The Comfort Of Strangers details
|Starring:||Rupert Everett, Natasha Richardson, Helen Mirren, Christopher Walken|
The Comfort Of Strangers
|Run time:||1 hour 40 minutes|
|Rental release:||01 Mar 2004|
Most helpful review
What, no dwarf?By spooby from London , 10 Mar 2005
[Highly rated reviewer]A diverting enough, but ultimately risible attempt to step from the shadow of Dont Look Now as a sinister Venice-set movie, beset with fundamental problems: Pinters script sees him at his most overripe; Schraders direction is set on portentous, bordering on pretentious; Everett and Richardson are rarely any great shakes, especially when we are asked to take them seriously; and Mirren and Walken are lumbered with pointless (and very shakey) accents.
Walken still impresses, naturally, but the main problem lies with Ian McEwans story which, like most of his earlier work, is just rather silly. The effects of sinister unease and fear of the foreigner (the only excuse for the accents) for which the film appears to be striving are attempted in only the most basic terms - Walken is a bit of a weirdo, slightly sinister and somewhat unpredictable; Mirren is just a weirdo; Everett and Richardson are a nice uncomplicated middle-class couple whose relationship is going through a crisis so passionless its hard to believe they care, never mind stirring oneself to do so. And as we all know its easy to get lost in Venice after dark.
The denouement is perfunctory and pointlessly derivative; the coda is simply pointless, and typifies the superficiality of the whole enterprise. That said, Dante Spinottis photography is almost edible and there are a good number of chuckles to be had at the po-faced seriousness of the whole thing, but its strictly for venetophiles and lovers of high camp only.
- Was this review helpful to you?
- (13) Yes |
- No (3)
waste of timeBy rayweaving (20 reviews) , 09 Aug 2011total waste of a rental - the only good thing about this film were the views of Venice , thats why it got 2 stars instead of 1
Puzzle, riddle, enigma?By SimonCBEvans (12 reviews) from Harleston , 12 Apr 2011Harold Pinter and Ian McEwan? What a pedigree! But what a pup! Maybe it was the direction that let it down. I have no real idea what it was about or how the dramatic ending was arrived at. There did not seem to be a logical progression at all. It was rather like someone had taken all the Venice based films that went before (Don't Look Now, Death in Venice) and mixed them together to try to create something new. Well, I guess it did, but not worth actually watching IMHO. What a shame with such acting talent too.
Dark and Twisted!By a customer from Beddington , 12 Nov 2010This is a dark and twisted story that was well acted with a good ending.
Pretensious and tediousBy a customer from London , 31 Aug 2010The biggest flop ever. Avoid by any means unless you are really interested in middle class sexual anxieties and Venetian cliches. Badalamenti's music is superb though.
- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (1)
Venice never seemed so wet.By Claire Neeson from Cambridge , 25 Jun 2010I enjoy Ian McEwan's writing and have liked the other film versions of his novels (Enduring Love, Atonement) but this just draaaags....The two supposedly loved-up protagonists (Rupert Everett CANNOT play straight, it tests his limited acting capability) just can't carry this pretentious, tedious story.
I stopped the film half-way through as I was sooooo bored. I tried, I really did, but it beat me.