Liaison fatale

... so says Tom Hanks in 1993's "Sleepless in Seattle" to his son in reference to this movie and comparing its outcome to a strange woman who has been writing the widower (Hanks) as a result of him appearing on a radio show. But that's another movie.

The point is, its lesson was still easily recognizable in popular culture six years after it was made. What looks like an easy lay with a beautiful single woman can easily turn into an object lesson on Murphy's law. Dan Gallagher (Michael Douglas) is a successful NYC attorney, and on a weekend when his wife and daughter are away from home at his in-laws' house, he has a work meeting that includes Alex Forrest (Glenn Close), an editor for a publishing company. This leads to a drink at a bar, and that leads to a passionate one night stand that turns into a two night stand when Alex attempts suicide when Dan tries to leave.

Dan thinks it's over. Alex has seemed to come to her senses. But then she tells him she is pregnant, and no she is having this baby because she is 36 and it may be her last chance. When Dan insists he is not leaving his wife for her, that he does not love her - well, let's just say that the opposite of love is not hate it's indifference, and Alex at first stalks Dan and gradually turns up the heat until his entire family is at risk. The suspense builds until the harrowing end.

The thing is, Dan always loved his wife, subtly played by Ann Archer. She is beautiful, supportive, and he still has passion for her. They have a little girl and are a very happy family. But he just could not say no to what looked like a one night adventure that nobody need ever know about that turns into a nightmare.

There is more to the film than the cautionary "Don't cheat on your wife" message. I think it's because Glenn Close does such a fantastic job playing Alex. There's something about her portrayal that, to me, paints Alex as ultimately powerful, not just outright insane. Until the end she mostly dominates what happens to Michael Douglas' character's life. I think this one has aged well and would still recommend it.

Prior to viewing Fatal Attraction I was familiar with the film. I saw clips of it here and there (on YouTube, TV specials), I saw the semi-remake/rip-off starring Beyonce, Obsessed, and I am aware of the huge reputation surrounding the film. There were no surprises.I can imagine being in the '80s, sitting in the theaters expecting a sweeping love story and being overcome with surprise and adrenaline rush when I realized its true nature. In a perfect world that may be possible, but in reality I am forced to be friendly from a distance.

Don't get me wrong, it's a great movie, probably the best thriller from the '80s, but being so immersed in the hype did took away the fun that everyone gossiped about opening weekend in 1987. In fact, Fatal Attraction, was the first of its kind that spawned countless "romantic" thrillers since. It's mystifying to think of the ways the world of thrillers has changed since the origin of the genre, but in other way stayed exactly the same. Same plot formula, same twists, different style, different noise levels. The bottom line is most haven't gotten much better than this.

Glenn Close has said that she doesn't view her character, Alex as the villain in the story. That's typical of an actor playing the antagonist in a film because actors have to justify their characters as human beings to be able to portray them successfully. But I am actually taking the actor's side this time. I felt an enormous amount of empathy towards Alex. She's a lonely woman, she's really lonely, and that's the cause of all her malicious actions that follow. In ways she was the victim. Close embodies Alex, making the loneliness enough for the viewer to link themselves to, but not too much to overwhelm the viewer. When the script calls for Close to be overt, man, does she bring it, though.

My favorite performance, maybe even over Close's, was Anne Archer. Knowing she got an Academy Award nomination prior to watching the film, I assumed she'd get a scene to cry and throw a fit and that's what scored the nomination. She does well in that scene I anticipated, but I think she's exceptional from start to finish. Warm, when need be. Sorrowful, when need be. Douglas is the trio-member who doesn't stick out as often, but when his moment finally comes for the character to shine, you realize he was shining the entire time, we just didn't notice.

The killer aspect of Fatal Attraction is the directing from Adrian Lyne. Lyne layers fear on top of characters, not the plot necessarily, but the fictitious characters themselves. A particularly wicked moment of direction involves a telephone ringing. The telephone is what we're focusing on, but Lyne keeps the audience's engagement with the telephone on whether Archer's character will answer it and what Close's might say to her. Lyne takes his time and builds real suspense that often results in a misleading outburst of intensity. Lyne also makes the intelligent decision to let the sex scenes happen, but not to let them define the film. He puts the characters, the story, and most importantly, the suspense ahead of the raunchy sex scenes.

The film editing is crisp, pinpointed directly at Lyne's vision of the suspense. It keeps the film tantalizingly alive. The film is aided by a piercing score the scorches the suspense volumes louder than it had a right to be. Although moving the story along at a nice-pace is the ultimate intention of the thriller, symbolism can be found such as the shot of Douglas leaving Close's apartment the morning after the affair, adding to the basic, almost-generic message of the film: don't cheat. The ending isn't the original ending, though it's one heck of a conclusion and a heart-pounding thrill fest that shouldn't be controversial. The original ending is a sterling, twisted scene as well, but it's one that's not nearly as exciting as the final ending.

Originality is lacks in Hollywood today, but Fatal Attraction remains as an original roller coaster jolt, which other films have adapted and cheapened to make a few bucks. They know it works with the audience so why not? That being said, the script is really good. The dialogue is coated with richness, while still being realistic (they speak the way people actually speak in the real world). There are tons of twists packed into the screenplay, many of which pay off. The ones that don't work as well feel awkward and downgrade the flick a tad, but nothing that can stop the reputation of the thriller.

