I was really disappointed because I had hoped this film was going to be at least half as good as the original. It wasn't. First, the film seemed too dark and not very well lit. This might have been on purpose, but I just don't like that style very much. Second, the script seemed a bit disjointed - from itself and from the the first Basic Instinct. I had a hard time following it. On the plus side, Ms. Stone is as gorgeous as ever. However, if you rent this film for her supposed full frontal nude scene, you're going to be extremely disappointed as it's not there. There's a scene of her in an open robe with nothing underneath, but all we get is a brief flash of her breasts and no lower area views. This may have another one of those Hollywood publicity stunts or the scene might have just been edited from the final cut. Who knows?
I liked this movie because of its uniqueness. You won't find another movie quite like it. I think the whole point of the movie is to show that sexual relationships don't have to be emotional.
With that being said, I would have enjoyed the uncensored version a lot better. I saw an awkwardly butchered version on the Sundance Channel with all the explicit sex and full frontal nudity removed. Sundance Channel really disappointed me there.
Okay, so this is not a masterpiece of film making. So what? It wasn't supposed to be and doesn't the deserve the bad wrap it got as the poster child for trash film making. Actually, it functions quite well for what it was intended to be, i.e., a pretty good mainstream erotic film. Unfortunately, because of the bum wrap it (as well as its writer, director, and main actress Elizabeth Berkley) got, it turned out to be one of the last ones ever made. Because this film got such negative reviews, most mainstream film makers began to shy away from doing erotica. Thus, if we wish to view an erotic film that was made in the last five years, we're mostly stuck with porn or those cheesy, plotless, softcore films which play on late-night pay cable and pay-per-view.
This is definitely a very sexy movie. I could have watched it without stopping even if it had gone on for five hours. The plot is not really complicated as most of the movie revolves around Bryan Brown giving Mimi Rogers massages while entertaining (or possibly boring) her with anecdotes from his life. However, it is a must for anyone who thinks Rogers is a hottie. She never displayed herself like this before and probably never will again. The only thing the keeps this movie from being THE most erotic film I've ever seen is that it doesn't have any full frontal shots of Rogers, although she does spend the majority of movie nude or topless.
This is supposed to be a comedy but I found myself transfixed by the stunning cinematography and beautiful bodies more than anything else. Sam Neill's bevy of beautiful nude models, headed by Elle Macpherson, nearly steal the show. Hugh Grant is surprisingly convincing in his role as the prudish minister and Tara Fitzgerald is equally convincing as his almost-as-prudish wife. The are a few funny moments in this film involving the models' interactions with Grant and Fitzgerald.
This is by far my favorite film of all time. That's mainly because it's not afraid to delve into some very politically incorrect topics (such as spanking and female submissiveness) that other mainstream films are just too timid to touch. Nothing seems to be off-limits in this film as the director freely develops the story without any concern given to possibly offending the viewer. However, I don't think anything was done here purely for shock value or to purposely offend anyone. Sean Young turns in an excellent and courageous performance. Most established mainstream actresses would not have taken on this role or would have asked for some major script changes before accepting it. The other cast members do a fine job as well.
Have you noticed that this movie hasn't appeared on pay cable since an obligatory brief run a year after it hit the theaters? Have you ever wondered why? The obvious reason is that it just doesn't fit today's political atmosphere. It seems quite ironic to me that some premium channels now carry softcore porn (that's getting closer and closer to hardcore porn) but will not carry a mainstream movie like "Love Crimes". Sadly, even though this movie is only 11 years old, it could probably not be made today.
While this is not a real great piece of film making, I found it to be erotic in a very subtle sort of way. First, the whole concept of a movie about 40ish and 50ish women hanging out (in more ways than one) at spa is very exciting to me. Then add the fact that we have established actresses like Sarah Miles and Vanessa Redgrave spending a lot of time lying around in towels and less and you have a very erotic film in my opinion. I really hated to see it end. If you find this concept much more sexy that overt sexuality, then you might want to check out this film. It's hard to find, though. I found it in a small independent video store in 1987 and haven't come across it since.
I saw the unrated version of "Bully" on one of the premium movie channels the other night and I thoroughly enjoyed it. This is definitely the best movie from 2001 that I have seen on pay cable this year. It gets the top rating from me.
I'm so glad there are a least a few directors like Larry Clark still around. He doesn't care if he offends a lot of people and that's the attitude that more directors SHOULD have. He makes movies like they were made in the heyday of movie-making (1976-1985), when movie makers took chances and were concerned more about art than money. One of the reasons I don't like most of today's movies is because most mainstream directors try to go for the broadest audience possible and are such slaves to political correctness and that gosh-awful PG-13 rating (which, by the way, is ruining American cinema).
I'll be politically incorrect myself my saying I really enjoyed all the nudity in "Bully" and I don't think it was excessive or gratuitous. It's refreshing to see nudity actually done by actresses playing leading roles in mainstream movies instead of by body doubles or silicone-infested porn actresses. This movie is a very raw and realistic look at teenage life in the early 21st century. There's nothing sugar-coated about it, which means this movie is not for everyone. As I alluded to earlier, they just don't make enough movies that anymore. I will also say that I was pleasantly surprised by Rachel Miner's performance. I had never seen her in a role like that before.