1290 Eyes Wide Shut

[tenia]

I thought I'd never see the day Criterion would finally break free of their marriage with Pixelogic in order to get better results.

I wonder if someone at C finally noticed that their standard place was chewing up the grain...

Peter Becker knows since at least 2019.

[MichaelB]

This was the big difference between the Criterion and Eureka versions of Shoah - when I did a side-by-side comparison I was really startled by how much better resolved the grain was in the (FiM-encoded) Eureka, given that David didn't have any more filesize space to play with.

[tenia]

It's my go-to example, because it's such a disc-space constraining movie that those differences can't be a matter of bitrate, not even instant bitrate. The explanation behind the differences thud couldn't be anything else than finetuning the encoder settings (ie skills and care).

[DevanAGScott]

I think it's worth noting that the old Warner master had a notable magenta push in some scenes. Check out where these two images fall on the color wheel: the new image falls right in the middle of the color wheel on the tint axis.

I'll also add that I've seen prints of this in the early 2020s as well as the mid-late 2010s, and both times I noticed both the extreme amounts of grain and a cooler push to the shadows than on the WB digital releases. This new release looks significantly closer to my recollections.

WB:


Crit:

[tenia]

Oh yeah, that older BD definitely looks like an older "video" presentation. It has all the markers of it.

[nicolas]

Jaw-droppingly beautiful caps are up: https://slow.pics/c/pDXxSSIQ. This would’ve been a nightmare in the hands of most other compressionists.

[Stefan Andersson]

Extensive discussion about film stocks, pushing the stock etc. here:
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=23590946

[domino harvey]

Comparison in action

[hearthesilence]

The old Blu-ray actually looks like it wasn't graded, like they did an HD scan of the negative and did little to nothing to match the film prints. (Actually, did Kubrick get to grade the film? I know he didn't finish the sound mix, but it's plausible he managed to give some grading notes or at least supervised one before he died.)

[domino harvey]

If you scroll down in the comments, you’ll see a triple comparison with a raw 35mm scan of the same scenes as well

[Stefan Andersson]

"On post-production changes to Eyes Wide Shut after Kubrick's death, from the Kubrick Archives:

Source: Eyes Wide Shut: Stanley Kubrick and the Making of His Final Film, by Robert P. Kolker and Nathan Abrams. /.../

The quoted block below is the verbatim list of alterations and tweaks made to Eyes Wide Shut after Kubrick's death as sourced by Kolker and Abrams from the documents at the Kubrick Archives. /.../ Here is the verbatim list of post-production notes from around March 13, when post-production resumed after Kubrick's death, presented in its entirety:

EDITING

The cut as screened last week is final apart from the following points and subject to the MPAA screening.

Two shots need to be chosen as per recent discussions regarding the flashbacks

(N.O.). The placing of these shots is decided. This also requires the need for one new shot of travelling New York. There is the question of a new shot to be placed before the main titles if this can be worked in satisfactorily.

There are several lines of dialogue that are to be looked at in regard to finding alternative readings and one alternative action at the start of one scene.

A final decision as to the format of the main and end titles has to be made. [underlined]

The flashbacks (N.O.) have to have some form of visual FX's to separate them from the reality of the story and reinforce the fantasy aspect of the scenario.

The composition, text and placing of the caption cards (in place of voice over) needs to be finalised.

There are several shots that are affected by neg scratching which need to be removed digitally.

A digital FX house to carry out this work has been chosen.

All fades and dissolves as shown in last weeks [sic] screening will be made A + B by the labs and not optically. The length and timing of all these is already set.

The shot being taken in New York by Lisa Leone is definitely required and replaces two shots in the existing cut.

MUSIC

Much of the music used in the temp mix is confirmed for the final version.

There are two scenes that require new scored pieces of music. The style and feel of the music is known but no composer has been chosen.

The main and end title music will need to be scored if a suitable alternative

cannot be found reflecting the music already used in the film.

Two alternative pieces of music need to be found to replace the background Frank Sinatra used in the temp mix, depending on the cost of rights for use.

An alternative piece to the Shostakovich may need to be found for the montage sequence. This is the same piece used in the temp as main and end titles music.

[Reel 1: remix Shostakovich

…]

Reel 4 remove "my way" and replace with "Bluette" Fix drive to L.I.

Reel 5 Fix music in orgy

Reel 6 Fix Ligeti at L.I. Gates Add atmos[phere] to Bill's office?

