IMDb > Indecent Proposal (1993) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Indecent Proposal
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Indecent Proposal More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 2 of 11:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 108 reviews in total 

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Explores what love really means

Author: Dan Grant ( from Toronto, Ontario
12 August 1999

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Warning, may be some spoilers

Indecent Proposal is a film that knows exactly how someone feels when it comes to jealousy. There is a great line in the film after Demi Moore comes back from her encounter with gazillionaire Robert Redford. Her husband, played perfectly by Woody Harlesson, is asking her questions that don't need to be answered. Because if they are, it will put a damper in their marriage. But he persists and finally Demi shouts out to him, " If I tell you he wasn't any good then I'm a liar. If I tell you that he was then I'm a whore. " What a brilliantly written line and it is one that lends a perfect ear to what the film is about in most senses. Jealousy is a powerful emotion but being broke and in love is just as powerful on the other end of the scale.

What is so great about this film is that is makes us all question what we would do in that exact same situation. Would you let your wife sleep with a man for one million dollars? Could you look at it and say that it was only one night and you can deal with it? Would you say that your marriage is strong enough to overcome something so meaningless? And that is the key issue right there. Is it really that meaningless? If you are married and in love ( if you are together in a monogamous relationship), is there ever a time when sex is meaningless enough to overlook, even if all of your financial problems are solved in the aftermath?

Indecent Proposal is a great film in almost every sense. The actors are great, especially Oliver Platt who has a cameo as their lawyer and he gets all the laughs. The direction is great as it never gets anywhere close to pornographic, and it lets the audience decide for themselves what happened on that fateful night. When you look at the whole concept of the film, you know it could get cheesy if handled poorly and irresponcibly. But it never does. It stays on course and delivers the goods. I highly recommend this film and I think it is good to watch it with someone that you love. It will invoke some very interesting conversations after words. But don't watch it with them if you are afraid of the answers that you might get. That, to me is good film making. Something that leaves you discussing it long after it is over. Indecent Proposal does that.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:


Author: penisandtesticles from United States
11 July 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This was one of the biggest pieces of crap I have ever had to watch. I mean, seriously. How would anybody else feel if they were in Woody Harrelson's shoes and your wife was even CONSIDERING it would be a good idea to sleep with the other guy even for a million bucks. After all, she was the one talking about it in bed and saying how it would be good for them since he can build his house or whatever with that money. Woody never fully agreed to it until she talked him into it. How CAN you trust her? Who the hell would actually even consider that if they were married? I don't care how desperate they were. That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life. Then, he flips out on her. Apparently, he had no right to mistrust her, other than the fact that his wife just slept with another dude who is extremely rich and handsome. Oh and wait, then he's supposed to apologize to HER after she files for the divorce so she can be with the guy she slept with. Of course Woody has no right to say anything to her or mistrust her especially after she still has Roy Hobb's card in her wallet. Then, at the end of the movie, she's apparently so in love with Woody still and misses him so much, that she was not going to leave Hobbs until he made some ridiculously stupid story up to try to hint to her to leave, and she bleeping thanks Hobbs???? Are you bleeping kidding me? Was she under contract as his sex slave or something?? I mean what the bleep?? Oh and wait it gets better. She bleeping kisses him passionately before she gets out of the car. Yea, she's not a whore. Oh, thank you for letting me go, let me go make out with you one last time for good ole' sake. Smooch smooch, smooch even though I'm still married to a guy I left for a rich guy. I have never seen such a piece of crap in my life. How the hell are we supposed to feel good after that horrible ending? What was this movie supposed to represent? NOTHING CAME OUT OF THIS! This was the most pointless movie I have ever seen in my life. Two pathetic desperate people. If I were Woody, I would tell her to go drown herself in that body of water they were near. Apparently, he had no self respect. What the hell was Roy Hobbs thinking by taking this horrible role. I feel like puking after watching this. This movie was so bad, it was seriously laughable. I want those two hours of my life back that I wasted watching this piece of ****.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Not so good as I imagined

Author: Lady Targaryen from Brazil
1 October 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I heard so much about Indecent Proposal, and after watching it, I can say that it is not everything that I expected to be.

First,I thought it would have much more passion,drama and even mystery.

Second: I hated the end: it is totally unlikely. So Hollywood's style.

The character John Gage has too many contradictory actions: He bought Diana's and David's house,persues Diana in her work, and even goes after her in her citizenship's class,showing how obsessed with her, he is. Then,in the end, just because David was sad with his divorce with Diana,John decides to break with her,touched with David's action.

