CriticSociety- film reviews

Review

Midnight Cowboy

Director

John Schlesinger

Year

1969

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Thursday, June 26, 2003

Naïve Joe Buck (Jon Voight), a western boy with no real future, decides to go east, in order to become a “hustler” in NYC. The way he sees it, many rich women are tired of all the sissy guys, and will need a real stud, even if he ain’t a f’real cowboy. His optimism is truly inspiring. However, once he gets to the Big Apple, he realizes that such a life wasn’t so easy to achieve. Money starts running out and his future was never so ill fated. To make matters even worse, or so it seems at first, he befriends a lowlife by the name of Rico ‘Ratso’ Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman). Together, as their situation evolves from bad to worse, they face life as it comes.

Extraordinarily brave movie (adapted by Waldo Salt from a novel by James Leo Herlihy) that takes us on a journey next to a man who sees his dreams and hopes fade as he tries to survive. The journey, however, is not unpleasant in the least, or at least not wholly. Buck’s relationship with Rizzo is full of bright and funny moments, while the story is accompanied constantly by flashbacks of Joe’s shady past that haunts him. It’s all very interesting and poignant and sad, a story of friendship and love, and life, and people who survive, and chase their dreams no matter what.

Voight and Hoffman are outstanding. There’s no other way to put it. And together, though they’re definitely not a match made in heaven, they share chemistry and multiply their charisma. Surrounded by a cast of very talented people, they’re in a Thespian haven.

Technically, the movie is also remarkable. The editing is especially breathtaking, a labor of immeasurable dedication. Ditto for the cinematography and the score (by John Barry). And most certainly, that “Everybody’s talkin’” song (by Fred Neil) that became an icon.

A must-see, and one of the best films ever made.

“Hey! I’m walkin’ here! I’m walkin’ here!”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Pollock

Director

Ed Harris

Year

2000

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, June 24, 2003

When Pollock opened in the U.S. three years ago some people loved it and some didn’t get the point. Fact is, the movie was nominated for several awards and it did receive the respect of many people. But then foreign distribution policies didn’t allow me to see this movie until now, and it was simply great.

The movie tells the story of how American painter Jackson Pollock (Ed Harris) emerged from nowhere to become somebody with the help of fellow painter and companion Lee Krasner (Marcia Gay Harden).

Pollock was an unconventional artist who was fond of drinking and loved Lee but somehow struggled to show his real feelings for her. He had a unique way of painting and that’s precisely what made him famous. Actor/director Ed Harris masterfully succeeds in his portrayal of those scenes in which Pollock is seen painting. They’re exhilarating and a pleasure to watch.

The movie also succeeds in telling part of Pollock’s life in an interesting, entertaining manner. He was a fascinating person, full of moments of insanity and moments of perfect lucidity. The movie kind of hints at the fact that Pollock’s family and childhood might’ve something to do with the way he is, but after all he’s just a person trying to put his vision on canvas. A vision some didn’t understand but that eventually became a sensation. It is an honest portrayal of the difficulty of an artist to stand up to the world’s demons and his own.

Ed Harris, as Jackson Pollock, is simply outstanding. His transformation is right on spot and he disappears into the role. Equally as good is Marcia Gay Harden, who delivers an Oscar-winning performance nothing short of heart-breaking and tough and real. And watch out for Jennifer Connelly in a couple of scenes near the end. Isn’t she just luminous?

A great portrayal of a great personality.

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

When Harry Met Sally...

Director

Rob Reiner

Year

1989

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Monday, June 23, 2003

Harry (Billy Cristal) and Sally (Meg Ryan) met after college, when she gave him a cross-country ride to get to New York City. The road-trip wasn’t exactly a matchmaker, since the two found many misunderstandings in their way of thinking. Namely, he didn’t believe in friendship between a man and a woman, without some sort of romantic implication. But all in all, they didn’t really like each other. Since then, they kept bumping into each other throughout the years, not too often, but enough to remind them of how much they didn’t want to be friends. At last, many years later, they met when they were both going through bad times in their own romantic lives, and now, as adults, they embarked into a friendship. But was it possible to keep it that way? That’s for them, and us, to find out…

Rob Reiner’s classic romantic comedy is wildly entertaining, consisting of smart conversations, mainly between the two main characters, that take us from poignant Woody Allen-isms to hilarious Billy Crystal-isms, always on target in their respective aspects.

