Reviews & Ratings for
Passion More at IMDbPro »

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

25 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

unintentionally hilarious.

Author: Greenzombidog from United Kingdom
2 March 2013

Advertising execs stab each other in the back over their careers and a an average looking cockney scrub in this mediocre pantomime thriller.

Rachel Mcadams is given the opportunity to prove she is more than just a rom-com princess in the role of the manipulative boss lady to Noomi Rapace's Ad campaign creator, an opportunity she squanders. It's not entirely her fault though with such a terrible script to work with there wasn't a lot she could do. Noomi Rapace is dreadful, for me she hasn't yet been convincing in an English language role and she is just either wooden or over the top in this. The plot twists are visible with your eyes closed and nothing will be a surprise. The only thing that kept me watching were the laughs and this isn't a comedy. Some of the dialogue is so stupid I just kept feeling my jaw drop.

When Rachel Mcadams tells a tragic story from her characters childhood and her and Noomi Rapace are just sat there sobbing it actually made me laugh because the acting was so terrible and the words they were saying were so poorly written. Add to this the amount of times you get one of those suddenly waking up from a dream moments (a cheap movie trick thats overused) that the film becomes a bit of a mess. So much of this is poor even down to the add campaign that triggers the war between these two women. Their clients are in such raptures over this dreadful idea that it's ridiculous. Also the rough looking guy they chose to play the love interest adds another comedy element to it. Why would these two attractive successful women be tearing each other apart over this guy?

I'm sure I read on some of the advertising that this was supposed to be an erotic thriller. There were no erotic moments in this film anywhere. I think someone pulled a dildo out a drawer at some point and there was a lesbian smooch thats all the eroticism you get I'm afraid.

I can't believe this was directed by De Palma. I have enjoyed many of his films in the past and I hope this is just a blip and not the shape of the things to come

32 out of 56 people found the following review useful:

Cross between a late-night made-for-cable movie and a European art film

Author: film54 from Toronto
14 September 2012

Saw this one at the Toronto International Film Festival, it's a cross between a late night made for cable movie and a European art film. The cinematography is great, lots of inventive shots. Actually, nearly every shot is a winner. The musical score can

Rachel McAdams and Noomi Rapace ham it up as back stabbing mind f*cking executives. They have great chemistry and as the plot twists along we are never quite sure who to root for. Rachel McAdams' Christine basically plays a grown up version of Regina George from Mean Girls.

None of it is meant to be taken too seriously. The Anyone who liked Basic Instinct, Fatal Attraction or De Palma's own Dressed to Kill will be into this movie.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

the illusionist

Author: temrok9 from Greece
21 March 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Passion was the most anticipated film of the year for me, as I'm in love with the cinema of Brian De Palma, especially when it centers in the adventures of regard through the form of thrillers;like here.Yet I hadn't found much in the original Alain Corneau film(which was interesting but not great)to be promising for something spectacular, and I was waiting to see what De Palma would make of it.The truth is that he tried.There is a reference to technology(especially the kind of that supports the function of regard), which was absent in the original movie, a take(or did I only think so?)on the substitution of passion by domination, an exclusion of the beyond (as the camera focuses mainly on faces), and, most of all, the different ending that reminds us of the greatest De Palma movies in the dream-like feeling it creates in his unique way.However, all these do not quite work the way they should to give a satisfactory result and the film feels a little pointless even in its best moments.I left the theater disappointed, but on my way home I caught myself in a dream-like state, thinking about the movie, especially the final scenes, with the yearning for finding something there.As in John Carpenter's The Ward(the great comeback of another cinema hero of mine) the ending of the movie is just the beginning and these directors care less for the plot and more for the dream within the dream we live in.Overall I consider Passion a failure, but I may have a second take. I feel something's missing, so I understand that somewhere deep inside(or outside?)I can still sense De Palma's greatness.

6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Not a passion for credibility (screen)

Author: leplatypus from PariS
25 May 2013

Even the aesthete should take a training course. Written and directed by a movie maestro, his new opus has become what movies have become today: totally cut from the reality and the people!

If it's about a sexual harassment at work, I wonder if the people involved in this movie have really worked one single day: the firm is making thousand selling ideas, they had great trips to London, NYC, meet clients in party, work in their expensive flat and everybody is having sex with everybody, boss or employee, man or woman. Well, this background is so absurd and unbelievable that I couldn't care for the characters.

And what about them? Except Noomi, all the cast is a failure: McAdams isn't convincing as a slutty boss and the rest is transparent. Worse, their motivations are totally dumb: if every time an employee has a disagreement, it leads to a murder, well, it will be know so far. The investigation is totally crap as I can't tell what have happened: anybody can explain me the final shoot? And as Lynch failed with "Mulholland", the lesbianism is again a boy candy: no emotion, no feelings, just a fantasy!

What's left?

De Palma offers a few psychotic moment with dark light and plays well with all the screens that modern technology offers: phones, TV, camera, computer...

And, Noomi, of course: frankly, she is really the best actress nowadays. Like the pantheon, she is a chameleon and seems to reinvent herself in each movie. Here, she looks a bit like a Vulcan and can always show the whole scale of her emotions: happy, sad, crazy, afraid, fragile.

As it was a disappointment, i wonder what the French original movie looks like because usually, french cinema is far worst !

9 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Please, lets go home.

