Movies-TV

Good Cast Wasted on Bad Screenplay

Michael Cimino delivers another unfocused, meandering "epic."Like Cimino's "The Sicilian," this movie is an adaptation of a novel. And like that earlier film, this one is dragged down by elliptical and illogical story points.Cimino's weakness as a director is his inability to distinguish between cleanly complex story lines and unnecessarily complicated story machinations. Like "The Sicilian" this film sputters forward in stuttering starts and maddening stalls.How so many fine actors came to agree to be in this movie is a mystery. The script is so illogical at times that it stops you cold with wonder. Didn't anyone notice how inconsistent Mickey Rourke's character was? How unbelievable the characters' motivations and actions were in so many scenes?A few glaring examples: when the teenage boy shows up demanding to keep his date, it would have been simple to have the father tell him she was sick and asleep and couldn't be disturbed. Instead, the consummately cold-blooded and brilliantly devious villain sends the girl out on the date, trusting her not to run right to the police for help? Even worse, she complies.And when the boy does first arrive, he mentions not one word about the massive police barricades he just passed on his way to the house.The interaction between the law officers is just as nutty. Lindsey Crouse is a shrill feminazi barking orders, until her lamely contrived "character change."With three screenwriters on board, it would normally be hard to fathom exactly what went wrong. But checking the credits, we find that two of them had previously collaborated on several much better movies. The third is the original writer, who had a hand in the screenplay, as well as having penned the novel and a play based on it. My guess is that Cimino deserves the blame. Based on his earlier works, he seems to think long and rambling equates to epic. One telling scene set in a beautiful outdoor setting, with music ripped off from a John Ford western, testifies to Cimino's self-grandiose vision.This film wouldn't be nearly as painful to sit through if Cimino was less talented at handling actors and placing his camera. It's too bad he has such rotten story sense. Apparently he needs a stronger, more intelligent producer than DeLaurentiis and better story development executives to reel him in.

An exciting thriller

For some reason, a lot of critics and moviegoers love to pick on Michael Cimino. Sure, "Heaven's Gate" virtually put United Artists out of business, but if viewed with an open mind, it's a very good and beautifully made western. Cimino has a lot of talent, and unlike many more popular director (like Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, etc.), he often makes gutsy, politically incorrect films that don't always tell people what they want to hear. This makes some folks hate him, but I think it's what makes him interesting. His films (see "The Deer Hunter" and "Year of the Dragon") are usually stirring and in- your-face, and seldom explore the nicest people in the world. But nice is boring, and it's really a shame Hollywood has ostracized Cimino. Most major-studio films are so incredibly boring anymore that Hollywood NEEDS more filmmakers like Cimino. His 1990 remake of "Desperate Hours" isn't one of his most significant works, but it's a much better film than the critics and its own studio (MGM dumped it) gave it credit for. Never dull, "Desperate Hours" is a crackerjack hostage drama that's well-directed by Cimino, gorgeously shot by cinematographer Doug Milsome and acted with fierce intensity by Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins. Many of the scathing reviews for this film singled out the scene where one of the three criminals (David Morse) leaves the house. Covered in blood from a dead body he just dumped, Morse ends up in a creek where heavily armed FBI agents surround him. Ordered to drop his weapon, Morse knows he's finished, and refuses to drop his gun. Then while standing in the creek, Morse takes one last look at the surrounding Utah mountains, admiring the scenic view while he whistles "Red River Valley" (which simultaneously plays on the soundtrack). Most critics scoffed at this moment, but I think it's a great and oddly moving scene -- Morse decides he'd rather be shot dead than return to prison, and decides to take one last glance at earth's beauty before the FBI kills him. And as Cimino pans the scenic surroundings, you can tell he's paying tribute not only to the West, but also to a lost way of life. Morse's death scene is precisely the kind of strange, but thoughtful moment that's sorely missing from most of today's dumbed-down movies. Like most of Cimino's work, "Desperate Hours" is highly underrated. Please give it a chance.

A "Desperate" one "Hour" and forty-five minutes....