Crystal and Ryan are at their very best, awesomely believable in all their phases, and capable of making us laugh and/or cry when necessary. Carrie Fisher and Bruno Kirby lend fine support.

Scripted by Nora Ephron, this movie has been regarded as the very best “date movie”. Should be checked out for a good time: no matter when or how, it works to perfection!

Gotta mention, by the way, that classic fake orgasm scene, and the irony consisting in the fact that in spite of Crystal and Ryan speaking most of the words in the movie, it was another actress (Estelle Reiner, the director’s mother) who spoke the most memorable line, and her only one by the way:

“I’ll have what she’s having.”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

My Cousin Vinny

Director

Jonathan Lynn

Year

1992

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Wednesday, June 18, 2003

My Cousin Vinny is best known as the movie for which Marisa Tomei surprisingly won herself an Oscar as Best Supporting Actress. So much turmoil happened afterwards that amidst the chaos one essential thing got lost: the appreciation for a performance that was indeed excellent. Throughout the years I’ve been an ardent Tomei defendant. I think she’s a terrific actress and whenever she appears on a scene it’s as if she injects life into it. She’s a dramatic force and a hilarious comedienne. Marisa simply rules!

A no-good Brooklyn lawyer (Joe Pesci) arrives to Alabama with his fiancée (Marisa Tomei) on hand in order to defend his nephew (Ralph Macchio) and a friend. They have been charged for murder, you see, but the reason they’re there is only a big misunderstanding. Then again, it ain’t going to be that simple a case, especially when it’s the lawyer’s first time in court.

Hollywood is really good at delivering courtroom dramas every now and then. Yet it’s rare when they actually try to do a comedy around the subject. That’s exactly the point of My Cousin Vinny. The movie is lighthearted fun at every turn. So we do care that these guys’ innocence is proved, but the getting there is what makes the movie such a delight to see.

It also helps that the movie has two leading actors who inhabit absolutely irresistible and interesting characters. Pesci and Tomei make a really odd couple, yet their relationship feels palpable. They know and understand each other, so they can do wonders together. They’re also deeply flawed human beings, yet they are way over that and simply love each other. The interaction between these two is one of the movie’s many highlights.

A lot of funny scenes also take place when Pesci actually interacts with the town’s people and especially when he’s on court behaving rather obnoxiously. Hilarious!

As performances go, this movie has a couple of star-making ones. Pesci is down-right perfect as the obstinate, fast-talking, goal-seeking lawyer who hasn’t got a clue about how things work around a real case. He’s just superb. Meanwhile he’s got Marisa Tomei at his side as a trashy gun-popping yet highly intelligent gal who is somewhat stuck in the 80’s. She exudes charisma and has excellent comic timing. She’s a lot of fun.

You don’t want to miss this simple comedy that’ll put a smile on your face. Yet it’s more than that!

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Rio Bravo

Director

Howard Hawks

Year

1959

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Tuesday, June 17, 2003

Sheriff John T. Chance (John Wayne) finds himself in real trouble after he captures the brother of a corrupt cattle ranger who’s also a part of a fierce gang. Since the US Marshals will arrive in some days, the prisoner, who was caught killing a man in cold blood, must be kept in the town jail, but his gang will do anything to free him. Chance finds himself mostly alone in a fight against a brutal enemy, for no one is willing to help… or is it? Oh yeah, there are helpers: a recently sworn drunkard (Dean Martin), a trigger-happy youngster (Ricky Nelson), a gorgeous showgirl (Angie Dickinson) and a limping older man (Walter Brennan). They are an unlikely team all right, but they might as well hold the prisoner a prisoner, though it won’t be easy...

This very entertaining western is very peculiar in the way that no aspect in it is really extraordinary: the shots are plain and straightforward, there are no close-ups, the score by Dimitri Tiomkin is not exactly ground-breaking, the pace is kinda slow, the action scenes are good but not great, and the performances are average, except for Dean Martin, who’s spectacular, and Walter Brennan, who’s also a standout... BUT there is something hard to explain about this movie, a combination of little, sometimes hard to spot factors, that make it so great. In the end, it turns out to be something completely unique and grandly entertaining, though it’s hard to name the reasons. Did you notice I found it hard?

