|List Price: $7.99
Our Price: $7.99
- "Nice Girl"
An excellent film that has in effect become a classic, Basic Instinct, brings to the screen a murder mystery involving a police detective and a sensual multi-millionaire writer.
The setting is San Francisco and detective Curran is investigating the gruesome murder of a man found dead in his bed after what seems to have been a passionate and steamy night. The investigation reveals a purely sexual relationship between the deceased and a striking novelist whose life seems to be intertwined with various deadly accidents and mysterious deaths. Things become rather complicated when her latest novel's hero oddly resembles detective Curran...
Michael Douglas, Sharon Stone and Jeanne Tripplehorn (both of whom are GORGEOUS!), Mitch Pileggi (X-Files), George Dzundza, and the rest of this AMAZING cast, have truly outdone themselves with their performances, which are outstanding to say the least! All the actors, without exceptions, give it their 100% and it really shows!
The film combines a great cast, a great mystery, and some very realistic and very erotic sex scenes (for a change).
The setting, the plot, the dialogues, and the music (!) are all wonderful!
In short, Basic Instinct is a movie definitely worth watching and one to seriously consider adding to your movie collection (if you haven't done so already)!
- "She's Evil. She's Brilliant!"
Michael Douglas plays Nick Curran, a troubled detective who is investigating the "ice-pick" murder of rock star. The prime suspect is the victim's lover, the overtly-sexual Catherine Tramell, a beautiful, blonde mystery novelist who shows no remorse and is in the habit of not wearing any under-clothing. Curran falls under his suspects seductive spell and what follows is a hi-speed cat and mouse game which leaves several dead and one incredibly confused cop.
Although Sharon Stone was making movies a full decade before this film was made ("Deadly Blessings", "King Solomon's Mines"), it was this raunchy, erotic thriller that finally put the blonde on the map. "Basic Instinct" became a massive hit when it was first released in 1992. The media had a field day covering the scandal this film caused. Religious groups were bothered by the sexually explicit images depicted in the film and the Gay community was infuriated of the negative portrayal of homosexuals. The public in general didn't seem to mind since "Basic Instint" ended up grossing over $100 million domestically. I guess we were all entranced by Sharon Stone's slick, icy beauty and the infamous leg crossing scene.
Whatever one thinks of the film, few will deny that Sharon Stone is one of the film's highlights. She steals every single scene she's in and her performance is captivating and it's not just because of her incredible look. It's how she delivers her lines, her body language, her voice, her cool demeanor. She mastered the art of seduction and we clearly see why Nick fell prey to her dark charms. These elements along with the witty dialogue all contribute in to making Catherine Tramell one of the greatest screen villians ever.
One of the problems I had with the film was with the casting of Michael Douglas. He is a great actor but in my opinion, he seemed a bit too old for the part. In many scenes he reminded me of someone's grandfather smitten by his daughter's much younger girlfriend. Since the release of the sequel recently, there have been several individuals/critics who have complained about Sharon Stone being too old to be reprising the role and acting alongside a younger leading man. These same individuals don't seem to care when film-makers cast much older men in the lead opposite younger women (in some instances MUCH younger women). No one complained when Harrison Ford was cast alongside Michelle Pfieffer or when Sean Connery was cast alongside the beautiful Catherine Zeta-Jones but when an attractive actress who is in her late 40's, in this case Stone takes the lead in an erotic thriller, everyone has something negative to say. It appears there is a double standard here.
As for the film's sexual content. Anyone who has ever seen Paul Verhoeven's earlier films "De Vierde man" ("The Fourth Man") or "Spetters" will know he does not shy away from showcasing human sexuality graphically and several of these European films will even make "Basic Instinct" look tame. This film was clearly made for adults and it was always advertised as sexually explicit so keep in mind this film is not for everyone. "Basic Instinct" is unquestionably sleazy but it is clever and Sharon Stone's polished portrayel of a hard-as-nails temptress with a heart of stone (no pun intended) is reason enough to recommend it. Despite all the negative, nothing can hide the fact that this is an entertaining, sexually charged thriller that is well-made and well-acted. It's amoral message may be evil but it's brilliant.
Highly recommended....more info
- How To Become A Star By Doing Onscreen What Actreses Used To Do Offscreen To Get Onscreen!