I mean, John already have destroyed Diana's and David's wedding,showing that he never cared about the fact that they were a couple, in love with each other. So, he breaking with Diana because he was sad with the situation, didn't matched at all.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It wasn't a great movie, but it entertained.

Author: joojoo3211 from Australia
31 March 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Only saw this movie late last night. I remember the hype of it's release and to be honest had I viewed it back then I maybe wouldn't have been so generous. I hate hype, it can ruin a movie. I think the movie glossed over the characters and put too much emphasis on Woody. He was good too - although kept wondering if he was stoned the whole time. It never went too deep. Redford was dark but not too dark and his character let me down in the end. To me he should have been more confrontational with Demi - throwing her out perhaps or telling her that she was paid for. After all he would have investigated them before he made the proposal - that's not shown in the movie, but no one in his perceived position would have made an offer to just anyone. He was cruel to the point of breaking them up and the last straw was the house and yet Demi fell for him? The passages giving an insight to Demi and Woody's relationship were the best part of the movie. There was a keen deepness that outshone the shallowness of John Gages character. He really could have been a lot stronger and as other people have alluded I think the movies draw-card was Redford and they didn't want tarnish his "image". I say what the hell Robert was old in this movie! Woody and Demi's characters were naive in a sense, but I think that was very intentional to draw you to their plight and champion their decision. But the reality is, they were losing their dream home and where did they go? Las Vegas? to gamble what little they had left and then accept a proposal from an insanely rich billionaire. I found their naivety when Redford was seducing them a little too unrealistic. The movie could have been so much more and other actors would have made a difference, but having said that on late night TV - it was enjoyable and I if you don't think too much - also palatable

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Miscast Redford

Author: jamdonahoo from United States
11 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This story had the potential of a good film. The difficult choice of love versus money and the angst and regret of making the wrong one. However the movie was ruined by the horrible miscasting of Robert Redford as the villain who offers $1,000,000 to sleep with Demi Moore. Like Redford has to pay for it. Redford's boyish good looks and All American charm just don't cut it as an unlikeable, threatening, boor. Redford's acting skillls are insufficient to make his character menacing. I can see it now, $1,000,000 to sleep with Robert Redford. OK says the lady but you will have to give me some time to raise the money. Jack Nicholson would have been perfect as the sleazeball.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Pure subversive brilliance ...

Author: ElMaruecan82 from France
18 August 2013

What would you do if a billionaire were consenting to pay you one million dollars (or more) for one night with your wife? This is the titular "Indecent Proposal", from which millions of viewers, men and women, have been debated for years, placing themselves in the same tricky situation than David (Woody Harrelson) and Diana (Demi Moore), the ill-fated couple who met the devilishly sexy John Gage (Robert Redford) in Las Vegas.

I remember when I was younger; there was a guy in my neighborhood who told me that in every woman, there was a potential prostitute. To confront him to his own contradictions, I carefully asked him whether that statement also applied to his family. The cynical macho nodded but felt the need to reformulate his thought, he meant that there was no woman in the world who wouldn't sleep with a man if she needed something, that's "potential prostitution", and I must confess I was almost convinced. And "Indecent Proposal" is all the more interesting because it confronts this option not with a woman, but a couple. The husband is part of the game, and that's the strike of genius some distracted critics failed to grasp.

Think about it: did Jack Engelheard, the author of the original novel of the same name, take for granted that a single woman wouldn't have thought twice before accepting the deal? I bet he did and I happen to think the same. Refusing wouldn't be honorable but stupid, and I'm sure many women would agree with me. We're speaking of one million dollars for a sumptuous night, and not with the most ugly man of the world. I bet when today's women visualize the myth of the Charming Prince, they think more of Robert Redford (or Brad Pitt) as a billionaire than the nameless Princes of Disney classics. We'd all need money to achieve our dreams and selling one's soul for one night with one handsome rich guy and one million dollars isn't too high a price.

But the film is cleverly provocative because it already admits the venal nature of women, which provoked the anger of feminists. But I'd love to see them in Diana's heels. The question isn't whether they would have accepted the night for one million, but how about two or ten, how high could John Gage raise the stakes before they'd say yes? That was the point and we got it, money can buy a body, but how about love? It all comes to David. And that's the subtlety the angry mob of feminists missed just like the intellectual critics: the film also highlights the very hypocrisy of men who brand any woman who sleeps with other men as 'broad' or 'whore', by confronting them to the same situation. And I would have loved to ask the question to my macho friend, what if he was in David's place? Wouldn't there be, after all, in every man, a "potential pimp"?

