i can't think a better performance in a crappyish film then michael caine's in "the hand". i think all the emotion and chill you read on his face is amazing considering what a bad plot/script/effects/(most of the) supporting cast he has to work with.
shareTrue. He was really good. The girl laying in his bed looked really good. His wife was a typical stupid *beep* (even though he was definitely self-absorbed). I was hoping he'd snuff her out. Outside of that, the film was pretty poor
Alcoholics Don't Freeze, They Chill
I had a tough time watching this movie, when i was younger. I recently watched it over an month ago on Halloween afternoon. The Hand is actually not bad, Michael Caine was certainly good in it. But the movie could have been better, although there`s some amusing unintentional laughter at times, especially with Oliver Stone`s cameo. When the director`s dies on-screen was one of the biggest unintented laughs of the movie.
I felt the movie had two endings, it would have been better if it`s just ended with Caine and the police officers discovering his lover`s dead body in the car instead of him being in a mental instutation.
He was ok and the film was not that bad. There are far worse out there. It was definitely better than anything Stone's done in the last 10 years.
shareThe movie is not bad at all but frankly there's not much you can do with a movie about a "killer hand".
Probably Marc Brandell's novel is terrific (haven't read it), but 'The Hand' IMO is one of those stories that on paper may be great, but that are nearly impossible to translate succesfully to cinema.
While watching this movie I realized why Edgar Allan Poe stories haven't brought succesfully to the screen. Because how can you "scare" the audience remaining true to Poe's stylized poems and tales such as 'The Raven', 'The Pit and the Pendulum' or 'The Tell-Tale Heart'. Is practically imposible. Same goes about most works from Kafka, Lovecraft, Rulfo, García Márquez, Borges, Cervantes, etc. They all are wonderful stories, but unfilmables, I am afraid.
In the other hand, much lesser works tends to produce terrific movies (e.g. Thomas Harris' "The Silence of the Lambs", Chuck Palahniuk's "Fight Club", Stephen King's "The Shawshank Redemption" and so on).
'The Hand' is probably as good as it gets. I can't imagine a much better psychological thriller about an "evil hand". The acting by Michael Caine is top notch, Oliver Stone direction is effective and even remarkable at times (despite the fact of being only his second feature film), but as soon as you see that cheesy hand crawling... everything starts falling apart.
I liked 'The Hand' for what it is: An interesting character study with a remarkable performance by the leading actor, based on a story that probably never should have been filmed, and directed by a talented filmmaker in the making.
I don't think the film is quite as bad as you, teejay, but I generally agree, especially about Michael Caine. It's actually inspiring how he gives himself over completely to this rather silly premise. Even when he's rolling around on the floor with a disembodied hand at his throat, he never condescends to the material and he gives it his all to make the scene believable. He doesn't just phone it in like a lot of actors would do with this script. Amazing, considering that he didn't get along at all with Oliver Stone, from what I've read. Caine has never been afraid to appear repellent, as here and in "Dressed to Kill", which is a trait I admire greatly in an actor.
shareThere was a pretty successful series of poe films back in the 60s actually. The Pit and the Pendulum was one. You make a good point though.
I think the problem was they never really were able to make the hand scary. The horror scenes come off as comical.
The films pretty well acted and isn't badly put together. As campy as it is at times, it also has some pretty nice character moments. I don't think Stone should be too embarrassed by it.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen
I am the walrus, googoo goo joob goo goo goo goo joob-J Lennon
The movie is not bad at all but frankly there's not much you can do with a movie about a "killer hand".This could have gone in the direction of "body parts" where they re-attach his hand at the end of the movie but it continues to have a mind of its own and strangles people, then maybe it kills Jonathan.
As usual, Michael Caine did what he can and gave a decent performance of a man who may have a few screws loose. I can't quite recommend this picture, though it's stylish, well made, and well acted. It`s been at least three years since I saw this film and so I don't recall my specific quibbles with this picture. I compare this film to Magic (1978), which was a similar but much creepier and better film featuring a great performance by Anthony Hopkins.
shareYeah I didn't really care for the movie but the always great Michael Caine made it watchable
"I'm just a happy camper! Rockin' and a-rollin'!" - Patrick Bateman, American Psycho
Caine is a very good actor and he knows how to make that scene where he loses his hand very, very realistic - even I freaked out during that scene! He carries the film well on his shoulders.
shareAgreed. Caine gave an excellent and credible performance in the lead.
I'm a totally bitchin' bio writer from Mars!
I agree. I just watched this for the first time. It's a mediocre (though entertaining) film, but Michael Caine is nuts. He does a great job.
share[deleted]