Why Sydney Pollack Replaced Harvey Keitel In Eyes Wide Shut

The late 1990s were a thrilling time for movie buffs to be online. The proliferation of independently owned and operated news websites like Ain't It Cool News, Corona Coming Attractions, and Dark Horizons gave readers unprecedented access to all manner of behind-the-scenes scuttlebutt, most of which came from tipsters with access to secrets the studios were accustomed to keeping under wraps. Suddenly, floodgates they didn't even know existed opened, and out spewed test screening reviews of mega-budget movies and rumors about everything from casting to directing. Even when the too-early buzz was good (e.g. AICN's rave notices for "Titanic," which, six months out from release, looked to be a looming disaster), studios were furious to not be in complete control of the publicity and marketing roll-out of nine-figure investments.

For moviegoers with zero skin in the game, it was glorious. Sure, there were some bulls*** artists who snuck laughable fabrications past these newly minted Hollywood influence peddlers (none of whom lived in Hollywood, nor worked in the film industry prior to launching their websites), but sniffing out the lies was part of the fun – particularly because some of the movies getting covered promised to be epochal. The theatrical release of the first new "Star Wars" movie in 16 years — and George Lucas' first official directorial effort in over two decades — was drawing ever closer. Meanwhile, in England, Stanley Kubrick was shooting "Eyes Wide Shut," his first feature since 1987's "Full Metal Jacket." Though we roughly knew what these movies were about, their plot particulars were still unknown, which meant many of us spent a good portion of our day refreshing AICN and Dark Horizons in the hope that a new morsel of information might get meted out. Then, when principal photography on "Eyes Wide Shut" stretched beyond a year, the film began to feel like something either groundbreaking or utterly ill-conceived.

The longer Kubrick's production dragged on, the more deeply we parsed every development that leaked from the set. And yet when Kubrick was forced to recast two supporting roles halfway through the shoot, most people just assumed the actors, Harvey Keitel and Jennifer Jason Leigh, left because they'd been booked to work on other projects. It wasn't until after the film was released that we'd learn the truth about Keitel's not-so-amicable departure.

In a 2016 interview on BBC's The Andrew Marr Show, the host of the program asked Harvey Keitel about the circumstances of his exit from "Eyes Wide Shut." Keitel expressed his displeasure thusly:

Keitel: Well, he was a genius. Mr. Kubrick did some things I objected to, I didn't like, I thought they were disrespectful — and I won't be disrespected by him or anybody. And if any actor can help it, they should help it. You don't want to get fired, but I was.

Marr: Is that the Brooklyn in you?

Keitel: It's the sense of worth in me.

And that's when Kubrick replaced Keitel with actor-director Sydney Pollack. But what exactly did Kubrick do to get on Keitel's nerves? When Gary Oldman visited The Opie & Anthony Show some years later, he shared this version of the story:

"Originally Harvey Keitel was in 'Eyes Wide Shut.' He was playing Sydney [Pollack's role]. He was doing the scene and they were just walking through a door and after the 68th take of this, just walking through a door, Harvey Keitel just said 'I'm out of here, you're f***ing crazy'. He just said, 'you're f***ing out of your mind', and left."

This makes it sound like Keitel essentially quit instead of being fired, but what does it matter? Clearly, Ketiel was no fan of Kubrick's exacting approach to filmmaking, while Pollack had no publicly stated qualms about walking through a door upwards of 70 times. In any event, it's interesting that this tantalizing piece of info was effectively buried at a time when so many, far-more-damaging behind-the-scenes tidbits were breaking daily at the aforementioned movie news sites.