Post a response to this discussion thread
I guess working in a hospital with doctors everyday tends to skewer my perception of how a doctor acts in a clinical manner, not a social one. Watching Tom Cruise deal with the clinical aspects of his job - as he did when the hooker had temporarily OD'd in Zieglar's room was just hokey and awkward to me. He sounded more like a parent dispensing advice on the dangers of drugs. I may be nitpicking, but even in his doctor's office, I just didn't buy into his clinical persona.
It's funny you mention that Tom Cruise's performance is in his face. His facial expressions (which I found annoying sometimes) lacked both depth and emotion, (something he showed very well in Born on the Fourth of July and Rainman), maybe the sterile persona was what Kubrick was going for - from what I understand, he made Tom and Nicole re-shoot some scenes over 70 times to the point of sheer exhaustion and frustration.
I really don't get this over-analytical viewpoint that it probably takes more than one viewing to comprehend this movie. I thought the movie was pretty elementary and every aspect of the sexual obsession, marriage, fidelity theme played out on a surface level. What was there to miss?
Hey, this is just my reaction to the movie. BTW - I thought Tom Cruise DID participate in one sexual situation (rather benign)- wasn't that Dr. Harford groping the breasts of the hooker's roommate under her denim shirt, before she informs him that her roommate who he had met the night before was diagnosed HIV-positive? Just wondering.
- Agreeing to disagree
G'Mom
Post a response to this discussion thread