Author: jartuka from Paris
20 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I like Brian de Palma, but this movie is actually one of the worse movies that I have seen in the Cinema these last years. Why? Of course there are worse movies but at least they don't sell the trailers like these ones are going to be awesome. Passion was sell with a "sexual" and "Passion" content and when you arrive to the movie you cannot wait to have one of these words, and you finally go out of the room without having any of them. Basically there is more mysterious and sexual content in Showgirls or Bound that in this movie. If you want to enjoy your "Brian de Palma feeling" (if you have it) don't watch this movie or your idea about him will change. I just want that these type of scripts stops to pop up in this Industry because seriously, they will kill the idea of enjoying a movie and the only thing that we will feel is (when is this finishing? I want to go home).

10 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

I've lost my Passion for cinema

Author: David Harris from France
18 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is one of those movies that try hard to convince you that they are intellectual, and hence good. Well, it's an absurd movie guided nowhere fast by bad acting and pointless scenes. Well, fast is not precise, I take that back: I checked my clock after what I thought to be almost 2h of movie... just to come to the horrible realization that we have only been there for one hour! My comment at the end was that it's like a pretentious version of "Mean Girls", but without the funny parts... and less intelligent dialogues. Go figure. It's just a bad job that the director tried to patch up with random "intelectual" scenes. You will hear about treason and mystery: there was treason, more like petty fights. I accept there was some mystery, but when you get to that point, you just don't care. Oh, and they advertise it like an erotic-like movie, but there are no actual sex scenes involved. You're welcome.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

All style, no passion

Author: avenuesf from United States
17 June 2013

Hard to believe Brian dePalma has sunk this low. The film is boring, dreadfully scripted, and looks like a long perfume commercial. Real people just don't dress and look like this; DePalma seemed to be heading toward this stylized, air-brushed look when he made "Dressed to Kill," and it's gotten progressively worse with each film, except "The Untouchables." "Passion's" script starts out to be about two female executives vying for the same account, and then goes off in five different directions. He toys with gratuitous lesbianism in some segments, which might have been bold and sexy in the 70's and 80's, but now just comes off looking dated and embarrassing. The film's 100 minutes could easily have been pared down to 20 and it would have been more interesting and less ponderous. A real disappointment.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

De Palma adding his own mark to remake

Author: Harry T. Yung (harry_tk_yung@yahoo.com) from Hong Kong
27 March 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Stylish De Palma gets a crack at "Crime d'amour" (2010) which starred Kristin Scott Thomas and Ludivine Sagnier respectively as Christine (Rachel McAdams) and Isabelle (Noomi Rapace). This is not a paint-by-number remake, which De Palma never succumb to. First, his makes it into a bit more of a whodunit while "Crime d'amour" takes audience directly along the POV of the murder perpetrator. Still, "Passion" is pretty predictable.

ADDITIONAL SPOILER WARNING The real difference is that "Crime d'amour" is essentially to showcase Sagnier who has made quite an impression with the global audience with "Swimming pool".(2003). Equal billing notwithstanding, Scott Thomas's is really a big support role as the murder occurs at the mid-point of the movie. In "Passion" De Palma has tried, as much as the plot allows, to balance between McAdams and Rapace. The murder occurs a bit later in the movie compared with "Crime d'amour" to allow the victim more screen time.

Screen time and focusing aside, the casting in "Crime d'amour" is more convincing, appropriately accentuating the difference in age and sophistication between the two protagonists. McAdams is a favourite of mine, even a tad more than Anne Hathaway, and at one time, there appeared to be a close race between them. Today, while Hathaway forges ahead, picking up an Oscar along the way, McAdam still has to get her break. "Passion", unfortunately, is not it. She looks too young and, although she tries hard, has not quite managed to project the persona that Scott Thomas did in "Crime d'amour". Swedish "Girl with a dragon tattoo" Rapace, on the other hand, gains useful exposure here after launching herself into the English language cinema in a couple of small roles in big movies. Interesting to note that these two leads appeared together not too long ago in 'Sherlock Holmes: A game of shadows" although their paths (or, more accurately, the paths of their respective characters) never cross in the movie.

"Passion" is all De Palma. Right from the beginning, it is propelling onwards with music that is at once mesmerizing and disturbing. Often on a glossy screen, the visuals are compelling. Acting is decidedly competent. The tale of an intriguing multi-front battle turning lethal is well told. All in all, well worth a trip to the cinema.

10 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

What an awful movie

Author: Philip Nagle from Belgium
18 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Terrible movie. Cant believe how bad this was. Its very rare that I leave the cinema mid way through a movie but for this I willingly made an exception. The acting was really bad, the script was horrendous, really bad! I only joined IMDb.com so that I can write a review of this movie - thats how bad this movie was! I thought that there was a very disappointing performance from Noomi, I thought she would be better. I thought Paul Anderson was also completely bad too and his name deserves a special mention for how awful his performance was. Some completely ridiculous bits in the movie which beggars belief as to how it was accomplished. Such a pity that Brian De Palma was involved in this movie, I'm sure there was lots of squirming at the premiere when it became apparent how bad this movie actually was...

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

It's a mystery!

Author: felixmartinsson from Sweden
13 June 2013

Not only did the movie contain a lot of passion, it was also a lot of mystery! Christine the smart, attractive and evil boss Vs the even smarter, and kind Isabelle! I don't know who's side I was on. I'm a fan of Rachel, I love her passion for acting and what she is doing to the roll she plays! I didn't think Noomi did such a good job though, it was actually a shame, I didn't recognize that Noomi Rapace I've seen in other movies!

The filming gives a sense of on old movie, and the cutting is really well done. The music though, it disturbs the movie according to me. But It's because I don't like old music. Overall the movie was pretty good, not excellent, but okay. And I believe it's a good Sunday-boring-gray day film! I enjoyed it, and I really liked the ending of the movie, which I will not expose to you! NOW go watch it!

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another review

Related Links