9½ Weeks (1986) User Reviews

underrated for sure

[Tuki-Clothespin · 7/10 · 23 September 2005]

I agree with the writer who mentioned that this film is too often underrated because it deals with a very dark side of sexuality that many people deny in society and in themselves. The relationship portrayed in the film is an adult one, and as such it is not a Little Mary Sunshine portrayal. It is a mature look at sex, not love, and it never pretends to be a romance. The characters find each other and they enjoy each other in a way that many people cannot accept, and therein lies the reality, the truth of this film, as well as the reason that it is consistently overlooked. For an established actress like Kim Basinger to accept this role and play it as naturally as she did speaks to her talent as well at to her willingness to explore alternate "romantic" ideas on film. Mickey Rouke has always been a maverick force in film. Look at him in "Diner" and you will see what I mean by that. He is much more talented than people give him credit for, and younger filmophiles should discover this early work and try to perceive him as an actor, not a joke.

Fun. A tease of erotic obsession that's tense and complex. A nice 80's visual.

[blanbrn · 7/10 · 24 July 2009]

After all these many years I finally watched "Nine 1/2 Weeks" and clearly it is a dated piece that captured the times of the 1980's well. Also many may find the film a bit overstated for the way it tries to prove it messages of love and feeling. Still this is a film that is fun and very enjoyable to watch as it proves just how complex and tense that love making can be really this film showcased it as a dangerous and mysterious game of obsession.

Set in New York City, with the hustle and rush of big city life you see Elizabeth(Kim Basinger) a young single and attractive woman who works at an art gallery showcase. Then one day while strolling the city by chance and fate she meets a handsome and strange man his name is John(Mickey Rourke). John is the perfect man who has a successful job as a wall street broker, he dresses nice has a nice place. Yet the big thing missing is love. He's just so emotionally empty that it hurts inside.

When the relationship progresses the love making leads to extremes as their ways of pleasure are strange. The scenes where food were used as support were interesting! John had clearly showed a side of being a risk taker and that is seen as even being more evident when his erotic love making ways with Elizabeth push her limits and boundaries. You name it from blindfolds to whip creme to another woman for hot turn ons for John! This film really proved just how fun love making can be true it pushed the limits, but it showed just how far someone will go like the John character who was so emotionally and physically empty for so long. Yet in the end as with most cases the passion wears off as it couldn't last proving that love hurts and it must be a special kind for it to last. Overall good film that may be a little to dated, still it's a nice treat for it's take of pushing love making to new erotic and obsessive heights. As it proved love can be so complex and which passion feeds from one's emotions. And the on screen chemistry between Basinger and Rourke made it a watch.

See it for Basinger.

[Hey_Sweden · 6/10 · 9 December 2015]

This memorable sexual drama is an adaptation of a novel by Elizabeth McNeill. Kim Basinger stars as a character named Elizabeth, a divorced art gallery worker. One day, she chances to meet John (Mickey Rourke), a charming young Wall Street financier. She finds out that he likes to play sexual games, and realizes that she's vulnerable to his manipulations. Ultimately, she finds this strange relationship taking dominance in her life.

"Nine 1/2 Weeks" is a largely two character film that is not degrading or "pornographic" as some people might have you believe. It's actually rather restrained, and even in its full length uncut version is never overly concerned with nudity or depravity. This may come as a disappointment to some potential viewers, but most of the time it's concentrating on detailing the evolution of this sex-based relationship.

Unfortunately, we never get to know our two principals all that well. But since she has more to work with, Basinger definitely comes off better. Rourkes' character forever remains an enigma. Also, for a film running close to two hours, it doesn't seem to have all that much story going for it.

The sex scenes will stick in the mind, even if most of them aren't particularly imaginative. The exception is the notorious "food" sequence, which was later parodied in "Hot Shots!". But the choice of song in the sequence kind of kills the mood.

Basinger looks positively ravishing throughout - the camera loves her - and she delivers an appealing performance. Familiar faces turn up - Margaret Whitton, David Margulies, Christine Baranski, Karen Young, Julian Beck, Dan Lauria, Ron Wood of The Rolling Stones, etc. - but the supporting cast has little to do in the grand scheme of things.

Fairly interesting but not all that successful, this marked a stepping stone for former actor Zalman King (who co-wrote and co-produced); he went on to a prominent career as a soft core auteur.