This is a highly forgettable movie which made a "Star " out of Sharon Stone for reasons which I can't quite fathom. The only thing I can remember about this movie is the Interrogation Scene whcih should appeal to every 16 year old High School Geek's sexual fantasies.I give this movie 5 stars because thankfully Ms. Stone and Mr. Douglas are rarely seen in movies anymore these days!...more info
- A Minority Opinion
In case you've missed the plot summary, it goes like
this: Sharon Stone plays a cold-blooded, near-sociopathic
novelist whose boyfriend has just been murdered. The
crime, which involves some barely believable bondage
is a replica of one she described in her last novel.
Michael Douglas is the detective on the case and Jeanne
Tripplehorn is the police psychologist who is Douglas'
ex-girlfriend and is-in violation of any ethical
standard imagineable-giving him counselling after
a questionable shooting that left innocent bystanders
So the question is 'whodunnit?'.
And the answer is 'who cares?'.
The plot is unbelievable-real cops would have solved
this murder in a day or two. The acting ranges from
giggle-worthy (Douglas) to creditable (Stone and
Tripplehorn). The complications are shrill and forced
and the attempts to complicate the whodunit are
so sad that they're almost not worth a parody.
So why two stars? It's a beautiful movie and worth
seeing once (although you may want to fast-forward
through a lot of it) Stone's rendition of the
cheerful sociopath is good. Her nude scenes are delicious
and best of all, she is the second most beautiful
creature in the film.
Top awards for elegant nudity go to Tripplehorn who
is absolutely breath-taking even with her clothes on.
Those of you whose aesthetic is different from mine
may want to say the same of Douglas.
But even a naked Jeanne Tripplehorn is not
enough to make a good movie. Director Paul Verhoeven,
who did Spetters and RoboCop does a credible job
on this badly written, ill-conceived flick.
I understand that the film was under consideration
for a Raspberry Award and that only makes me
wonder how bad the film was that beat it.
Lynn Hoffman, author of The New Short Course in Wine and the forthcoming novel, bang-BANG from Kunati Press....more info
- A brilliant movie, tarnished with a reputation
I'd got this as a present for Christmas, although my mum already had it, but she has a thing for Michael Douglas. *Bleurgh* I'd never had much of an incline to watch it with my mum, and after watching it, I've decided it's probably not a good idea to watch it with my mum!
Basic Instinct has two major horrible points for me. Any scenes featuring Michael - which was the majority of the film unfortunately - shaking his bare booty. I'd already been scarred for life by that image in Fatal Attraction, and you do see a lot more of it in this film. Not pleasant.
My other horrible point, but not so much a horrible point, more of a statement, is of course, the infamous leg crossing scene. I'd never really seen it in any clips or anything, but had heard enough about it. Surprisingly, it happens quite early on in the film. I thought it would have happened at least half way through. This scene was unbelievable. It probably spawned a generation of men who remember having some pleasure to that scene. But my quibble, as a woman, is there's not much there to see! It's more letting your imagination run wild. For me, there wasn't much interest, but I can imagine there are plenty of pre-teen/early teenage boys out there, who have watched that scene over and over. The first shot you see the crease of her legs in the middle (nothing more), and the second shot, you definitely don't see much more than the very top, and it doesn't look like she shaved! That's it though. All the hype about that one scene. There was also a huge hoo-ha that Sharon CLAIMS she had no idea Paul Verhoeven was filming that particular area in the interrogation scene, and when she saw the rushes, she slapped him, and ordered him to remove it. Without that scene, I don't think the film would have got so much publicity, and might have died a death. Paul Verhoeven denies the above ever happened. But I like the fact that at the start of the scene, the policemen are in charge, then she opens her legs, and they turn into drooling idiots. Talk about turning the tables.
I was instantly put off by how much I hated that scene, and was about to change my mind, but decided to keep watching. It did happen quite early on. I was quite shocked at how GRAPHIC the bedroom scenes were. I mean it's nothing on what goes on online these days, but for me, it looked so realistic. (So glad I didn't watch it with my mum, I would have been blushing!) They were extremely realistic, which added a different element to the film. Some bedroom scenes are so faked (or body doubles), or there's zero chemistry between the actors but this seemed very realistic, although I've seen better than Michael Douglas.
The actors were all very good. I liked Jeanne Tripplehorn's character, she was more superior to Sharon's and she should have had more screen time, she's always excellent in anything she does (although I do get muddled up between her & Parker Posey.) Sharon did a good job of her role, and made it so much more than the stereotyped vixen it could have been.