Let me try: the story makes you think it will all be tension, but instead, there’s place for comedy, and music. And poignancy. And drama. And comedy again. There’s no way Chance can go back to that jail without Brennan saying something incredibly funny; and there’s no way Martin’s character does not touch your heart. Even Wayne’s romance with Dickinson rings true. The whole team becomes one of cinema’s greatest teams, one of those bumbling teams that isn’t really, but is remembered as such. I really can’t think of a way to catalogue this movie, but it is a western indeed, and a good one too, with lots of action and drama, that simply works... to perfection.

“If I ever saw a man holdin' the bull by the tail, you're it.”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Nightmare Before Christmas

Director

Henry Selick

Year

1993

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Monday, June 16, 2003

I’m a huge fan of Tim Burton, so it was unforgivable that I hadn’t seen his classic The Nightmare Before Christmas. Somehow it had just slipped from me but I was finally able to give it a look and let’s just say it proved to be more than I had expected. Now I can pretty much say nothing has been done to the likes of this movie. Ever.

It’s yet another October 31st for the unique inhabitants of Halloween Town. Jack Skellington, the Pumpkin King (speaking voice of Chris Sarandon, singing voice of Danny Elfman), has always led the biggest scare fests and this year he simply excelled himself. But somehow he isn’t happy. He feels empty; he’s tired of the routine. While walking through the forest he finds doors to different holidays and ends up inside Christmas Town. He can’t believe what he finds there, it’s everything he needs to feel alive again. So he sets up to organize this year’s Christmas with the help of the people from his hometown, starting by kidnapping “Sandy Claws”. Only Sally (voice of Catherine O’Hara) realizes it could turn out to be disastrous, but she has problems of her own and really wants Jack to notice her.

The Nightmare Before Christmas might be too dark for very young audiences, but after all it is a family film like any other. It has one of the most original storylines I’ve ever seen on the big screen and every scene spells magic. It is one of those movies in which you never know what’s around the corner and in which the awe factor never ceases to show up.

To start off, the movie is visually brilliant. Tim Burton produced this movie based on characters he created. To think he came up with such an array of wonderful, odd and amazing creatures is beyond belief. Not only that, but after several years of work, director Henry Selick and his team came up with a movie done with stop-motion animation that feels and looks flawless. It’s visually dazzling and as creative as it could get.

But underneath its amazing visuals, the movie also has a wonderful story. It is a story about not giving up, about getting better as each day goes by, about believing in yourself, about sticking to what you do best and about never betraying your feelings. It is also a story about love… and a highly touching one in that respect. It incorporates the holiday seasons in the most imaginative of ways and contains a handful of great songs that serve the story really well.

A very important mention should go to Danny Elfman for his extraordinary, ravishing score. The movie is aided a lot by its music and songs, in which Elfman also participated with his beautiful voice and charisma.

A holiday classic in every sense of the word.

“What’s this? They’re busy throwing snowballs instead of throwing heads.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

City of God

Director

Fernando Meirelles

Year

2002

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Thursday, June 12, 2003

Whoa! So you think you’re just going to watch another movie? Think again. City of God doesn’t just play in the screen, it explodes! It’s one of those movies that leaves you exhausted, both physically and emotionally. It provides an utterly complete cinematic experience.

City of God tells the epic story of Cidade de Deus, a housing project built in the 60’s where the Brazilian government sent all the poor, homeless people it didn’t know what do with. Eventually the place became one of the most dangerous sites in Rio de Janeiro, hitting a peak somewhere in the 80’s all the way to present day. Busca Pé (Alexandre Rodrigues) serves as our narrator. He’s a smart young guy who doesn’t like to be involved in such a violent environment, yet he’s smart enough to make his way and follow his dreams… at least to the point he’s allowed. We quickly learn about the two bands that rule the place, one lead by Zé Pequeno (Leandro Firmino da Hora), the other by Cenoura (Matheus Nachtergaele). The battle between both bands would eventually defy any limit.

Did I say the movie was epic? Well, it is. I truly admire director Fernando Mireilles for pulling such a difficult task off. Not only has he made a visually arresting and stylishly fascinating portrait of they way of living of certain sector of his country, but he did that by telling a story that serves as much as a dramatic tale as a disturbing documentary, dealing with harsh truths that are simply too much to accept.

