Rating: 
Summary: Disjointed and silly
Review: 'Desperate Hours' is a good example of how not to make a thriller. The movie is all over the map. It's a map only the writer and the director could conceiveably read. The audience rarely knows where it is at any point in the story. A beautiful young attorney helps her lover / client to escape from jail. They try to make it look as though the woman was forced to help the guy. The police don't buy it, but decide to let her go, hoping she will lead them to the escapee.
Meanwhile, bad boy and his two buddies decide to take refuge in a house in an upscale neighborhood and to hold the family living there hostage. As if the poor family didn't have enough problems already! The husband and wife are in the middle of a hostile divorce, the house is for sale, and neither the couple nor their two kids wants to be in the house in the first place. The bad guy is supposed to have a genius IQ, so why does he come up with such an idiotic plan? There's no real reason to terrorize the family, except that there'd be no movie if he didn't. But even in the confines of the house, there's no rational to his actions. [I can't say more without using plot spoilers.] The only characters who are dumber than this guy are the cops. Their plans and actions truly defy belief and only serve to add a lot of gratuitous violence. Aside from the silly script, the movie also fails as a thriller because the camera leaves the house too often to cover events occurring elsewhere. This eliminates the claustrophobic atmosphere that works so well for many thrillers. It also removes the focus from the trapped couple, played by Anthony Hopkins and Mimi Rodgers. These two actors are the only worthwhile elements of this turgid, pointless movie.
Rating: 
Summary: It's a GREAT film !
Review: Despite some of the glib, cute, reviews here, the cast is strong, the story is strong, the direction is strong. For the money, it's a purchase you won't regret. The whole point of the film, as any film, is to entertain. This effort delivers what it promises...a taut, tense drama, that entertains. No one liked this film because Hollywood NEVER forgives Michael Cimino, and they successfully "buried" him with this film, and the public bought it, as these reviews here show. It's our loss, but at least we have this DVD.
Rating: 
Summary: The movie is good I think...
Review: Don't understand why so many critics have given this movie only 1 star? It's not a pointless movie at all I think, the acting is brilliant, and it contains a beautiful, gripping scene where the "villain" played by David Morse is shot in some lake, very poetic done and in contrast the the rest of the set "locked" inside the house of the hostages. The picture-quality, even on DVD and for its' time, is really bad. Other than that it is an entertaining movie worth a peek...
Rating: 
Summary: Great Film, Superb Acting!
Review: Going up against an original with the likes of Humphrey Bogart and Fredric March is daunting enough, but Cimino pulls it off in this riveting remake, eliciting outstanding performances from everyone involved (including Shawnee Smith and Danny Gerard as the terrorized children of Anthony Hopkins and Mimi Rodgers). I've never been a big fan of Lindsey Crouse, but even she is worth watching here (although her attempt at a Mormon Clarice Starling is a little grating). Cimino's forte has always been action, and the film benefits greatly from the famous synergy between the director and Rourke (remember the great Year of The Dragon from the early 80's). There isn't a wasted frame in this picture, and Cimino puts just the right touches on this updated effort (Kelly Lynch as the steely blonde fembot attorney who collapses into jello in the face of Rourke's malignant criminality; Rodgers/Hopkins in typical 90's "marriage on the rocks"; Smith as the sullen teen who disses EVERYone in authority). David Morse and Elias Koteas tread a fine line in their performances as well, resisting the temptation to descend into Abbott-and-Costello farce as the two accomplices of borderline intellect. Although Cimino has had his share of failed experiments (who can forget Heaven's Gate?), he more than delivers the goods in this film.
Rating: 
Summary: This version is a very bad "remake" of a very good film
Review: Greetings to one and all. Just wanted you to know that if you are looking for a pretty good film called "The Desperate Hours," this is NOT the one you want to watch. You want to watch the 1955 version with Humphrey Bogart and Fredric March. This is the 1990 "remake" with Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins. The original is a taunt drama in which a man discovers that his home has been invaded and his family taken hostage by a trio of gangster escaped from prison and focuses on his desperate attempts to save their lives. This remake is exercise in terror in which the sadistic violence of the criminals becomes the driving force of the story and the goal is to see how far they will go before they are finally stopped. On paper you would have thought Anthony Hopkins could do a marvelous job in the role of the father, but the script pretty much makes that impossible. Turning the bad guy into a major league psychotic just destroys the psychological chess game that made the original so compelling. Rourke is simply the wrong choice for the role, always coming across as a sick punk rather than a criminal menace, but then few actors are going to be able to play against Hopkins, even when he is in low gear. I cannot believe anybody would watch this film twice; I only watched it because I was interested to see how they updated the original, the ending of which I just watched again on television. Of course the ending would be more violent, but it was the elegance of the ending of the original, as the hero saves his family with an unloaded gun, that made it stand out. This one is just a splatter flick dressed up a bit to fool you. Go check out the original because like Rourke's character, you do not want this in your house anywhere near your family.
