MovieChat Forums > Femme Fatale (2002) Discussion > Worst De Palma movie....EVER

Worst De Palma movie....EVER

posted 17 years ago by nedwiggins
29 replies | jump to latest

Just watched this last night. Still cross with myself for it....
Not sure if I'm watching the same Femme Fatale as other reviewers who say that all fans of Brian de Palma will love this. I am a fan of a lot of his films (Scarface, Mission Imp., Untouchables, etc.) and his very recognisable directorial techniques (long tracking, pans, cuts etc. that build set-piece tensions), but only when employed in conjunction with a good script, plot, acting, etc.

With my hand on my heart I can honestly say this was one of the worst films by any A-list director that I have seen in a long time.

1) The title. What were they thinking? Or rather, why weren't they? It's an appalling title for any film other than something of the 'Scary Movie'/'Date Movie' genre. It has pretensions of being a serious thriller so why give it the ultimate movie cliche as its title. Why not call it 'A Twist in the Tale' to really state the frigging obvious?

2) The script is woeful when it isn't so bad it's hilarious.

3) Banderas, who always seems such a nice guy and a pleasure to have on your cast, is unfortunately rarely a very good actor in English-speaking films, no matter what people say. This film is no exception as he bumbles around, occasionally posting in his acting performance.
Romijn-Stamos is better but has an awful script to work with, cheesy and cliched beyond belief.

4) The plot. More holes than Switzerland's annual production of Emmental. Utter drivel. And don't even get me started on the 'twist'. Utterly pathetic. De Palma should hang his head in shame.

5) Directorially and screenplaywise it felt like I was watching a De Palma pastiche directed by Michael Winner (and not in a good way!!!)

6) Am too angry with having stayed up till 1am last night watching this drivel to go into any more critical analysis right now. How can any of you rate this as a decent film, let alone a decent de Palma film??!!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sjmgen 17 years ago

LOL!

Yeah me too, I got suckered into wasting my time on this complete drivel last night on Channel 5 but when i realised it was directed by the hackster De Palma I was not altogether too surprised by the eventual outcome.

"A-list" director? Who are you kidding? More like D-list as in "D" for consistent dross. He is the most unoriginal writer / director going. He is a very poor man's Hitchcock clone.

[–] vimbildann 17 years ago

watched this last night, and I am not surprised to see so many negative reviews here)) the movie is just terrible, and I can see how De Palma tried very hard to make it original by putting a lot of sexual undertone, hot women, and puzzling plot (and dont get me wrong, sometimes this works, Mullholland drv. as a good example) but in this movie it looked fake and stupid beyond belief, what the hell was De Palma thinking

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Joe_Scaramanga 17 years ago

I assume you've never seen MISSION TO MARS or WISEGUYS then?

Look, what do you expect?

It's a no-nonsense, erotic thriller. They're not meant to be high art, they are meant to be titillating and intruiging.
I thought it was both of these things. De Palma can direct this stuff in his sleep, and he clearly only did it as 'a job'.

It's much better than most of the crap clogging up cinemas at the moment.

"I've made over 100 films, sir. How many have you made?"
"One GOOD one."

[–] gewoon_emiel 16 years ago

Just watched it. Two hours of my life wasted. By Brian De Palma.

A good director should try and make everything the best he's ever done. Even if it is just 'a job', you don't make it look like one. Underestimating your audience isn't a mistake someone like De Palma ought to be making...

Yes, this does look like he made it in his sleep. And that's not a compliment.

"Also... I can kill you with my brain" - River Tam

[–] tobias_681 9 years ago

and he clearly only did it as 'a job'.

So that's why he wrote it himself? He could probably have gotten a movie similar to Mission Impossible (or possibly a sequel to it) that would have payed better.

---

You see things; and you say Why? But I dream things that never were and I say Why not?

[–] ColinChapman 17 years ago

To OP. I agree.

[–] M_Warren 16 years ago

I thought it was all rather elegant; in fact perhaps one of DePalma's most elegant. (Especially compared to his flops, like Mission to Mars or Snake Eyes.) Good or bad music/acting, etc., is all a matter of conjecture, and the storyline, for better or worse, was enticingly elaborate. Plus, there are so many cinematic tips of the hat in this film; things that go beyond the simplicity of DePalma's usual trademarks. There's the way it opens with her watching 'Double Indemnity;' which is a wonderful way to set up a movie as slippery as this. Or in the kindly old couple's home; the way the fishtank is overflowing in the film's beginning and half empty near the end, and the computer's screensaver, which show's Lilly's necklace reflecting the light. There are too many sneaky little things like that to mention here; the way our villain gets out of jail with bloodstains still on his suit, the way the titular femme fatale has two great falls, each time waking up as a different person, the posters on display in the square when the villains confront Laure's girlfriend...
I won't want to undermine any opinions here; the movie's IMDB poll is low, so you're probably on to something, but I wanted to get in my two cents. This is an intricately constructed and skillfully executed film, in my opinion. But maybe I'm wrong, so I'd like to hear you guys go into more detail about what you disliked.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]