This 1986 movie has three narrative perspectives that run concurrently throughout the film: the evolving relationship between Elizabeth and John; the evolving relationship between Elizabeth and the reclusive artist Farnsworth; and Elizabeth's interactions in NY art circles through her work at a gallery.
In the first, John, who wears nothing but black suits and white shirts and lives in a colorless and impersonal apartment, is shown to be able to feel nothing except through extreme forms of sexual expression. In the second, Elizabeth gradually comprehends the mystical revelry of pure sensation--Farnsworth examining the fish he has caught--that also comes through in his painting. The last--Elizabeth's art world--is the intersection ... Read More:
>>More Details
Curtis Hanson has managed to direct a film which captures the late 1940's in both style and spirit. Often films depicting the glamourous side of this era immerse themselves too much in the styles and fashions of the time, rendering the actual characters superfluous to the movie. Not here though - the characters drive the film, blending in perfectly with the directing style swaying effortlessly to capture the gritty and the classic-Hollywoodesque, the guy has done his homework.
Risks were taken by casting relatively unknown non-Americans in the two major roles, a rare thing by a Hollywood studio. It's hard to imagine anyone else but Russell Crowe as the fiery `Bud' and at times Guy Pierce seems a bit awkward as `Exley' - but this isn't ... Read More:
>>More Details
Curtis Hanson has managed to direct a film which captures the late 1940's in both style and spirit. Often films depicting the glamourous side of this era immerse themselves too much in the styles and fashions of the time, rendering the actual characters superfluous to the movie. Not here though - the characters drive the film, blending in perfectly with the directing style swaying effortlessly to capture the gritty and the classic-Hollywoodesque, the guy has done his homework.
Risks were taken by casting relatively unknown non-Americans in the two major roles, a rare thing by a Hollywood studio. It's hard to imagine anyone else but Russell Crowe as the fiery `Bud' and at times Guy Pierce seems a bit awkward as `Exley' - but this isn't ... Read More:
>>More Details
Don't buy this!
The packaging on the box claims this is ' unrated' - IT ISN'T!
ALL the sex scenes are missing - how the studio involved can get away with the lie on the packaging is a mystery to me, but they have!
Worthless sanitised US version, NOT the print that was released in Europe.
AVOID!!
>>More Details
The apocalyptic horror merges with the child-in-peril thriller, while Chuck Russell, director of the
lumbering Schwazenegger vehicle "Eraser," provides a modicum of chills in this sloppy, disjointed and hackneyed movie.
For many Bond fans, the return of Sean Connery in this "unofficial" Bond entry, was an exciting opportunity to experience the Connery magic and charisma before the earlier pre-Roger Moore years. Released in 1983, the film competed head-to-head against Moore's entry, "Octopussy" which, to some critics of note, one of the better Roger Moore efforts. Obviously, this production had a more engaging cast, an entertaining story, and some good actors: Maude Adams and Lois Jourdan as Bond's nemesis than "Never Say Never Again."
While it's good to have Connery back, looking actually fitter than he did in "Diamond Are Forever" in 1971, and wearing a faultless toupee, the film manages to fall short on a number of levels. Viewers should note, it is a different ... Read More:
>>More Details
For many Bond fans, the return of Sean Connery in this "unofficial" Bond entry, was an exciting opportunity to experience the Connery magic and charisma before the earlier pre-Roger Moore years. Released in 1983, the film competed head-to-head against Moore's entry, "Octopussy" which, to some critics of note, one of the better Roger Moore efforts. Obviously, this production had a more engaging cast, an entertaining story, and some good actors: Maude Adams and Lois Jourdan as Bond's nemesis than "Never Say Never Again."
While it's good to have Connery back, looking actually fitter than he did in "Diamond Are Forever" in 1971, and wearing a faultless toupee, the film manages to fall short on a number of levels. Viewers should note, it is a different ... Read More:
>>More Details
Batman has always been a vastly over-rated movie and I find it difficult to understand how it garnered such positive reviews on it's release . Having watched this recently on TV it seems like a good time to look again at this disappointing film.
It has many flaws but chief among these is the casting of 80's "it girl" Kim Basinger. She almost single handedly ruins this film with her unbelievably poor performance, coming across like some am dram second rater. Michael Keaton does some of his best work but is scuppered in the Batman role by a Batsuit which allows extremely limited movement of body and none of neck whatsoever. He walks around like he has a washboard stuck up his back, completely not his fault I understand. Jack Nicholson's Joker is dressed in cheap looking ... Read More:
>>More Details
This extraordinary film noir from director Curtis Hanson has truely earned it's place among modern cinema's greatest. The reasons why are that it it is a classic tale of corruption in the police, crime, lust and morality. The director has also got incredible performances from all of the film's cast members, including Kim Basinger, who gives her career-best. The cinematography, lighting, direction, set-pieces and locations are all excellent too, making the film as memorable as any other great American film.
The standout performances (though every one of them could be) have to go to Russel Crowe's confused and mixed-up brute of a cop Bud White and Guy Pearce's ambitious but ever so moral Ed Exley.
This extraordinary film noir from director Curtis Hanson has truely earned it's place among modern cinema's greatest. The reasons why are that it it is a classic tale of corruption in the police, crime, lust and morality. The director has also got incredible performances from all of the film's cast members, including Kim Basinger, who gives her career-best. The cinematography, lighting, direction, set-pieces and locations are all excellent too, making the film as memorable as any other great American film.
The standout performances (though every one of them could be) have to go to Russel Crowe's confused and mixed-up brute of a cop Bud White and Guy Pearce's ambitious but ever so moral Ed Exley.