Six out of 10.

Curious but entertaining

[thegypsyspirate · 9 December 2001]

I find it interesting that people can get so many different feelings and experiences from one movie, but then; this is exactly the type of movie that would cause such disparity. The question really is, are you watching the movie for entertainment, or to critique it? There are wondrous scenes of erotic intimacy here (unfortunately not as fully developed as they could be) - and glimpses into just what two people "in lust" will allow themselves to be led into... The sensuousness of the relationship is the key - not the believability of the surroundings or the rest of the 'plot'. Is it believable? It certainly is conceivable... Liz (Kim Basinger) studying slides at work, so distracted by her thoughts of intimacy with a man she hardly knows that she can't keep her hands off herself... John so taken with her that he will spend exorbitantly for a gift - to give a woman he doesn't know - but feels that he must meet. The passion and need for these two lonely people that lets them open doors to their inner selves and allow another in BEFORE thinking of the consequences (there are ALWAYS consequences, in film and life; for opening "those" doors). Is it believable that they would win the fight with the street thugs? No. Is it believable that the adrenaline rush, the release of the flight impulse and fear, the closeness found in 'defeating a common enemy'; could possibly lead to the intensity of sexual closeness and climax in a semi-secluded spot (under falling water at that)? Yes. Are the other scenes believable? It's entertainment, not a psychology class... They are conceivable, certainly. Ever been really mad at your partner, and that anger leads to words then breaking dishes then apologies then hugging then closeness then sex? How about anger leading directly to sex? It can happen, and it does. It is not so much a rape as it is a purging of desire. The scene with Liz blindfolded, and the whore coming in to the room - you share the tenseness Liz feels. Will she be stimulated? Of course. Will she let John know it turns her on? He already knows it does. He wants HER to know that he knows it will.

This movie is a glimpse of what manipulators people are. The efforts made to manipulate another person into 'making them want what you want'. So much so, that it becomes their desire, not yours. So much so that the desire is to see if you can manipulate the other becomes more consuming than the original goal. Seeing if she WILL crawl across the floor becomes more important than seeing her actually doing so. And her feeling the depth of her self in what she will do - and finding she is doing it because SHE wants to, not because he wants it. Liz takes her pleasure from John, too. What appears to be a "rape in progress" as John pushes Liz back on the table, ends with her crying because she was excited enough by it to climax. That is perhaps the 'real' rape; her discovery that even if she is initially violated, in her mind she realizes it arouses her enough to let it continue; and as it continues she finds herself clutching at her 'attacker'; and attaining orgasm. The rape as much of her mind as it is her body. It is her discovery of what she learns of herself. When she finally leaves the relationship, he finds he can't live without her. Who manipulated who?

This movie, dated as it is, is still fresh because it is enough like life to be real. No, we may not be that rich or that attractive or that selfish or that spoiled. But we also may wish at times that we were...

the heat is on

[lee_eisenberg · 6/10 · 29 January 2020]

Is it going overboard to call Adrian Lyne's "Nine 1/2 Weeks" the "Citizen Kane" of bodice-rippers? Maybe, but movie pulls no punches in its steaminess. As with Lyne's "Fatal Attraction" the next year, one could come up with countless interpretations of the movie. Most likely people will remember the erotic scenes (they're enough to give any guy the hots for Kim Basinger).

I figure that nowadays, controversy would arise over Elizabeth staying with John even after he performs degrading acts on her, implying that she enjoys getting objectified. I'm not sure if that's what the movie's saying. All that I can say is that you won't forget any of this material anytime soon.

Aside from Kim Basinger and Mickey Rourke, the cast includes David Margulies (the mayor in "Ghostbusters") and Christine Baranski.

A slow paced movie!!!!

[sauravjoshi85 · 5/10 · 10 March 2019]

The movie is all about the destruction caused by sexual obsession. The movie is very slowly paced, although storyline is gripping. Acting by both the characters is good and Kim Basinger had played her part with perfection. The movie is good one time watch

Kim Basinger makes this worth seeing

[DennisLittrell · 7/10 · 20 March 2004]

What one realizes while watching this is how limited and ultimately unsatisfactory is a relationship based purely on sex.

