Un détective de la police violent enquête sur un meurtre brutal dans lequel pourrait être impliqué un romancier manipulateur et séducteur.Un détective de la police violent enquête sur un meurtre brutal dans lequel pourrait être impliqué un romancier manipulateur et séducteur.Un détective de la police violent enquête sur un meurtre brutal dans lequel pourrait être impliqué un romancier manipulateur et séducteur.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Nommé pour 2 Oscars
- 6 victoires et 23 nominations au total
- Lt. Martin Nilsen
- (as Daniel Von Bargen)
Avis à la une
I always considered this to be a Hitchcock style film, but now that I'm working my way through his catalogue I'm not too sure, although it does put me in mind of the noir films from the 40's.
It's a super sexy thriller, and let's be honest, the infamous sex scenes have this film a lot more notoriety than it ultimately deserved, it's a good film, but in no way is it a classic.
It has a degree of suspense and tension, you are made to wait a long time to learn if she did or didn't, and the big reveal scene is worth the wait, and perhaps the film's best scene.
Douglas and Stone are both very good, and there's a definite chemistry between the pair, it is one very attractive cast, Stone is genuinely jaw dropping throughout.
It is hard to watch this movie without thinking of the many spoofs that followed, that infamous interview scene was sent up several times, and rightly so.
Considering it's now over thirty years old, I'd suggest it's held up rather well.
7/10.
Infamous for its explicit exploitation of said sex and nudity and forever frustrating for that's pretty much all there is. The soft-porn aside it can be a somewhat sultry, trashy ride with enough intrigue to keep the interest but not enough to make it a totally engaging entertainment.
The biggest problem is the ambiguity about most of what unfolds. There are dangling plot elements and shallow, confusing side shows. In all, it is a murky, muddy, and thin piece of Pulp that has modern machinations and push the envelope displays of Crime Fiction laced with so much pomp that it's rendered impotent.
The Movie has enough sizzle to attract viewers but cannot justify all the indulgence and will most likely be an unsatisfactory guilty pleasure. It is quite an overrated Film whose appeal comes from the most lowbrow lexicons of entertainment. But hey, someone once said...there's one born every minute. That's a lot of ticket buyers.
The film caused controversy with some of the gay crowd (who didn't like the negative press) and for the graphic sex (with bedroom violence). It became a box office winner, that made Sharon Stone a star, and yet was basically p****d on by the critics! The word is the film is better than your average B movie skin flick, only by the quality of the actors, and Verhoeven's ability. I feel the film is still not given the respect it's due.
I first saw the R-rated version, which is very good, but now you can get the even better Unrated Director's Cut, which has even more graphic content! If you don't like erotic-thrillers, then don't see it. But anyone with taste will enjoy the thrill ride of events that take place in Basic Instinct. The script by Joe Eszterhas was highly thought of in Hollywood, and if not for the graphic nudity, a top star like Michelle Pfeiffer would have taken the role made famous by Sharon stone.
Does the script go too far at times? Yes, but that's part of the films charm, and after all, the now 'classic film moment' of Sharon Stone's leg spread interrogation, likely would have been dropped in a conventional film. Still though, I wouldn't have minded seeing a few less people getting killed off, to keep even more suspense and realism.
The score is also beautiful, and fans of Hitchcock's great "Vertigo" can appreciate the homage that Paul Verhoeven has included. The film has a lot of eye candy, but Jeanne Tripplehorn deserves special mention for her impressive supporting role (sadly she hasn't done much of note since). Michael Douglas does a solid job also, but I can't help wondering if a better actor like Clint Eastwood could have brought more to the table. The dialogue is not up to the level of "Pulp Fiction", but it's still interesting and fun.
I highly recommend this film for fans of adult mystery.
The makers of this film tried to give it a film-noir style, perhaps even going for a Hitchcockian influence. What they did do is succeed in making a powerful, intense whodunit which keeps you guessing as to the identity of the murderess right up until the end - and even then, a final twists means that it's all still ambiguous. As well as all the sex that's going on, Verhoeven still finds the opportunity to put in some of his trademark graphic violence in the shape of a pair of icepick murders which see blood flying everywhere in an extremely grisly fashion.