Although it was slightly long for my liking, it was still good, but it could have done with a very small amount of editing, just to make it run smoother. There were occasional moments when I was looking at my watch, or looking at the display to see how long it had left.
If Basic Instinct had been a book first - now THAT could have been interesting. A book about someone writing a book that then happens in real life ... Ooh, I'm confused.
It's an absolutely amazing story too. Much better than the murder-by-numbers I was expecting. There were so many twists and turns, and on a second viewing (yes there will be!), there will be quite a few clues to spot. I definitely think the director was playing games with the viewers in this, as it constantly jumps back and forth and keeps you second-guessing about who the killer really is. Even now, after watching the film, reading various posts on IMDB, and reading other reviews, I'm still undecided as to who the killer was. I think there are at least a couple of characters in the frame, but at one point during the film, you are led to believe there's a third who could possibly be the killer.
The score was excellent too. At points I didn't notice it - which is always the best score in my opinion, rather than one full of stingers. I have heard one part of the score before, the part over the first bedroom scene between Michael & Sharon, yes it was good, but it's so much better when you see the scenes that accompany it. It makes it that more powerful than just the music by itself.
I was very impressed with Basic Instinct, and will definitely be watching it again, just to satisfy my curiosity about the clues littered throughout the film, which I think there are plenty of. I also definitely want to watch it again, to try and figure out the killer definitely is. I'm not sure how to end my review, how to sum it up. I'm intrigued to see comparisons to "The Fourth Man", also by Paul Verhoeven, so that might need to go on my list of DVDs to get. But I definitely suggest if you haven't seen this movie, you snap it up. It's an excellent movie, and I thoroughly enjoyed it....more info
- Basic Instinct
This movie is better than when it came out in theaters. The extra items are super. buy it and you'll like it....more info
- Not much different than the "IcePick" version
This Ultimate Edition could have been the definitive edition, had it been produced a little differently.
First, with the exception of the two new Sharon Stone items, Intro and Commentary, it is the same as the "IcePick" Unrated Director's Cut that came out some years ago. When I mean "IcePick", I'm talking about the release that came in the clear plastic case with a little bonus metal icepick.
Second, the movie's video and audio quality are also the same as that IcePick version. Which means passable, but not great.
This is where my biggest gripe with this item is located. The video and audio quality.
What would have made this a truly "Ultimate" Edition would have been if they had made it a 2-disc edition, one disc with only the movie, and the other all the bonus features. Many current releases do it this way.
As it stands, a one-disc version of a movie that is slightly over two hours (2 hours 8 minutes more exact) along with all the bonus material means that the video bitrate of the movie is limited to no more than an average of 5.0 Mbps.
A 2 hour movie can be encoded at 9.8 Mbps (almost the theoretical maximum) if placed entirely on a DVD-9 RSDL disc.
The difference between 9.8 Mbps and 5.0 Mbps is huge, as long as the source material is high enough quality to take advantage. Since this edition says "newly remastered widescreen version" I would think the original video quality would be such.
In addition, we are still stuck with Dolby Digital 5.1 448 Kbps for the audio. But with the extra storage that comes with a two-disc edition, they could have increased the audio quality to DD-EX 6.1 and DTS 6.1 formats.
Had they done that with this "Ultimate" edition, making it a two-disc extravaganza and increased the video and audio bitrates, this would have truly been the final, must-own version of this film.
So therefore, if you already have an Unrated Director's Cut version of this film, there is no need to purchase this "Ultimate" edition, unless you absolutely have to have those two extra Sharon Stone features. The movie itself is the exact same material.
- Trashy, Yet Entertaining
Up until now, "Basic Instinct" has always been that little movie in pop culture in which Sharon Stone uncrosses her legs and exposes her vagina for an instant. After watching this movie, that is exactly what I'll remember it for. This movie is pop culture staple, it's stupid and impossible to predict. As soon as you think you've got it, you don't, only to discover you do; as we we see with the ending. The movie what critics refer to as "a bad movie".
And it is. However, people will forget "Gandhi" the Best Picture winner of 1980 something before they forget this movie. If you label your DVD collection, this would definitley be in the "Guilty Pleasure" section where you would also find movies like "Wild Things" and "Cruel Intentions". It's a movie that has big stars, a big budget, and a stupid story. But this all works perfectly. Oscar Winner Michael Douglas (Best Actor, Wall Street) plays Detective Nick Curran, an ex-alcoholic and smoker, who's investigating the murder of a former rock star. The person believed to have commited the murder is Catherine Tramell (Stone), a novelist who's novel has detailed the killing exactly. As Nick discovers more about the case, he finds simalar incidences involving Catherine and at the same time he begins an affair with her. Probably not the best thing to do when you're pretty damn sure she's killing people with ice picks. The movie is packed with cliches and occasional bad dialouge that is only annoying sometimes. Oddly enough, Douglas and Stone are perfect in their roles. Stone catches the feroscity, sexuality, and glamour of Catherine perfectly; and Douglas plays the vulnerable, yet tough cop perfectly, as well. I can't see another actor in any of these roles, which is one of the highest compliments I think an actor can recieve. While it looks like Douglas made the smart decision by not returning for the sequel, I look forward to seeing Stone playing Catherine Tramell again in the movie. So, film buffs who actually know what a Best Boy Grip is probably won't like this movie; but entertainment seekers will surely like it.
And hell, if you don't even care if it's a good movie...The sex scenes are great.
IN REALITY: B-
HOWEVER, VERY ENTERTAINING: A-
- The DVD to buy
I know that this is like the 4th DVD release of the classic 90s film "Basic Instinct" but this is really the best edition you can buy. It has nice packaging as well as video and audio. It also includes all the pervious bonus features from the regular Special Edition release and adds more. Along with the Director's Cut of the film, the main reason to pick this up if you have yet to get it, is the commentary from the director and the director of photography. They discuss all the points of the film you had in question and its a great addition. There are also featurettes and documentaries and intreviews to waste time. Yes, I know this is a shameful way to promote the release of "Basic Instinct 2", but its nice to have a definitve edition of the film on DVD. "Basic Instinct" is not an amazing film, but it is fun and sexy. It was revolutionary for its time and if you are a film buff I suggest you pick up a copy. ...more info
- Original Instincts
With all the buzz surrounding the release of Basic Instinct 2 ("Will Sharon Stone look as good nude at 48 as she did at 34?"), I got a hold of this Director's Cut and decided to see the original. I'd never seen it in '92, turned off by all the hype surrounding Stone's "leg crossing" scene. I should have stuck to my original instincts.
Yes, there is suspense in this movie: Is Stone really the killer? Unfortunately, that question was never definitively answered...which set up the opening for today's long delayed release of the sequel. But unlike the "classic" movies which transcend their own era and bring a compelling story or characters to any time they may be viewed, this movie now comes across like That 70's Show, so mired in the artificial conventions of the time in which it was filmed that it is an embarrassment when seen today; sort of like having someone show the pictures of you in your leisure suit and platform shoes of 30 years ago. You can't believe you actually ever dressed like that.
I am not sure that ANYONE was ever as hip, cool, liberated, and callous as the character in this film are supposed to be, but what comes across today is a cast of quite unlikable people acting in ways that defy logic. I can't, for example, imagine Michael Douglas making this movie today, and not simply because he's too old to pull it off. Rather, the reason would seem to be that we have all matured past the pseudo-cynical "edge" that his "Nick" displays throughout this film. Indeed, for all the panting and brow furrowing, the only characters the viewer really winds up caring about are Nick's therapist-girlfriend (who is apparently and successfully framed for the crimes committed by Stone's character, and who then meets an unfortunate end), and his down-to-earth partner, who meets a similar and related fate.
It was sensationalism and sex that sold this movie 14 years ago; but sensationalism wears off, and sex is now available literally anywhere. Those attractions taken away, this film and the execution of its basic story simply do not hold up. In short, I am glad I passed this film by 14 years ago, I am sorry I spent the time to see it now, and there is no really reason for a sequel.
- Hollywood's most 'basic instinct' = CASH GRAB.
I will dispense with the standard plot synopsis and, for the most part, a review of this movie. 14 years later, most of us looking at a special edition "Basic Instinct" DVD already like it enough to at least show interest in possibly buying this. My question was, is it worth it to replace my old "Basic Instinct" DVD with a new one?
By my count this is the 4th DVD transfer of this film (there was a bare-bones DVD of the theatrical release, then a special edition with extras, then the unrated directors cut special edition with the same extras (that one had the dumb "ice pick box," but was eventually, and is now, available in a standard box whose cover art looks just like all the other releases (including the original VHS release): All white box, torso-and-up shot of Stone and Douglas whith her clawing his back), and now this one that still retains that same image of the stars, but now it is inside the lettering of the title).
