I remember both Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert giving very enthusiastic reviews for THE RAZOR'S EDGE back in the fall of '84. I was a big Bill Murray fan and a literature student in college at the time so I was very excited by this movie when it was released.
And I still love it.
I only saw this for the first time a few years ago, and I love it too. It's pretty amazing to see that the stoic, "depressed guy" thing that Murray has done the past few years all really started here. Most people probably think of it as a fairly recent transformation, meanwhile, he was doing it 22 years ago.
On a side note, by coincidence I watched this and "Bad Timing" within a couple of nights of each other...Holy *beep* Theresa Russell can act her tits off. There's not many roles out there that are a showcase for an actress like these two films have. And not only does she do them both, and both really really great; but she did them back to back.
There's been a very cool Criterian Collection DVD of "Bad Timing" released in the past year or so that's worth picking up.
sharethey actually liked it...I liked it for everthing it had to offer...drama, romance and music
shareAnd don't forget genuine locations! These days with everything filmed in front of blue or green screens, it's cool to see Murray in the Himalayas or on the streets of Paris--and know he was really there!
share>>>>>>>>>"These days with everything filmed in front of blue or green screens..."
Blue/greens are NOT used with everything, you idiot! Go back to watching Sesame Street.
Every "Behind the Scenes" featurette I see anymore shows actors standing in front of blue or green backdrops shooting their scenes, idiot, whether it's special effects shots or a cheap way to avoid taking a crew to a genuine location.
And I hate to burst your bubble but Sesame Street is a fake set too.
It's called hyperbole, idiot. And yes, most action and quite a lot of location shots are green screened.
This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.
Are you sure? Because Ebert gave it 2 and a half stars in his print review which you can find on the "External reviews" link. He didn't seem too enthusiastic about it there.
Tony Soprano: Everything turns to sh-t.
MrBlondNYC,
I'm going by his review on "Sneak Previews" with Gene Siskel. I don't know if I've ever read his print review but both he and Siskel were both very receptive to it on their PBS show in '84.
Siskel and Ebert had already left PBS' "Sneak Previews" in 1982. So maybe you're thinking of the new hosts Jeffrey Lyons and Neal Gabler. If it really was S&E than it was on "At the Movies" which was syndicated. I found the episode on YouTube and they are not as enthusiastic about the film as you remember. It is a special episode devoted to Murray's films:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Fn7eeaAiRtw&feature=related
They disagree on the film. Siskel says its "by no means a great film but there is something quite wonderful about it" and he liked Murray's performance and gave it a good review. Ebert did not like Murray's performance and he echoes this in his print review. He felt Murray was "too serious" whereas Siskel thought he "wasn't serious enough".
Ebert's print review:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19840101/REV IEWS/401010374/1023
George Carlin: It's all bullsh-t and it's bad for ya.
I remember that Bill Murray was so furious at the critical reception of the Razor's Edge that after the reviews came out he said he'd never work in Hollywood again, and took a year or two off before he acted in another film. He was really proud of the Razor's Edge—it was his first serious leading role and he put his heart and soul into it. When it was panned he took it personally. (I think his reaction at the time is indicative of his unexpected serious side. He has such a big ego! Remember how p-ssed off he got when he didn't win the Oscar?)
My guess is that a lot of the poor reviews came from the fact that the film is a horrible adaptation of the book. I love the book, but I'm glad I saw the movie first because I might have judged it harshly, too.
[deleted]
According to the IMDb Trivia Page, the day after Murray finished shooting "The Razor's Edge," he went to start work on "Ghostbusters." Murray had made the deal that he would do "Ghostbusters" only if the studio financed "The Razor's Edge." I think that it turned out pretty well! It is tough going from the more outlandish comedy Murray was doing to not only doing a drama, but doing one that is as introspective as this one.
shareI often mention the Razor's Edge-Ghostbusters ties when people discuss Murray with me. The movie that everyone wanted Murray to do vs the movie that Murray actually wanted to do. Not that Ghostbusters is a bad film, it's a great film but compared to The Razor's Edge? It makes you wonder how Murray really thinks of his career, what he wanted versus what it became.
shareThat's strange, I remember both film critics commending Bill Murray for trying to stretch himself dramatically, but felt "The Razor's Edge" as a movie was just too long and boring. I could be wrong, If there is a link to the original clip, I'd love to see it.
BTW, my take on this version, is that it was indeed too long and boring.
If you love and support Michael Jackson 100%, copy & paste this into your signature. We love MJ!
I recall them (as well as most other critics) panning the film. Ebert's written review is available online at http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19840101/REVIEWS/401010374/1023.
shareI'm afraid that your memory may have failed you. Ebert's written review in his column is pretty negative.
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-razors-edge-1984
I wouldn't say they were enthusiastic, but they did like it.
This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.