IN: Review: Director Paul Verhoeven's American vehicles are of varied quality, but most of the films he made in his native country are indisputable masterworks. This is the story of alcoholic (and bi-sexual) writer who moves in with a beautiful rich and very strange woman. But the lady does not know that he is only interested in meeting the woman's handsome male lover. In the meantime, the writer is plagued with strange visions - at first they look like hallucinations triggered by alcohol abuse, but he soon begins to realize that he is actually experiencing some kind of premonitions. Fascinating Hitchcockian thriller, very original and provocative. I love films that make you think they are about something, but then you realize they are about something completely different. This is one of those movies; a thriller during the first half, and a quasi-religious surrealist saga during the second half. Very erotic, original and blasphemous, not for kids or people that go to church every Sunday. Great cinematography by future director Jan de Bont. Highly Reommended!
What is this review like?
OUT: positive

IN: Review: This is a great idea for a film but it, unfortunately, doesn't turn out to be a great movie. What starts out as a sweet and almost goofy romantic comedy about a Fluffer in love with his Fluffee spirals out of control into a bizarre combination of genres and a veritable stew of plots, with liberal borrowings from BOOGIE NIGHTS, THELMA AND LOUISE, SHOWGIRLS, FRISK, and even a curious "dash" of 400 BLOWS thrown in towards the end. (At least the director did his research!) The result is not necessarily boring but, in the end, this slick, well-produced flick doesn't quite add up to anything. However, the actors all do a game job with the material and there are a few good laughs at the behind-the-scenes world of gay porn.

What is this review like?
OUT: negative

IN: Review: This movie is just plain silly. Almost every scene has some bit of humor: running gags, slapstick, and great jokes. The acting isn't that great, and the plot is cliche, but the jokes more than make up for that. If you have a chance to see this movie, I recommend that you do.
What is this review like?
OUT: positive

IN: Review: Unless you are geeky film student who has to see everything, this film will not only be a waste of your time and money and a huge disappointment, but it will also make you angry beyond belief.

There might be a story worth telling somewhere inside, but Hopkins decided to hide it and encode under so many incessant chaotic layers of apparently random audio video microcuts, making the viewer's patience run thin after a very short while.

Why would someone like Hopkins choose such a heavy, most difficult and highly unstable project as his first script, first score and third film can by anyones guess. Maybe he played with it in his mind for such a long time until it became unrecognizable as what it became, not even for himself. The result proves that he has by far not enough experience or skill to achieve the desired result.

Even the weirdest Carpenter and Lynch films, to name just two uncoventional filmmakers, had 90% more coherence, 95% less characters and 99% more story flow.

Sir Anthony you aimed for the stars, but unfortunately missed by a couple of light years. Please stick to acting, in that department you are a unequaled giant and nobody should ask more from you, not even yourself!
What is this review like?
OUT:
negative