Michael Douglas is well-suited for the role of the cop on the edge, with slicked-back hair to make him look younger. I know that his nudity in this film is a basis for a lot of people to make fun of him, but when I think of other male actors around at the time I can't really imagine anybody else in the role. While Douglas has the fairly straight and unexciting role, Sharon Stone on the other hand is a revelation: extruding an icy cold air and totally in control of herself and just about everybody else, her seductive siren instantly made Stone a star - and put her into the mainstream eye, away from the bit parts she had previously had in the likes of NICO: ABOVE THE LAW. It's safe to say that this film contains Stone's best performance and that she's never lived up to it since, except maybe in her believable portrayal of a drug addicted wife in Scorcese's CASINO.
In support, George Dzundza is good as a comic relief cop while Jeanne Tripplehorn also gives an excellent performance as Douglas' psychiatrist. BASIC INSTINCT is well worth a watch, and not just because of the obvious reasons. Fans of thrillers should check it out.
As has been mentioned, there are echoes of Hitchcock's Vertigo throughout the film, including the San Francisco setting, the attire of the female lead (Catherine, played by Sharon Stone), the styling of her hair, the background music, the shots of interior stairwells, and the lead character (Nick, played by Michael Douglas) following Catherine around the city in his car. The apartment of Beth (played by Jeanne Trippehorn) might also remind one of Rear Window.
Many of the characters have emotional/psychological problems like addiction, dependency, or worse. This makes it more difficult for the viewer to determine the motivations of the suspects. Nick--the filter through which we see all evidence--is flawed. We learn that he has had problems with cocaine and alcohol. Sexually, he is ripe for exploration and, maybe, manipulation.
The film walks a fine line between revelation and obfuscation. In the course of the story, murders are committed, and we are given just enough information to pull us deeper into the mystery, but not enough to reveal the truth. Even the ending leaves the future ambiguous.
This is an excellent mystery for the nineties. The acting is excellent, especially that of Sharon Stone who plays the rabbit we gladly follow down the rabbit hole where the rules of the game are confusing and constantly changing.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesNo body doubles were used in any of the sex scenes.
- Gaffes(at around 45 mins) When Nick calls up Hazel Dobkin's police record it states that she was released from San Quentin in 1965. San Quentin has been men only since 1934.
- Citations
Dr. McElwaine: Nick, when you recollect your childhood, are your recollections pleasing to you?
Nick: Number 1, I don't remember how often I used to jerk off, but it was a lot. Number 2, I wasn't pissed off at my dad, even when I was old enough to know what he and mom were doing in the bedroom. Number 3, I don't look in the toilet before I flush it. Number 4, I haven't wet my bed for a long time. Number 5, why don't the two of you go fuck yourselves; I'm outta here.
- Versions alternativesThe European release is much more explicit than the American release (which had to be submitted seven times to the MPAA in order to avoid an NC-17 rating). The European version is available unrated on video in the US. The US version uses alternate, less explicit takes of several scenes to tone down the sex content.
- The murder of Johnny Boz in the opening scene is more graphic; we see the killer stabbing him in his neck, stabbing him repeatedly in the chest, in the face and we see the ice-pick passing through his nose.
- The scene where Nick rapes Beth is severely cut in the US version (we see ripping off her underwear and forcing her over the couch, then there's a cut to the two of them lying in bed). In the uncut version Nick pulls down his pants, penetrates Beth from behind and he apparently has an orgasm.
- The scene where Nick and Catherine make love after going to the disco is longer much more explicit in the uncut version (Nick is seen burying his face between her legs).
- ConnexionsEdited into Destruction Finale (1999)
Meilleurs choix
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Bajos instintos
- Lieux de tournage
- 157 Spindrift Road, Carmel Highlands, Californie, États-Unis(Catherine Tramell's mansion)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 49 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 117 727 224 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 15 129 385 $US
- 22 mars 1992
- Montant brut mondial
- 352 927 224 $US