Un poliziotto violento investiga un brutale omicidio in cui una bella e seducente scrittice di romanzi potrebbe essere coinvolta.Un poliziotto violento investiga un brutale omicidio in cui una bella e seducente scrittice di romanzi potrebbe essere coinvolta.Un poliziotto violento investiga un brutale omicidio in cui una bella e seducente scrittice di romanzi potrebbe essere coinvolta.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Candidato a 2 Oscar
- 6 vittorie e 23 candidature totali
- Lt. Martin Nilsen
- (as Daniel Von Bargen)
Recensioni in evidenza
I thought this was going to be a 1990s thriller, nothing too special, sort of a companion to "Fatal Attraction". I mean, come on, both have Michael Douglas getting attracted to the wrong sort of woman, with plenty of sexual activity and his butt freely exposed to the world.
But I actually think this was far more clever, almost even a satire of itself, if that is possible. The melodrama, the over-the-top nature, the fine line between thriller and horror with the nasty death scenes... this is a cut above the rest and may be something of a modern classic.
The makers of this film tried to give it a film-noir style, perhaps even going for a Hitchcockian influence. What they did do is succeed in making a powerful, intense whodunit which keeps you guessing as to the identity of the murderess right up until the end - and even then, a final twists means that it's all still ambiguous. As well as all the sex that's going on, Verhoeven still finds the opportunity to put in some of his trademark graphic violence in the shape of a pair of icepick murders which see blood flying everywhere in an extremely grisly fashion.
Michael Douglas is well-suited for the role of the cop on the edge, with slicked-back hair to make him look younger. I know that his nudity in this film is a basis for a lot of people to make fun of him, but when I think of other male actors around at the time I can't really imagine anybody else in the role. While Douglas has the fairly straight and unexciting role, Sharon Stone on the other hand is a revelation: extruding an icy cold air and totally in control of herself and just about everybody else, her seductive siren instantly made Stone a star - and put her into the mainstream eye, away from the bit parts she had previously had in the likes of NICO: ABOVE THE LAW. It's safe to say that this film contains Stone's best performance and that she's never lived up to it since, except maybe in her believable portrayal of a drug addicted wife in Scorcese's CASINO.
In support, George Dzundza is good as a comic relief cop while Jeanne Tripplehorn also gives an excellent performance as Douglas' psychiatrist. BASIC INSTINCT is well worth a watch, and not just because of the obvious reasons. Fans of thrillers should check it out.
I will not go deeply into plot detail, as the story is practically part of hollywood folklore, but in summary volatile cop Nick Curran(Michael Douglas) falls in love with murder suspect Catherine Trammell(Sharon Stone) who may,or may not, have brutally murdered her lover with an ice pick. If the plot sounds familiar its probably due to the fact that Basic Instinct is essentially a combination of writer Joe Eszthera's film 'Jagged Edge' and director Paul Verhoeven's film 'The Fourth Man', both of which had their fair share of sex and fashionable violence. Despite this Basic Instinct still is enjoyable and having seen either of those films will have no affect on the unpredictability of the film.
At the centre of the film is Stone's performance which is actually quite superb(though in the long run this film's been more of a curse than a blessing to her film career)as although she's easily the least probable femme fatale ever to grace(or poison to be more accurate) the silver screen, Stone plays her with such zeal that we can't take our eyes off her. That said it should also be pointed out that she becomes rather less intriguing after the first 40 minutes when she becomes involved with Michael Douglas, as her character loses a great deal of her mystique and her personality has less bite. Then of course is the infamous scene (which practically every other reviewer has mentioned and I am going to be no exception) where Tramell is being interrogated by the police and coolly turns the tables on them by exploiting their libidos and reducing them to drooling idiots, totally ridiculous but easily the film's best scene and certainly one that is not going to be soon forgotten (no doubt to the chagrin of Sharon Stone).
The rest of the cast are fine, with Michael Douglas doing the character he does best(the rather thuggish white male who constantly gets involved with the wrong kind of woman), Jeanne Tripplehorn doing an adequate job as Nick's pyschologist and George Dzunda manages to be the only half-way likable character in the movie as Curran's best(and only)friend. Unfortunately Leilani Sarelle is under-used as Catherine Trammell's enigmatic girlfriend(I forgot to mention Catherine's Bi-sexual).
The film is, of course, not without flaws. No-one (not even the director) could deny that Basic Instinct has such big plot holes you could park a car in them as for some of the events in the film to make sense characters would need to be either clairvoyant or in possession of other-worldly powers. The endings also a bit of a cop out (no I WON'T reveal it) as it was clearly engineered so that it could be easily changed with a single edit if preview audiences were unsatisfied with it.