Reel 7 Add Bill convo to Dream Sequence

Fix music over Bill calls Carl/Sally

Reel 8 Lose Bing Crosby in Toystore and Jingle Bells]

ADR

There are still several characters that need to be revoiced due to either their English accents or poor performance. These are mostly one or two liners apart from the female character at the party.

There is a number of lines to be looped by the principle [sic artists 1 ½ day per principle [sic) should be sufficient.

FOLEY's [the creation-of sound effects]

Foley's will be shot at the house as normal and the personnel required has been agreed.

SOUND FXS

As a result of the screening we have a much clearer picture of the sound fxs required.

MIXING

It is anticipated that we should be ready to premix on either 19th April or 26th April. The full mixing period including final mix and mastering should take

5-6 weeks. This would key in with bulk printing starting around June 7th.

LABORATORIES

All work regarding neg cutting and intermediate process has been agreed subject to final consultation with the labs.

FOREIGN VERSIONS

A definitive schedule of release needs to be agreed. No work on selection of voices for characters has started at this point and requires further discussion."

https://www.reddit.com/r/StanleyKubrick ... s_to_eyes/

[xmchaikenx]

Eyes Wide Shut editor Nigel Galt:

https://thefilmstage.com/that-cut-is-st ... ks-intent/

[Stefan Andersson]

Interviews with Larry Smith on Eyes Wide Shut:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9MFTmTIv-s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fVK6kFKTWI

[Altair]

If you scroll down in the comments, you’ll see a triple comparison with a raw 35mm scan of the same scenes as well

Further to this, on Reddit there's a helpful comparison between the Warner BD, the Criterion BD, and the 35mm print scan, which seems pretty convincing that the Criterion was colour-timed in reference to a release print.

[jt938]

If you scroll down in the comments, you’ll see a triple comparison with a raw 35mm scan of the same scenes as well

Further to this, on Reddit there's a helpful comparison between the Warner BD, the Criterion BD, and the 35mm print scan, which seems pretty convincing that the Criterion was colour-timed in reference to a release print.

That comment section is a nightmare, amazing how on a Kubrick sub, they can't accept one of his films looking how it's supposed to.

[mfunk9786]

Watching this right now (arrived early from Orbit). It is the biggest improvement from Blu-ray to UHD that I’ve ever seen, and one of the best 4K discs ever authored. And I watch a lot of these fucking things.

[Stefan Andersson]

More interviews with Larry Smith:
https://www.slashfilm.com/2031286/stanl ... xperience/
https://www.indiewire.com/features/gene ... 235162004/

[hearthesilence]

That comment section is a nightmare, amazing how on a Kubrick sub, they can't accept one of his films looking how it's supposed to.

More than anyone else, Kubrick draws a lot of jackasses who believe in nonsense and refuse to admit being wrong despite forensic evidence and actual documentation proving otherwise. It's like the cinephile version of anti-vaxxers.

[aox]

That comment section is a nightmare, amazing how on a Kubrick sub, they can't accept one of his films looking how it's supposed to.

Then there is willful obstinence:

I find the extreme amount of grain distracting. I will stick the 1080p WB release. For me the grain is so severe it pulls me out of the spell this movie creates. I just notice grain crawling all over every surface and am instantly transported outside the EWS world and reminded I'm watching movie.

](*,)

[MichaelB]

More than anyone else, Kubrick draws a lot of jackasses who believe in nonsense and refuse to admit being wrong despite forensic evidence and actual documentation proving otherwise. It's like the cinephile version of anti-vaxxers.

I've seen more than one really earnest attempt at explaining why the helicopter shadow in the 1.33:1-framed version of The Shining was totally deliberate, despite the man who shot it—Kubrick himself wasn't in the helicopter, of course— saying that it was an accident (which was obviously the case anyway, because duh).

[aox]

More than anyone else, Kubrick draws a lot of jackasses who believe in nonsense and refuse to admit being wrong despite forensic evidence and actual documentation proving otherwise. It's like the cinephile version of anti-vaxxers.

I've seen more than one really earnest attempt at explaining why the helicopter shadow in the 1.33:1-framed version of The Shining was totally deliberate, despite the man who shot it—Kubrick himself wasn't in the helicopter, of course— saying that it was an accident (which was obviously the case anyway, because duh).

Why would it be "deliberate"? What was the reasoning?

[MichaelB]

I can't remember specifics—this was 25-30 years ago. Sometimes you encounter such complete and utter cobblers that the sane response is to point, laugh, and move on, which is what I did.

I think the thought process went something like this: the correct aspect ratio of The Shining is 1.33:1 (a surprisingly widespread assumption before the Taschen book definitively debunked it by reproducing marked-up storyboards), Stanley Kubrick was a famous perfectionist, there's undoubtedly a helicopter shadow in the 1.33:1-framed version, therefore it must have been deliberately put there for some reason.

