MovieChat Forums > Diabolique (1996) Discussion > Underated..

Underated..

posted 16 years ago by luvehorror
14 replies | jump to latest

I feel this film lacked in writing and substance but I enjoyed many aspects of the film. Including the acting. Anyone else feel this way?

"When you're slapped you'll take it and like it."

[–] PrivateVasquez 16 years ago

I had never seen the original, so I didn't know what to expect. I saw this movie in '96 and really liked it. Yeah it's kinda slow and plodding, but I thought it was stylish and I agree, I did like the acting. This is my second favorite Sharon Stone performance after Casino. Kathy Bates was also dead-on.

"Carol Anne, go into the light"!

[–] luvehorror 16 years ago

I haven't seen the original either. From what I've gathered it is suppose to be better. However I still really like this film.

"When you're slapped you'll take it and like it."

[–] PrivateVasquez 16 years ago

Random, but this movie has been on a couple times, and every time it's on I can't stop watching it. The music, mood, Sharon Stones cool wardrobe? I'm not sure what it is. My one friend likes it and the other hates it? I guess there's no in between.

"Carol Anne, go into the light"!

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] berrorg 16 years ago

This is a very, VERY, good movie IMHO... all that crap about how "an original is always better" is just annoying nonsense... nostalgia sucks, and so does most of old movies nowadays (there's a lot of exceptions, but for the most part I don't understand how someone can say that, say, a Hitchcock movie like Rope is better than most movies from nowadays). Is just a stupid notion that humans have.

Realistically, what's best now is what's now produce. The movies of old were done for the kind of audience of their times, and won't usually hold to what we, in-the-now, are used to. That's why old masterpieces are called "timeless" (like "The Good, The Bad And The Ugly" for example), because you don't detect the wooden and staged acting, or the old mannerisms; they're just GOOD.

I have NOT seen the original, and chances are that I'll like it.. my whole rambling is not against this original, of course, is just that it annoys me how a movie just because is old is seen as "better" by most people.

[–] tecumseh88 10 years ago

yeah i agree. there are plenty of examples of remakes that are more effective or of higher quality than the originals. The Thing from Another World was remade into the Thing by Carpenter in the 80s. i preferred carpenter's way more, though i liked the Hawks version some.

[–] aef-6 16 years ago

Yep, its very underated [I give it 8/10]
In imdb must have about 6.2/10

Last seen
Inland Empire (2006) - 9/10
Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) - 6/10

[–] crazyfroglegs 15 years ago

I agree that it's underrated in a lot of ways, but I think the main reason people rate it so low is that they changed the ending. The original has what some people think is one of the best endings ever, and they messed with it for the remake. It deserves to get a lot of criticism for that.

[–] didomusic 14 years ago

This movie is not listed as a remake, but rather as "a version of" the same story, along with 3 other ones, so I don't see what the big deal could be.

I watched both at different times and enjoyed both. This one is 7/10 imo. Original is 10/10.

[–] onn1320 15 years ago

Yeah I feel the same way and I did see the original. - I liked how the Original left more to your imagination. - This one sort of lets you know what's going on and is easier to figure out the mystery. The biggest difference is the ending.

But overall - I thought it was a good film to say I never even heard of it back when it came out. - Kathy Bates was a beast as always. Stone is good playing "the strong bitch" roles - and the other actress is just hard to take your eyes off of. - And I've seen Chazz in better roles, but this one wasn't so bad for him.

And how about the two camera men? - I reconize the long haired one from many of todays movies and the other one with the glasses was J.J. Abrams - probucer/director of Lost, Alias, and a few Movies.

"And what was it last time? Didn't know what the box was?" - The Female Cenobite in Hellbound

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hysteria28 13 years ago

I have to agree. The writing was lacking in some segments. The build up of suspense progressed at a steady rate, but never climaxed well. I think there was a requirement for more plot twists and Kathy Bates's character didn't ever stumble upon many clues.