It is also impossible to ignore the huge controversey that surrounded the films release with a particulair furor being caused by feminists and lesbians over their portrayal in the film. In truth the jury's still out on wether Basic Instinct is homophobic, but I personally don't think it is as the characters' sexuality is never really an issue although in fairness it is used as a somewhat cheap plot device to titillate the audience. The case made by feminists is much stronger as all the women in the film are portrayed as dubious and potentially dangerous. The main defence against all this is that, frankly, all the characters are unpleasent and devious , with perhaps one exception, and no discrimination is given in any way. The other issue was, of course, the sex scenes which ,although explicit, are really rather passé these days.
The film is stylishly filmed, expertly paced, brilliantly directed and has a superb music score from Jerrry Goldsmith. I'll give it a high score(by my standards) of 8 out of 10
As has been mentioned, there are echoes of Hitchcock's Vertigo throughout the film, including the San Francisco setting, the attire of the female lead (Catherine, played by Sharon Stone), the styling of her hair, the background music, the shots of interior stairwells, and the lead character (Nick, played by Michael Douglas) following Catherine around the city in his car. The apartment of Beth (played by Jeanne Trippehorn) might also remind one of Rear Window.
Many of the characters have emotional/psychological problems like addiction, dependency, or worse. This makes it more difficult for the viewer to determine the motivations of the suspects. Nick--the filter through which we see all evidence--is flawed. We learn that he has had problems with cocaine and alcohol. Sexually, he is ripe for exploration and, maybe, manipulation.
The film walks a fine line between revelation and obfuscation. In the course of the story, murders are committed, and we are given just enough information to pull us deeper into the mystery, but not enough to reveal the truth. Even the ending leaves the future ambiguous.
This is an excellent mystery for the nineties. The acting is excellent, especially that of Sharon Stone who plays the rabbit we gladly follow down the rabbit hole where the rules of the game are confusing and constantly changing.
The film caused controversy with some of the gay crowd (who didn't like the negative press) and for the graphic sex (with bedroom violence). It became a box office winner, that made Sharon Stone a star, and yet was basically p****d on by the critics! The word is the film is better than your average B movie skin flick, only by the quality of the actors, and Verhoeven's ability. I feel the film is still not given the respect it's due.
I first saw the R-rated version, which is very good, but now you can get the even better Unrated Director's Cut, which has even more graphic content! If you don't like erotic-thrillers, then don't see it. But anyone with taste will enjoy the thrill ride of events that take place in Basic Instinct. The script by Joe Eszterhas was highly thought of in Hollywood, and if not for the graphic nudity, a top star like Michelle Pfeiffer would have taken the role made famous by Sharon stone.
Does the script go too far at times? Yes, but that's part of the films charm, and after all, the now 'classic film moment' of Sharon Stone's leg spread interrogation, likely would have been dropped in a conventional film. Still though, I wouldn't have minded seeing a few less people getting killed off, to keep even more suspense and realism.
The score is also beautiful, and fans of Hitchcock's great "Vertigo" can appreciate the homage that Paul Verhoeven has included. The film has a lot of eye candy, but Jeanne Tripplehorn deserves special mention for her impressive supporting role (sadly she hasn't done much of note since). Michael Douglas does a solid job also, but I can't help wondering if a better actor like Clint Eastwood could have brought more to the table. The dialogue is not up to the level of "Pulp Fiction", but it's still interesting and fun.
I highly recommend this film for fans of adult mystery.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizNo body doubles were used in any of the sex scenes.
- Blooper(at around 45 mins) When Nick calls up Hazel Dobkin's police record it states that she was released from San Quentin in 1965. San Quentin has been men only since 1934.
- Citazioni
Dr. McElwaine: Nick, when you recollect your childhood, are your recollections pleasing to you?
Nick: Number 1, I don't remember how often I used to jerk off, but it was a lot. Number 2, I wasn't pissed off at my dad, even when I was old enough to know what he and mom were doing in the bedroom. Number 3, I don't look in the toilet before I flush it. Number 4, I haven't wet my bed for a long time. Number 5, why don't the two of you go fuck yourselves; I'm outta here.
- Versioni alternativeThe European release is much more explicit than the American release (which had to be submitted seven times to the MPAA in order to avoid an NC-17 rating). The European version is available unrated on video in the US. The US version uses alternate, less explicit takes of several scenes to tone down the sex content.
- The murder of Johnny Boz in the opening scene is more graphic; we see the killer stabbing him in his neck, stabbing him repeatedly in the chest, in the face and we see the ice-pick passing through his nose.
- The scene where Nick rapes Beth is severely cut in the US version (we see ripping off her underwear and forcing her over the couch, then there's a cut to the two of them lying in bed). In the uncut version Nick pulls down his pants, penetrates Beth from behind and he apparently has an orgasm.
- The scene where Nick and Catherine make love after going to the disco is longer much more explicit in the uncut version (Nick is seen burying his face between her legs).
- ConnessioniEdited into Y2K (1999)
I più visti
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Basic Instinct - Istinto di base
- Luoghi delle riprese
- 157 Spindrift Road, Carmel Highlands, California, Stati Uniti(Catherine Tramell's mansion)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 49.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 117.727.224 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 15.129.385 USD
- 22 mar 1992
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 352.927.224 USD