Busca Pé’s story is awesome to learn about. He was at the epicenter of every major event surrounding Cidade de Deus and somehow managed to stay clear of any side. We see the story through his eyes, so we root for him when courting the girl he likes, when trying to fulfill his dream of becoming a photographer, when showing his friendship to Bené (Philippe Haagensen), when not knowing what to do amidst such difficult circumstances. Through his eyes we experience the horror.

And therein lies much of the brilliance of this movie. We get a harrowing depiction of how generation after generation we sometimes head towards self-destruction. We see what violence can do to people. We see what having a gun can do to children. We witness what lack of education can mean in some places. We experience what power, money and drugs can make people do. And it’s all based on true stories. I was shocked.

The cast is made up of unknowns except for one actor, Nachtergaele, which is the most remarkable aspect. There’s an urgency and honesty in every performance difficult to find anywhere else. Truly exceptional work.

Oh, and I should also mention the music and the photography. I can only say: Whoa!

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Seventh Seal

Director

Ingmar Bergman

Year

1957

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Wednesday, June 11, 2003

In the 14th century, Antonius Block (Max von Sydow), a knight coming back from the Crusades, finds no hope and no meaning in his life when he seems unable to perceive the existence of God on Earth. Something significant then happens: Death (Bengt Ekerot) appears, a Grim Reaper figure, but a wise, gentle one, not a merely evil or scary one, if one who takes pleasure in his job. Block, afraid of dying without finding God, challenges Death to a game of chess, where if he wins, he’ll be given another chance to live. The game takes some time, during which Block, accompanied by his squire Jöns (Gunnar Björnstrand), meets different people in different circumstances and struggles to use time well in order to fulfill his one and only desire. He philosophizes, and makes his point clear that while God is strong inside of him, he’s nowhere to be found outside. The magnificence of this story lies mostly in the way that God does appear, continuously, in front of Block’s eyes: in the people he meets, in their joy to live, in the experiences, in love; but Block doesn’t seem able to look in the right places.

Fascinating, to say the least, this Swedish masterpiece by Ingmar Bergman is justly considered one of his best films, and surely a must-see. The story goes from drama to comedy and back again smoothly and beautifully, presenting a set of extraordinary characters (excellently performed), notably the actor Jof (Nils Poppe), his wife Mia (Bibi Andersson) and their infant son Mikael. Their story, the brightest one in the movie, contrasts Block’s, in the different ways they see life, in the visions that Block and Jof have, in the love and the lack of it, in the joy of the little moments or the atrocious way of letting them go through, etc.

One too many unforgettable images fill this visually delightful movie: the hawk floating in a cloudless sky, the vision of the Virgin Mary and her little son, the two horses on the surf, the procession of flagellant victims of the plague, and certainly, the eerily beautiful dance of distant figures toward the unknown.

A poetic, cynic, and ultimately rewarding experience, this movie’s beautiful and unforgettable, filled with haunting dialogue and philosophy, easy to apply to anybody around the world, now as much as ever.

“I shall remember this moment: the silence, the twilight, the bowl of strawberries, the bowl of milk. Your faces in the evening light. Mikael asleep, Jof with his lyre. I shall try to remember our talk. I shall carry this memory carefully in my hands as if it were a bowl brimful of fresh milk. It will be a sign to me, and a great sufficiency.”

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Matrix Reloaded

Director

Andy Wachowski

Larry Wachowski

Year

2003

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Tuesday, June 10, 2003

The Matrix (1999) is one of my favorite movies of modern times. It simply got me by surprise, just as it did to everyone else, and has stayed with me ever since. Watching it is like being submitted to a fantastic, mind-bending experience. Four years later we’ve got the sequel, the second movie in a planned trilogy. Expectations obviously grew to insane proportions. Some were disappointed and some went on for the ride. I belong to the latter group. After having watched it twice I really do think the movie is awesome. Not perfect, but awesome.

Six months have passed since we first left the characters. Neo (Keanu Reeves) has become more comfortable with his status as The One. He and Trinity (Carrie-Ann Moss) have also established a stronger relationship as a couple. Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) continues to believe in the Prophecy and is certain that the war against the machines will soon be over. But his beliefs are definitely not showing, as the Sentinels are getting nearer to Zion, the last human city on Earth, and it’s difficult to know how to stop them.