Once, Michael Cimino was a great director. Now, he's just a Hollywood joke.
Why?Here's a good example."Desperate Hours" is a remake of a similar movie which starred Humphrey Bogart. I've never seen the original. Wish I could say the same about the remake.Rourke plays the mad dog killer this time out, who is on the lam with his attorney (Lynch, who should probably sue Cimino for defamation of character) and holes up with his cronies in the house of a distant man (Hopkins) and his equally distant family. Screams, fights, violence and blood all share equal screen time.Then Crouse shows up to head the manhunt for Rourke and every last shred of belief jumps out the window to escape her. Are FBI agents really this stupid? Don't they have entrance exams? Isn't it against the law to endanger innocent peoiple just to capture an escaped convict? Isn't it?
Didn't Cimino and his writers suspect as much?Wait, I forget: this is the same man who made "Heaven's Gate".This is, without a doubt, one of the most blatantly stupid, tasteless, egomaniacal trips through Idiot-Land I've even seen since "Dumb and Dumber".
But at least THAT one was supposed to be funny.No stars. Not a one. Watching "Desperate Hours" is like witnessing a car accident, only more painful and with more victims.

Decent acting in dreadful movie!

As other reviewers I picked this movie to watch due to the cast forgetting that particularly Hopkins really only made the big name for himself later in his career.... what a mistake. He plays decently though but were to my surprise overshadowed by Mickey Rourke's very realistic portrayal of a psycopath (in retrospect he does seem to feel right at home in such roles!).
The cinematography was nice showing beautiful scenery from Utah particularly in the beginning making us viewers wonder if this was a nature film we had ended up seeing... totally unclear what the director had in mind including this in a movie covering a hostage taking situation!

The smaller roles were however played poorly particularly the entire police force led by a woman who seemed as if she had been taken straight out of school play.. (You would think they could afford better with the rest of the cast in mind).
The worst part of the movie however was the completely unrealistic choices made throughout... other reviewers pointed several out already such as why the hostage taker lets one of his men go bringing along the body of a random victim, why he lets the daughter leave on a date (while not knowing the police was already onto him!) and last but not least why he choses to engage in hostage taking right after making a spectacularly unrealistic escape from prison!

Candidate for worst screenplay of the past century but compensated slightly by decent acting performances

Great movie!

Mimi Rogers is taken hostage as well as her husband (anthony hopkins) and son and daughter.

This is a riveting movie about how a family deals with the emotions running through them when they are being held hostage.

Definatley one of the best movies I've seen in a long time. Definately a strong 4 out of 5.

Ugh

If anyone was ever meant to bring the excessive, hugh productions of Andrew Lloyd Webber to the stage, its Michael Cimino. With his grandiosque vision and tendency towards pushing his actors to give the broadest, most theatrical performances possible, Cimino is perhaps the greatest Opera director of our time. Unfortunately, Cimino became a filmmaker instead and soon specialized in creating overblown, overbudget movies whose huge proudction values serve only to reveal their painfully slight stories. Never has this been more obvious than his remake of the nail-biting 1955 film Desperate Hours (itself based on an acclaimed, often-revived play). The plot is simple -- criminal Mickey Rourke escapes from prison and ends up hiding out in a suburban home while waiting for his girlfriend (Kelly Lynch) to meet him. While he waits, he holds a dysfunctional family (Mimi Rogers, Shawnee Smith, and Anthony Hopkins) hostage. This is the type of suspense thriller that demands an intimate touch so of course, Cimino shoots everything in wide screen so we can see how vast all of his locations are. Seeing all that land out there, it makes you realize how easily any of the characters could escape if not for the fact that Cimino has two hours (actually more than two hours) to fill.

At times, it seems that Cimino specifically tried to cast this film with the least suitable actors imaginable. As such, we get perennial nice guy David Morse trying to be a threatening thug. Daughter Shawnee Smith at one point says she's a pain because, "I can be." (No, Shawnee, its because Cimino can't be bothered to come up with anything more imaginative.) Kelly Lynch sleepwalks through her role (and wanders around naked in scenes that would be titilating if not for how strangely pointless they are) while Mimi Rogers chews every piece of scenery available as a strident housewife who'll remind you why most people in the suburbs hate their neighbors. Worst of all is federal marshall Lindsay Crouse who basically allows a steady stream of profanity, a big cast on her leg, and the worst Southern accent in a long line of bad Southern accents, serve as her performance.