Rating:
Summary: Public Service Warning: You are watching the wrong movie
Review: Greetings, people. Just wanted you to know that if you are looking for a pretty good film called "The Desperate Hours," this is not the one you want to watch. You want to watch the 1955 version with Humphrey Bogart and Fredric March. This is the 1990 "remake" with Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins. The original is a taunt drama in which a man discovers that his home has been invaded and his family taken hostage by a trio of gangster escaped from prison and focuses on his desperate attempts to save their lives. This remake is exercise in terror in which the sadistic violence of the criminals becomes the driving force of the story and the goal is to see how far they will go before they are finally stopped. On paper you would have thought Anthony Hopkins could do a marvelous job in the role of the father, but the script pretty much makes that impossible. Turning the bad guy into a major league psychotic just destroys the psychological chess game that made the original so compelling. Rourke is simply the wrong choice for the role, always coming across as a sick punk rather than a criminal menace, but then few actors are going to be able to play against Hopkins, even when he is in low gear. I cannot believe anybody would watch this film twice; I only watched it because I was interested to see how they updated the original, the ending of which I just watched again on television. Of course the ending would be more violent, but it was elegance of the ending of the original, as the hero saves his family with an unloaded gun, that made it stand out. This one is just a splatter flick dressed up a bit to fool you. Go check out the original because like Rourke's character, you do not want this in your house anywhere near your family.
Rating:
Summary: Public Service Warning: You are watching the wrong movie
Review: Greetings, people. Just wanted you to know that if you are looking for a pretty good film called "The Desperate Hours," this is not the one you want to watch. You want to watch the 1955 version with Humphrey Bogart and Fredric March. This is the 1990 "remake" with Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins. The original is a taunt drama in which a man discovers that his home has been invaded and his family taken hostage by a trio of gangster escaped from prison and focuses on his desperate attempts to save their lives. This remake is exercise in terror in which the sadistic violence of the criminals becomes the driving force of the story and the goal is to see how far they will go before they are finally stopped. On paper you would have thought Anthony Hopkins could do a marvelous job in the role of the father, but the script pretty much makes that impossible. Turning the bad guy into a major league psychotic just destroys the psychological chess game that made the original so compelling. Rourke is simply the wrong choice for the role, always coming across as a sick punk rather than a criminal menace, but then few actors are going to be able to play against Hopkins, even when he is in low gear. I cannot believe anybody would watch this film twice; I only watched it because I was interested to see how they updated the original, the ending of which I just watched again on television. Of course the ending would be more violent, but it was elegance of the ending of the original, as the hero saves his family with an unloaded gun, that made it stand out. This one is just a splatter flick dressed up a bit to fool you. Go check out the original because like Rourke's character, you do not want this in your house anywhere near your family.
Rating:
Summary: Don't know why so many don't like it?
Review: I just finally watched this whole movie. I thought it was well done. I don't understand why so many bad reviews. I guess it is that I am not that critical of movies, and I don't over analyze things. I enjoyed Anthony Hopkins in this role. I thought Mickey Rouke was okay. I have never been a big fan though. I would recommend it. But, I do agree the FBI leader played by Lindsey Cruise was very annoying.
Rating:
Summary: Don't know why so many don't like it?
Review: I just finally watched this whole movie. I thought it was well done. I don't understand why so many bad reviews. I guess it is that I am not that critical of movies, and I don't over analyze things. I enjoyed Anthony Hopkins in this role. I thought Mickey Rouke was okay. I have never been a big fan though. I would recommend it. But, I do agree the FBI leader played by Lindsey Cruise was very annoying.
Rating:
Summary: Ugh
Review: 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!
| 