I imagine that the familiar dominance/submissive psychology at the heart of this visually stunning movie--and it really is beautifully shot--comes from the novel by Elizabeth MacNeil. I say that, not having read the novel, because the seduction of Manhattan art dealer Elizabeth (Kim Basinger) by the smooth and supremely confident financier John (Mickey Rourke) is so very well done with the expensive presents, the well-timed flower deliveries, little endearments, etc., that it amounts to a woman's fantasy. The partial debasement of Elizabeth and her eventual triumph over her darker instincts and her realization that there is a difference between love and submission is also something that one might expect to find in a woman's point-of-view novel.

However when we get to the actual sexuality and how it is acted out, it is unclear who dreamed up the scenes, MacNeil or director Adrian Lyne or the scriptwriters. I say this because the scenes were so predictable and so ordinary, and when not ordinary and predictable, were bordering on the just plain dumb. Making love in the rain, at the top of a tall building (inside the clock tower), blindfolding the woman, making her crawl, feeding her strawberries, etc., bring nothing new to eroticism. And the scene requiring some imagination--baiting the gay bashers--was not realistically done. Why directors insist on allowing a man holding onto the hand of woman to outrun the men chasing them never ceases to amaze me. And then to have Elizabeth and John stop in the middle of the street to allow the bashers they have outrun to catch up was just plain stupid, not to mention the phony fight that followed.

Not only were the sexual scenes predictable but clearly Lyne was in harness (and I am glad of that) since he stops well short of what might happen if this sort of theme were fully played out.

Putting all that aside what makes this movie worth seeing is Kim Basinger. She is absolutely stunning, and it is clear that Lyne and his camera adored her. More than that Basinger does a fine job of acting in a demanding role.

I was impressed. Before seeing this film I thought she was a rather ordinary actress, but her ability to combine grown-up New York chic with little-girl vulnerability and to make absolutely clear the psychological dilemma her character's heart faced really held the movie together.

Lyne's insistence on whispered dialogue difficult to hear was consistent with the theme of the movie but not kind to these ears. But that was okay because much of the dialogue was secondary to the visual exploration of the woman's sexuality. The peek-a-boo and off center and shadowed shots of Basinger's face and her silhouette, and the studied smile from Rourke combined with the stark black and whites of their clothes and the furnishings served to highlight and emphasis the flesh tones of Basinger's skin while lending an appropriate artistic and fashionable atmosphere to the movie, which after all has an art dealer at its center. The many scenes that were began and suggested, and then cut away from, allowed a richer texture of experience for the viewer than would have been possible had the scenes been played out. And that was doubly good because again it is the visuals that make this movie worth seeing, not the originality of the story and its development.

To those viewers who thought that this was some sort of high class pornography, I can only say you missed the point entirely, and indeed, you may be projecting your own sorry mentality. For those others who were not, shall we say, sufficiently stimulated, I can point you to a graphic novel with a similar theme (written by a man) entitled The Story of O which will NOT be coming to a theater near you anytime soon.

See this for Kim Basinger whose sensitive and robust beauty dominated the screen.

(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!)

Painful

[hall895 · 2/10 · 13 November 2012]

A sadomasochism tale in which the most pain is inflicted on the audience. This is one truly awful movie. A woman meets a mysterious man who pushes her sexual boundaries. This mystery man is the dominant type and he leads the relationship into some dark places. He's manipulative, at times abusive. She goes along for the ride. Happily at first, less happily later. She gets emotional, he does some more stupid and bizarre things, and then the movie just fizzles out. Tension and drama are in very short supply. What little dialogue there is in the movie is mostly laughable. Basically the movie just careens aimlessly from one "daring" sex scene to the next. And while the film has achieved a somewhat notorious reputation it's really not that daring at all. Any of the really dark stuff is only hinted at, not seen. What's on the screen is not explicit at all, by today's standards it's downright tame. Watching people play with their food is not particularly erotic. Mickey Rourke turns in an atrocious performance, smirking his way through the whole thing. Kim Basinger comes off slightly better but she's not nearly good enough to save this dreck. How they ever stretched this movie to a length of nearly two hours is beyond me. There's not even enough story here to sustain a 30-minute TV show, much less a full-length feature film. On and on it goes with nothing interesting ever happening. This is about as bad as it gets.

