Novelist Catherine Tramell is once again in trouble with the law, and Scotland Yard appoints psychiatrist Dr. Michael Glass to evaluate her. Though, like Detective Nick Curran before him, Glass is entranced by Tramell and lured into a seductive game.
Carly Norris is a book editor living in New York City who moves into the Sliver apartment building. In the apartment building, Carly meets two of her new neighbors, author Jack Lansford who... See full summary »
A young man is plunged into a life of subterfuge, deceit and mistaken identity in pursuit of a femme fatale whose heart is never quite within his grasp. Remake of François Truffaut's 1969 film 'Mississippi Mermaid'
Upon taking a new job, young lawyer Rick Hayes is assigned to the clemency case of Cindy Liggett, a woman convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to death. As Hayes investigates the ... See full summary »
Crime novelist Catherine Tramell is living in London, and becomes the center of police investigation (yet again) when her football player boyfriend drowns in a car accident and it is revealed that he was already dead because of a drug overdose before Tramell drove the car into water. Police psychoanalyst Dr. Michael Glass is called for examining Tramell, and is intrigued by the seductive and manipulative woman. On the other hand , his friend Det. Roy Washburn is sure Tramell is guilty. Tramell asks Glass to treat her for her 'risk addiction' problem, and with each therapy session , Glass gets more and more suspicious about her intentions. As more and more murders are committed, including that of Glass's ex-wife, Glass becomes obsessed with proving Tramell's guilt even though the evidence is contradictory . Written by
Was greenlit several years before it actually reached production, but was halted because Sharon Stone vetoed several actors who auditioned for the Glass role, including the producer's favorite Benjamin Bratt. See more »
When the detective picks up Michael to go to a murder scene, we can see that Michael has not shaven for at least a day. When he steps in the car you can see right away that he is clean shaven. See more »
It is now fashionable to trash "Basic Instinct 2" even before you see it.
It seems that it is becoming fashionable to rip "Basic Instinct 2," to the point that a significant part of the audience (including critics) found it terrible even before it was released. It seems even more fashionable to trash Sharon Stone wholike all of usis now fourteen years older, andunlike most of usstill looks wonderful. First comments on this movie were so vicious that I had to see for myself. In my opinion, this sequel is not nearly as good as the original film, but is not as bad as most comments pretend. Michael Caton-Jones is not Paul Verhoeven, neither Henry Bean and Leora Barish are Joe Eszterhas. "Basic Instinct 2" is just an entertaining, average thriller, and besides the addition of Jerry Goldsmith original score, keeps little resemblance to its predecessor. Even Stone gives her character a different dimension, creating a lustful, devilish Catherine Trimell, who can perfectly well rank among other monsters like Hannibal Lecter. She is an intelligent actress who is not afraid of taking risks and can play with camp at her leisure. Unfortunately, she seems to be the main target for those who enjoy trashing this flick. She became too successful, too much of a main icon, and like all those actors who have reached that level, her time has arrived and she is now bound to be destroyed by Hollywood audiences.
The rest of the cast is outstanding, giving performances that are far better than the material deserves. David Morrissey is a much better actor and by far more interesting than Michael Douglas: his acting is flawless, giving a dense, complex dimension to an otherwise one dimensional character. Since he has more screen time and is the axis of the movie, he can keep your attention from beginning to end.
I am not recommending "Basic Instinct 2" as a great movie; I am just expressing my disagreement with most of the comments on this site and my conviction that agendas other than the movie itself are shaping the opinion of most spectators.
150 of 214 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?