|Page 7 of 22:||               |
|Index||217 reviews in total|
If anybody has seen Play Misty For Me, with Clint Eastwood and Donna Mills, they would realize that Fatal Attraction is a sugar-coated remake. They even went as far as to replay the suicide attempt in which Close's character slits her wrists. Again, something they got from PMFM. The story line, I admit, was different, but carried all the same elements the were used in PMFM. In "Misty" Eastwood's character is not married, he's a DJ for a jazz station, and he does impregnate whe woman for whom he has the one night stand with. A new movie out starring Tom Cruise titled Vanilla Sky seems to be the same also, ive yet to see it.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Although it is derivative of Clint Eastwood's "Play Misty for Me",
Adrian Lyne's "Fatal Attraction" is still a very entertaining thriller.
The plot finds happily married Dan Gallagher in a very compromising situation after he has a weekend fling with one of his work colleagues. From here on director Lyne begins to create mounting tension which eventually culminates in a terrifying climax. His sense of purpose and control is very impressive.
Michael Douglas and Glenn Close are both outstanding, and Anne Archer is also very competent as Mrs. Gallagher. The only disappointment is Maurice Jarre's under used score.
Definitely not for the faint hearted, this movie remains frightening and unnerving time and time again. Splendid!
Thursday, November 19, 1992 - Video
"Fatal Attraction" will best be remembered as the movie that scared millions of men back to their wives. A superb psychological thriller, this film owes its success to director Adrian Lyne (whose tempo and balance is spot on) and the three lead players.
Michael Douglas and Anne Archer are excellent as the Gallaghers, a couple whose marriage is under extreme pressure after hubby's weekend fling. And as Alex, the vengeful mistress in this frightening love triangle, Glenn Close is truly amazing. Downright disturbing cinema.
Tuesday, November 2, 1993 - Video
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
After a chance meeting at a party, married lawyer Dan Gallagher meets
editor Alex Forrest at work and goes for dinner. With his wife and
daughter upstate for the weekend to look at houses, Dan sleeps with
Alex for the first time in a weekend of passion. With his wife coming
home the next day, Dan breaks the news to Alex, who is understandably
angry at being used and cast aside. They split badly but Dan returns to
his family anyway. However Alex doesn't just go away and continues
calling him and, ignored and rejected, becomes more and more erratic in
Although I would not be so crass as to say that Fatal Attraction is as low a product as things like Reefer Madness and other moral warning films, it is interesting to think if future audiences will see it that way because it already is starting to come across a little that way. A modern retake on Play Misty For Me, this is very much a cautionary tale for the AIDS generation with a married man paying a terrible price for an affair. In this way the film is very simplistic in its morals and the descent is as predictable as it is unstoppable. At the time it was perhaps not a narrative that was common but looking back it is clear how basic it is built atop of this simple foundation. It is understandable why it is remember for its specific scenes (bunny boiler) and why the extreme actions of Alex have entered the public consciousness.
Many viewers will accept it at this level and just watch it as a "classic" within the genre but what is more interesting to look at the missed potential and strange message. There was potential here for an interesting character piece around both Alex and Dan; however after briefly flirting with that as an idea the film moves on to become a simple b-movie creature feature, with Dan and Beth as the couple and Alex as the monster (especially obvious at the end of the film!). There isn't really any forgiveness of Alex (particularly if you don't have the director's cut and alternative ending) and she is never once seen as a victim or offered anything in the way of permission to feel. The casting seems to back this up as well as we are constantly contrasted between the soft Archer with her warm skin and family bed and the harsher Close with her public fellatio; we are never left in any doubt that the "other" woman is very wrong and will only lead to badness. It is an unfortunate direction for the film as it only reinforces how this is a very simple morality tale.
Close plays it as such and I suppose is good for what she does. Personally I found her difficult to buy as a sexual force and also thought the material forced her too far. Douglas sweats with his ass hanging out then sweats when his ass metaphorically starts hanging out in front of his wife; he is good enough for the little that the material asks of him. Archer is a dutiful wife while the typically "cute kid" Latzen is basic.
A famous film then but not really that good. It is a basic plot with a basic morality to it that I personally believe has elements of Reefer Madness to it it is certainly pretty simple in its content and approach. An OK genre film and worth seeing for being a standard in this type of film but annoying for all the potential it ignored and the way it is so simplistic and how it treats Alex as a monster rather than a person.
