Eine Frau wird in eine unpersönliche Affäre mit einem Mann verwickelt. Sie weiß kaum etwas über sein Leben, nur über die Sexspiele, die sie spielen, also beginnt die Beziehung kompliziert zu... Alles lesenEine Frau wird in eine unpersönliche Affäre mit einem Mann verwickelt. Sie weiß kaum etwas über sein Leben, nur über die Sexspiele, die sie spielen, also beginnt die Beziehung kompliziert zu werden.Eine Frau wird in eine unpersönliche Affäre mit einem Mann verwickelt. Sie weiß kaum etwas über sein Leben, nur über die Sexspiele, die sie spielen, also beginnt die Beziehung kompliziert zu werden.
- Auszeichnungen
- 4 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I find it interesting that people can get so many different feelings and experiences from one movie, but then; this is exactly the type of movie that would cause such disparity. The question really is, are you watching the movie for entertainment, or to critique it? There are wondrous scenes of erotic intimacy here (unfortunately not as fully developed as they could be) - and glimpses into just what two people "in lust" will allow themselves to be led into... The sensuousness of the relationship is the key - not the believability of the surroundings or the rest of the 'plot'. Is it believable? It certainly is conceivable... Liz (Kim Basinger) studying slides at work, so distracted by her thoughts of intimacy with a man she hardly knows that she can't keep her hands off herself... John so taken with her that he will spend exorbitantly for a gift - to give a woman he doesn't know - but feels that he must meet. The passion and need for these two lonely people that lets them open doors to their inner selves and allow another in BEFORE thinking of the consequences (there are ALWAYS consequences, in film and life; for opening "those" doors). Is it believable that they would win the fight with the street thugs? No. Is it believable that the adrenaline rush, the release of the flight impulse and fear, the closeness found in 'defeating a common enemy'; could possibly lead to the intensity of sexual closeness and climax in a semi-secluded spot (under falling water at that)? Yes. Are the other scenes believable? It's entertainment, not a psychology class... They are conceivable, certainly. Ever been really mad at your partner, and that anger leads to words then breaking dishes then apologies then hugging then closeness then sex? How about anger leading directly to sex? It can happen, and it does. It is not so much a rape as it is a purging of desire. The scene with Liz blindfolded, and the whore coming in to the room - you share the tenseness Liz feels. Will she be stimulated? Of course. Will she let John know it turns her on? He already knows it does. He wants HER to know that he knows it will.
This movie is a glimpse of what manipulators people are. The efforts made to manipulate another person into 'making them want what you want'. So much so, that it becomes their desire, not yours. So much so that the desire is to see if you can manipulate the other becomes more consuming than the original goal. Seeing if she WILL crawl across the floor becomes more important than seeing her actually doing so. And her feeling the depth of her self in what she will do - and finding she is doing it because SHE wants to, not because he wants it. Liz takes her pleasure from John, too. What appears to be a "rape in progress" as John pushes Liz back on the table, ends with her crying because she was excited enough by it to climax. That is perhaps the 'real' rape; her discovery that even if she is initially violated, in her mind she realizes it arouses her enough to let it continue; and as it continues she finds herself clutching at her 'attacker'; and attaining orgasm. The rape as much of her mind as it is her body. It is her discovery of what she learns of herself. When she finally leaves the relationship, he finds he can't live without her. Who manipulated who?
This movie, dated as it is, is still fresh because it is enough like life to be real. No, we may not be that rich or that attractive or that selfish or that spoiled. But we also may wish at times that we were...
This movie is a glimpse of what manipulators people are. The efforts made to manipulate another person into 'making them want what you want'. So much so, that it becomes their desire, not yours. So much so that the desire is to see if you can manipulate the other becomes more consuming than the original goal. Seeing if she WILL crawl across the floor becomes more important than seeing her actually doing so. And her feeling the depth of her self in what she will do - and finding she is doing it because SHE wants to, not because he wants it. Liz takes her pleasure from John, too. What appears to be a "rape in progress" as John pushes Liz back on the table, ends with her crying because she was excited enough by it to climax. That is perhaps the 'real' rape; her discovery that even if she is initially violated, in her mind she realizes it arouses her enough to let it continue; and as it continues she finds herself clutching at her 'attacker'; and attaining orgasm. The rape as much of her mind as it is her body. It is her discovery of what she learns of herself. When she finally leaves the relationship, he finds he can't live without her. Who manipulated who?
This movie, dated as it is, is still fresh because it is enough like life to be real. No, we may not be that rich or that attractive or that selfish or that spoiled. But we also may wish at times that we were...