A Film About the Destructiveness of Sex Obsession

[classicalsteve · 8/10 · 16 May 2010]

I think most people don't understand this movie. This is not a love story, at least not in the conventional sense. "9 1/2 weeks" is about sexual desire and intimate sensuality run amok and becoming the monopolizing forces in a relationship, and the ultimate demise of that relationship as a result. Certainly the physical pleasures and sensuality of sex are aspects that make a relationship fulfilling and gratifying but they are not the only facets. A relationship purely based on sexual desire is doomed to failure. At first it seems like a game, but later on the intensity is too much for the relationship to withstand, largely because if love and caring are sacrificed for the sex, it will die.

You almost couldn't find more suitable casting than Mickey Roarke and Kim Bassinger. Roarke plays John, a sexually-driven finance executive who is not satisfied with winning over the woman he wants. He craves continual heightened sexual excitement from his "lady friend". And he uses subtle coercion to achieve his goals. For Elizabeth, played by Bassinger, John is the ideal lover. He makes her breakfast, buys her clothes, brushes her hair. He takes care of her in an interesting role reversal. But nothing is free. In return, John wants Elizabeth to be in his complete control and engage in sensuous sex games. And each game is more intense than the last.

At first the games seem innocent enough. He likes to blindfold her and play a touchy-feely game in which he introduces objects that she feels and/or tastes. But then the requests become more intense. He wants her to enact a strip-tease, to dress in a certain way without her consent, and to receive a spanking for being a "nosey parker". They have sex in the oddest of places, sometimes engaging in intimate contact in public. At first Elizabeth enjoys the attention and the excitement until she begins to lose the sense of herself as the relationship intensifies. And John eventually goes too far.

At one poignant moment in the film, Elizabeth speaks with an artist-recluse. Because her job is at an art gallery, she helps coordinate artists for exhibitions. When she finds him in a rural area, she asks him if he remembered that his exhibition is coming up. He replies that when he is hungry he remembers to eat and when he is tired he remembers to sleep. She has lost the simpler pleasures of life, and this old man reminds her of that.

Late in the film there is an interesting scene where Elizabeth's former boyfriend comes to the place she works--not to see her but he is now dating one of her co-workers. He's a plain man who does not have nearly the sexual allure of Roarke. But he seems kind and honest. Liz watches her co-worker and her former boyfriend leave and there is an expression on her face that speaks volumes: maybe she misjudged him after-all. For a moment, the two stare at each other from a distance, and you get the feeling that she was the one who left him. He is not the Mr Exciting that John is, but maybe he has other qualities that John could never have.

This is quite a stunning film, certainly not for all tastes, and some of the steamy sex scenes could be misinterpreted as being only for pornographic sake. What saves it are the incredible and absolutely believable performances by the two leads, Roarke and Bassinger which strangely complement one another. Roarke plays his character right on the money, always enigmatic, never raising his voice, but always mysterious. His character is always just outside of reach. He constantly smiles, even when he is noticeable disappointed. Basinger is a perfect complement as one of the few actresses left who can be vulnerable and elicit a willingness to be under control that you don't see in many female performances anymore. Despite what may appear to be pornography, there is a point to the film I think, and that is that constant sexual control and nurturing relationships mix like oil and water. In the end you wonder if it was all a game.

Ice-cold eroticism

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 27 February 2001]

Divorced SoHo art gallery employee meets a coolly handsome, enigmatic Wall Street arbitrator who harbors a kinky side: he's into role-playing and emotional (and sexual) manipulation...also, he's a bit of a jerk. "Nine 1/2 Weeks", directed by Adrian Lyne and adapted from Elizabeth McNeill's novel by Patricia Knop, Zalman King and Sarah Kernochan, is almost-sexy, almost-erotic, but never very inviting. The central relationship between Kim Basinger and Mickey Rourke is there to be busted up--and Lyne doesn't appear to be concerned with the characters, anyway (his thing seems to be gauzy supplement spreads of apartments and restaurants). The early sexual foreplay with the blindfold and ice cubes is hot stuff, even though the scene is curiously chopped short (presumably so as not to offend prudish Americans). But, as it turns out, all the sexual clinches have been edited in much the same way: the rush of passion, the brief flash of nudity (hers), some heavy breathing, end of scene! There are two or three playful moments (such as a food frenzy in the kitchen), but mostly it's a lot of whispered talk without much action--and unintentionally funny bits like Rourke attempting to get Basinger in the mood by playing Billie Holiday's "Strange Fruit". **1/2 from ****

Sexy, to the uneducated

[sleepingsunrise · 3/10 · 20 January 2023]

I have seen this movie a few times, before and after going through therapy for abusive relationships. At one point, I thought this was a sexy film, like so many others who seem to love it. I used to think the same thing as all these people giving this film high ratings, that it's just sexy, dark, intriguing.

