Rating: 
Summary: va va voom!
Review: Emile Zola goes to Holliwood. For that, I give it one star. But for Antonio Banderas and Angelina Jolie doing the dirty deed in front of the camera in glorious nudity, and for Jolie filling the screen with a gorgeous exploding bosom for two hours, five stars! That's reason enough to see this movie. It had better be, because there's really nothing else here worth watching. Let's see: one star plus five stars divided by two judgements leaves us with three stars. Three stars it is!
Rating: 
Summary: depressing and meaningless
Review: the only good point about this movie is the physical beauty of the main actors. there were some steamy love scenes between Jolie and Banderas but other than that the movie is full of unnecessary violence, nudity, and sex. As a love story, the movie doesn't deliver until the final 5 minutes, but overall the movie's simply too slow. The plot, scenery, and acting in itself might deserve more than 2 stars, but coming from two fine actors this movie is simply a disappointment.
Rating: 
Summary: a twisty erotic tale with a dark feeling to it
Review: I loved this picture! In Germany it opened a week after "Tomb Raider" (so Angelina Jolie was one of the reasons I went to see it), and because it was praised as a love story, I took my girlfriend - and she also loved it! Jolie (more beautiful than ever in those costumes), Banderas and Thomas Jane ("Thursday") did a good job in their roles, but mostly the erotic and morbid atmosphere of Havanna during carneval was what made the movie so pleasent to watch. The story-twists were good, it was exelently shot - only the ending was a bit of a disapointment, simply because the director chose to lighten up the dark theme of the movie with a happy ending, which doesn't really fit into the flow. To sum it all up: This is not popcorn-cinema! It's a dark love story with great atmosphere! I fully recomend it, although it isn't a movie for all audiences...
Rating:
Summary: Shamelessly bares its actors but woefully bears no soul.
Review: "Original Sin" is a daring but unsuccessful attempt at an erotic thriller, baring Angelina Jolie's bust but never bearing a soul worth caring about. Actors Jolie and Antonio Banderas are in fine form, and just to see them act together is worth it, even if their talents are cast into a lost cause. The writer and director of the film, Michael Christofer, gives the film two different complexes. One makes the film look like an honest effort on his part to make a movie that reveals too many of its secrets work. The other makes it look like one of those skin flicks that one can easily find on Cinemax in the early hours before dawn, only given an A-list cast and Hollywood gloss. The film stars Banderas as Luis Durand, a rich coffee mill owner who is looking for a woman to be his wife, bear him children, and be kind and loyal. He's not interested in love, though his head certainly turns when he meets the woman he has sent for, Julia Russell, played by the overly busty Jolie. She provides simple explanations for why she did not write to him, and why the photograph he received looks nothing like her. They waste no time in getting married, then taking their time to get to know one another. He gives her full access to his bank accounts, his house, and his love, which is sullied when she runs away, his money in hand. What she leaves behind is a trunk with the real Julia Russell's belongings inside, and feelings of betrayal and rage in Luis's heart. Up to this point, the movie has built up some momentum. A scene involving Julia's sister protesting that the handwriting in Julia's letter is not that of her sister's has some impact an the opener for Luis's realization that Julia is not really Julia at all. And, despite what the critics will say, Jolie and Banderas do have some chemistry onscreen, more so in scenes that do not involve sex. The movie is bold in giving us such a vivid depiction of sexual activity, however softcore it is, but in doing this, it causes the audience to lose interest in the rest of the story. Not only were people in the audience snickering during these scenes, but they really do not fit into the big picture. We know they are in love, so what is the purpose of scenes such as this? As the film moves on, it begins to trip on itself. Luis hunts and reclaims Julia, and they reconcile their differences. When a rather mysterious detective comes into play (played by Thomas Jane), Luis shoots him, and the story turns into Bonnie and Clyde (incidentally, Julia's real name in the film is Bonnie). They go on the run, still being chased by the detective who is still alive and meeting Julia in secret to discuss Luis's financial ruin and timely death. Truth is, the movie is just not that interesting. The beginning is not too bad, but the second half of the film is unbelievable, contrived, and listless. Luis wants her back because he is so consumed by his love for her, which would be convincing if the movie did not play him to be a whining martyr. He has force in the beginning, but as the movie wears out its welcome, he becomes little more than putty in Julia's hands. The ending is also a complete betrayal of what the movie has been trying to prove all along. In the beginning narration, it is said that "this is not a story about love, but about the power it holds over people." The movie gets the power point right, yes, but in the end, the love aspect of that speech finds its way into the picture, throwing us for a loop when our predictions were centered on an unhappy ending. Watching "Original Sin" reminded me of such movies as "The Scarlet Letter" and "Eye of the Beholder," two movies that were given harsh reviews as well. "Letter" worked for me because, despite the fact that it strayed from the novel, the story was still enjoyable. "Beholder" was a nice unconventional film to watch, with superb lead performances. "Original Sin" is unconventional, and has good acting, but somewhere along the line, it fails to hold any interest as it dwindles down.