The Occam's razor explanation, that the intended aspect ratio was a standard 1.85:1 (which by 1980 was all but universal for non-anamorphic major studio releases) and that the helicopter shadow was either not spotted at all (depending on how the image was framed during editing) or spotted but dismissed because it would be cropped out when projected correctly, just didn't seem to register with these people, mainly because they'd so completely bought into the idea that cinemas were showing the film incorrectly. Even though in 1980 that would have been the film's major public conduit and certainly the only way to see it in the intended picture resolution.

[Zot!]

Kubrick putting hidden messages specifically in a TV version of his film is of course hilarious, but then they made an entire "documentary" on illuminati bullshit in The Shining. Somehow I was hoping the answer is that it means that Jack Nicholson is a Replicant.

[ryannichols7]

this post is dedicated to zedz and yoloswag...

so I'll echo the usual points here - there's no scholarly contributions to be found here aside from Megan Abott's essay in the booklet - which I found good but barely scratching the surface, and Criterion did actually only record three new pieces for this edition (all excellent and I'll cover in a moment), but this nonetheless comes away as one of their best editions this year, easily. I originally had a rocky start with this film, first watching it in high school and not understanding it at all, and thinking Cruise and Kidman were horribly miscast. 10 or so years later I saw it in a theatre by myself, on the precipice of a two year long relationship. I started to understand it a bit more, with some lived, real life experience, but watching it over the weekend, armed with this fantastic new 4K (I will go to war with any online commenter that claims they prefer the old WB BD) and its lovely third disc of extras, really opened up the movie a lot for me. Criterion's approach to this edition is equal parts the "archive collected" type edition (similar to All About Eve or Some Like it Hot) and also the "setting the record straight" - much like they did for Citizen Kane. obviously none of us are strangers to Eyes Wide Shut's unbearably annoying conspiracy theories - the "20 minutes" that were cut, the 1.33 ratio, Kubrick being murdered, and all sorts of Qanon tinfoil hat bullshit. Criterion smartly, much like they did with Kane, avoid all of this, and I literally sat through even the TV spots and read every word of the booklet essay, watching every piece here, to ensure that was the case. obviously we know from Curtis Tsui talking about producing the Barry Lyndon edition that the Kubrick estate does approve everything, and Katharina, Christiane, and Jan Harlan are of course thanked for their involvement here. but I was still impressed by the openness towards some subjects throughout exploring the third disc

Larry Smith's interview not only is here to set the record straight on the look of the film, but to give an admirable portrait of someone who really enjoyed working with Kubrick and was immensely proud of doing so. I loved hearing about his background working in film and how he ended up working with Kubrick, from Barry Lyndon on. after watching this feature, I'm shocked that Smith has had the career that he has - I'm not particularly a Nicolas Winding Refn fan but that really seems to be the only director of substance he's worked with since. a shame, as he's great to listen to here and seems lovely to work with.

the admiration for Kubrick and again kinda "setting the record straight" with the man himself was only expanded in Lisa Leone's lovely interview. prior to my "comeback" to cinema in 2021, I had been one of those people who believed that Kubrick was some sort of cold, calculated guy who occasionally made brilliant films (2001 and Dr. Strangelove were my favorites at the time). I watched The Killing, Paths of Glory, and most importantly Barry Lyndon, all of which helped me understand him as not being that guy at all. I began pouring time into reading about him, reading Katharina's reddit AMAs, etc. this was a guy from the Bronx who really just loved his work and was fascinated by a lot of interesting subjects. but he was a New Yorker at heart. Lisa's interview here kinda proved that to me - it was wild hearing Nas and Illmatic mentioned on the Criterion disc for Eyes Wide Shut but it made sense to me, just like how it didn't surprise me when I read about Kubrick being a huge fan of White Men Can't Jump. Lisa's interview painted Kubrick as being a great collaborator, something echoed elsewhere in these features - while he absolutely was a perfectionist, he loved hearing the ideas of others so much, and Lisa's dedication in showing him the New York of the 1990s was fascinating to hear, in addition to her breaking down her two acting scenes in the film