Well, after therapy, I can't even watch it. The characters are a bad example. Elizabeth is a bad example for women because she doesn't set boundaries for herself and ends up slightly traumatized because she has let herself be used, done things she wasn't comfortable with because it made the man happy.

John is a bad example for men because he's the typical alpha male, womanizer, predator who has no regard for the women he abuses. In fact, he seems to like the fact that she is uncomfortable. Her reluctance turns him on more. He likes pushing her comfort limits.

This film has no informed consent, no agreement on what is pleasurable for BOTH participants. In fact, there are times when you can see Elizabeth is clearly not happy and it doesn't matter.

If you desire healthy relationships, even ones based on sex, then skip this movie.

91/2 weeks

[skhuffman · 8/10 · 5 June 2006]

I have seen this movie many times. I find it to be, not a sexual movie. It does have depth and symbolism if you are able to get passed the simple sex scenes. My favorite part is when Elizabeth goes to visit Fransworth, the artist.If you really think about it just as he is at the gallery opening of his show, so is she "a fish out of water".It can't survive and in the end neither can she.I love the way this film was shot.This movie is more about stepping out side your comfort zone. You know about her family and life, but you don't learn about his until it is to late.People need to get passed the sex scenes and realize this movie is about human limits.All of us feel this inside, but are afraid, like Elizabeth to try it.

Surprisingly good but notable more for the trends it sparked in American erotic cinema

[MBunge · 6/10 · 20 June 2011]

Nine ½ Weeks is probably one of the most culturally and economically influential box office bombs in movie history. I t established that there was no real market for high class, mainstream erotica in American film, and also helped spawn and define a cottage industry of lesser quality, niche erotica that continues to this very day, primarily on cable TV. When you add in the fact that Nine ½ Weeks is pretty entertaining as well, you end up with an impressive motion picture.

Here's the plot. A divorced New Yorker named Elizabeth (Kim Basinger) falls under the sexual spell of a mysteriously cool man named John (Mickey Rourke). They have a lot of sex of varying physical and emotional quality. Elizabeth eventually tires of their unhealthy union and leaves. The end. That's not an awful lot to sink your teeth into, but that's sort of the point. This was an attempt to make a legitimate movie about the sexual relationship between two people without delving into the realms of softcore porn. It basically uses their sexual encounters to tell us who these people are why they bond.

Elizabeth is lonely and stuck inside the degenerate artifice of the New York City art crowd. If John had thinning hair and a beer gut, he'd be an obsessive, controlling pervert. Since he looks like what Mickey Rourke looked like in the mid 80s, he's like a fantasy figure come to life to liberate Elizabeth from her inhibitions. His need to command her and her sexuality at first lets her enjoy parts of herself she would never admit to. Eventually, his need to control expresses itself in more and more deviant behavior and Elizabeth finally rebels in order to hold onto the very awareness that John helped stir in her.

Director Adrian Lyne did a very nice job her, though much of the look and all of the music of the film is about as dated as you can get. There's never any doubt what decade Nine ½ Weeks was made in. The scenes of foreplay and sex here are so stylish and powerful that they've been imitated in the sex scenes of countless movies made after this one. And Lyne effectively compensates for the paucity of plot by immersing the viewer into the rhythm of New York City street life and the adolescent culture of the New York City art world.

Basinger and Rourke are stunningly attractive but neither becomes lost in their respective beauty. Basinger's silkily conveys Elizabeth's journey of self-discovery and Rourke is magnetically quiet and calm. What's best about their work here is that each always lets you see that their character is thinking about the games they're playing with each other and choosing to go forward with them.

Stylish direction powerful performances and a good bit of media sensation weren't enough to make this film a hit. I t became a film in the 80s that a lot of people heard about but not that many saw and there's been very little in the way of high class, mainstream erotica out of Hollywood ever since. What did happen is that co-producer and co-writer Zalman King went out to make a few more erotic films, all dumber and much closer to softcore porn, then made his way into cable TV with Red Shoe Diaries. That was an anthology series that did a more prurient and less sophisticated version of this movie over and over again. It proved their was an audience of middle brow erotica, just not one that would go to the cinema.

