Dangerous Liaisons
|
List Price: Our Price: $5.46 You Save: $9.52 (64%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $3.00 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Dangerous Liaisons
Movie Review: Beautiful to the eyes yet chilling to the touch; a cinematic masterpiece...
Summary: 5 Stars
My adoration of period pieces should have brought me to this film a long time ago, truly, but sadly I had never even heard of this movie until 1999 when a certain `Cruel Intentions' blazed its way into my life (I still kick myself for forgetting to include that film in my top ten of `99). After expressing my devotion to the beautifully twisted film my cousin asked me if I had seen the film that inspired it. She then proceeded to tell me about this film called `Dangerous Liaisons' starring Glenn Close and Michelle Pfeiffer and suddenly I found myself experiencing heart palpitations beyond normal. I just had to see this movie immediately.
And I did; that very evening in fact.
`Dangerous Liaisons', based on Choderlos de Laclos' 1782 novel `Les Liaisons Dangereuses', finds French aristocrats (and former lovers) Marquise Isabelle de Merteuill and Victomte Sebastien de Valmont weaving their schemes of betrayal and deceit all over 18th century France. Isabelle and Sebastien fancy themselves with destruction of the people around them, hurting others for their own selfish pleasures and taking pride in their manipulations and conspiracies. Issues arise though when Sebastien finds himself falling into love with his latest victim, the young and beautiful Madame Marie de Tourvel, and this spark of genuine emotion derails his tryst with Isabelle and threatens to destroy everything in the process.
`Dangerous Liaisons' is superbly crafted. Everything from the beautifully detailed set pieces to the stunning costumes and cinematography to the brilliant script and impeccable direction are all top-notch and carry this film to a whole other level.
What really drives it over the edge though is the phenomenal acting on the parts of the three leads. John Malkovich may not posses the same dashing good looks as Ryan Phillippe but he has undeniable charm and a firm grasp on his character. The development of Sebastian in `Cruel Intentions' is a different direction than that taken for Sebastien in `Dangerous Liaisons' and so it's truly unfair to compare the two performances for ultimately they are different people all together. Michelle Pfeiffer is stunning as usual here, but her control and innocence when fleshing out Marie is so mature and flawless that I'm almost tempted to say this is her finest performance to date (but Michelle is so good in everything it's hard to say that for sure). Taking the majority of the praise and admiration though is Glenn Close who is ravishingly superior in this film. Her performance is luminous, truly absorbing and commanding and delicious to watch. She is the ultimate villain; cunning and witty; able to manipulate the audience into loving our loathing of her. I'm soured by her Oscar loss; but at least she received the nomination.
The supporting players hold their weight, especially Uma Thurman who is able to transcend the confines of her character and stand out as memorable indeed. Swoosie Kurtz delivers strongly here as well. Keanu Reeves is an actor I detest strongly. I have never felt he delivered strongly, except maybe in the first `Matrix' film where his deadpan delivery aided in the formation of Neo. Aside from that though, he continues to bore me with his lack of talent. In `Dangerous Liaisons' he manages to entertain me slightly, delivering maybe his best performance (thankfully it's not a focal point of the film) and so I'll refrain from attacking him full on here. He is far from a good actor, but he doesn't disgust me here (I may be blinded by my adoration of the balance of the film though).
What I love most about `Dangerous Liaisons' is its ability to expose the dangers of love and betrayal, of wealth and greed and selfishness. At its deepest point, `Dangerous Liaisons' is a film about the decline of morals and the destructive nature of our own carnal desires.
In the end I have nothing but the utmost love for `Dangerous Liaisons'. If you are a fan of the modern adaptation that is `Cruel Intentions' then prepare yourself for the ultimate treat and rent this masterpiece. Steven Frears (who should have received the Direction nomination for this) brilliantly crafts a film that embraces its strengths and amplifies them marvelously. It's a period piece; it's a drama; it's a thriller; it's a black comedy and it's a romance, and it succeeds effortlessly on every account.
Movie Review: The Eleventh-Hour Valmont
Summary: 5 Stars
The period costumes for this movie were sumptuous--I wish I could wear some of the pretty dresses sported by Michelle Pfieffer and Glenn Close!
Anyhoo, the acting is top-notch, from the soon-to-be-corrupted Uma Thurman's Cecile, the moral Michelle Pfieffer's Madame de Tourvel, the sans conscience Glenn Close's Marquise de Merteuil, to the role that would typecast John Malkovich for more than a few movies, his notorious Vicomte de Valmont. (You can see that Malkovich's Osmond in "A Portrait of a Lady" channels the pre-repentant Valmont.) The only slight off-casting was Keanu Reeve's role of music teacher/lover of Cecile and the Marquise. Keanu is great in The Matrix movies and in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure," but I don't think this role was his best work.