Being the first of its kind cannot be easy, but Fatal Attraction maintains the respect and class of it's massive reputation. It's filled with startling twists, great acting, and a director reaching shocking heights of the suspense genre. It's worth seeing for the terrifying finale which has stood the test of time extremely well. As much as I appreciated the technical elements, I wish I wasn't so familiar with it before actually seeing it which would've allowed myself to be swept up in its madness. Maybe this is a flashing light that we shouldn't familiarize ourselves with something so much that it becomes too late to fathom the art in its purest state.

Rating 8.5/10

Grade: A

The plot of Fatal Attraction is well known and supposedly, when the movie was released, it terrified married men to the extent that it reduced adultery rates, or so the story goes. I find that mildly amusing and hard to verify.

What is more interesting is the character of Alex, portrayed skillfully by Glenn Close. The fact that Close didn't have the typical physique to play a "femme fatale" makes her role even more compelling, demonstrating the unpredictability of attraction. Her Alex is only mildly attractive but exudes a wild, deranged sexuality. Her frizzy hair, lack of eyebrows, and pale mouth didn't enhance her appearance, but Alex compensated with aggressive outfits and a matching attitude.

Some have tried to frame her as a feminist icon, but Alex is just a deranged, damaged criminal. At the start of the movie, it's clear that she's leading Dan where she wants him. During their dinner, Dan says, "This will end the way you want it," indicating that the idea was a no-strings-attached one-night stand between consenting adults, especially since Alex knew Dan was married.

They spend another day together because Alex insists, but Dan never gives the impression that he is in love with her or anything more than temporarily interested.

What is bizarre is Alex's change of behavior when Dan shows no further interest. From an independent professional, Alex transforms into a clingy, begging mess of a woman, which is explained vaguely, if at all.

While Dan's infidelity is not justified, I think he receives a punishment far harsher than he deserves. It's not true that he "used" Alex, who was more than willing to be used (as seen in the elevator scene). Moreover, falling out of love-or in this case, out of lust-is not a crime.

Alex turns into a violently aggressive psycho, and if the genders were reversed, everyone would side with the married person. Imagine a man harassing a former female lover with nonstop phone calls, destroying her car, and kidnapping her child. Everyone would scream "Stalker!" So why is Alex seen as a "feminist" and not a criminal?

All the lead actors were excellent, including Douglas, Archer, and Latzen, who played one of the few genuinely cute kids I've seen on screen. It's a pity about the over-the-top ending.

"Fatal Attraction" is one of those famous things that got people talking during every free moment – and also one that's sure to be spoiled if you're like me and wait 30 years to see it.

Plot-wise, I know that to expect; but it still surprised me in some ways. Like the character of Alex Forrest. She doesn't have very much depth and it reduced to a stock schizo, but you wouldn't know it from Glenn Close's performance. Alex's (let's call them) antics have an unpredictability to them. Even when they're outlandish, they still work towards terrorizing Michael Douglas. She just keeps closing in, man. I don't think I'm really spoiling anything by saying Douglas eventually comes clean to his wife (Anne Archer) about the affair and that look of abject devastation on her face is horrible.

If the writing ever fails you (and it gets iffy) the acting won't. This can be a real nail- biter at times, and that's because the performances elevate the trashy script.

7/10

So here we have it, the granddaddy of the psycho-thriller genre and in all respects a more subtle and realistic film than you'd expect from a genre that later descended into cheesy madness and inanity. By the time these run of films had finished – and there are still some B-movies coming out, here and there – we'd had psychotic babysitters, mothers, fathers, children, nurses, co-workers, you name it. But FATAL ATTRACTION is the one that kicked them all off in a wave of popularity, even if there were precedents in the likes of Eastwood's PLAY MISTY FOR ME and the slasher genre. It's a simple story of the archetypal happy family and what happens when the father and husband has an affair with an unhinged woman.

Michael Douglas is on top form as the slightly sleazy family guy who can't resist shacking up with loopy Glenn Close when his wife (Anne Archer) is away. Douglas later found a home in this type of film, menaced by more adulteresses (Sharon Stone) and even his own boss (Demi Moore). Here, though, he's fresher faced and more realistic, with the script making no bones of his adultery and the way he betrays both his wife and child by having an affair while they're away. Glenn Close is frightening in the role that made her name, but I have to say she doesn't cut it as an object of desire – with that hairstyle she looks like a maniac from the outset! The realism of the plot excludes the kind of murderous rampage sequences that later popularised the genre, and it's all the more chilling for it – the suicide attempt scene is far more disturbing than watching a madwoman running amok with a kitchen knife. Then, of course, there's that scene involving the favourite family pet that's rightly gone down in history as one of the most memorable of all time, and a now-familiar shock climax to polish things off. I did find the film somewhat subdued in places where it could have been more thrilling, but that's because it plays it as a character drama for the most part, more interested in getting to grips with Close's psychosis than bumping off a string of inconsequential types.