To answer that, watching the film isn't even necessary, it's all part of cinematic pop-culture, and we all have an opinion on the subject. In fact, if Adrian Lyne's film had one merit, it was to feature one of the most memorable premises of Cinema's history, and handle it with a believable mix of realism and romanticism. It is crucial within the context of the film, because the theme is so sordid it had to be washed up by a poignant love story. And on that level, the chemistry between Harrelson and Moore works, and built our empathy toward this couple of sweethearts, watching the ashes of their fantasy dreams gone with the wind of the 90's crisis. In many other films, the fact that the husband is an architect and the wife a real estate agent would only be details, but they're significant in "Indecent Proposal".

Indeed, after the bursting of the US housing bubble, there was no offer for Diana and no demand for David. Inevitably, their descent into poverty guide their hopes toward Las Vegas, an interesting setting where two worlds coexist: people who need money and can't afford losing, and those who've got enough to lose one million a night without even caring. The film even succeeds to make a brilliant social commentary, behind the appearance of a cheap soft-porn flick; it subtly denounces the pervert aspects of liberalism, where free trade is synonym of salvation at the expenses of principles, totally worthless when money is at stakes. And the world sunk into liberal lows so eagerly it ended up giving a price to anything, and people have been so effectively brainwashed by greed and lust they would look now, at the half-full glass. Isn't there one word to say 'crisis' and 'opportunity' in Chinese?

I live in a country where many beautiful girls, students or salaried, go out with mature men, because they can buy them things they couldn't afford. Basically, they use their charm as an asset to overcome material problems. It's certainly what lured my macho friend into his certitude. But when you take the plot to larger scope, you realize it's less the selling-your- body dilemma than the eternal selling-the-soul-to-the-devil story, doing something morally wrong for a pay-off. Movies are made to provide some interesting 'what if' situations? What if we lived the same day again and again? What if we hadn't existed? "Indecent Proposal" is the ultimate 'what if' asker because this time, we can respond to the plot and relate to the protagonists, even more because we live in a similar economic context, and the world is crazy enough to feature such characters as John Gage. And Redford finds the perfect tone for his character: subtly obnoxious but always charming, one hell of a tempter!

And I guess part of the fascination doesn't come from our relief not to be in David and Diana's shoes but from our regret. And that's pure subversive brilliance!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Fatal Attraction for the Juvie Set

Author: correcamino from Potomac River
24 April 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A good example of the differences between American and foreign cinema can be seen in a film I recently watched on television: Indecent Proposal.

Indecent Proposal's two protagonists, David and Diane Murphy are played Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore. I'm not sure if it was their total lack of chemistry or that they were not acting well, but why we should care so much whether these two stay together was beyond me. Love, affection, playfulness, attraction – none of these materialized on screen in their interactions together.

Since I knew that eventually Robert Redford would show up, it was clear from the beginning that the good part, the meat of the movie, would be the scenes between him and Demi Moore. Poor Woody Harrelson just could not muster any emotion at all for the film. He seemed to be holding back, preoccupied with his receding hairline.

OK, so fast forward. What idiots these two (Diane and David) are for thinking they can win back the $50,000 they owe by gambling. No acting faux pas there, just hideously bad, lazy, unforgivable writing. Of course they lose all their money. Surprised? I know I wasn't. Enter Robert Redford (John Gage in the film) – a romantic, perhaps emotionally frigid man, an updated Gatsby. A very good role and though not a great, great actor, next to those two, Redford looks like Olivier. He immediately falls in love and lust with Diane and we the viewers for once FEEL it. This is how to love a woman! Not David's way, trading gum mouth to mouth with Diane on a slimy pier. (Did I see that right?) As Gage, Redford wears a suit and tie in every scene. Yes it's meant to instruct the seemingly brain dead audience that here is a Rich Man, but he also looks damn good and by this point the brain dead audience appreciates it! Other wardrobe symbolism includes David's now-ironed shirts at the end of the film, signifying resolve, getting it together after a long interlude of forlorn wrinkled shirt wearing.

And what is it with California garden parties as depicted in Hollywood movies? Suddenly everyone appears British, complete with lacy dresses, three piece suits for the men, hats (HATS!) and of course the parasol. Yes Diane, her transformation to Rich Man's fiancée now complete, is there at the auction daintily twirling a parasol. Though she insisted that she couldn't be bought, she succumbed at last to the sexual tension. Here is where the film branches off into pure Americana. I mean, of course David and Diane will end up together, my question is: WHY? Diane was bored with David, why not let her ride the Robert Redford wave? And I mean for a good long while? How can she pull herself out of the sexual-romantic thrall of this sexy older man so easily just because Woody Harrelson brings his receding hairline to the garden party, sits himself down and looks Demi Moore in the eyes. That's just not how it goes. He was so WEAK.