I quite liked Nine ½ Weeks. I also liked that Basinger got naked but it spared me any sight of Rourke's ass. If you're looking for a smart and graceful movie about two people getting it on, this is it.

Why is she even interested in him?

[albertalvarez2k · 2/10 · 5 February 2019]

The Mickey Rourke character is a tough pill to swallow. I found him rude, tactless, and obnoxious. He is similar to the Prince character in Purple Rain.

* * *1/2 out of 4.

[brandonsites1981 · 4 September 2002]

Two successful, but lonely yuppies embark on a sexual odessey for 9 and a 1/2 weeks. All people seem to talk about when it comes to this movie is about the sex scenes and the nudity in the film. This film is not about sex and nudity in my opinion. It is about control and power. I found this film to be intelligent and stylishly done and yes very erotic. Rourke and Basinger make a steamy couple and the ending and the events that unfolded in the film lingered with me long afterwards and left me thinking for a while. This is one film that actually seems to have gotten better with time.

Kim Basinger, what else to say?

[PredragReviews · 7/10 · 9 May 2016]

This is a movie that breaks many taboos, not just fun naughty ones, but deep-seated cultural ones. There are some unforgettable scenes (don't miss the striptease scene, which is amazing two decades later!) and a great soundtrack. The film's photography is gorgeous, using darkness and rays of light to set the shifting contexts of sensuality and sensation throughout. Rourke and Basinger are both superb in their roles, John who is painfully frozen in his incapacity to feel, and Elizabeth who grows visibly in self awareness over the course of the film.

The chemistry between Rourke and Basinger is electric. You can practically see the sparks fly off the screen. Is Rourke's character a nice guy? Not really. However, is he sexy, and would he make most women melt? Yes he would without a doubt. The story is compelling and absolutely fascinating as you watch the couple's relationship spring up and then unravel. Highly recommendation for all erotic movie lovers.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

beautiful erotica but story is thin

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 9 December 2015]

Elizabeth McGraw (Kim Basinger) works in a SoHo art gallery in the hustle and bustle of NYC. She is taken with confident Wall Street trader John Gray (Mickey Rourke). They begin a torrid sexual affair lasting nine and a half weeks. He's a commanding presence and she feels herself breaking new boundaries. Her best friend goes out with her ex.

At least, this is better than 50 Shades. Mickey Rourke is simply a superior actor especially at this time period. He exudes the over-confidence of his character. Kim Basinger is beautiful and also very enchanting. The movie develops the world of New York. It's fun, a little wild and very alluring. The cinematography is beautiful. The food eating lit by the fridge light looks sexy and beautiful. At the end of the day, this is a pretty thin story. Despite the nice acting, there is not much more here than an erotica. The montages are beautiful but shows the lack of drama. Also the controlling nature of John Gray can be taken as misogynistic and very off-putting.

An emotional roller-coaster

[K3nzit · 7/10 · 3 January 2020]

An emotional roller-coaster. There are not many movies like this one.

Don't Kid Yourselves

[ccthemovieman-1 · 2/10 · 27 June 2006]

This is high-gloss soft-porn; a boring soap opera concentrating on one thing: sex. They actually made sex boring, sad to say, because I defy you to watch this casually and tell me what the storyline was. What this is, is an excuse for Kim Bassinger to show off her great body and for Mickey Rourke to smirk a lot. That's it. Rourke's smugness is so bad it's sickening and Bassinger, despite the great figure, looks cheap more than beautiful.

Kudos to the photographer for some nice closeup shots and some wonderful color, but the story is so weak - no character development and no plot - it's unable to compensate. Let's face it: this movie was made for only reason - to titillate male viewers. On that level, it probably succeeded. If I recall, it's why I gave it a look being a fan of Bassinger's looks, but I actually expected a story, too.

Those trying to pass this off as "arty" and something deeper than soft porn are only fooling themselves.

I didn't watch well enough back then ...

[bill-729-637551 · 9/10 · 27 April 2016]

This film has been unfairly slated by people who were perhaps expecting something else. Re-watching it 30(!) years on, I notice above all the beauty of Kim Basinger, above all when she is apparently not trying to be beautiful. The range of expression she can bring to a scene just by looking is amazing; her hair often seems to have been brushed by a dog's claws, but there is something in her eyes which can take your breathe away. Mickey Rourke is above all effective as a guy who is willing to take risks and wants the woman to do the same, and I'm sure if I was a woman I would find him irresistible in this role ...

