This is the sequel to "Romancing the Stone" where Jack and Joan have their yacht and easy life, but are gradually getting bored with each other and this way of life. Joan accepts an ... See full summary »
Happily married New York lawyer Dan Callagher has an affair with his colleague Alex, and the two enjoy a love weekend while Dan's wife and kid are away. But Alex will not let go of him, and she will stop at nothing to have him for herself. Just how far will she go to get what she wants? Written by
Sami Al-Taher <firstname.lastname@example.org>
During initial development, the title was Diversion. When Michael Douglas was first attached to the film, they were looking at Diana Ross to play the role of Alex. See more »
In the first sex scene in the kitchen, Alex's clock reads 5.20, however, when her wrist watch becomes visible, the time reads 8.15. When Dan and Alex are eating dinner together in the restaurant and he asks why she doesn't have a date tonight, this makes the time on the watch more likely to be accurate, otherwise, how would he know that he didn't have a date that evening? See more »
When watching this movie, my biggest problem was that I couldn't really sympathize with either one of the main characters, Michael Douglas' Dan, or Glenn Close's Alex. Douglas played a married man who had a weekend-long affair with a business associate, played by Glenn Close. Dan didn't know he was getting involved with a psychopath, but he shouldn't have cheated on his wife in the first place. It's never really clear why he cheats on his wife, other than a selfish attack of lust. Alex was trying to make a point that he couldn't just use her and then go back to his family, but she knew he was married, so she should have known what she was getting into. She seemed so mature and sophisticated in the beginning, and then we never find out why she is so crazy. I lost any bit of sympathy I might have felt for her during the rabbit scene. It's one thing to harass a grown man whom you feel has wronged you, but it's entirely different to take it out on his innocent 6-year old child. The final showdown with Dan's wife in the bathroom is very predictable, right down to the screaming teakettle in the kitchen that masks the screams from upstairs. I do think the ending was a little more than Douglas' character deserved. He didn't really seem sorry for what he did; it took terrible things happening to his family to make him confess to his wife. His family was so lovable and nice, and they definitely didn't deserve to be so poorly treated. Dan was very lucky to have home and family restored to him at the end; he didn't really deserve it. All in all though, this film wasn't a bad thriller. I must admit I was a little tense trying to guess what Alex would do next. I wasn't entirely sure what she was capable of, so it added to the suspense of the film. Close's acting was good; she was a very believable psycho. There was a lot of talent in this film, and everyone turned in good performances. Although it was relatively predictable, if you allow yourself to get swept up by it, it is made exciting by Close's performance. Not a bad film, but not the best thriller ever made.
19 of 27 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?