]

Can't be coincidence that they've finally opted to go with David on a very grainy (and high profile) title. I wonder if someone at C finally noticed that their standard place was chewing up the grain...