BASIC INSTINCT 2 not soooo bad

Talk about the latest movies and video releases here!
Post Reply
Message
Author
romanD
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:18 am

BASIC INSTINCT 2 not soooo bad

#1 Post by romanD »

hi there.. ok I admit it.. I just saw BI2... and I have to say.. it was good. Sure, it wasn't necessary, but on some levels it improved on the first, on some it didn't. With all the crap out in the theaters I can only say it was decent enough to give it a go. It could have used some style in the photography or design, and a better pace... it's more like a who-did-what-dialogue movie than thriller... don't expect any action scenes like in the first one, it's basically just talking and uhm... well, some inevitable sex scenes, which were apparently cut for the US market. But honestly I don't know what they cut, as the scenes in our unrated version are very short, not graphic or long. They seem like throwaways, just being there because it is BASIC INSTINCT... a couple weeks ago you could watch a threesome in the internet which is totally absent from the movie... nice to see that the makers apparently saw that it was not necessary... lol...

it's also very light on violence and just goes for the mind-games, which were quite good. Have to say that I didnt really understand the ending... it's even more vague than in the first one.

Anyhow... how's the score??? well, the main titles say the music was by John Murphy and Goldsmith only gets a theme credit in the end titles among the song credits! Talk about insult! 95 percent of the music was from Goldsmith, they used every single cue from part 1. Murphy contributed one strange arabian sounding theme and some electronic stuff, his variations on Goldsmith's work are nice, but not giving Jerry any credit in the main titles is insulting!!!!

maybe all of his music was thrown out and replaced by Goldsmith's music.. the lalaland cd states only on very few tracks that Goldmsith's stuff was used...

well, it's maybe not a movie you need to see ath the movies, but it's a lot better than most people think it is. Sharon can still look hot when she is not plastered with tons of makeup, which happens only twice in the movie... :-)

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 35777
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#2 Post by AndyDursin »

Roman I am going to make a point to check this out -- probably when the DVD comes out, but I have to admit I'm interested.

Our local newspaper critic in Providence gave it 4 stars (this is, however, the same guy who gave ROBOCOP 2 four stars!), and even Entertainment Weekly thought it was passable.

Every other "Tomato Meter" critic hates it, but it almost sounds like this is another instance of people reviewing the movie before it comes out and not analyzing what's up there on-screen...or at least I hope so! She does look quite good, btw...

romanD
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:18 am

#3 Post by romanD »

yeah, I think so, too, that it is just that a sequel after 14 years to a classic, which has never been taken seriously anyhow, so that everybody just doesnt give it a chance at all. It is not a great movie, but it is not the trash everyone thinks it is.
I just watched part 1 the night before, so that a direct comparison was possible. And I have to say, that the only things the first one really has going for it is fantastic camerawork, editing and the score. The script is horrible, the psychological aspects ridiculous, even Verhoeven states in the commentary, before Douglas shoots Tripllehorn "this doesn't make any sense that she puts her hand into her pocket and she had a lot of trouble to do it, because it didn't make sense. But the audience bought it and it worked great!"... excuse me! that was one of the worst things in the whole movie, what laszy writing and directing!!! Ive seen it a couple times and now with the commentary it was the first time I understood the thing with the broken door at Tripplehorns place...

so the second movie has a much better script in those regards... it certainly tries to be more clever than it really is, but it plays (successfully) with Trammell being a killer or not a lot more than what the first one tried to do. It is confusing at the end I have to admit, I am really not sure what the ending meant... lol

still, Stone is not the greatest actress to begin with and Charlotte Rampling steals the show even with such a simple role (and looks actually a lot hotter even in her 60ies than bottox-stone).

nevertheless, BI2 is a decent watch. Really.

Post Reply