MovieChat Forums > Eyes Wide Shut (1999) Discussion > Why did Kubrick hire Sydney Pollack?? Hi...

Why did Kubrick hire Sydney Pollack?? His acting is awful!!!!

posted 9 years ago by Collector-Man
47 replies | jump to latest

Sydney Pollack was probably a friend of Kubrick's but seeing as Kubrick is such a perfectionist director it surprises me he would hire such an awful actor.

[–] einstein (2609) 5 years ago

I found Sydney amazing, he carried the movie at certain points and certainly outplayed tommy cruiz

[–] Cognoscente (2776) 3 years ago

It's also fitting since Sydney had earlier directed Tom in The Firm.

[–] ducksoup (3933) 3 years ago

You wouldn't say that if Kubrick had had Cruise sliding across the floor in his underwear.

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 3 years ago

I never had a problem at all with his performance.

[–] 123Guy (7827) 3 years ago

Why does no one point out that the director is fully responsible for exactly how the characters acted and spoke??
They did what the director wanted them to do.

[–] QueenFanUSA (3379) 3 years ago

Either way I don't get what was supposed to be so "bad" about his performance. His scenes were totally effective in my eyes.

[–] 123Guy (7827) 3 years ago

yeah, I don't get that either. I think everyone in this ACTED how the director wanted them to: awkward and off kilter. If I recall, I thought Sydney was closer to normal than many of the rest

[–] T79 (151) 3 years ago

Sydney insisted on being in the movie.... it may be a documentary of Hollywood.

[–] Heisenberg (6730) 3 years ago

What may? EWS?

[–] T79 (151) 3 months ago

He looks like he's one of the Hollywood types who revere sex. If there is no sexy sin business going on in Hollywood then that's good.... but Kubrick and Pollack are both dead now. The Moral World has been cleansed.

[–] TexasJack (12516) 3 years ago

I thought he was good, as always. RIP Sydney

[–] sONOMArEturns (1326) 3 years ago

no performace is as bad as kidman's interpretation of being stoned. seriously, what was that? she acted like she was either very drunk or on painkillers. clearly kubrick nor kidman had ever smoked weed before.

[–] Seperatrix (1348) 3 years ago

Right?

And I thought Pollack was great.

[–] Druff (1841) a year ago

> seeing as Kubrick is such a perfectionist director

Exactly, which is your cue to back and figure out why he gets it and you don't.

Anybody in this thread who criticized Pollack's acting OR directing would do well to go find a bucket of dicks and eat them all as fast as possible.

[–] Melton (5489) 10 months ago

Correct response.