Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Willie Oleson" data-source="post: 405960" data-attributes="member: 8">DANGEROUS LIAISONS (1988)[ATTACH=full]53916[/ATTACH]In preparation for....etc, this warranted a re-watch because I didn&#039;t remember how I felt about it all those years ago. It certainly looks like something I would have enjoyed.Well, this time I kinda struggled with the plot - the scheme itself - because it went from this person to that person and then it became all about Michelle Pfeiffer&#039;s character and I wasn&#039;t sure why.At the end of the story, Marquise de Merteuil reveals that that had been her intention all along, to make Valmont fall in love with Madame de Tourvel and then persuade him to destroy the love.But there was nothing in their first conversations that suggested that Tourvel should become part of their plan, therefore it kinda looks like making things up as they go along which gives the film a slightly meandering aftertaste.Glenn Close and John Malkovich seem to revel in their respective roles of cynical scoundrels, but it&#039;s Michelle Pfeiffer who has to do all the hard work and sell the story&#039;s urgency, and she does it very well (I believe she played a similar role in The Age Of Innocence, but that was five years later).Also starring Uma Thurman and the young Doctor Who. It&#039;s only the peculiar casting choice of actress Swoosie Kurtz that makes me realise that this is a French story played by Americans, and it&#039;s those moments that takes me out of the period drama.However, since her character appears to be somewhat bourgeois I wonder if this was a creative/abstract/metaphorical/something decision.Overall, it&#039;s an engaging film to look at but it&#039;s not consistently interesting enough to feel emotionally invested (partially hindered by the obvious satire), except for the last part when we witness the downfall of the Marquise.And for a story about love and lots of sex I think it should have looked a bit more sexier, more Keanuploitation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Willie Oleson, post: 405960, member: 8"] DANGEROUS LIAISONS (1988) [ATTACH type="full"]53916[/ATTACH] In preparation for....etc, this warranted a re-watch because I didn't remember how I felt about it all those years ago. It certainly looks like something I would have enjoyed. Well, this time I kinda struggled with the plot - the scheme itself - because it went from this person to that person and then it became all about Michelle Pfeiffer's character and I wasn't sure why. At the end of the story, Marquise de Merteuil reveals that that had been her intention all along, to make Valmont fall in love with Madame de Tourvel and then persuade him to destroy the love. But there was nothing in their first conversations that suggested that Tourvel should become part of their plan, therefore it kinda looks like making things up as they go along which gives the film a slightly meandering aftertaste. Glenn Close and John Malkovich seem to revel in their respective roles of cynical scoundrels, but it's Michelle Pfeiffer who has to do all the hard work and sell the story's urgency, and she does it very well (I believe she played a similar role in The Age Of Innocence, but that was five years later). Also starring Uma Thurman and the young Doctor Who. It's only the peculiar casting choice of actress Swoosie Kurtz that makes me realise that this is a French story played by Americans, and it's those moments that takes me out of the period drama. However, since her character appears to be somewhat bourgeois I wonder if this was a creative/abstract/metaphorical/something decision. Overall, it's an engaging film to look at but it's not consistently interesting enough to feel emotionally invested (partially hindered by the obvious satire), except for the last part when we witness the downfall of the Marquise. And for a story about love and lots of sex I think it should have looked a bit more sexier, more Keanuploitation. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What month follows July?