I mention this for two reasons.
The first may not matter much to amazon and other on-line shoppers, but here's what happened to me while walking around Best Buy today: I already owned the "bare-bones" version (I picked it up for 5 bucks brand new at least 5 years ago, so this has never been a movie one needed to drop a lot on to own), but I wanted the unrated director's cut I saw advertised in the Best Buy weekend circular. I picked it up off the shelf and saw there was the older '02 special edition release right next to it for $5.99. I was not crazy about spending $15 (not that that is a terrible price, mind you) on a movie I already owned so I decided to go with the '02 version (I'll get to the comparison between the two in a moment - that is reason #2). I got home and found out it was the special edition alright, but it was the original theatrical version. It had extras and such, but the point of replacing the thing in the first place was to get the director's cut. So I went back to Best Buy and, sure enough, because the boxes look the same except for a tiny-worded "director's cut" in the bottom corner, I grabbed the wrong one. The director's cut was there and it to was also only $5.99 (and because of some additional sale I was unaware of it rang up as something like $4.40). So BE CAREFULl WHEN SELECTING A VERSION OF THE FILM. The ice-pick box, dumb as it looked on the DVD shelf, seems to be gone so there is no easy way to tell all these apart. You gotta do a little reading. "Special Edition" doesn't automaticly mean "director's cut." (Especially for a DVD that has had as many similar - and similar looking - releases as this one.)
That's my first point. The second is to inform you that, in comparing this new version "special edition director's cut" with the $5 version I got, the only difference, besides the newly arranged cover art, is that there is an interview and an introduction by Sharon Stone. That's it. Other than that, it has the same bonuses, commentaries, etc. And that is said if that even matters to you in the first place. If you just want the movie, there is no reason to opt for this new, more expensice release; or if you already have the director's cut, replace it with this one - unless you really want to hear from Sharon Stone (that's her now, mind you, not 1992 - I'm just sayin'...)
So why was this made then? "Basic Instinct 2" hits theatres in a few weeks. I'll reserve judgment on that move until I see it, but I can judge this as a cash grab. I'm not angry though. "Basic Instinct" is hardly the first film to pull this stunt and I almost wish that some of the movies I really loved had just one "special edition" or update from its first DVD incarnation, not to mention 4 or more. I would just hope there would be something that sets them apart from the previous version.
That's not the case here.
* One quick observation I could not resisit mentioning: It is ironic that a movie as notorious for its graphic sex and violence as "Basic Instinct" that the Amazon info lists its rating as simply "Unrated for drug use and laguage." :)...more info
- Well remembered, but not a classic
At the time, Basic Instinct was considered shocking and new. In retrospect, in a world where much harder pornography is so commonplace, it's not got much sex appeal going for it. What I do like is the OTT game of cat and mouse between Stone and Douglas.
Catherine Tramell is a writer of sleazy novels who lives out her pulp trash after she's written it. This would be fine if she wrote about saving the children or building churches but Tramell writes about sex, murder and betrayal. She's accused of murdering her Rock-star boyfriend by icepicking his head 86-times during a massive shagathon. She feels no guilt and no sadness and Detective Nick Curran regards her with utmost suspicion even though she passed a lie-detector test.
Determined to find the truth among Catherine Tramell's web of pork-pies, Curran falls into her world of sin and seduction. Already a bad cop well on the way to cleaning up his act, all of his nasty habits come flooding back to him. The drinking, the snorting, the smoking...all because of a blonde. I would be impervious to this.
In fact, Jeanne Triplehorn, who plays Curran's psychiatrist, is a billion times more sexy than Sharon Stone. Especially when she wears her glasses. But that's just my thing.
One can accuse Basic Instinct of being contrived, overly-complicated and over-plotted but they'd be missing the point. I do feel that the irony of gutter-level fiction becoming real within gutter-level fiction would have been more appropriate and perhaps louder if Basic Instinct were a book, but as a movie it makes its point despite the high level tawdriness that most audiences are going think is all the film has to offer.
Paul Verhoeven takes a Hitchcockian approach to the material as there are already a few connections to Vertigo. At one point in the film, Sharon Stone even dresses up in an outfit identical to Kim Novak (hairstyle and all). You can't help but notice the sleaze sometimes though. Like Michael Douglas walking around a nightclub in a horrible V-neck sweater or the 'infamous' leg-crossing scene with is only really notable for its unsubtlety.