Don't know why I didn't see this movie until recently, as I am a big Adrian Lyne fan. Maybe because Mickey Rourke has become so repulsive in recent years. However, I found this to be a thoroughly entertaining film, with fascinating performances and all the 80's accoutrements - music, fashion, set decoration, etc. I don't know how anyone could call it boring, but we all see different things when we watch a movie.
I thought the much-vaunted "sex" scenes were pretty tame, actually, but really, really fun to watch! Kim Basinger never looked more beautiful, and Rourke looked great, too. I disagree that there was no character development. I think there were depths to both characters that didn't come out until the end of the movie, which I found very poignant. Yes, I think it was more about power than sex, and when the moment of truth came for the balance of power to shift - as the Rourke character had planned for it to do - he had scared off his true love. Sad, and a true sequel could have been fun.
I give it 8/10 and plan to add it to my video collection ASAP.
I thought the much-vaunted "sex" scenes were pretty tame, actually, but really, really fun to watch! Kim Basinger never looked more beautiful, and Rourke looked great, too. I disagree that there was no character development. I think there were depths to both characters that didn't come out until the end of the movie, which I found very poignant. Yes, I think it was more about power than sex, and when the moment of truth came for the balance of power to shift - as the Rourke character had planned for it to do - he had scared off his true love. Sad, and a true sequel could have been fun.
I give it 8/10 and plan to add it to my video collection ASAP.
Although generally rubbished by critics because of the two lead actors, among other things, this was an interesting film in that it attempted to be artistic, something of a rarity for Hollywood. Much of what is presented was designed to look sexy, even if it was unlikely to be if you tried it yourself. And to give it its due, those responsible for art direction and cinematography did a pretty good job and it stands repeated viewings to pick up on nuances missed first time around. It is tantalizing but not especially erotic; a lot more is suggested than actually happens. Anyone who can remember working in an office in the 80s will relate to the telex machines, phones with bell-rings, and no desktop computer for the manger, and no mobile phones. The 80s apartment decor and fashions will also jog memories.
I am very surprised reading several negative reviews about this movie. Probably this is not a movie made for the American audience, which many times react in a bad way when a movie push a little bit too much the envelope. This movies was a very big hit in Europe when first came out. It was the most talk about movie of the year because of his extremely unique and modern approach to sexuality in a film. I was very young when this movie came out, but i still remember the big fuss about it. The director is one of the best director, he challenged himself constantly, his movies are never boring or dull and he like to take chances which many directors are very afraid to do it. Nine and 1/2 weeks is a very interesting movie to watch, because it is about what is going on between this 2 people, in an emotional level. Which can be pretty scary for the intensity of that. It is not about sex, it goes beyond that. It is a very innovative movie that it would always be remembered for changing the rules about making movies that are considered erotic. Too bad that not everybody is Adrian Lyne, and the majority of the films of this genre are horribly bad.
Two successful, but lonely yuppies embark on a sexual odessey for 9 and a 1/2 weeks. All people seem to talk about when it comes to this movie is about the sex scenes and the nudity in the film. This film is not about sex and nudity in my opinion. It is about control and power. I found this film to be intelligent and stylishly done and yes very erotic. Rourke and Basinger make a steamy couple and the ending and the events that unfolded in the film lingered with me long afterwards and left me thinking for a while. This is one film that actually seems to have gotten better with time.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesDirector Adrian Lyne used emotionally manipulative tactics on Kim Basinger during the shooting to elicit the performance he wanted from the somewhat new actress, which Basinger later criticized harshly. For example, Lyne did not allow Mickey Rourke and Basinger to talk to each other off-set. The two were kept isolated from each other and Lyne would tell Basinger rumors about how Rourke intended to make her like or dislike him so that she would carry that attitude into the scene. Lyne would also offer Rourke performance notes, but Basinger none, in order to unnerve her. In a very unusual and expensive move along these lines, Lyne shot the film sequentially, so that Basinger's actual emotional breakdown over time would be effectively translated to the screen.
- PatzerWhen John turns on his stereo to play Joe Cocker's "You Can Keep Your Hat On" for Elizabeth's striptease, the speaker switch on the power amplifier is in the off position.
- Alternative Versionen117 minute uncut and unrated European version is available on DVD.
- VerbindungenEdited into Die Geschichte des erotischen Films (2004)
- SoundtracksThe Best Is Yet To Come
Performed by Luba
Written by Graham Lyle and Terry Britten
Courtesy of Capitol Records, Inc.
Produced by Narada Michael Walden for Perfection Light Productions
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- 9 1/2 semanas
- Drehorte
- 101 Spring Street, New York City, New York, USA("Spring Street Gallery")
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 17.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 6.735.922 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 328.804 $
- 23. Feb. 1986
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 6.740.470 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 57 Min.(117 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen