By Charlie Wachtel
What was Stanley Kubrick saying?
One of the most intriguing expressions of the sanctity of the human body, Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut functions as a paranoid, psychosexual mind-warp. Characters are portrayed in absolutes as either prudes or extreme sex-crazy existentialists. The magic of the film can be seen during times wherein characters consciously or subconsciously cross over this sexual spectrum into a world less familiar to them. The consequences of such actions are ultimately personal to the individual character affected. What Kubrick has done is set up a world where the accepted convention and social contract of marriage is compromised by the visually depicted notion of sex-driven humans running amuck in a preverbal state of nature. The acknowledgment of Kubrick’s animalistic interpretation of humans being inherently “made to mate” is the central crisis for main characters, Dr. Bill Harford and Alice Harford. And thus the film portrays the human body as inviolable and at its purest state for two people who agree in contractual marriage.
It is the perversion of this marriage in the form of bodily infidelity which haunts Bill’s psyche and lingers in the form of a poisonous spirit, later corrupting his own mind. The Harfords’ previous desire to remain untouchable from the claws of a sex-obsessed state of nature is challenged as their attitudes of bodily sovereignty shift from comfortable acceptance to skeptical fascination with the prospect of having another lover.
The initial signs of unfaithfulness are first seen in the character of Alice Harford. Alice reveals to Bill her dream-like fantasy of a passing naval officer at a hotel they once stayed at. She mentions that if he had asked her to run away with him that she was prepared to leave everything: her husband, socioeconomic stability, and even her child. Such impetuous decisiveness was all strictly motivated by the sexual longing of a “kept woman” (Kreider 45). From the onset of the film, Kubrick sets up the essence of Alice as serving only superficial purposes to both herself and her environment. The fact that Alice exists solely as eye candy both to herself and others is corroborated as her first line of the film is “How do I look?” From then on she is seen brushing her daughter’s hair, hooking on a bra, applying deodorant in the mirror, and later flirting with Sandor Szavost in the ballroom scene. Kubrick defies the traditional purpose of costume which “harmonizes the mood” and complements or expresses character (Gaines 195). He instead explores the mind of Alice which shows signs of breaking the links of her own superficial bondage.
Additionally, the mise-en-scene of her surroundings particularly in her home further emphasizes the beauty and riches which surround her. Bright lights, Christmas ornaments, and abstract paintings in an upscale apartment indicate that Alice is superficially happy. Along with her gifted daughter, handsome husband, and care-free life, Kubrick has created the perfect embodiment of a human possessing the highest quotient for happiness. The mise-en-scene exhibited is similar to that in How to Marry a Millionaire (1953) which paints its protagonists in a similar light of luxury and comfort. The effect this has is remarkable once we learn of Alice’s consideration for a new kind of lover at the expense of losing this life of grandeur. In order to permeate the ideal life and crossover into a sexual state of nature, a reasonable person would probably consider the motivation partly, if not completely circumstantial. But because Alice already has everything, her subconscious decision in the form of fantasy dreams to resort to sexual animalism is particularly compelling.
The emphasis of Alice’s psychosexual decision to consent to such a sexual state of nature hearkens back to Last Tango in Paris. Both films communicate a philosophy which “suppresses feeling and ‘civilizes’ the ‘savage’ in us all by repressing bodily needs” (Mellen 10). The characters of Paul and Jeanne in Last Tango are informally consenting to this lifestyle. When the couple grows increasingly skeptical of their raw, animalistic relationship there is paranoia concerning whether a convention-based lifestyle in the realm of the “civilized world” is possible for people of their kind. Eyes Wide Shut presents a diametrically opposite relationship with Bill and Alice who find they are instead gravitating towards the sexual state of nature.
Both films also see a significant requirement of the sexual state of nature as one which requires anonymity. Characters make conscious decisions to sacrifice their identity in order to be unfettered in their sexual endeavors. In Eyes Wide Shut we are introduced to a secret, underground world of naked ritual where disguised members dress in Venetian masks and must possess a secret password for entrance. Upon hearing of his wife’s psychosexual infidelity, Bill consents to this underground world and arrives at a secret meeting. It seems perhaps that Bill’s fascination with this world is largely attributed to his new perspective which gives such a dark, foreign world a chance. He consents to its existence when he initially purchases the costume and mask and asks Nick Nightingale for the password. The mask is of particular importance to the notion of anonymity because it exhibits a cold, impersonal touch with regard to Bill’s journey. This self-deprivation of the human face underscores the idea that the masks represent “the transformation of the wearer into a soulless object” (Kreider 46).
In pinpointing a logical interpretation of the anonymous nature of these secret ritualistic sex meetings it seems the only possible reason for hiding oneself is because of shamefulness for hidden, repressed sexual feelings or perhaps the idea that a perceived visual line must be drawn between the sexual state of nature and the convention-based world. The first reason is practical because it assumes that the characters portrayed are ashamed by their secret lifestyle and seek to remain safeguarded and sheltered in this process. Their shame can be attributed to the fact that they exist in a minority of people brave enough or conscious enough to express the true nature of their existentialist beliefs. The latter reasoning of the need to establish a barrier between both worlds acknowledges that both worlds are separate from each other and should be kept that way. This notion accepts the philosophy that if we fail to discern both worlds as “separate” then there will inevitably be a reciprocal perversion of both worlds. The mere fact that consenters to the sexual state of nature also partake in the normal world compromises the legitimacy of whatever world they partake in at any given time. The idea that consenters must eventually “return to” one world or another requires the repression or expression of their sexuality. What is particularly compelling about the secret organization is the socioeconomic makeup of its members. Almost all members are wealthy and high class. And because a secret password is required for entrance into this organization, the nature of the socioeconomic makeup is perpetuated. Perhaps this says something about the kind of people Kubrick believes have access to such sexually existentialist beliefs.
When Bill’s friend, Victor Ziegler finds out about Bill’s intrusion into the secret organization he defensively accuses Bill of being “out of [his] depth” and qualifies that the members were not “ordinary people.” Upon asking Victor who the names of the members were, Victor continues that “if I told you their names…you might not sleep so well.” This ambiguous hint leads us to believe that the most important politicians, celebrities, or mere power-players who run the world are enlightened with a raw truth which they feel must be protected. The irony of their covert involvement reveals that the people running the world are instinctively sexual animals who possess the ultimate truth of human existence. Like animals in a state of nature, such people “can buy and sell ‘ordinary’ men like Bill…and fuck or kill [anyone]” (Kreider 47). Bill and Alice eventually reconcile that they cannot see themselves in this world but would rather remain protected and kept innocent in their own world.
Though that is not to say that both don’t acknowledge their mutual repression of such sexually animalistic impulses. When Bill decides to end his sexual escapist journey and return to his wife, it is a sign that he thinks he can “make things work” the way they are. What is remarkable about Eyes Wide Shut is that throughout the entire film we never see Bill and Alice having sex. It takes the entire film for Alice to initially propose this to her husband after their intense, psychosexual journey forges a resolution. Perhaps this is an indication that all they need to spice up their relationship is a transformation of their sexual habits or a reliance on sex as an important part of their relationship.
Lest we forget that when Alice asked Bill if he derived any sort of pleasure from feeling his patients’ breasts that she was shocked and disappointed when he admitted the scientific response of “I’m a doctor.” Kubrick’s take on Alice’s sexual obsession and Bill’s fascination with it demonstrates that sex is always on our minds and it is perhaps the most important thing that should be on our minds. While Kubrick presses the obsession with the perversion of the body through infidelity it seems that it is something which he accepts and believes is intrinsic to us all. This final exchange between Alice and Bill seems to even acknowledge this acceptance as the viewers are asked to buy into the idea that the couple “plan[s] to forget all this unpleasantness soon in the blissful oblivion of orgasm” (Kreider 48). Alice’s final request for Bill is “something important” which she says must be done “as soon as possible.” When Bill asks what could be so crucial, Alice responds with just one word: “fuck.” Thus it can be assumed that either Bill must accept this new approach to life or inevitably their relationship is doomed to fail. The ending is enigmatic in this sense because the sexual underworld is something which we are unsure if Bill can really ever accept. It almost seems as if he is frightened by it and so returns to his false sense of stability. We can probably infer that sex will revitalize the marriage of the Harfords. But the ambiguous nature of the ending leaves this open-ended. Though Bill may not change his perspective on his sexual lifestyle, he knows that sexual existentialism is something which is too dangerous and frightening for him to be a part of. And while this film may not provide direct answers to all of these questions, the depth with which it covers the topic is telling since it acknowledges sex as a fundamental, inescapable natural part of life which everyone eventually must come to terms with.
Charlie Wachtel is a Senior Writer for The Film Crusade and Founder of www.filmcrusade.com.
Works Consulted
Castiglia, Christopher. Sex Panics, Sex Publics, Sex Memories. Summer 2000. 2 December 2008.
Eyes Wide Shut. Dir. Stanley Kubrick. Perf. Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman, Sydney Pollack.
Feldmann, Hans. “Kubrick and His Discontents.” Film Quarterly. 30.1. (1976): pp. 12-19. JSTOR. University of California Press.
Gaines, Jane. “Costume and Narrative: How Dress Tells the Woman’s Story.” Fabrication: Body and Costume in Screen History, Routledge, New York, 1990.
Kreider, Tim. “Review: [Untitled].” Film Quarterly. 53.3 (2000): 7 pgs. 28 November 2008. JSTOR. University of California Press.
Mellen, Joan. “Sexual Politics and Last Tango in Paris.” Film Quarterly. 26.3 (1973): pp 9-19. 24 November 2008. JSTOR. University of California Press.
Turim, Maureen. “Designing Women: The Emergence of the New Sweetheart Line.” Fabrications: Body and Costume in Screen History, Routledge, NY, 1990