There are also some parts of the film which kind of date it badly. The production design and fashion is sooo early 90s. It's not the kind of story that oozes class but the outdated look kinda distracts. But the one amazing thing Basic Instinct has going for it is Jerry Goldsmith's wonderfully haunting score. Truly one of his best in the latter part of his career.
Add it all up and Basic Instinct is wildly inconsistent in terms of quality but the sheer OTT nature of plot is enough to keep it afloat. And all these years later, when we have mostly become impervious to titillation, people still remember all the skanky publicity and the aroma of sleaze will never quite die away. See past all that and you'll find a clever thriller underneath....more info
- If Only The Formatting Could Be Better --
There isn't much more to say about this movie than hasn't been said by other reviewers, however, I'd like to point out that this version is in widescreen, meaning "letter-box," style. For those with the right kind of televison set this shouldn't be a problem. But for me with a smaller screen, I would have preferred to have seen more of Ms. Stone and this movie than the wide angle letter-box gives. There is a version listed by Amazon that only says only NTSC format rather than say widescreen, though that may not make it actually full screen as some movies are noted to be. If there is a full screen version of this movie, the production company should make that clear. And if there is no full screen version of Basic Instinct, why isn't there? We should be given the choice.
Oh, and be careful of that silly plastic box with its "ice pick" pen: the box is rather fragile and can break. It's kind of cute but not really worth the effort save as a promotional piece. Even the pen is useless and doesn't write.
- How disappointing
After waiting for over two weeks, I was finally notified that the company no longer carried this item. I seem to be having bad luck receiving things lately, so I've not bothered re-ordering with any other 'carriers.'
What's going on lately? I'm still waiting for another order that I'm told was mailed on March 19. Worse, THEY billed me, and wanted payment.
This is not a good way to conduct business, with this kind of economy. Most people are watching where they spend their money....more info
- Finding the identity of a killer is always fascinating, no matter what you're watching...
Everyone who has seen the film, discover that the story runs into an intense sexual chess game between a San Francisco detective ('But you said you liked men to use their hands.') and a vivid writer ('No. I said I liked Johnny to use his hands.')
Catherine (Sharon Stone) loves coke and Jack Daniel's... She is enigmatic ('How does it feel to kill someone?'), cool ('I like men who give me pleasure.'), frank ("What are you going to do? Charge me with smoking?") penetrating ("I've always had a fondness for white silk scarves"'), in complete command of herself... Her character holds men in her grip... To each uncrossing of legs, she masters every type of attraction...
Catherine is a bisexual heiress, who teases, tempts and commands... She refuses to let us know that she's a true threat... She creates one of the classic Femme Fatale by leading us up to twist after twist, weaving outcomes of situations to her advantage...
Nick (Michael Douglas) is the vice cop who drinks, and does a little cocaine... He accidentally shot two tourists in the line of duty... He is a troubled policeman who knows all about homicidal impulse... He is torn between two skilled women at psychology... One of the women is an evil manipulator... We can sense that Nick knows which one is the supposed killer... Nick insists he will be strong enough to take her down...
The third intriguing character of Verhoeven's "Basic Instinct" is Roxy (Leilani Sarell). She is Catherine's lesbian lover... Roxy is the menacing blonde of the black Ferrari, who seems not to get jealous, but to get excited... We see her wearing pants and a jacket, and dancing with another woman... Roxy let Nick sees Catherine with two men, one of them is a big, body-built black guy...
And there is another interesting character who deserves wide attention: the police psychologist who helps Catherine understand homicidal impulse... Dr. Beth Garner (Jeanne Tripplehorn) is a very good-looking, dark-haired woman, who has been involved in a love affair with a policeman...
Basic Instinct's photography borrows a range of angles from Hitchcock... The score, by Jerry Goldsmith, is wonderful... The film is wildly considered a controversial and popular erotic thriller...
- Best movie of all time.
Watching Sharon Stone is very sexy,naughty,and good to look at.In this movies she is very seductive,naughty,sexy.Watching her having sex,makes u repeat that scene over and over.Good movie to watch from the begining to the end....more info
- Basic Instinct unrated directors version
good movie in blu ray. Sharon Stone was well....Sharon Stone. My husband enjoyed it more than I did....more info
- ONE OF THE BEST SEXY THRILLERS OF ALL TIME!!!!!!!!
