Interesteg What makes it different from others?
Mjeteconer Just perfect...
UnowPriceless hyped garbage
FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
PtownB5 Beautifully filmed with a hallmark noir smoky narrative by Billy Zane, who plays the main character, Marty Lakewood. All the characters in this movie, like this movie, are intriguing but so very flawed. But then, aren't we all? The cast was superb, Rue Mclanahan as a feeble mother whose life has outplayed her strength, Billy Zane as Marty Lakewood, a complex parasitic character driven, or being driven, by an ethos perhaps only he understands. Sheryl Lee was phenomenal as a character so desperately needy it blurs your vision, and Gina Gershon plays the twin sister to Marty Lakewood, and she is simultaneously vulnerable and calloused. I can't really tie this movie down with any certainty, but it lingered with me for days, and that is a hallmark of something good. There are some clunky scenes, some gorgeous scenes and there are beautiful diaphanous elements of human nature- there is a dim light within apathy and arrogance, a bond within self indulgence and narcissism- I think the movie is definitely worth checking out.
allengaryk-2 This movie has a consistent "comic book" style throughout, even though its story is dark, erotic and sadistically violent. Although the presentation may be something that would appeal to 12-year-old boys (revenge fantasies played out for real, escape from punishment, domination of parents), the world it depicts is an adults-only one, with its frequent bare breasts, sadomasochistic sex scenes, mangled flesh of torture victims, and religious rants. The over-the-top acting is not a result of an incapable cast, but a directorial choice, one based on the idea that any frame could serve as a silent film style "tableau". The movie's art production is nicely done (think of "The Phantom" or "The Shadow" crossed with "The Untouchables"), but it's easy to see why this film never found an audience.
forecastmazy Come on, Billy Zane is amazing in this film. If for anything, it's worth watching to see his performance. I watched this film after standing at a Bright Eyes concert for hours, I was tired but just let it go on because it kept my attention, STOOD WITH ME, much more than many modern day pop. films do. It really is a tribute to Film-Noir more than anything. The angles and shots at times remind me of Hitchcock, but mostly it stays within the bounds of Noir. It's like the director watched A & E and Nick at Night forever. If you watched Film-Noir you know the plot isn't always explained with your hand held like many films are for nowadays people. Film Noir was slick and cool. It's not a perfect film but it's a damn good one! Worth a watch, don't judge this film by its cover, actually don't even look at the cover at all. The cover sucks, its worthless, the film itself, is great.
FlickJunkie-2 This is not a film for everyone. It is dark, sultry, twisted and self indulgent, and that doesnt have mass appeal nowadays unless Quentin Tarantino is directing and people are shooting each other in the face. It is, however, a terrific piece of filmmaking and as a fifties period piece it is surpassed only by films actually made in the fifties.It is the story of brother and sister twins who were traumatized as children and turn out quite screwed up as adults. There is the ever present hint of incest looming in their relationship and they are both prone to lascivious escapades. The story serves up a slice of their lustfully demented lives together.You almost have to be over 50 to appreciate this movie or be someone who likes old black and white films from that era. Director Michael Oblowitz has recreated not just the look, but the feel of the period. Tom Priestly, who went on to be the cinematographer on The Thomas Crown Affair did a fantastic job with filters and lighting to give the film an authentic fifties feel. The sets, props, costumes and music were all meticulously accurate. The use of a first person narrative (the story was narrated by Marty [Billy Zane]) was a very popular device in 40s and 50s films (think Humphrey Bogart).Unfortunately, the film was more form than substance since the story was a just meandering film noir libido ride. Still, for fifties nostalgia buffs, this is a treat.Gina Gershon was fabulous as Carol. She was sexy, seductive, and lewd while simultaneously being vulnerable and fragile. I cant remember seeing her in a role better suited to her talents, nor can I remember her giving a better performance. Billy Zane was really wrong for this part. His acting was fine, but it failed to capture the character considering the context of the period. Men of this period were known for their strength and impassive response to almost everything. Naturally this would always lead to a great scene marked by a fit of anger somewhere in the film as the pressure became too great for him to bear. Zane was too mercurial in his portrayal of this character. He had the male sex thing down, but he came across as shrill and defensive in a lot of scenes, very un-fifties.Sheryl Lee gave a terrific performance as Lois, the sex crazed lady cop who becomes obsessed with Marty. We may never hear from her again, but for one film she grabbed the spotlight and ran with it. She was so desperately needy and shameless in her appetite for Marty that it seemed she couldnt live unless she was breathing the air he just exhaled.I gave this film a 7/10. It is a 10 as far as filmmaking and period authenticity and the story was about a 5. If you like film noir, unabashed lust and the fifties, this movie is a must see.
