How much, and exactly what did Warner Bros cut out of Eyes Wide Shut? Is there any version out there that got some of the cut parts?
>>217363396you fell for a very tenacious urban legend that spread with zero supporting evidence.
>>217363477>cease now with your useless inquiries
>>217363531i've talked about it here at length numerous times.it's a nice story, but it's not supported by any direct evidence, fueled only by speculation.
>>217363396What was the fucking deal with this movie? Was this guy dreaming? Was his wife dreaming? Did either of them actually cheat? I thought everything was real until her monologue in the toy store at the end where she talks about their “real or imaginary” infidelities. Was she simply casting doubt on his story? The mask was on the pillow though…
>>217363396Here's one image from an actual deleted scene from Eyes Wide Shut. Where it was supposed to fit in the movie is not clear.
>>217363477I read somewhere that there are people who saw the movie with Kubrick that say the party scene was like half an hour longer and it was bloody.
>>217363605This looks AI generated.
FIDELIO
>>217363616you read... somewhere??? wow, powerful.like I said, urban legend.
>>217363638It's from the Taschen book about Kubrick, I believe.
>>217363672I saw a YouTube video about it. Looked well researched and convincing.
>>217363703>no link
>>217363396Why is the fact the screenplay was based on a book always left out of discussions like this?
>>217363703That's pretty much how urban legends spread, anon. Post any supporting evidence you got and let's get to the bottom of things.
>>217363768>>217363812https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5cy4f4z8Fk
>>217363477how did you kill kubrick, jew?
>>217363991If that one video convinced you, I don't know what you expect me to tell you. I don't have the patience to deconstruct a 16 minutes video point-by point, post a timestamp where a specific claim is made if you want me to adress it. On a quick skim, it doesn't seem to go into any real evidence, just a surface-level analysis and jumping to conclusions.
>>217364211post evidence
>>217363396It was penises. Tom Cruise had to walk through shot after shot of crowds with dicks out. Many of the crew have talked about the nudity and how Tom Cruise had to actually do it. They didn't use a stand in. It's like Kubrick was playing a practical joke on Cruise. Making him do take after take for weeks of him seeing all kinds of naked men.
>>217363616Confusing shit There was a single cut scene at the orgy where Bill, while wandering around, finds an empty non-descript room with a stone slab altar inside of it. Bill doesn't look around and leaves it unimpressed, but the camera lingers at the altar slab and the viewers see dried blood on it that Bill didn't see that indicates people were killed on it, giving viewers their first warning of bad things afoot at the orgy.
>>217364333trips of truthchecked
>>217363991https://youtu.be/YWxJqaIFi3w?si=lFJUK1Qfp55oi8Wwhttps://youtu.be/5czh-EWGlLs?si=I5fzl34jLD6O-JNzhttps://youtu.be/VpoU7dDv59g?si=ldqsQH-ymBmLu0k2
>>217364398Ok. I'll watch this. Looks interesting.Thanks!
>>217364354it's funny everyone has a different story about what was cut from the film. almost like all these details are made up.
>>217364447More like they movie filmed for over a year. And the sheer amount of footage means a lot was cut. Though a lot of it was similar. People who worked on it have said various things and confirmed somethings. It's impossible to know what Stanley wanted, but people who were there know what they did. Like, it wasn't known Cate Blanchett did the voice of the masked woman for a very long time. It was an insanely long shoot for what was mostly a humble drama. 400 days. Literally, 400 days. It took the perfectionist that is William Friedkin to do the Exorcist in half that length. Kubrick was an asshole.
>>217364745>People who worked on it have said various things and confirmed somethings.Could you possibly be more vague?
