A small-time reporter tries to convince the police she saw a murder in the apartment across from hers.A small-time reporter tries to convince the police she saw a murder in the apartment across from hers.A small-time reporter tries to convince the police she saw a murder in the apartment across from hers.
IMDb RATING
6.9/10
18K
YOUR RATING
- Director
- Writers
- Brian De Palma(screenplay)
- Louisa Rose(screenplay)
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- Brian De Palma(screenplay)
- Louisa Rose(screenplay)
- Stars
- Awards
- 1 nomination
William Finley
- Emil Breton
- (as Bill Finley)
Cathy Berry
- Lobster child
- (uncredited)
Olympia Dukakis
- Louise Wilanski
- (uncredited)
Art Evans
- African Room Waiter
- (uncredited)
Catherine Gaffigan
- Arlene
- (uncredited)
Justine Johnston
- Elaine D'Anna
- (uncredited)
James Mapes
- Guard
- (uncredited)
Laun Maurer
- Druggist
- (uncredited)
Bob Melvin
- Extra
- (uncredited)
Burt Richards
- Hospital Attendant
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- Brian De Palma(screenplay) (original story)
- Louisa Rose(screenplay)
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaTo indicate the musical effects he wanted, Brian De Palma put together an edit of his film that was dubbed with music from the films of the composer he most wanted to hire, Bernard Herrmann. While he was showing it to Herrmann, the composer stopped him with, "Young man, I cannot watch your film while I'm listening to Marnie - vaarallisella tiellä (1964)."
- GoofsAfter leaving Danielle's apartment, Grace and her mother exit that building and Grace's mother suggests she should change clothes. Grace then reenters the lobby of the same building, to go up to her own apartment. Although it may not be apparent, Grace and Danielle live in the same apartment complex, in the same building. The former "Alexander Hamilton" - now 36 Hamilton Avenue - in Staten Island is an H-shaped building, meaning apartments on its inner courts face each other across two courtyards. Therefore Grace has a view across one of the courtyards directly into Danielle's windows. In addition, the elevators that characters take to and from both apartments are identical.
- Quotes
Crazy Woman: Did you know that the germs can come through the wires? I never call and I *never* answer. It's a good way to get sick. Very, very sick... That's how I got so sick! SOMEONE CALLED ME ON THE TELEPHONE!
- Alternate versionsFor the original 1973 UK cinema release cuts were made by the BBFC to edit the violent stabbing of Phillip Woode. All later releases were fully uncut.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Kauhua katsomossa (1984)
Review
Featured review
Plays fast with cheap tricks and makes bad acting virtuous...wobbly wobbly!!!
Sisters (1973)
I don't know the boundary between humor and stupidity, but this teeters more toward stupidity. There's no way you can take it seriously, so it's not like an actual horror film where twin sisters do the usual good sister bad sister thing. It's some kind of distanced parody of it, but the acting is stiff, and the plot stiff, and the whole thing filmed with a professional capability that goes nowhere special, but makes you take it seriously.
I have to admit, de Palma has never worked for me--he's either so sexist, or abusive, or violent, or indulgent it just gets irritating. Yes, Knife in the Water has its chilling moments, and here there is some intelligence, for sure, like when the split screen effect reaches a point where the two viewpoints merge at the doorway (really nice). But it's a cheesy 1970s flick that pushes buttons and is, if you are insensitive, a fun ride.
The inevitable comparison to Hitchcock makes the differences more salient than similarities--though Bernard Hermann does the score here (as in Psycho and other Hitchcock gems), and so the movie sounds like Hitch. But the themes and how they develop are divergent. For one thing, Hitchcock never seems to enjoy cruelty--he turns to humor, or to the artificial, to avoid actual conscious meanness. De Palma, here and elsewhere, uses nastiness for his own end, like Serrano uses shock, to get attention. One way to show this is to notice that there isn't a classic Hitchcock device--the innocent accused of the crime. We are mostly just drawn to the crime, and the criminal. The one outsider, the investigating columnist, is a device for the filmmaker to explore his theme--the conjoined twin idea in particular.
Is this a dud or a failure. Not at all. There's a raw, 1970s frankness to it all, and a kind of fast, uncomplicated development of plot, that is gripping, if you let it be. But be prepared. If you aren't predisposed to enjoy an over the top, highly deliberate film that leaves you outside the drama, you might find it slightly ridiculous. With enough sense of humor, you might find it hilarious, or, like Blue Velvet, campy and "fun." But it's not my kind of joy ride.
I don't know the boundary between humor and stupidity, but this teeters more toward stupidity. There's no way you can take it seriously, so it's not like an actual horror film where twin sisters do the usual good sister bad sister thing. It's some kind of distanced parody of it, but the acting is stiff, and the plot stiff, and the whole thing filmed with a professional capability that goes nowhere special, but makes you take it seriously.
I have to admit, de Palma has never worked for me--he's either so sexist, or abusive, or violent, or indulgent it just gets irritating. Yes, Knife in the Water has its chilling moments, and here there is some intelligence, for sure, like when the split screen effect reaches a point where the two viewpoints merge at the doorway (really nice). But it's a cheesy 1970s flick that pushes buttons and is, if you are insensitive, a fun ride.
The inevitable comparison to Hitchcock makes the differences more salient than similarities--though Bernard Hermann does the score here (as in Psycho and other Hitchcock gems), and so the movie sounds like Hitch. But the themes and how they develop are divergent. For one thing, Hitchcock never seems to enjoy cruelty--he turns to humor, or to the artificial, to avoid actual conscious meanness. De Palma, here and elsewhere, uses nastiness for his own end, like Serrano uses shock, to get attention. One way to show this is to notice that there isn't a classic Hitchcock device--the innocent accused of the crime. We are mostly just drawn to the crime, and the criminal. The one outsider, the investigating columnist, is a device for the filmmaker to explore his theme--the conjoined twin idea in particular.
Is this a dud or a failure. Not at all. There's a raw, 1970s frankness to it all, and a kind of fast, uncomplicated development of plot, that is gripping, if you let it be. But be prepared. If you aren't predisposed to enjoy an over the top, highly deliberate film that leaves you outside the drama, you might find it slightly ridiculous. With enough sense of humor, you might find it hilarious, or, like Blue Velvet, campy and "fun." But it's not my kind of joy ride.
helpful•217
- secondtake
- Jan 19, 2010
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $500,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $318,348
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content



