Basic Instinct really showed us viewers what a ice pick can really do..... Sharon Stone and Michael Douglas star in this thriller..... When guys start getting killed by a ice pick Michael is on the case and he knows its this writer by the name of Catherine Tramell played by Sharon Stone...... Needless to say he can't prove it but he knows it.... When he gets caught in her little mind game and falls in love with her he can't say if she or didn't she kill these men!!!!!! All i can say is that this is one of the best sexy thrillers of all time and its worth owning in any dvd collection!!!!!!...more info
- I need an icepick.
Do you know why sex is always the downfall of men? Because even when their lives are in danger, they still have to pull out their wanker. That sums up Michael Douglas's character's stupidity here. I mean, for the entire film he suspects her of being a cold-blooded killer yet he allows himself to sleep with her and fall in love with her. He's so stupid. I don't know any "magna cum laude p***y" worth getting an icepick in the throat.
But seriously, it's a movie where the sex scenes are actually integral to the plot. That alone makes it at least 4 stars. Seriously. The sex scenes are like suspense scenes. Each time they make love you're waiting for the icepick.
This movie is also complex. To this day, people still debate as to whether the ending was really as simple as "she killed them all." Was Dr. Elisabeth Garner really as innocent as initially perceived? She seemed to have some issues and a few skeletons in her closet that could have been explored further. ...more info
It is a outrageous film. Sharon Stone is simply exotic. The argument is good. The photography excellent....more info
- Sharon Stone is so confident in her character as Catherine Trammel in this film...
Sharon Stone is so confident in her character as Catherine Trammel in this film, and portrays some of the best sex and orgasm I've seen in a blockbuster movie before. It is fun to see all the explicit scenes of sex, nudity and violence all rolled into one movie. The story unravels with perfect rhythm, keeping your senses titillated all along the way. It is timeless in its' plot, the murder mystery that even at the end never seems to be solved completely. The viewer is left seduced, allured, and looking back on the different scenes and characters trying to figure out exactly what just happened.
Michael Douglas does a terrific job in his role as detective Nick Curran. He's on top of his game one moment, and the next completely clueless, giving in to the pleasures of drinking and smoking after months of sobriety.
- "Ice pick" me, please!
Sharon Stone in one of her better roles! Her underlying coldness as Catherine Trammel surfaces between scenes where she makes you empathetic, particularly when she wants you to think she's vulnerable.
But underneath that calm and calculating mind is a suspected pathological killer and writer, plus bisexual to boot!
I enjoyed the scenes of what was suggestive of San Francisco, but have a hard time figuring how Michael Douglas' character as Nick always seems to find a convenient parking spot in front of his building! If you've ever been to the foggy city, you know that's a rare. Adding to the confusion is the scene at the dance club, which is a replica of New York's Limelight Club set in a church...what the heck is that doing is SF?
I did find the sets of Trammel's homes to be quite accurate. The Divisadero mansion is something you'd expect to find in that area. The seaside home though was actually filmed on location in Carmel, even though it was suppose to suggest Marin. Aside from that, if you didn't realize that fact, you would have never thought otherwise (except some areas of Marin are not close to water).
The ending fades that happened several times was annoying, but it did keep you guessing...was she really the murderess or not?
The Ultimate Edition that is unrated shows a tad more nudity, particularly in Michael Douglas' case, but overall adds nothing too significant to the storyline.
Wouldn't it be better to see more of Stone and the infamous interview process? That in itself is the gem of the movie....more info
- A good thriller with a lot of sex scenes
This film keeps you on your tows from the start. It does start with an interesting, very explicit bedroom scene, with an unexpected twist at the end. What follows is one of the best detective stories in recent years, with a loot of humour and plenty of sex, for which the film is really famous for. Sharon Stone makes quite an appearance, dressed or undressed, but either she, or the director of the film, or both, seem to have a fixation on smoking to an irritating degree. Now as to the director's cut, I am not so sure that it adds much over the previous ten-year anniversary two disc edition. It is certainly worth watching and at its present price, a real bargain. If you are thinking of buying the sequel, don't bother. It does not even come close to the original....more info
- Basically I Stink
Excellent movie, especially for a guilty pleasure. wonderful quality Bluray. worth the price paid. will order again....more info
- Much better than episode 2
I did watch this movie for many times. Finally, i got this blu ray version. I am a bit disappointed about the content because some hidden scenes were not covered in it. Sharon fans, don't miss it....more info