Diagonaldi Very well executed

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

cinemajesty Film Review: "Dangerous Liaisons" (1988)Director Stephen Frears handles an "Academy-Award-Winning" adaptive script by Christopher Hampton based on a novel of 1782 by author Pierre Choderlos de Laclos (1741-1803) to utmost of excellence, directing all-up-front actress Glenn Close as Marquise de Merteuil teaming up with actor John Malkovich, given face to scene-stealing Vicomte de Valmont, who together rule a French court of the 18th century "Renaissance"; winning affections of the innocent as they were fruits to be picked from a sacred tree, when supporting cast members surrounding Uma Thurman, Michelle Pfeiffer as unfortunate Madame de Tourvel and Keanu Reeves as all-too inexperienced knight in an climaxing egee-swinging duel, when Merteuil & Valmont keep the upper hand to win high society favours only to confront themselves nevertheless in the end after all that there can only be one to survive for a future at the court.The Warner Bros. distributed picture has nothing lost of his seductive beat-work throughout every scene as director Stephen Frears well-researched conditioning of his ensemble cast, when just getting blocked out at the Oscars in their 61st edition for a "Best Director" nomination over British comedy "A Fish Called Wanda" directing Charles Crichton (1910-1999) as the adaptive script and costume designs win nevertheless for eternalized recognition of a remaining motion picture classic.

timetotime Watched this Oscar winning movie right after finishing the book. It was waste of time! The screenplay, which strangely won an Oscar, was totally different from the book. Author of the script just spoiled everything, didn't include very important moments of the story and just used cliché sentences. The end of the movie doesn't say anything. Or actually one might think she's seeking revenge, which is not exactly correct. The only reason to watch this movie, is the fabulous acting of Glenn Close. She is fantastic and i wish the script was as good as her play. And of course - costumes are amazing! So if you have no time to read the novel, just remember, movie will say nothing to you!

Predrag "Dangerous Liaisons" has a very particular rhythm which moves like a mathematical calculation. Frears has chosen fantastic music to accompany the style and enhance this aspect of the film. Even the expressions from the actors which are often caught in their playful demeanour are carefully timed in the length of the shot and in the musical cue when needed. There is also a humor constant throughout the film which dramatically magnifies the sting at the end of the story. The script may fraternize with the amoral characters in their sadistic plotting and appalling behaviour but it has a lot to say about the values and weaknesses of all the characters, no matter with whom you sympathize. This is a very multi-layered story structure which is lost on most people because they lack experience and perception on the human condition. I for example only sympathize with Glenn Close's character, who is a modern woman trying to keep her power and individuality in a man's world. This unfair balance in her world is both supported by ignorant men and equally weak, ignorant women. For such a devious story to work, a talented cast is in order, and "Dangerous Liaisons" supplies us with precisely that. Glenn Close is outlandish as Merteuil, mastering with incredible wit and sensibility the calculating nature of her character. She wonderfully portrays the physical beauty used to mask the cold-hearted novice with terrific gusto; in Merteuil's "win or die" conversation with Valmont, Close sells us on the character, and also proves her worth as an actress. Mirroring this delightfully evil performance is that of Malkovich, whose delectable wit and cool masterminding of deceit are supremely effective. For his character to work, there must be two key factors involved: we must believe enough in his ability to seduce and destroy, and we must be able to accept the change of heart that comes after meeting Tourvel. Malkovich is able to accomplish both with suave, debonair charm and true emotional feeling within his words. High praise to the supporting cast as well, who all give well-rounded performances. Pfeiffer portrays Tourvel's resistance and innocence perfectly, as well as the heartache and hardships once she accepts her feelings for Valmont. The two pawns in Merteuil's wicked game, Cecile and her young love, Chevalier Danceny, are played by Thurman and Keanu Reeves with a much-needed naivety and innocent virtue that casts Merteuil and Valmont in an even more chilling light. The script and dialogue are wonderful and the actors play it to the hilt. Enjoy it over and over. Great period movie with beautiful scenes and costumes.Overall rating: 9 out of 10.

secondtake Dangerous Liaisons (1988)A cunning, beautifully written, and rather enchanting period movie (set in late 1700s in France—the same time as the American Revolution). Glenn Close is subtle and changeable and wicked, as well as funny, luckily, in her complex role. Really great. John Malkovich is good, though I agree with a common comment that he doesn't have the dastardly charm a rake like his character would have needed to succeed. Competing young beauties in the form of Michelle Pfeiffer and Uma Thurman make an interesting backdrop. And the games begin.The terrific basis of the whole interwoven intrigues is the simple fact that the upper classes were bored and amoral. They were willing to do mean things to good people for amusement. That they end up conflicting with each other is just part of the grand bargain. Why not? Otherwise their pampered lives would be oh such a bore!The script is the star here, even more than the leading actors who do so well reading it, and inhabiting it. Close is actually phenomenal, from the opening scene to the last sad end. Watch all her changes in expression, clear and emphatic but not theatrical. Malkovich is both terrific and poorly cast (an odd glitch from the masterful Juliet Taylor, casting director). There is something chilling and cunning about his role, toying with young women's hearts and generally being an indifferent cad, and we know the actor is good at that. But he's also supposed to be dangerously charming, and he doesn't come close. He wins women by insisting rather than beguiling. It seemed off pitch.But never mind a quibble. It's an amazing movie, rather like a William Wyler version of a 1940s drama—in color of course, but with a feeling of making it perfect on the screen. It never flags, it's sometimes deliberately maddening, and it even has a kind of Shakespearean ending that works. And works well. High praise. And watchable more than once for the sheer smartness of the writing.