Still, as bad as the above mentioned are, Hopkins and Rourke are actually far worse because they actually could be acting if they wanted to. Rourke's playing a sociopath so he whispers all of his line and adds a few extra helpings of gel to his hair. Hopkins is a broken-down divorced Dad so he doesn't shave before his scenes. I hope both of them did wonderful things with their paychecks because they certainly made filmgoers suffer for that money.

Most bad films leave you feeling as if there actually was a good film hiding in there somewhere. Desperate Hours leaves you feeling that there was indeed a good film and it was playing in the theater next door. The only suspense generated by this film is wondering when and where Michael Cimino will strike next!

Certainly not as good as Silence of the lambs...

As a die hard Anthony Hopkins fan I decided to buy this and add it to my collection of his movies - unfortunatly the only thing good about this film was Anthony. In fact, it wasn't fair to cast such a brilliant actor as Sir Hopkins in this sort of movie, as you don't see just how good he actually is - watch Silence of the lambs instead. Okay if you're bored one Sunday afternoon I guess. Sorry Anthony xxx :o)

Man oh man what a piece of trash this is!!!!!!!

I give this claptrap a rating of one lowly star because INDB will not allow any score lower. Mickey Rourke in the Bogart role is laughable and deplorable all at once. Bogie is the greatest actor of all time and Rourke is kinda retired now isn't he! And Anthony Hopkins in the Fredrick March role could be the second biggest joke of the century. The above Bogie/Rourke casting would be the first. They could have remade this movie by digging up Bogart's and March's bones and propping them up and they would have done a better acting job that Rourke/Hopkins. As Hollywood has no fresh ideas in the can, they try (ha, ha, ha) to remake the classics. Oh by the way for the record my real rating of this film is burn all copies. Now I have to go another classic scene is starting, the great car chase in Bullitt!!!!!

Desperate Movie

After the financial disaster that was HEAVEN'S GATE, Michael Cimino was on a warpath to prove he was still a legitimate filmmaker. He subsequently made the overwrought YEAR OF THE DRAGON, THE SICILIAN and a remake of DESPERATE HOURS in the 1980s. All of those films bombed at the B.O. and his credibility never really recovered. Of all three films he directed in the 80s, DESPERATE HOURS is, by far, the worst. The movie is bad, bad, bad. The movie actually reflects its title. It's truly desperate.Like the director, the film wants to be taken seriously and yet it's woefully misguided with overwrought acting, leaden direction that rarely makes any sense and a script that's totally outdated and is divorced from logic. As I've said, the movie wants to be taken seriously but every attempt of seriousness is quickly shot down with remarkably ludicrous details. For instance, when David Morse is alone in the wilderness and he's running away from the police, the whole moment is (oddly) directed with reverence but then, as Morse is heading towards a gas station, he meets two buxom bimbos who are dressed in such ridiculous clothes (they look like they just stepped out of a Playboy spread) that the director's attempt at reverence is destroyed by the unexpected sight of those two women who just didn't belong in the movie. I'm sure someone got laid from hiring those two women. Arf!And then there's the whole way Kelly Lynch is treated in the movie. What an embarrassing role. She didn't deserve to be treated like that. I love Leonard Maltin's description of what is done to her character: kamikaze disrobing. But topping everything, even the dreadful music or scenery chewing from Mickey Rourke or Anthony Hopkins, is Lindsay Crouse's performance, which can only be described as being out of this world. The way she talks, enunciates her dialogue, the way her character is directed, well, the whole thing is totally perplexing. I've tried to come up with a way to describe her acting/role but I can't. Remember Dolores Fuller's acting in GLEN OR GLENDA? Well, Lindsay Crouse must have taken some lessons from Dolores because her acting is identical. Personally speaking, Lindsay Crouse's acting in DH ranks up there as one of the weirdest performances ever put on screen.I haven't seen the original version of DESPERATE HOURS but I can't imagine it's remotely close to being as dreadful as Michael Cimino's version.

Not bad.

