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.
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
David Cronenberg was in talks to the direct the film for some time. John McTiernan was set to direct after Cronenberg bailed out due to producer Mario Kassar banning him from using his own cinematographer, production designer, and the rest of his usual team. See more »
As Dr. Michael Glass is investigating the article entitled "Detective X" by Adam Towers about Roy Washburn, under the sub-headline of Witness Intimidation the article reads "A perfectly good movie script could be made from the information I gleaned in the sewers and alleys and fire escapes of the seedier parts of town." When he reads on to the next sub-headline of the article "Falsifying Evidence" the exact same passage has been repeated: "A perfectly good movie script could be made from the information I gleaned in the sewers and alleys and fire escapes of the seedier parts of town." Additionally, the sentence directly preceding the second sub-headline is incomplete. It reads "Our current political leader" (No punctuation) See more »
If you follow inter-subjectivity to its natural end, aren't you asking who's the patient and who's the doctor?
See more »
It's hard to believe, after waiting 14 years, we wind up with this piece of cinematic garbage. The original was a high impact, dark thriller that achieved "cult" status demonstrating the fine art of cinema as directed by Paul Verhoeven. This film adds nothing, delivers nothing, and ultimately winds up in the big box of failed sequels.
The opening sequence could have triggered an intriguing set of plot developments using a considerably talented and able cast. Unfortunately we are treated to a 90 minute dissertation in the self-indulgent life of Catherine Tramell... or is it Sharon Stone. Possibly a copulation of both.
If the desire is too see a continuation of the sensually provocative stying of sex as in "B.S.1", forget it. You wind up with soft-porn boredom which ultimately upholds the old adage that a woman can be more alluring in clothes than out of them. It's interesting to note that the wonderful Charlotte Rampling was romping around in her skivvies, via the 1966 GEORGY GIRL, when Ms. Stone was only 8 years old. A very talented actress and quite adept at holding her own even here.
If you're a true cinema fan then you must see this film and judge it using your own rating system. If not, you might as well wait for the DVD release in the "rated" version, "unrated" version, "collectors" edition, or "ultimate" version, and perhaps in another 14 years we will be saturated with news of "Basic Instinct 3" at which point Ms. Stone will be 62 years old and nobody will really care.
122 of 199 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?