I have read almost half of the novel by Choderlos de Laclos and will one day complete it (I have a very bad habit of reading several books at the same time and of neglecting a book I had started to read for many months b/f I pick it up again). There's one scene in the book that was also depicted in the movie that I particularly like. In order to build "brownie points" with Madame de Tourvel, Valmont, knowing full well he was being followed by a servant of Madame de Tourvel, paid the debts of a peasant family who were about to be evicted. In the book (this book is written in epistolary style, that is, the whole book consists of letters characters have written to each other), Valmont admitted to the Marquise that he felt genuine pleasure and was even moved to tears when he helped save this family from ruin. He recognized that "do-gooders" receive a sense of pleasure from their charity, and that this pleasure has its own value---not of the same vein of the pleasure of self-gratification that Valmont usually sought. This scene's brief glimpse of Valmont's "higher self" would later take root in his sincere love for Madame de Tourvel. That a blackguard who's capable of abysmal cruelty can come to love the angelic Madame de Tourvel is sight for sore eyes.
Unfortunately, Valmont wasn't exactly clear about his own feelings until the Marquise spelled them out for him. He had indeed loved the good Madame de Tourvel, and he was attracted to her goodness, a quality not often intact among his other lovers and acquaintances.
Michelle Pfieffer really engaged the audience's sympathies when she broke down after Valmont told her he must end the relationship and that this break was "beyond his control." All of her worst fears about Valmont and the warnings she had received against him seemed to be confirmed. However, Madame de Tourvel was informed before she died that Valmont had indeed loved her and that the time he spent with her was the happiest of his whole life. This aspect of the movie/book is about as far as you can get from cynicism and transcends the other "nasty, decadent" relationships in "Dangerous Liasisons." Valmont's eleventh-hour repentance was beautiful, skillfully enacted by Malkovich b/f his death.
The Marquise was devastated when she learned of Valmont's death. She was booed at a concert after letters of her treachery were circulated (one of Valmont's dying wishes).
On the special features, the actors gave some feedback about their characters. Glenn Close attributed the Marquise's cruelty in part due to the lack of options women had back then. The Marquise was preoccupied with challenging and violating conventions while keeping up the appearance of them. John Malkovich was less sympathetic towards his character and just called Valmont's life a waste. However, his character's change of heart was better late than never.
Movie Review: Dangerous Liaisons
Summary: 5 Stars
Marquise de Merteuil (Glenn Close) and Vicomte de Valmont (John Malkovich) are the lead characters in this movie. Both of them were determined to get what they want, revenge for the Marquise, and glory and notoriety for the Vicomte. And together they orchestrated an arrangement that would destroy the virtuous and innocent Madame de Tourvel (Michelle Pfeiffer) and the naïve Cecile (Uma Thurman). The plan went off track when one of them fell in love with the prey and what follows was a power struggle between the Marquise and the Vicomte that would lead to everyone's destruction.
Glenn Close gave a marvelous performance in a role she's so adept at playing. She had that "period appropriate" spunk and edge that made you believe that she's some sort of society goddess. When she finally got what she deserved in the end of the movie, she magnificently conveyed a person crushed by defeat. And is it just me or is her fate more tragic than the fates of the Vicomte and Madame de Tourveil combined? John Malkovich, the chameleon himself, matched Close every step of the way. His arrogant and assured characterization of the Vicomte was very effective, physically he may not be the most attractive man but he made you believe that he was THE MAN of that time.
Pfeiffer gave a touching and devastating performance. She perfectly captured the different stages of the character's development from the harmless, righteous woman to her struggles to the advances of the Vicomte and eventually of her own feelings, to finally surrendering and allowing herself be part of that "dangerous liaison" and finally to being heartbroken of how that liaison concluded. Her best scene was when she was subtly but visibly fighting her own emotions as she was clearly falling for the Vicomte. The guilt, self restrain, and the helpless and inevitable surrender she conveyed in that scene was an acting ahowcase for her. You believe that it was "beyond her control".
The number of times this story has been told in movies as well as in other mediums (novel and theater) somehow shows how fascinating the story is. The main structure of the story was brilliantly put into the screen. It's engaging, elegant, and very interesting. The different character intersections with each other through out the movie were nicely done as they used each other to act out their lust, revenge, deceit, and manipulation. The three major characters were all fully realized characters. All of the three's last scene (which happen to be not with each other) provide memorable and powerful closures with Close's character appropriately getting the very last scene as her societal reign was tragically put into an end.