Rating:
Summary: I Like them both...
Review: I haven't seen it(yet) but I like them both, but I heard that Antonio has a few"eye popping moments" How much does he show exactly? Like everything? Or what? Just so I am not surprised when I do see it.. How much?
Rating:
Summary: Mildly entertaining chick flick
Review: WARNING: SOME VERY MILD SPOILERS***** The first time I saw this, I was prepared to laugh at a sleazy, direct-to-video Harlequin novel-on-celluloid. What is it about Antonio Banderas? He's very handsome and not a bad actor, but he seems to choose a lot of really cheesy projects, "Femme Fatale" being a particularly awful one I recall watching. But I thought this was a decently entertaining, if not brilliantly deep film. I was unaware at that time of it's provenance -- it's based on an excellent novel by Cornell Woolrich called "Waltz into Darkness". The book is well worth reading if you like this film. It was also made into a film in the mid-sixties by Francois Truffaut called (inexplicably ) "Mississippi Mermaid". Strange title, because the original novel is set in 1870s New Orleans and Julia travels to meet Louis on a steamer down the Mississipp BUT in the Truffaut film he reset the story in the 60s and the action of the film in colonial Africa and the French Riviera! "Original Sin" is, interesting, vastly closer to the novel than the Truffaut version. The setting is changed to Cuba, presumably to accodomodate Bandera's accent, but the period is correct and the story doesn't work well in modern times, so overall, I find "Original Sin" to be the better of the two movies -- and that's saying a lot, as Truffaut is revered as a brilliant director. ("Mississippi Mermaid" is NOT by any means one of his better efforts, however.) An early cautionary tale of "personals ads" and blind dating, the story seems even more relevant today than when it was written. Luis (Banderas) writes to a mail order bride, who is supposed to be plain, shy and religious. He is surprised when stunningly beautiful and sexy Julia (Angelina Jolie, of the collagen injected lips) shows up. Even though she betrays him and cheats on him and steals all his money...he still loves her. Both film versions clean up the ending -- I won't give the film ending away -- but in the book, Julia/Bonny actually kills Louis/Luis. A very bleak ending. Don't worry, the movie is a lot more fun. The kind of film that falls under the heading of "guilty pleasure", "Original Sin" has lots of great costumes and sets and Banderas and Jolie are two of the sexiest people imaginable and we get to watch them getting hot and heavy. (BTW: the "unrated version" isn't really all that dirty...I don't get the rating thing. The sex isn't graphic or bizarre in any way -- it's two people who are MARRIED and making love. In the age of "Sex in the City", what the heck is the big deal?) Anyways, call over your best girlfriends, microwave some popcorn and have a good time....
Rating:
Summary: No great acting. No great art. But I still loved the story
Review: This 2001 film stars Angelina Jolie and Antonio Banderas and is set in 1900 Cuba. He's a wealthy landowner who has sent away for a plain Jane mail order bride. Much to his surprise, the woman that steps off the ship is Jolie, a real babe. There is an immediate attraction and soon they are married, having a great time with each other with lots of romantic scenes. This is soon to end, however, when he discovers that she has deceived him. The woman he was supposed to marry has disappeared. And who, exactly is this beautiful creature who fate has brought to his door? This is just the first half hour of the film, however, and from here on there are ups and downs and lots of deceptions. The man is smitten and Jolie has him wrapped around her finger. The plot thickens.
I've never thought much of Jolie as an actress. That is why she is so perfect for this part. She's supposed to play a "bad" actress, and the role calls for a lot of "over-acting". This made me enjoy her performance. And she also wears beautiful clothes and is a pleasure to look at. Antonio Banderas is completely believable as the man who she makes jump through hoops. But he doesn't really get much sympathy because he lets her do it to him. And, in a funny way, it is Jolie who I wound up empathizing with. She's cast as a survivor and it's a good role.
There is certainly too much melodrama in the production. And the situations are just often just not believable. And yet I enjoyed every bit of this film and wouldn't change a word. . Not great art! Not great acting! But I loved the story and was never bored. And so I definitely recommend it as a lightweight escape on a cold winter's night.
Rating:
Summary: Rewatched & rewatched
Review: I watched this movie in the theatre, and I really loved it. I was even more surprised to see the "uncut" version, which has 1 second (I believe that is what the director says) cut out to make it rated R. (Although, as some have said, the sexual explicit scenes ARE more soft porn, it depends on whether you are offended by it or not if you will enjoy the movie.)
After watching the movie, I bought the original book and read it. It was quite different from the movie (as usual), with an extra character that is integral to the story. The movie, as someone mentioned, AS USUAL, was "Hollywood-esqued" but still has a wonderful surprise ending.
I found the movie to be MORE intriguing than the book (for ONCE) with more twists to the plot. And of course, Bandaras is nice to look at! hehehe...
If you have the DVD, try out the extra feature where the director talks over the scenes, explaining more about the I movie and its set-up. I found it kinda interesting.
I loved the movie, loved Bandaras, and loved the plot twists. I recommend this movie, just be VERY AWARE of the sexual explicit scenes
Rating:
Summary: romance is in the air
Review: This is not a very deep film but I found that it was absorbing for a romantic, rainy afternoon. Angelina Jolie is a lovely woman and such a b----. Luis, who is played by Antonio Bandaras is a guliable, romantic, impetious man with too much money, too handsome and not enough love in his life. If you go back in history you will find that there were many men that found that ordering love was more desirable than the selection at hand. Impersonations in that day and age could be very handy for the down and out cons. Thanks, Grandma
Rating:
Summary: The nudity is a lot more impressive than the plot twists
Review: "Original Sin" is based on the novel "Waltz Into Darkness" by Cornell Woolrich (1903-1968), whose story "It Had to Be Murder" was made into the classic 1954 Alfred Hitchcock film "Rear Window." Waiting until 2001 to turn this particular novel into an American movie starring Antonio Banderas and Angelina Jolie has a couple of interesting impacts (the book was filed as "La Sirène du Mississipi" by Francois Truffaut in 1969 with Jean-Paul Belmondo and Catherine Deneuve). The first is that the unrated version of "Original Sin" available on DVD is able to have nude scenes featuring the two stars. The second, and I was dare say more important difference, is that director Michael Cristofer, who also did the film's screenplay, released his film to an audience that was weaned on films like "The Sting" and have had their suspicions raised to red level by "The Usual Suspects" and other films in that mode.
It is clear from the start that there are trust issues with this story. Jolie first appears as a woman in prison who is facing execution by garroting in a particularly wicked looking chair. She is telling her story to a priest (confession seems too strong a word to describe her narrative). Our assumption is that she must have committed murder to deserve such a fate, and so the story begins. Luis Vargas (Banderas) is the rich co-owner of a coffee plantation on Cuba around the previous turn of the century. For reasons that would certainly belie the actor's good looks his character has sent away for a bride from the United States. He shows her photograph to his friends; his intended is rather plain looking, but his goal is to find someone who is kind, true, and young enough to bear children. Neither her being beautiful nor him being in love is part of the plan.
But then Julia Russell (Jolie) shows up and clearly has lied about her looks. She does not want to wanted for her pretty face and it seems clear she has a past she is trying to get away from if not hide outright. Luis confesses that he has lied as well, hiding the fact of his wealth. This leads Julia to conclude that these two strangers who are about to be married in a few hour's time have at least one thing in common: "Neither one of us can be trusted." Luis might not believe her, but we certainly do. They marry and if there is not love between them the sex seems to be really great. But then there are uneasy letters from Julia's sister and then an American private investigator, Walter Downs (Thomas Jane), arrives in Cuba, hired to find out what is really happening to Julia.
The good news is that no matter how suspicious you are about what is happening in this movie, you are never going to figure out the ending. You might stumble on it, but it will be the result of blind luck rather than reasoned formulations. There is an inherent ambiguity to both the characters and their actions, and if you told me that Cristofer had purposefully made sure all of the scenes could be read in opposite directions I would not be surprised. At some point you will learn not to be surprised by what is happening and then it becomes a question of how far the momentum of the plot twists will take you.
However, the bad news is finding a character to root for as this game plays itself out. Luis should be the obvious choice, but you can get weary trying to decide if he is in love or just trying to get revenge. Besides, there is something pathetic about this rich and handsome man intending to buy himself a homely bride. When he realizes he has been stupid and keeps on doing stupid things, Luis becomes an even more pathetic figure. There is a limit as to how stupid the hero gets to be in a movie such as this one. This story would work a lot better if the leading man were not so much more better looking than the leading woman. But then when they look at each other each has the same reason to like what they see. Still, the dynamic bothers me at times.
We are told that this is not a love story, but rather a story about love. But that is no more of a trustworthy comment that anything else we hear in this film. Ultimately, I come to the sad conclusion that the sex scenes were probably the best part of this film. At the end, when all the twists are out in the open and I think back on what the final revelation means for every thing up to that point, I still cannot connect all of the dots and have it make sense. It is like the payoff exists despite the setup and not because of it. Or, to put it another way, the tricks of all the plot twists are not up to the treat of the sex scenes. If that sounds like a good thing to you, then "Original Sin" might not be such a disappointment to you as it was to me.
|