I get absorbed in stories like this, and my imagination does the rest.
Others seem to find many limitations with the film but I think it's too easy to be purist.
Certainly all seemed perfectly normal in the beginning - not that I've been lucky enough to clinch like that or with a woman like that - but as story lines go, these two seemed to be normal and start a "normal" affair. Glen Close's decent into paranoia was gradual, insidious and unexpected. I became increasingly scared and apprehensive as the plot progressed, realising the increased range of terrible endings that could be approaching.
But the clincher for me was the ending where the bi*ch would not die....
I reminded me of Yull Brinner's robot cowboy in Westworld ... fantastic.
I saw Fatal Attraction at the movie theater when I was only 8 years old. That was in 1988. I saw it I know three times. To this day it is the best movie I have ever seen. The little girl Ellen was so cute and articulate. Michael Douglas gave his finest performance to date. Plus, I did just love Glenn Close's hair. This is just absolutely a terrific movie to see with your spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend. Anyone that has not seen this wonderful drama should see it. I have the videotape. It is a keeper. You will wonder why Anne Arhcer's character stayed with her husband in the end. The bathtub scene will keep you on the edge of your seat. It is thrilling to say the least. I am 24 years old now; and it is unequivocally the best movie my eyes has ever witnessed.
Fatal Attraction stars Michael Douglas in one of his best roles. Plus Glenn Close as the woman that won't go away, and Anne Archer playing Douglas's wife. Adrian Lyne did a great job with this movie. This was a thriller that didn't have big gunfights and jumping off a building and was great without any of that. Maurice Jarre gives good thrilling music for the movie which helps explain the mood of the characters and the scene being shown. This film is fun, sexy and an Exciting Attraction made of good characters, actors and a good plot which deserved every Oscar nomination it got that year. Douglas, Close and Archer would go on to take on great roles.
I recently bought this DVD and I'm amazed that I was as intrigued with this film as I was when I first saw it about 10 years ago. Michael Douglas is classic in these type of roles (see Disclosure and Basic Instinct). Glenn Close was phenomenal in the role as Alex. This film by Lynne comes off much better than his recent film dealing with similar subject matter, Unfaithful. This is definitely a film to remember. *** 1/2 out of **** stars.
I first watched this movie about a week ago (January 7, 2003). I just fell in love with Glenn Close and I rented it to see her play in one of her greatest roles. I found that I had fell in love with the movie as well. Michael Douglas is amazing. the fight scenes are fantasticly planned out, and Glenn's death scene...If you only watch it to see "Alex" die it's worth it! I loved the movie and recomend it to anyone who wants a good scare!
I just recently revisited Adrian Lyne's "Fatal Attraction" on it's recently
released DVD, and to this day, the film still generates the same chills and
power that it did back in 1987.
The story of one man's nightmare after he has a fateful fling with a psychotic editor (played wonderfully by Glenn Close) is still a testament to the power of filmmaking. Lyne's film is taut, suspenseful and doesn't browbeat it's moral message (unlike his 2002 film "Unfaithful"). Michael Douglas, Glenn Close and Anne Archer are all very effective in their Oscar nominated performances, and James Dearden's screenplay (from his own short film "Diversion") still packs quite a wallop.
I also got to see the controversial "original" ending for the first time, and found as effective as the jarring climactic showdown that made the final cut. It's a keeper. Rent or buy this one and judge for yourself which ending is more palpable
The fact that a competent reviewer gave Fatal Attraction a no-no, proves the adage that art, like beauty, is in the eye of the ticket holder. Bow-legged and deliberately-portrayed ominous, Glen Close- and Michael Douglas are bound by adultery. Douglas, professionally and in this movie, a nasty piece of work, is ensnared by his own lust, Close, by her paranoiac self-reflection as an irresistible lover. The title, one would like to believe was ironic. But knowing Hollywood's tortoise-like following of social mores, the movie's kernel belongs to pre-aids days. The word attraction' is a misnomer; there is- nor ever was- anything attractive about adultery- or betrayal. So what makes this movie, with its ludicrous ending, great? Our involvement with the spiritual poverty of its central protagonists? The divergent wholesomeness of Ann Archer and Ellen Hamilton Latzen as the sinned-against middle-class American family? If I knew that, I would be making movies. But in those who have contemplated the memory and what-if?' repercussions of wrongdoing, this movie will strike a profound conscience pang.
|Page 7 of 22:||               |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|