Cleopatra's Second Husband

Rating:
Summary: Excellent, provocative little movie.
Review: Alright I rented this because I had read that the director of this had done a Danzig video which not only was banned on MTV but also on the Playboy station (Its Coming Down - I later saw this video and can now understand why. Ouch!) In anycase, having been intrigued I decided to check out Mr. Reiss' directorial debut. Having seen it - WOW. That was one strange movie. Off the bat I give him kudos for daring to be as different as he is, and going as far with the material as he chose to (same praise go for the actors as well). The movie runs along the same line as say "Happiness" or "Your Friends and Neighbors" - leans a little more towards "Your Friends And Neighbors" with the budget of "In The Company of Men." The story on a whole is about this couple who get two "friend of friends" to house sit for them for a while, but when they get back, cant seem to get the people to leave. From there the movie takes every turn you dont expect it to take until finally you just get up...In anycase, its highly reccomended for fans of strange and unusual storylines.

Rating:
Summary: Unexpected, twisted little gem
Review: Full disclosure: I rented this film because a former boyfriend of mine was the director of photography and I was curious to see what he'd been up to. For a low-budget film, it is gorgeously filmed (good job, Matt Faw!) and well acted. Given the title and the word "erotic" on the cover, I was expecting the plot to evolve into a kinky threesome, but instead its twistedness takes a whole different route. It starts out normally enough: a couple who's stressed out from trying to get pregnant takes a vacation and allows another couple they don't really know to house-sit. When they get back, the house-sitters won't leave. The mind-games quickly escalate and eventually turn violent and unexpectedly (but very inventively) sadistic. Not a date movie, but definitely worth watching if you like odd, twisted, offbeat films. (And the director's commentary only added to my appreciation of the cast and crew's achievement.)

Rating:
Summary: Unexpected, twisted little gem
Review: Full disclosure: I rented this film because a former boyfriend of mine was the director of photography and I was curious to see what he'd been up to. For a low-budget film, it is gorgeously filmed (good job, Matt Faw!) and well acted. Given the title and the word "erotic" on the cover, I was expecting the plot to evolve into a kinky threesome, but instead its twistedness takes a whole different route. It starts out normally enough: a couple who's stressed out from trying to get pregnant takes a vacation and allows another couple they don't really know to house-sit. When they get back, the house-sitters won't leave. The mind-games quickly escalate and eventually turn violent and unexpectedly (but very inventively) sadistic. Not a date movie, but definitely worth watching if you like odd, twisted, offbeat films. (And the director's commentary only added to my appreciation of the cast and crew's achievement.)

Rating:
Summary: A good, independent film
Review: I originally saw this movie during a film festival in New York and the audience reaction was fairly positive. This movie is an interesting treatise on societal male emasculation (at least in my opinion)with some unexpected and harrowing plot turns, especially at the end. The cast is quite good (although the actress'portrayal of main character's wife may get on your nerves)and pretty much unknown.
If you like a movie that's off the beaten path (and I do mean way off the beaten path), this movie won't disappoint you.

Rating:
Summary: Cleopatra needs to go back to 1st husband
Review: I'm not going to tell you how the movie ended like the previous poster had, thank you very much. If you like diabolical movies, then add this to your list of ones to watch. It's predictable in a many ways with a sick surprising ending. I wasn't enjoying it much and not too enthuses about this cuz it's not my type of movie and i would not watch it again due to the nature of the subject matter which is twisted. My question is 'who is the 2nd husband of cleopatra?' which is what i was trying to figure out during the whole movie.

Rating:
Summary: i would give it zero if i could
Review: the characters were immediately unlikeable and the plot was ridiculous and the production values were so-so. it seemed like a clueless attempt to do what david lynch did so masterfully in "twin peaks" and "blue velvet". except that it's not erotic or interesting. it was a very superficial character study of character not worth studying. i would have turned it off, but my boyfriend wanted to see the end.
blech.

Rating:
Summary: i would give it zero if i could
Review: the characters were immediately unlikeable and the plot was ridiculous and the production values were so-so. it seemed like a clueless attempt to do what david lynch did so masterfully in "twin peaks" and "blue velvet". except that it's not erotic or interesting. it was a very superficial character study of character not worth studying. i would have turned it off, but my boyfriend wanted to see the end.
blech.

Rating:
Summary: Peculiar amalgam of other films
Review: The first half of this film actually works well because the dynamics of the two couples portrayed are sizzling, punchy, and smart. One of them is a yuppie duo made up of a photographer obsessed with somewhat creepy subjects, and his wife who's equally compulsive in her behavior about trying to become pregnant. These two obvious uptighters are paired off against a couple who are the obvious opposite--wild with enormous libidos, selfish, and inconsiderate.