But we must have our happy ending. We have to swallow the Moral Lesson. We're not sophisticated enough yet to have it otherwise. Director Lyn tried to make a Fatal Attraction for the juvie set, the young'uns.

In addition to garden parties in which there's nary an SUV, tee shirt, or baseball cap in sight, such films also feature a reliable public transportation system that connects far-flung California cities and municipalities. How else to symbolize the return to middle class or working class life?

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

surprised by the low rating

Author: bm-35 from United States
29 April 2006

I watched the movie for the first time, on TV. It's not a great film, but it certainly didn't deserve the 5.3 low rating. Something's going on here, and I think it's because most reviewers here are male, and we are threatened by the prospect of losing our wives to a Robert Reford look like billionaire, because we know for a fact we wouldn't stand a chance, even without the million bucks.

With divorce rate at 50% as it now, i am not even married but I suspect when a billionaire ( with a heart nonetheless ) came calling, my wife would leave me in a heartbeat.

sorry but everything does come with a price tag, even your marriage.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Romantic film for the girls

Author: kaylznmartin from United Kingdom
4 July 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched this film recently having heard people talk about it for years. I warmed to both Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore's characters immediately and thought there love for each other came across as beautiful on screen.

I think the casting for Robert Redford's character was perfect, unlike many other people. If the John Gage character was played by a unattractive, mean guy then David Murphy (woody) would have no need to feel jealous about the night his wife spent with the billionaire. The reason David felt jealous as he explains at the end is because he can see how successful, good looking and charming John Gage is and he was worried his wife would fall in love with him. He was also riddled with his own insecurities and failings and believed his wife deserved a man like Gage.

Although he came across as a bit of a sleaze ball in the beginning, watching Diana Murphy (demi) across the casino gambling with her husband in the end it showed he was a lonely man looking for companionship. He lives in a world where everything can be bought and he was proved right when Diana and David agreed to his proposal.

However when David visited Diana at the end to sign the divorce papers, although John Gage did not feel sorry for David he simply knew Diana would never love him the way she loved David and so knew he could not buy her love.

Overall a very romantic film about a young couple, so deeply in love that they believe they can cope with the 1million proposal when in reality jealousy is a strong emotion which in the end tears them apart. However in true Hollywood fashion, love conquers all and the couple reunite at the end.

A lesson learned also that money does not buy happiness and although the couple were in serious debt, they had each other and not the complications of a third man.

Loved the film and shed a tear at the end on the pier :)

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Impossibly romantic and sentimental ending

Author: oliver-123 from United Kingdom
11 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched this, taped off TV, because I found the basic idea interesting. It was acted out well, though I agree with the reviewer who said that Redford just didn't have enough of the devil about him. I thought it was particularly clever not to show John Gage (Redford) making love with Diana (Moore), though there had been plenty of scenes with her and David (Harrelson). To judge from another comment, the book would have been far more interesting, as a picture of John Gage and the repercussions of what was done. In fact, there are deep contradictions in how John Gage is portrayed. He is at first amoral enough to be ready to threaten the marriage of a young couple just to get a night with Diana. Then he becomes obsessed with her, behaving as if he's fallen truly in love, and for a while, after David walks out (apparently; it is not altogether clear), Diana seems to respond to this and be in love with him (but this too is not made clear. She could have decided to be his mistress, with no depth of emotion at all, for all we are told). Then, on seeing the interaction between David and Diana, when the former comes to sign the divorce papers, he makes a quixotic gesture and deliberately cheapens himself in Diana's eyes, by making clear how often he has played the million dollars ploy, so that she will go back to David, which she duly does, and they re-connect. It is hard to believe that one man could go through so many changes of heart, or even that Diana, if she has come to love him, could so easily go back to David, who hurt her badly enough with his mistrust that she was ready to contemplate getting involved with Gage, whom she had fended off before. There are minor glitches that irritate, such as how the couple pay off their debts etc. if the million dollars remains intact, and how Diana gets a bus at the end without apparently having a cent on her (she is not carrying a purse), but the contradictions in Gage's character seem to me to be the central flaw, and I don't believe the couple could resolve their differences and come back together as easily as all that.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 2 of 11:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history