A much-maligned film which deserves re-evaluation as a masterpiece of its kind. 1 point off because it seems a little too afraid of the censor at times ...

6/10

[SamJamie · 6/10 · 1 May 2022]

Two strangers, Wall Street trader John (Mickey Rourke) and art gallery assistant Elizabeth (Kim Basinger), become involved in a new relationship. What begins as a courtship, though, becomes extremely sexual, as John begins to push for more daring and kinky scenarios, including striptease and bondage. Although their passion is strong, Elizabeth starts to realize that John is not sharing any part of his life besides sex. She must decide what she wants from their relationship.

For me, 9½ Weeks is a film in which its various flaws are overcome by the sizzling chemistry between the two leads. I say this because the film often feels like the thin plot is overshadowed by the intensely erotic and outrageous sex scenes which the film is known for. So although the film isn't rich in story or direction, Rourke and Basinger's erotic tension makes the characters and their relationship convincing and the film worthwhile and enjoyable to watch.

over-rated

[DukeFan · 3/10 · 12 September 2001]

For years I had heard about this movie and how erotic it is, and in particular about the fridge scene. We finally rented it, and I nodded of a few times (in the early evening). It was a boring movie, with no apparent point to the story. The plot went nowhere, and the sexy scenes weren't especially. As for the fridge scene - YAWN.

An ignored and Marginalized Film

[njashanmal · 8/10 · 1 April 2000]

Except perhaps in Paris where, until recently, it played in a cinema just off the Champs Elysee. This film has been condemned from just about every possible, so I will not try and defend it blow by blow. There is much to appreciate here, particularly when the film is looked at in the context of it being the '80's "Last Tango In Paris" - perhaps even self consciously so. The opening shot of "Nine 1/2 Weeks" echoes the famous opening of "Last Tango In Paris" and there are many parallels, but never to the point of it becoming overt.

If one accepts that form is to mirror content and apply that here it becomes clear that efforts were made to do so. The visual 'look' of both films not only mirror their content (for 'Tango': a muted color pallette, yet somehow lush, there is a layer over everything) but also their era. Both films deal with similar subject matter, in the context of the time in which they were made.

"Nine 1/2 Weeks" IS the '80's in much the way that "Last Tango..." is the '70's - the obsessions of an era are embodied in the struggle of two human bodies. Motions, touches are imbued with something beyond what is happening in the here and now. Very much in question here is the internal landscape of the characters involved - something one, as a filmmaker, would rather expose in a visual way as opposed to having characters pontificate about it (though Brando TALKS in "Last Tango..." it is very often what he doesn't say, the silence between two lines of dialogue, that SAY more) - in "Nine 1/2 Weeks" there are many visual cues/pointers as to the characters' states of mind, i.e. their apartments, the manner in which they are decorated stark, all straight lines (John) vs. cluttered and dusty (Liz). Elements like that make a film work.

The only moments of relief that Liz experiences in the film are when she is away from the city, away from John, amidst nature with the painter - in fact, one almost never sees John outside, just like Paul in "Last Tango..." - all these little cues about character should raise the questions in the viewer's mind - what sort of person would?...

Kim looks hot, the soundtracks not

[wuharami · 6/10 · 2 June 2000]

I first saw this movie in junior high, i think, and i was in awe. I mean, Kim Basinger and that strip tease scene! Now, after watching it again, I think the movie was good ion large part due to her. The little psychological nuances of teh film didn't really interest me, and i thought the cheesy pop songs throughout the soundtrack were vastly annoying.

Seems Like 9½ Years

[gbheron · 2/10 · 15 March 2001]

What's up with this movie? Does Mr. Lyne and his writers think that a sado-masochistic fling between two screwed up Yuppies can carry a feature length movie? Maybe if it had some comedic elements (which is doesn't, at least intentionally), or there were some additional dramatic elements (which there are not), or maybe if it was hardcore. No, it's simply the history of the affair; a chronology of a bunch of R-rated trysts. Ho-hum, who cares? "Nine ½ Weeks" deserves every Razzie nomination it got. It's a loser.

And by the way, what's up with Roger Ebert and his rave review? Where was his head back in 1986?