Grade: A-
Movie Review: The vanity and the happiness are incompatible!
Summary: 5 Stars
This bitter statement comes from Glenn Close in the final dialogue with John Malkovich and somehow resume scrupulously the final consequences of defy and challenge such sensible and perdurable feeling as love is.
Alfred Hitchcock sated in a famous interview with Francois Truffaut that the three fundamentals factors for a good movie were to his mind: 1)A good script, 2)A good script and 3) A good script. And if also you add the presence of this glorious cast you the obtained result will be by far, still major than the sum of its parts.
This mature drama is a cold bet between two outlaw human beings, far descendents in spirit, evidently of Don Juan. One of them, the female will establish the rules of the game and the other part will have to make the agreement. In this sinister everything will be allowed and the goal will justify the way to reach it.
The seduction has never had such sinister face, understood as the unspoken road to blend two different wills in the final act. In this case, the seduction is just the frame and not the landscape. You can argue all what your imagination, good manners, touch of class, and promises of never ending love the feminine soul can accept. And all this huge effort is done just to satisfy a genuine and perverse fascination: the vanity .
But as you know the life owns much more imagination than us and in this macabre labyrinth the love may be spying on behind our unconscious wishes and twisting our original purposes.
John Malkovich simply remarkable with the role of his life until the date, draws an admirable portrait . Glenn Close is superb too as the perverse, analytical and cold mind. Pfeiffer and Thurman are unequal playing the role of the ambitioned objects of desire.
The dialogues are eloquent; the artistic decoration, design customer, photography and edition are first rate. This film owned all the demanded conditions to win all the possible acclaims and prizes all over the world. If the result was not the expected you will have to find other kind of explanations far distant and certainly not so pleasant.
But the time has always been the best judge to emphasize the supreme qualities of the real masterpieces, and in this case this picture will not be able the exception. You can realize how its cult status has prevailed and even improved through the years and definitively this constitutes a good signal. Based on the famous Ninon De Lenclos ' s novel until that date had never received such a deep treatment.
Stephen Frears' supreme masterpiece!
Movie Review: Two Movies of the Same Story. One Clear Winner. Buy It!
Summary: 5 Stars
The two movies, `Dangerous Liaisons' directed by Stephen Frears and `Valmont', directed by Milos Forman are a real anomoly in that they were released at almost exactly the same time and tell almost exactly the same story, based on an old novel, `Les Liaisons Dangeruese' by Choderlos de Laclos. It is a minor tragedy that `Valmont' received so much less attention and promotion than `Dangerous Laisons'. I suspect that had a lot to do with the fact that `Valmont' was released by the company Orion which may have been in its last throes of survival and simply did not have the means to promote the film.
The only bright side of this situation is that the `Dangerous Liaisons' implementation of this story is much better. It is a sign of the value of `...Liaisons' that it is much better than a really worthy movie.
I believe the difference in the quality of the two movies lies directly on the aptness of the casting and the quality of the acting. On all the lesser qualities which go into making a movie such as set decoration, cinematography, editing, music and the like, the two films are easily on equal terms.
The heart of the matter is in the comparison of `...Liaisons' casting of Glenn Close and John Malkovich in the principle roles versus `Valmont's casting Colin Firth and Annette Bening. While Firth is physically much more believable as a Casanova type, Close and Malkovich are far superior than Bening and Firth at playing world class scoundrels. At the secondary level, `...Liaisons' casting of Uma Thurmen and Keanu Reeves as the two young innocent lovers is immensely more satisfying than the `Valmont casting of unknowns Fairuza Balk and Henry Jones. My memory of their relative careers is a bit dim, but this movie is ample evidence of why Uma and Keanu are big stars today and Fairuza and Henry are footnotes to cinema history.
Of the fifth major role, we have `...Liaisons' casting Michelle Pfeiffer versus `Valmont's casting Meg Tilly. This may be the only role where the two movies are close. Tilly gives a great performance as a naïve young wife who ultimately gives into Valmont's seductions, but I think Pfeiffer is even better. Here, the difference may have been in the writing, as I suspect Pfeiffer's role is just a bit more strongly written, so Michele had more to work with.
If nothing else convinces you, compare the seduction scenes between Malkovich and Thurmen versus Firth and Balk and the mix of sweetness with darkness in the former versus the pure soft core porn of the latter will carry the day.