After seeing Sin City starring Mickey Rourke, I decided to set out and see all of Mickey Rourke's films. I heard from people that most of his films are terrible, but this one was pretty good. I bought it from the bargain bin, so I wasn't expecting much, but it was okay for 6 bucks. It tells the story of 3 escaped convicts lead by Michael Bosworth (Rourke). They take a woman, her family, and her estranged husband (Anthony Hopkins) hostage in their house. A game of cat and mouse between the two men ensues.I have never seen the original with Humphrey Bogart, but this movie is alright. I really enjoyed the plot, and even though Mickey Rourke isn't the greatest actor around, he's certainly a compelling villain. Anthony Hopkins is pretty good as the husband desperate to save his family, but he's not at his best. I think the biggest mistake anyone can make about this movie is to assume that it's a serious attempt at a thriller. In reality, I think this movie is a fun popcorn movie.Like any cheap action thriller from the early 90's, there's a lot of flaws. Two of the flaws are in the acting. The one playing Bosworth's lawyer/girlfriend is probably one of the worst actresses I've ever seen. Her character is pointless as well. The other terrible acting job was the cop in charge of taking Bosworth down. That actress must've come straight off a soap opera. A really bad and noticeable flaw in the movie was the shoddy editing. The film cuts to a new scene before the previous scene even has a chance to end.Overall, the movie is pretty enjoyable. It was worth a 6 dollar buy.6.5/10

Frustrated at a wasted opportunity

What a wasted effort. A story with real possibilities, and probably the perfect actor to portray the psychopathic lead in Mickey Rourke. He was probably the only thing that was able to keep this thing from completely sinking.Anthony Hopkins was simply the wrong choice for the role of the husband here. It's really hard to understand this; he simply didn't belong in the role. He may be one of the finest actors in the world, but that doesn't mean he is the right choice for any character. He was simply out of place. This was probably the biggest distraction, in a movie pretty much full of them. I can't even begin on Lindsay Crouse's FBI agent character. This has to be one of the most bizarre acting jobs in memory, and her accent is from a solar system we haven't visited yet. Shawnee Smith's leering, sneering teenager was laughably naive and idiotic.Was ANYBODY directing this?Some of the dialogue was bad, some of the acting was bad, and the pacing, atmospherics and camera cuts were choppy and jarring, and poorly thought out. There was, obviously, a real opportunity to make a very good suburban horror story, and this was completely scuttled by lazy, slap-dash film-making.

Please only see if really 'desperate'

STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For A Meal Instead*Avoid At All CostsThis film was kind of dogged from the beginning in my opinion,as I was subconsciously aware that it was a remake of what could very well be a much superior film,albeit one that was well before my time (then again,so was Citizen Kane.)Well,having watched it,all I can hope is that it wasn't an imitation of what a poor film it already was.Mickey Rourke can play the smooth,menacing villain role practically in his sleep and Anthony Hopkins is always a reliable,if rather overly smug,leading man and both actors are given surprising sparkle and snazzy lines by the script.Sadly,none of this can make the film any less of an uninvolving,uncredible and deadly dull affair than it already is despite this couple of virtues.Michael Cimino directed the lengthy but thoroughly absorbing The Deer Hunter,a drama which sure had more thrills than this 'thriller' has.*

Desparation

A psychotic criminal about to go on trial seduces his lawyer into helping him escape. As they try to make their escape she is left behind, but he waits for her to come to him. He hides out in a beautiful house owned by the Cornells who have problems of their own; they are separated, and the FBI is after them. An exciting psychotic film directed by Michael Cimino, with great suspenseful acting by Michael Rourke, Anthony Hopkins, Mimi Rogers and Linda Crouse. This one makes you sit up and listen! 6/10

ROURKE AND HOPKINS WILL HELP YOU TO FORGET THE PLOT HOLES! 2 1/2 STARS!

I had high hoped for this one, but too many contrivances and plot holes made my hopes disintegrate right before my eyes. Rourke and Hopkins do their best to keep this one from completely failing and keep it somewhat entertaining if you don't think about it too much.
Look for it on cable as I can't see sitting through this one more than once.

Desperately Idiot

1/10Another idiot movie from Hollywood. Actor/actress are bads, image is bad, music is bad and more the story is idiot.This movie show that even if they are potentially good actor they can act bad when they are not directed correctly. And if also the story is stupid well we can't hope to watch something good.But at least I find something funny in this movie. To watch Kelly Lynch walk with high heels. Man she walk like me with that. :)Also to watch Mickey Rourke to play. In this movie he is not a "Martian" (like Michael Jackson) again! :)If you feel desesperate don't rent/buy this "movie". Else you will suicide...

