7.3/10
180,184
912 user 214 critic

Closer (2004)

The relationships of two couples become complicated and deceitful when the man from one couple meets the woman of the other.

Director:

Writers:

(play), (screenplay)
Reviews
Popularity
878 ( 364)

Watch Now

From $2.99 (SD) on Amazon Video

ON DISC
Nominated for 2 Oscars. Another 21 wins & 47 nominations. See more awards »
Learn more

People who liked this also liked... 

Black Swan (2010)
Drama | Thriller
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8/10 X  

A committed dancer wins the lead role in a production of Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake" only to find herself struggling to maintain her sanity.

Director: Darren Aronofsky
Stars: Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Cassel
Alfie (2004)
Comedy | Drama | Romance
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.2/10 X  

A cockney womanizer learns the hard way about the dangers of his actions.

Director: Charles Shyer
Stars: Jude Law, Sienna Miller, Susan Sarandon
Drama | Romance
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.7/10 X  

A young lonely woman takes a soul-searching journey across America to resolve her questions about love while encountering a series of offbeat characters along the way.

Director: Kar-Wai Wong
Stars: Norah Jones, Jude Law, Natalie Portman
Cold Mountain (2003)
Adventure | Drama | History
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.2/10 X  

In the waning days of the American Civil War, a wounded soldier embarks on a perilous journey back home to Cold Mountain, North Carolina to reunite with his sweetheart.

Director: Anthony Minghella
Stars: Jude Law, Nicole Kidman, Renée Zellweger
Edit

Cast

Complete credited cast:
...
...
Dan
...
...
...
Taxi Driver
...
Edit

Storyline

Smart-but-ineffectual journalist Dan "We use euphemisms!" cannot decide between his girlfriend, loving-but-clingy waitress Alice, or his lover cold-but-intellectual photographer Anna; herself indecisive between Dan and honest-but-thuggish "You're bloody gorgeous!" doctor Larry. The film puts the four leading characters in a box and strips them apart. Written by Anonymous

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis

Taglines:

If you believe in love at first sight... Take a closer look. See more »

Genres:

Drama | Romance

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated R for sequences of graphic sexual dialogue, nudity/sexuality and language | See all certifications »

Parents Guide:

 »
Edit

Details

Country:

|

Language:

Release Date:

3 December 2004 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Closer: Llevados por el deseo  »

Edit

Box Office

Budget:

$27,000,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA:

$7,707,972, 5 December 2004, Limited Release

Gross USA:

$33,987,757, 13 February 2005

Cumulative Worldwide Gross:

$115,505,027
See more on IMDbPro »

Company Credits

Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

| (TV)

Sound Mix:

| |

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

A segment of dialog from the movie was used for the titles of two Panic! at the Disco songs: "Lying is the Most Fun A Girl Can Have Without Taking Her Clothes Off" and "But It's Better If You Do." See more »

Goofs

While Larry and Anna are having lunch to sign divorce papers, Larry is wearing his wedding band, when Anna reaches for her pen, and Larry's hand is on his leg, he isn't wearing his ring, nor when he grabs her hand on the table, and in the next scene he is wearing the ring. See more »

Quotes

[first lines]
Alice: Hello, stranger.
See more »

Connections

Referenced in The Holiday (2006) See more »

Soundtracks

Non v'e piu tempo, anici
from opera "Così fan tutte"
Performed by Renée Fleming, Anne Sofie von Otter, Frank Lopardo, Olaf Bär,
Michele Pertusi with London Voices and Chamber Orchestra of Europe
Conducted by Georg Solti (as Sir Georg Solti)
Courtesy of Decca Music Group Limited and Universal Classics Group
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

See more (Spoiler Alert!) »

User Reviews

4-Braided
15 January 2007 | by See all my reviews

I prefer when a movie is a movie. But when a movie is a very good play, we should be happy as well because there just aren't that many good things around.

This is a play, there's no mistaking. All the dynamics in it are seated in the words, all the motives in the four beings. There is no cinematic device used or necessary, except the revealing of the passport at the end, and I am sure that was handled differently in the stage version.

Mike Nichols makes a living out of taking constructions that work well on the stage and adding a few cinematic glosses so that the thing gives the impression it was born as a screen being. I find his tricks in this regard distracting, even a bit offensive because he hasn't adapted as the visual vocabulary has.

Never mind. Just eliminate the film components of its being and focus on the stage components and you still have something worthwhile, because here Nichols is still fresh.

You can read other folks to learn the story. It hardly matters. What matters to me is the clever, deep way the writer has constructed the thing. The visceral effect is from the panic and desperation of love. Nothing new there. What makes this effective, I think, are two things. Writerly things.

The first is that he hasn't just described the tippy balance of living in a romance. He hasn't just displayed the radical fuzziness and unpredictability of a world where that is all you know. He's made it the root of the story. This story has absolutely none of the logic to it that you expect when you see a love story. Everything seems real and natural after it has happened, but there's no way at all to predict what will happen next when you are in the thing. Its a great help in storytelling; you have to cling fast to what is happening. Its the best type of engagement, sucking you in by simply making you wonder, even worry about what is going to happen next. Its rare. Its good.

I'd like to point out how the four characters are constructed. A popular writing technique is to take one whole soul and break it into bits. Then the bits can get fleshed out imperfectly and interact so that the interaction has a being. In this case, start with a movie. What four pieces do you need? The writer (Dan), the photographer (Anna), the actor (Alice) and the director, the person concerned with the "skin" of the thing.

Its no accident, I think that it is impossible to settle on any one of these characters. You can go through this experience time and time again, each time tracing a different person's path, or the path of a relationship or even an urge.

This part is great too. Apart from Nichols' cinematic naivety, there's only one blot: Julia Roberts. She just doesn't understand what it means to be part of an assembly. She's not an actress in the real sense, the theatrical sense that Nichols knows how to sculpt. No wonder he wanted Cate Blanchett instead.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.


13 of 16 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you? | Report this
Review this title | See all 912 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page