I liked Georgina Orgill's contribution a lot as someone who works at the Kubrick archive in London, but it was definitely the one feature where I was most left wanting more. again, this is that desire for scholarly material, and what we get from Orgill is certainly great. a big key to unlocking Eyes Wide Shut for me was learning of Kubrick's original intentions to cast either Steve Martin or Woody Allen in the lead role - really opening up the idea that the movie is supposed to be so much more comical than what's on the surface. I appreciated her breakdown of Kubrick's lifelong obsession with Traumnovelle and the shots of archival material, as well as a surprising showing of the amount of stuff in the archive existed for The Aryan Papers and Napoleon, something that would be explored later on in the Lost Kubrick documentary, which mostly ends up just being about the two films I named, giving AI a very brief mention. which I do find to be a shame! AI in Kubrick's archive is something I've always been interested in, maybe I'll have to return to London myself and check it out. but anyhow, it's a great deeper dive into Aryan Papers and Napoleon, especially since they talk with so many of Kubrick's key players and even potential actors for those films! lovely to see Jack Nicholson show up. speaking of people I always like showing up, I always love listening to Christiane Kubrick and she was delightful here, especially her pure honesty of how much she didn't like Traumnovelle or Arthur Schnitzler and pushed Kubrick away from adapting it. her admittance that she totally understands if someone hates Eyes Wide Shut is very refreshing to hear, not something you hear super often on these kinds of editions, but she (as well as Katharina and Jan Harlan) is always honest and great to catch up with.

Never Just a Dream really flies by but it's always good to get more material with Katharina and Jan as I said above, and Anthony Frewin was a nice listen as well. I know a scholarly commentary was a huge pipe dream for this edition, but I do wish some folks involved with Kubrick had been up to do a track over the film - I think about the excellent commentaries on Days of Heaven and The Thin Red Line (over a movie I don't even like!!) and wish for a similar track from any number of Harlan/Frewin/Todd Field/etc, would've really amped up this edition. what we have from these folks in bits and pieces is good but it definitely leaves you wanting more a little bit. as usual, Criterion do find a short piece of Kubrick talking, this time his DW Griffith Award speech, which I'd seen before but I love hearing him talk about Griffith. I really do wish we'd gotten more of him talking about films he loved..

new interviews with Cruise and Kidman were always unlikely too, though Kidman has mentioned the film somewhat recently - though I've expressed my general disappointment with her never appearing on these (I know she's busy, but still), but the press conference with the two of them and Jan Harlan (who gets totally forgotten, even though he has some of the best bits) is a pretty great watch, and it was great seeing both actors be so open and honest about working with the director. amazing moment when they recall going home and watching Dekalog thanks to Kubrick, which seems to have been a massive inspiration on Eyes Wide Shut, especially judging from Sydney Pollack also mentioning it in the booklet interview. and I can see it! Kubrick was obviously a huge admirer of Kieslowski, something MichaelB thankfully included when producing Arrow's edition of Dekalog. I finally finished Dekalog between the last time I saw Eyes Wide Shut and now, and I do think atmospherically and editing wise, Kubrick was subconsciously influenced by Kieslowski's work, ditto the Three Colors films - I couldn't help but think of the fashion show scenes in Red during Ziegler's Christmas party.

I enjoyed Sydney Pollack's interview a good bit and it made me wish I liked his films a lot more than I do. it seemed like he and Kubrick got along really well, even though Pollack seems like he didn't fully grasp the character of Ziegler, though (as the title of the interview says), he gave exactly what Kubrick wanted. this is truly expanded upon in Kubrick Remembered, which was a seriously fantastic documentary. they got players from nearly all of Kubrick's films and painted a seriously lovely portrait of him. at all times realistic, and honest, it's not overly puffy or sentimental, but just the right amount of emotional and illuminating.

as for the film itself - as I said it really elevated for me, and the fact that I picked it up from the Barnes and Noble on the Upper West Side last week feels super fitting. I actually will close this overwrought post with bringing up the conspiracy theorists again - every single one of them that debate this nonsense or claim the "20 minutes of footage cut" would add so much to the film are entirely missing the point of the movie. sure, it lambasts the elite and all that, and it is really amusing in doing so, but Traumnovelle is a story about marriage and jealousy, and Eyes Wide Shut is also a story about marriage and jealousy. nothing else. and it's a great movie for that reason, and I thank Criterion for this fantastic release of it.

[Roger Ryan]

Criterion put the "Recreating New York with Stanley Kubrick" extra up on its official YouTube channel on Nov. 25th. Since I don't have the Criterion edition yet, can someone tell me what's going on with the clips from the feature included in this extra? Clearly the grain has been completely scrubbed away in these clips. Does it appear this way on the Blu-ray itself or is this just how it appears on-line? Maybe this was done for the clips used in the extras to shrink the file sizes and avoid having to properly reproduce the grain?