IN: Review: Whoopi was the only reason I watched the Oscars that year. She is hilarious. Of course there was a major serious side to the show. She was great not only because she's funny, but because she said some things that needed to be said in a public forum. White folks need to be reminded that Hollywood awards' ceremonies, employment, and representation are WAY out of balance racially. There should be no need for "black" awards shows. The white-bread, milquetoast nominators and judges need to bring their heads into the sunshine and see that great material is not limited to "white" directors, producers, actors, etc. Allowing Woody Allen on the air was the depth of poor taste. He had no business being there. The fact of the matter is, this is the first Oscar presentation I've watched since "The Color Purple" was up for awards. That miscarriage of voting soured me on watching the shows until 2002. Which is not to denigrate other presenters. Billy Crystal is a riot.
What is this review like?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
OUT: positive

IN: Review: This movie was absolutely pathetic. A pitiful screenplay and lack of any story just left me watching three losers drool over bikini babes. At times I felt like I was watching an episode of Beavis and Butthead. I couldn't even sit through the whole movie. Emran Hashmi disappoints, and Hrshitta Bhatt is not impressive at all. Celina Jaitley was not bad. The only worthwhile part of the film is the spoof on Anu Malik and his obsession of shayaris. It was pretty hilarious. The songs "Sini Ne" and its remix version were really good. You can always count on Emran lip-locking and lip-synching a chartbuster. All in all, it seems Emran doesn't have a good script from the Bhatts to back him up this time.
What is this review like?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
OUT: negative

IN: Review: I heard tell that Madonna was briefly considered for the Catherine Tremell role. Compared to Sharon Stone, Madonna is too coarse and BAUERISCH. She's not even close.

EVIL INCARNATE: Sharon Stone is a bit long in the tooth, the ameliorative effects of modern chemistry and surgery notwithstanding. However, she artfully treats us to a frightening personification of evil beyond redemption. In the obligatory sex scene, she projects pure, crystalline lust. Especially her hooded, luminous eyes and a face flat with pleasure. Thanks to brilliant use of lighting and other stage techniques, the harsh lines of age are only occasionally manifest. Rather, she seems to have a slight golden glow (YES, YEATS).

The locations gave us a view of London that is a welcome departure from the usual Londonscapes .The Catherine character is so powerful and menacing that I thank my lucky stars that our paths never crossed. I wouldn't have had a chance.

THE ORIGINAL BASIC INSTINCT; ATTEMPTS AT CENSORSHIP: I must briefly comment on the original 1992 film, set in San Francisco, a beautiful city worthy of this film. It is outstanding, from the music to the locations to the sets, and so on. Paul Verhoven pulled striking performances out of the cast and crew.

That the main Baddie was a woman did not escape the scrutiny of Bay Area Gay and Lesbian activist groups. Attempts at censorship were vehemently denied. SWELL. These philosophical pygmies demanded editorial control over the script, insisting on re-writes that would promote their political and psychiatrically driven agendas. Example: Sanctimoniously alleging sexism and misogyny, they demanded that the lead role be switched from BAD GIRL to BAD GUY.

On locations in San Francisco, the gentle, tolerant activists did their best to sabotage filming of the scenes with noise, flashing lights and other tactics. The Executive Producers, Mario Kassar and Andrew Vajna, vowed to fight any efforts to restrict the artistic freedom guaranteed in our democracy and obtained restraining orders against the disruptive tactics.

BLOWBACK: Thanks to the fulminating activists, the film got huge national press coverage - millions of dollars worth of free advertising. Their calls for viewers to boycott the film resulted in a backlash that had customers waiting in long lines wherever the film was launched. It also received widespread critical acclaim. It was, in the words of the reptilian Hackett in NETWORK, "A BIG- TITTED HIT!" Sorry, Gentle Reader; I just couldn't resist that one. Yes, it's a gibe.

In conclusion, I believe that both BASIC INSTINCT 1 AND 2, with their brilliant musical scores, aesthetics and acting, are works of art

that deserve protection under our Constitution.
What is this review like?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
OUT:
positive