Sissy Hankshaw is born with enormous thumbs that help her hitchhiking through the U.S. from a young age. She becomes a model in advertising, and her New York agent, "the Countess", sends ...
See full summary »
When David Sinclair, a popular and talented high school student commits suicide, his best friend Chris takes over many of his responsibilities; from the school production of "H.M.S. ... See full summary »
Winston Connelly wakes up in the middle of the night in an alley with no idea of how he got there. Nor does he know where in Los Angeles he is or why he is wearing a beat-up tuxedo. Through... See full summary »
A story of amour fou. Walt is madly in love/lust with a young illegal Mexican immigrant. However, the object of his unrequited affection doesn't even speak any English and finds Walt really... See full summary »
Sissy Hankshaw is born with enormous thumbs that help her hitchhiking through the U.S. from a young age. She becomes a model in advertising, and her New York agent, "the Countess", sends her to his ranch in California to shoot a commercial, set against the background of mating whooping cranes. There, she befriends Bonanza Jellybean, one of the cowgirls at the beauty ranch. The cowgirls take command of the ranch from the Countess, and drug the cranes with peyote. The police besiege the ranch.Written by
Pieter van Scherpenberg <email@example.com>
Oh, come off it, Sissy. What do you mean, drugged? Every living thing has a chemical composition, and anything that is added to it changes that composition. If you eat a cheeseburger or a Three Musketeers bar, it changes your body chemistry. The kind of food you eat, the kind of air you breathe, can change your mental state. Does that mean you're drugged?
See more »
At the beginning, lot of stars rise in the sky. One, aside and slower than the others, writes the words "For River". [River Phoenix] See more »
Gus Van Sant's original version was first shown at the Toronto Film Festival in 1993 before the film was pulled at his own request and reworked. The most significant differences are described in a N.Y.Times article from May 15 1994: "The New York scenes, and Sissy's relationship with an urbanized Mohawk Indian (played by Keanu Reeves), were cut back in the interest of beefing up the ranch scenes and focusing more attention on the relationship between Sissy and Bonanza Jellybean, a straight-shooting cowgirl played by Rain Phoenix. The novelist William Burroughs survived the editing. Audiences will see him cross a Manhattan street, look at the traffic and utter three syllables: "Ominous." Roseanne Arnold, however, will see her cameo as a gypsy fortuneteller whittled down to a mini-cameo. Most dramatically, Mr. Van Sant shed an entire subplot, about the mysterious Clock People, keepers of the keys to cosmic consciousness, and the source of the original film's final image (as well as the clock on the paperback cover). In the first version, Sissy became pregnant after making love to the Chink, a loony visionary played by Pat Morita, who tells her she will bear a race of large-thumbed children who will roam the earth in love and peace after surviving an apocalypse. In the final frames of "Cowgirls I," Sissy's child, seen in the womb, makes hitchhiking gestures toward the audience, an invitation to the future." Van Sant is quoted in the article, that he doesn't know which version is better. See more »
Wow, I can't believe that the average rating for this movie is a 4! At first I thought it was rated by closed minded mainstreamers who enjoy The Avengers or Fast and Furious, but after reading the reviews I realized that most of the bad ratings come from the people who read the original novel the movie was based on, and I can totally understand where those people come from. But as a person who has not read the book and just accidentally stumbled upon this film, it turned out to be a pleasant surprise. It was strange, surprising, sexual. It kept me tuned till the end and although the original plot may have been truncated and the details emboldened by the pace of the film, I definitely don't think it deserves a 4. As a new viewer to this story, I was left with a feeling of being entertained.
6 of 6 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this