Great remake of a Humphrey Bogart psycho drama

"Desperate Hours" is a 1990 remake of William Wyler's psycho drama of the same name from 1955 featuring Humphrey Bogart and Fredric March as original cast. Michael Cimino directed this story of a blood-thirsty gang raiding an upper class suburb house on their run from the police after a series of ambitious big projects like "Heaven's Gate", "Year of the Dragon" and "The Sicilian" in the eighties.In this remake, it is Mickey Rourke's turn to play Bogart's leading role, and he turned Bogart's coolness into a portrait of a psychopathic gentleman gangster whose violent dominance is about to erupt like a volcano every second. His counterpart is lawyer Anthony Hopkins, an upper-class citizen and head of a broken family. Both men are fighting against each other in every possible way, starting with psycho duels and witty conversations to hard fights and pure wars of nerves.Most of the plot takes place in Hopkins' house, and as soon as the story is settled out of this apparent suburb paradise hell breaks out, starting from Rourke's violent escape from a courthouse prison in the beginning of the film to the final showdown when the police arrives.Cimino's direction works well with his whole ensemble often placed in the living room like actors on a static theater stage, and the camera views the psychological warfare often from a very distant ankle like in a documentary. The great cast of all actors featuring Mimi Rodgers, Kelly Lynch, Elias Koteas and David Morse and the minimal and seducing sound track score by David Mansfield add much tension to this well-dome remake of a great fifties crime drama.

Great actors perform badly in a messy script.

Hostage dramas are getting really passé, but this one should remain on the bottom shelf in the video store gathering dust. Unbelievable characters in impossible settings create a third-grade movie. When desperate criminals hold a family hostage in their own home (yawn) there is at least the opportunity for some good characterization. Instead, this film wanders in too many directions, has to many points of conflict and loses the viewer. The big question is how did such a good cast get caught up in this? Not one performance stood out as worthy of comment.

tight thriller, sick of cimino hatred though

I'm sick of all these elitist film school jerkazoids posing and preening for whatever opinion comes out of their professors next. This film is NOT the bogart picture - it's a tight little picture about a psychopath taking a family hostage amidst a brazen plan to break out of jail and hook up with his lover. That's IT. Hopkins, Morse, Koteas, Rogers all provide EXCELLENT support, but this is a Rourke show and Cimino's cinematography never fails to let us know it. Rourke is seductive, cool and violent. And speaking of Cimino's cinematography, it's quite beautiful in this film. Grab a widescreen print, turn the lights out, and enjoy.

Save us from remakes

This film is actually a remake of a 1950s film with Humphrey Bogart and Frederic March. It was based on a highly successful novel and stage play by Joseph Hayes. Perhaps if you've never seen the original this version would be more palatable. But there is nothing like Bogart as the sociopath who invades a suburban home and trades insults with papa Frederic March. The original was also shot in the Leave it to Beaver House (now used in Desperate Housewives) just for good measure. So pass this one up and find a copy of the original!

Pointless film!

When you decide to adapt a classic film you should take warning several aspects: Has the story aged? How has the suspense's concept altered for the new audiences?

We know about the professed sympathy of Cimino for Rourke. We saw him in The year of the Dragon. And somehow Mickey doesn't look credible as the distorted mind criminal. He is too rational and cold to represent that hard character. The illumination is another serious problem. The whole drama looks extremely theatrical: Anthony Hopkins looks uncomfortable with the role and Mimi Rogers is inexpressive. Elias Koteas is simply out of context and perhaps that's why the insipid dialogue. Maybe David Morse shows certain wild tendency. There is a rigidity in the dialogue. Obviously you assist to the common places: the internal disagreements in the policy procedure. Lindsay Cruise is assertive in this role. But the initial sequence of the getaway is terrific. It looks too artificial and the viewer' adrenaline simply is not emanated. The sumptuous photography saves the film of the collapse. The music didn't help to maintain the suspense. It is not easy to readapt a classic film of the fifties. Something similar happened with Cape fear `s remake.
The question might be around the new approach of the suspense and the new technologies. Bogart looked extremely old for the role and Rourke looked too elegant to be a convincing ex con.

Good entertainment for teenagers in a pop corn rainy weekend.