SummaryA cruel wager is made between the beautiful but deviousMarquise de Merteuil (Close) and her former lover, the Vicomte de Valmont (Malkovich). The Marquise challenges Valmont to seduce the virginal Cecile de Volanges (Thurman) before the girl can be wed. As a counter-challenge Valmont bets the Marquise that he will be able to bed the marr...
SummaryA cruel wager is made between the beautiful but deviousMarquise de Merteuil (Close) and her former lover, the Vicomte de Valmont (Malkovich). The Marquise challenges Valmont to seduce the virginal Cecile de Volanges (Thurman) before the girl can be wed. As a counter-challenge Valmont bets the Marquise that he will be able to bed the marr...
In "Fatal Attraction" [Close] was a woman out of control. Here she's in control of her emotions, too much in control. When Merteuil finally lets loose and gives way to complete animal despair, Close is horrifying. [13 Jan 1989, Daily Datebook, p.E1]
A visually beautiful film, where evil and perversity show their most attractive and seductive side.
The Baroque period was a time that became history for its wars (Seven Years' War, Spanish Succession War), for the emergence of art and opera (Handel, Vivaldi, Carlos Seixas, Bach etc. in music, Velasquez, Caravaggio , van Dyck, Josefa de Óbidos, Rembrandt etc. in art), for the elaborate clothes and wigs worn by the rich and for the aristocracy, for royal absolutism and for their gigantic palaces (like Versailles, Sanssouci, Charlottenburg, Peterhoff, Tsarskoye Selo, Mafra, El Escorial etc.) But the Baroque was also a period of some moral relaxation, particularly for the upper classes. Figures such as Giacomo Casanova or the infamous Marquis de Sade are precisely from this period. And it is around two particularly infamous figures that the film takes place.
The marquise Isabelle de Merteuil is a manipulative, cold and cruel widow, who has a long-standing affair with the promiscuous and rude Viscount Valmont. It is she who asks Valmont to seduce the pure young Cécile de Volanges, who was destined to marry a man whom Merteuil hated. The viscount hesitates, preferring to try to seduce Madame de Tourvel, married and highly moralistic, due to the challenge this represents. But together they will jeopardize their and others' honor and feelings.
In this film, the story combines seduction, cruelty and passion quite well. The main characters, played brilliantly by Glenn Close and John Malkovich (one of the most notable films in the career of both actors), are truly despicable but have style and class, and that is what makes them alluring. Evil can be attractive, as we all know. Beside them, we have a great Michelle Pfeiffer, living the golden years of her career, and a young Uma Thurman, emerging, showing a developing talent as she played a Baroque Lolita. Keanu Reeves also appears, in a somewhat discreet role but that the actor effectively fulfills without having the space to show more.
Directed by Stephen Frears, the film has excellent costumes and sets. The use of excellent filming locations such as the Château de Neuville, Vincennes and the Montansier Theater in France helped a lot to the beauty and realism of the final product. The film also features a photograph with good contrast and regular filming.
Absolutely amazing, I did not even know about the movie till today.....breath taking costumes , hair and jewelry, set design is spectacular, great great acting, director paying attention to every detail, fantastic writing and dialog......complicated layered characters....everyone’s acting is superb, I forgot I was watching a movie, you get immersed in the storyline which is well told, never once could I see the script in my head, No weak link in this movie. It’s a must see. No one will be able to remake this movie, you cannot make it any better than this. They should re release this movie in theatres so the ne wgeneration can see.
Malkovich's lead performance digs in its heels, deadening the movie's speedy exhilaration. The result is a highly diverting but ultimately unsatisfying production that doesn't perform -- so much as paraphrase -- the script.
The real problem is Malkovich's Valmont. This sly actor conveys the character's snaky, premeditated Don Juanism. But he lacks the devilish charm and seductiveness one senses Valmont would need to carry off all his conquests.
A second-rate adaptation of the second-rate Choderlos de Laclos novel: two hours of pretty people sitting in pretty rooms and talking about sex. [23 Dec 1988, A& L, p.19]
This movie has the most complicated characters ever.
Glenn Close should have won an Oscar for her masterfull performance as Marquise de Mertefull. The writing is really wonderfull, with the words of Christopher Hampton and the production design, the costume, the music and the performances this is one of the best movies of all time
I thought Glenn Close and John Malkovich both gave very good performances in this film - they have decent on screen chemistry and I can't deny Malkovich does the 'death stare' particularly effectively. Also present is a young Peter Capaldi and an even younger Keanu Reeves, who swordfights in one scene. The period costumes and settings are good and the dialogue is quite good (somewhat thought provoking) at times. I suppose its about a power play, asserting authority over others. Yes I'd recommend this film, for the performances alone. If I were to describe it (plot wise) in a few words, it'd be 'subtle scheming plans play out'.
"Dangerous Liaisons" is a brilliant melodrama whose assets are difficult to count. Let's just say this film wins you over layered characters, the luxurious and convincing reconstruction of the era in which the action takes place, rich emotions, the great camera, and meticulous directing. Still, the striking trumps are phenomenal actors. Difficult to say who is better, John Malkovich, Glenn Close, Michelle Pfeiffer or then very young Uma Thurman. Nowadays famous Keanu Reeves (Matrix), had a small but nice act. In addition to great criticism, Frears' "Dangerous Connections" can boast of great success at cinemas and a great number of awards.
Je ne crois pas que ce livre (qui remonte au XVIIIème siècle) soit vraiment adaptable, ni au théâtre, ni au grand écran… ni ailleurs, d’ailleurs ! ce film compassé est quoi qu’il en soit tiré d’une pièce, elle-même adaptée pour le cinéma par Stephen Frears, lequel n’a -au moins- pas lésiné sur la qualité de la distribution.
Ils étaient tous si jeunes à cette époque que visionner ou tenter de revisionner ce machin nous fait demander en quel temps il fut tourné… eh bien, en 1988 pour être précis ! diantre, autant dire une éternité… Elles étaient belles en tout cas et il était beau le Malkovich ! en plus, avec la perruque d’usage, on ne remarquait pas sa calvitie…
On remarque ces sacrés corsages par contre, avec une préférence pour Uma thurman qui campe une oie blanche à la gorge généreuse (est-ce qu’elle arrive encore à respirer ? ça semble difficile…). Mais ces complots d’opérette chez les peigne-culs se révèlent assommants… impossible de tenir sans dormir.
A tout prendre, je préfère de loin le sketch d’anthologie des Inconnus (évidemment infiniment plus court que cette litanie pédante de deux plombes) et très drôle : « les liaisons vachement dangereuses » que ça s’appelait ! et ça, c’était quelque chose… Comme quoi merde, avec des efforts et des idées, on peut… tout adapter… finalement !