If one could define the Matrix movies as having one common trait is that both are Kung Fu movies. In this second installment there’s far more action. We get fights and confrontations all the time. Some don’t find the fun in watching Neo fight if we already know he’s not going to be hurt, but for me it’s a different story. I just loved every single one of the action pieces, including those that do not feature Neo, because they all feel like a ballet, like visual poetry. The Wachowskis and their team of martial arts experts certainly know what they are doing, and they provide us with some amazing sequences that left me literally breathless. From the choreography to the music to the editing, they are just perfection.

There are two sequences that definitely stand out in The Matrix Reloaded. One involves Neo fighting dozens of Agents Smith (Hugo Weaving), just as he’s found the way to reproduce himself. The sequence is not only a breakthrough in special effects, but also a heart-pounding brawl that delivers even more than it promises. It’s something you have to see to believe.

The other segment that stands out is a highway chase during the third act of the movie that involves cars, trucks, motorcycles and all sorts of people trying to make it such as Neo, Trinity, Morpheus, the very cool Twins, a couple of Agents, Niobe (Jada Pinkett Smith) and even the Keymaker, an important character in the overall mission Neo has in his hands. This 14-minute sequence is right up there with The French Connection (1971) and Ronin in my list as the most spectacular and nail-biting chases in the history of cinema. And the way it ends, God, it’s a literal bang.

But there’s more to the movie than simply the action pieces. As with the first installment, the Wachowskis show a tendency to pretentiousness that they handle admirably. There’s a lot of philosophical undertones to the overall plot and dialogue. If you thought the concept of the Matrix was already convoluted you should know that there are more twists and turns that we didn’t know before. There’s a character, the Architect, that could change the way we see everything, although it’s to be seen how influential he can really be in the proceedings.

Because The Matrix Reloaded is only the second movie of a trilogy, there’s really no ending to it, but more of a cliffhanger that leaves us craving to see the conclusion of the story. To tell you the truth, I liked it!

What I didn’t like that much about the movie were the early scenes in Zion. I think they somehow go on too long and don’t get really anywhere. I loved the Rave sequence, but apart from that only the visuals caught my attention. The rest of the scenes got kind of boring after a second viewing.

The original cast of the first movie is back in full form to continue to develop their characters. Keanu Reeves is the perfect Neo, Carrie-Ann Moss a force to behold, Laurence Fishburne is wiser than ever and Hugo Weaving just as threatening as always. The late Gloria Foster also makes a most welcomed appearance as The Oracle. New cast members include Jada Pinkett-Smith, Lambert Wilson and Monica Bellucci in an eye-opening short role. She’s got one of the most tense and fiery scenes in the movie.

A great ride!

“It’s like wiping your ass with silk, I love it.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Courage Under Fire

Director

Edward Zwick

Year

1996

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Wednesday, June 04, 2003

I remember this as one of the first serious movies I saw when I was already old enough to appreciate movies the way they should be. I had never seen a movie with a Rashomon-like type of storytelling and I was mesmerized. I’ve watched the movie a couple of times more throughout the years and I can still say its power resonates. It’s an extraordinary movie.

Lieutenant Colonel Nathaniel Serling (Denzel Washington), after screwing up an important mission, is appointed the investigation of a certain Captain Karen Emma Walden (Meg Ryan) who is a candidate to receive a Medal of Honor after her death following a disastrous operation. Thus Lit. Serling interviews all of Cap. Walden’s team to scratch for the truth, although they all have different versions of what really happened out there.

Courage Under Fire is really about two different people and how the story of one affects the other. Lit. Serling is having a hard time coping with what he did in the battlefront yet, while investigating Cap. Walden’s death, he starts to realize there’s more to life than one’s mistakes. The story affects him deeply as he continues to discover who Cap. Walden really was and the motivations behind her actions. Some saw her as a cruel boss, others admired her bravery. Whatever it was Cap. Walden was out there defending her beliefs and trying to do things the best way possible… or was she?

The movie shows us different versions of the same event. Whether it’s Sgt. Monfriez (Lou Diamond Phillips), Brigadier General Hershberg (Michael Moriarty) or Specialist Ilario (Matt Damon) telling the story, there’s always something new to learn about Cap. Walden’s last hours. It’s up to us, the audience, to scratch beneath the surface and start unravelling the truth as Lit. Serling does. Ultimately the truth comes out and everything’s revealed. I won’t tell you anything about the resolution here except that it closes the movie in a perfect full-circle.

