Yar, you be here: Indecent Proposal > Customer Reviews

Indecent Proposal Customer Reviews (1 - 3 of 30 Reviews)

Not Lyne's Best
In another provocative, erotic film; Adrian Lyne brings up a difficult question. Can money buy anything? This movie could've been done in several ways and the way that it's done is not the best of those ways. As far as entertainment value and brief shots of Demi Moore naked, this movie is pretty good. But some of the decisions, reactions, and some of the things that happen in this movie make it a little bit too silly for 4 stars. The movie stars Demi Moore ('Charlies Angels: Full Throttle') and Woody Harrelson ('The People Vs. Larry Flynt') as a happily married couple named Diana and David. Diana and David are perfect for each other and are very happy, but are down on their luck and having serious money problems. So one night, in the middle of the night, David comes up with a great idea. Go to Las Vegas with 5000 dollars and turn it into 50,000 dollars. Yeah, that's a great idea. You're about to lose your house, but still...Try your luck. Anyway, David and Diana go to Vegas and are lucky for a while but end up losing all their money. Distraught and on their way home, they run into a billionaire named John Gage (Robert Redford, 'All the Presidents Men'). After hanging out with Gage for a while, Gage gives the couple the ultimate indecent proposal.
One night with Diana, one million dollars. David and Diana go with the immediate reaction, which is no, but suddenly they're dealing with what everyone would go through in a situation like that. Reluctantly, both David and Diana agree to it; Diana goes off with Gage, but David is suddenly stricken with instant regret. When she gets back, giving David no details of what occured, it's hard to return things to normal. Anyway, I've covered more than an hour of the movie; So, I'll stop. All the actors are good;
Redford is perfect as John Gage, Demi Moore adds the right touch of innocence and sexiness to her role, and Woody Harrelson is massively understated. As I said, the movie is entertaining but so many stupid things happen...It's hard for me to give it a high rating. The revelation Redford makes at the end of the movie is one of the lamest ways to give an excuse to end the movie I've seen lately. Oliver Platt co-stars as David and Diana's lawyer and Billy Bob Thornton makes a hilarious cameo.

GRADE: C+


A good start that stranded in the middle of the storm!
The spirit of the tragedy has been slow but progressively demolished and even confiscated since the XVII Century. Since these ages, the tragedy has suffered a visible process of perverse distortion, becoming just a moral lesson to follow. Jean Anouilh, Jean Paul Sartre, Joyce, Selma Lagerloff, Albert Camus, Fedor Dostoievsky, Eugene O Neill, Giovanni Papini, Ionesco, Beckett, William Faulkner, Ernst Hemingway, August Strindberg and Henrik Ibsen are weird exceptions, but in general terms, the cathartic experience derived from the tragic ethos, has vanished.

So, if you dissect the tragedy into fragments of moral lessons, you just are telling a fable, but nothing else. You simply have frozen the wrath of Gods into hermeneutic pills, in order to satisfy the great audiences and so guarantee them, a final return to their respective homes. But the soul has not suffered the expected shock, and the spirit has not experienced the sharpness of the contrasts: long life to triviality. In the tragedy there are not good guys or bad guys; there' s no one absolutely innocent; the tragedy is the violation and transgression of a rule related with the cosmic order. It's impossible to understand in its wholeness, the force of its significance if you do not look it under the mythic coordinates.

The film starts with an interesting dilemma to solve what if?. The corrosive and nasty feature represented by Redford , may be considered as the Devil' s embodiment. The proposal was made and accepted. But once the dramatic peak has been reached, one can feel how the film precipitates obstreperously, the expected reactions fall in a well know stereotyped cliche; she cries and is in shame; he looks arrogant but then the character becomes a marionette.

A false redemption works out as the final launch, that will allow them to understand one each other and the forgiveness will hover about them.

This material really did not deserve such predictable final. In hands of Robert van Akeren (The woman in flames), for instance the result would have been absolutely different; there is a lot of self indulgence not only for the characters and the audience in general.



A good start that was shipwrecked in the middle of a storm!

The spirit of the tragedy has been slow but progressively demolished and even confiscated from the XVII. Since these ages the tragedy has suffered a visible process of perverse distortion, becoming a moral lesson to follow. Jean Anouilh, Jean Paul Sartre, Joyce, Selma Lagerloff, Albert Camus, Fedor Dostoievsky, Eugene O Neill, Giovanni Papini, Ionesco, Beckett, William Faulkner, Ernst Hemingway, August Strindberg and Henrik Ibsen are weird exceptions, but in general terms, the cathartic experience derived from the tragic ethos has vanished.

So, if you dissect the tragedy into fragments of moral lessons, you just are telling a fable and nothing else. You simply have frozen the wrath of God into hermeneutic pills in order to satisfy the great audiences and so guarantee them a final return to their respective homes. But the soul has not the expected shock and the spirit has not experienced the sharpness of the contrasts: long life to triviality. In the tragedy there are not good guys or bad guys; there' s no one absolutely innocent; the tragedy is the violation and transgression of a rule related with the cosmic order. It's impossible to understand in its wholeness the force of its significance if you do not look it under the mythic coordinates.

The film starts with an interesting dilemma to solve what if ?. The corrosive and nasty feature represented by Redford , may be considered as the Devil' s embodiment. The proposal was made and accepted. But once the dramatic peak has been reached, one can feel how the film precipitates obstreperously, the expected reactions fall in a well know stereotyped clich�; she cries and is in shame; he looks arrogant but then the character becomes a marionette.

A false redemption works out as the final launch that will allow them to understand one each other and the forgiveness will hover about them.

This material really did not deserve such predictable final. In hands of Robert van Akeren (The woman in flames), for instance the result would have been absolutely different; there is a lot of self indulgence not only for the characters and the audience in general.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Next Page