It's when the film progresses to the dynamics of the two men alone that it encounters serious problems. The interaction here is much too forced, contrived; there's a lot of treading water here, but the water is pseudo-water and the treading is thrashing about without a reason. After all, why thrash around in water that's not even water? Without giving away the plot points here, it's just not credible that the dominant one of this male pair would continue to accept the ministrations of the other man after a major problem arises. In addition, the dominant guy's treatment of the other man is much too crudely handled.

This obvious lack of credibility ruins the entire second half of the film whose ending would otherwise be very creepy. But because the events leading up to it really don't work, the ending suffers considerably. We just don't buy it.

Had the filmmaker thought through the interaction of the two men more carefully and plotted the film in this middle section more believably, this would have been a significantly stronger piece of work. As it is, it is a muddle whose three stars are for the strong first half and some definite creepiness in the ending section. In addition, any title that requires serious cogitation to understand (after which it is STILL not understood) is perhaps somewhat suspect.

Rating:
Summary: Peculiar amalgam of other films
Review: The first half of this film actually works well because the dynamics of the two couples portrayed are sizzling, punchy, and smart. One of them is a yuppie duo made up of a photographer obsessed with somewhat creepy subjects, and his wife who's equally compulsive in her behavior about trying to become pregnant. These two obvious uptighters are paired off against a couple who are the obvious opposite--wild with enormous libidos, selfish, and inconsiderate.

It's when the film progresses to the dynamics of the two men alone that it encounters serious problems. The interaction here is much too forced, contrived; there's a lot of treading water here, but the water is pseudo-water and the treading is thrashing about without a reason. After all, why thrash around in water that's not even water? Without giving away the plot points here, it's just not credible that the dominant one of this male pair would continue to accept the ministrations of the other man after a major problem arises. In addition, the dominant guy's treatment of the other man is much too crudely handled.

This obvious lack of credibility ruins the entire second half of the film whose ending would otherwise be very creepy. But because the events leading up to it really don't work, the ending suffers considerably. We just don't buy it.

Had the filmmaker thought through the interaction of the two men more carefully and plotted the film in this middle section more believably, this would have been a significantly stronger piece of work. As it is, it is a muddle whose three stars are for the strong first half and some definite creepiness in the ending section. In addition, any title that requires serious cogitation to understand (after which it is STILL not understood) is perhaps somewhat suspect.

Rating:
Summary: Darkly Compelling
Review: This is a fascinating look at the dark turns unhealthy relationships can take. This low budget film, written and directed by Jon Reiss, starts off innocuously enough. Robert (Paul Hipp) and Halle (Bitty Schram) are a rather boring,yuppyish LA couple. Halle is domineering in a whiny sort of way; her husband is submissive in a detached sort of way. This fact does not seem very interesting at the outset, but it sets the stage for the rest of the film's bizarre developments. Paul and Halle go on vacation and entrust their house to the care of another couple, Zach (Boyd Kestner) and Sophie (Radha Mitchell). Those of us who have seen any psychological thrillers know that this is a fatal mistake, but Paul and Halle are preoccupied with their own issues. Theirs is a passionless marriage; Halle regulates their sex life based on her ovulation cycles. Paul, meanwhile, is trying to jumpstart a fledgling career as a photographer. He is also a hypochondriac who constantly downs herbal remedies. When they return, the house is a mess and Paul's tropical fish are dead. Zach and Sophie declare they have no place to go, and convince the other couple to let them stay another week. From here, things turn at first predictably, then unpredictably dark and strange. Sophie seduces Paul; Halle leaves. Zach gradually reveals himself to be a sadistic psychopath who easily dominates the physically and emotionally weaker Paul. The rest of the film is all about violence, sado-masochism and revenge. Jon Reiss does a very good job of allowing his film to sneak up on us. It doesn't exactly build suspense in the manner of Hollywood film; the pace is slow and the mood changes subtly rather than abrubtly. Those looking for a conventional suspense-thriller may become bored early on, as it starts off rather sluggishly. Like many low budget independent films, the cast is small and the atmosphere somewhat claustrophobic. Yet Cleopatra's Second Husband (a cryptic, misleading title) makes the most of it's limited scope, actually turning it into an essential feature of the plot. There is no simplistic resolution to things; this is neither a morality tale, a gore-fest nor a gimmicky thriller, but a complex exploration into the deepest realms of the human psyche.