Meg Ryan, in a role totally against-type, appears at first to be miscast, but gradually wins us over with the honesty and dedication to her performance. Denzel Washington is extraordinary as Lit. Serling, who must find the path to recover his saneness. And watch out for a shockingly slim Matt Damon in one of his first roles that got Hollywood’s attention.

I’ve always said Courage Under Fire was criminally underappreciated when it came to handing awards. It certainly deserved more attention.

At the end Courage Under Fire is a movie about honor, loyalty, dignity, friendship and dedication. It is, as the title says, a movie about the courage shown under fire, although here the fire might be taken figuratively as well as literally. It is a movie about courageous people dealing with life face to face.

“It’s not the doing shit that gets to you. It’s the consequences. Imagine a life without consequences.”

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

The Magnificent Ambersons

Director

Orson Welles

Year

1942

Rating

Reviewed by

Gon Curiel a.k.a. Groucho

Review date

Tuesday, June 03, 2003

Eugene Morgan (Joseph Cotten) is a young and handsome dreamer who wants to marry Isabel Amberson (Dolores Costello). He’s too wild for her though, and she chooses to marry another man. Their only son, George (Tim Holt), grows spoiled and overprotected. Years later, Eugene comes back, still a dreamer, and still wild, but now a successful automobile maker. He still fancies to marry Isabel, only now he’s corresponded. However, a different obstacle comes in the way: George, who strongly opposes the liaison. Now he and his resentful aunt Fanny (Agnes Moorehead) will plot against the romance… and eventually, manage to destroy more than they planned.

Tragic story of magnificence and doomed fate and incest, outstandingly directed by Orson Welles, with striking shots here and there and unbelievable camerawork… messed up by RKO, who cruelly chopped several minutes of the film and re-shot the ending to make it happy, all without Welles’ consent. Still, Welles’ second feature film is an amazing movie, with a moving story that works to perfection, even if it’s inaccurate when compared to Booth Tarkington’s novel. Oh but just look at that cinematography, let yourself go with the camera movement and enjoy the precise editing, and you’ll forgive the movie’s famous flaws, for they are insignificant when looking at the whole.

The performances, as expected, are top-notch, with Cotten charming as Eugene, Holt fragile as George, Anne Baxter exquisite as Lucy, and of course, Agnes Moorehead flawless as Fanny; she completely steals the show.

Not to be missed, be it for its magnificence or its historical importance. Enjoy!

Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter

Review

Sliver

Director

Phillip Noyce

Year

1993

Rating

Reviewed by

José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris

Review date

Monday, June 02, 2003

What can I say? I love Sharon Stone. And I love every time she stars in an erotic thriller. Perhaps it’s just me or something, but I’ve got a crush on her. Sliver was scorned by critics, no wonder, but there’s something about it that makes it one of many guilty pleasures I’ve had over the years. Movies like this are not made anymore and that’s a pity. Fortunately we’ve got Sharon Stone, who… well, I’m starting to go on delusional mode. Better to go on.

Carly Norris (Sharon Stone) is a successful 30-something executive who finds in her new apartment everything she had dreamt about. Suddenly she finds out that the woman who used to own it died in a mysterious accident, something she finds even more suspicious when more dead people start to emerge. Carly suspects of Zeke (William Baldwin), the mysterious voyeuristic landlord with whom she’s emotionally involved, and Jack (Tom Berenger), an enigmatic writer who lives in the building.

Why does a movie like Sliver ever get made? It’s easy, there aren’t much brains involved in its script or execution, yet it knows perfectly where to go and what to do to keep audiences, like me, interested. Sliver is a thriller first and foremost. As a thriller it works pretty well. We keep trying to guess who’s behind everything that’s happening until the very end. Since Carly has also formed a relationship with Zeke it becomes even more stressful. It’s a fun game to go with.

The movie also has its share of steamy scenes, which are definitely very sexy. Not that graphic, but sexy nonetheless. Director Phillip Noyce finds the right balance between exposition, suspense and eroticism. I liked it!

As of the acting in this movie, well, it’s pretty good. Nothing exceptional, but every performance serves its purpose. Sharon Stone is luminous. She’s just everything.

Sliver is, at the end, an effective, well-done movie.

CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook

Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter