Fair Game

Okay, so the screenplay wasn't really Sidney Lumet, and the two leads were in bad need of an acting class, but you can't say this movie wasn't entertaining. It was campy! Everyone in the cast talked like they were reading off a chalkboard somewhere, making it hilarious. What's more (or to add good expectations for the male side) you get a full glimpse of Cindy Crawford's bare breasts and the millionth Baldwin brother to take a shot at acting. (And without a surprise, this shot proved blank.) Don't take this as something serious; look at it as the "Plan 9 Of Outer Space" for Hollywood action movies. If you have to poke fun an it, you could, but take the whole thing like a grain of salt.

Invite some friends over, leave your brain at the door, get a few beers and Chinese take-out and prepare yourself for a blast!

Really bad and tedious with it. The mystery here was not who was trying to kill Cindy Crawford, but how her hair was magically dry and sexily tousled after a series of dunkings.

Cindy has exhibited better acting in lipstick commercials. And that scene where she uses her charms to persuade the geek in the computer shop to help her was reminiscent of Ginger trying to coax a coconut from Gilligan.

Silly from start to finish.

No, a teenager couldn't have written the script for this, because a child in preschool could have done a better job! Quite possibly the worst movie I've seen this year with the exception of "1941", I was shocked by the stupidity of "Fair Game". I really think the author of the book this was based on must have just decided to make up a pointless story on a Sunday morning with only ridiculous gadgets, pointless violence, and a sexy woman to hold up this lemon.

The plot was stupid and the acting was so bad. Cindy Crawford can absolutely not act. And the movie didn't even have any decent nude scenes. If the people responsible for this movie are going to subject us to such garbage they can at least throw in some decent nudity so that the movie won't be a total loss.

This is bad, very bad. It must have sounded like a good idea at the time: "Die Hard With Legal Mumbo-Jumbo" with a twist: we'll have a sexy model as the star.

Erm, it sounds good on paper, and perhaps it would have been a good idea if they hadn't screwed the damn thing up by giving us a weak script, even weaker plot, weaker villians and then give up on the sexy model as John McClane and turn her into a damsel in distress.

It almost feels like Producer, Joel Silver is satirizing or parodying himself in the constant need for set-piece action after set-piece action strung together on the weakest thing to ever grace the screen.

Everything that hits something explodes, cars hit telegraph poles and explode violently, tree's that are in the way explode even more violently...its almost too much to take in. I know action is what was driving hollywood around the early 90s - but this is just TOO much.

Anyway, the film pretty much nose-dives when Crawford - who looks stunning - turns into a damsel in distress with Baldwin acting like he's painting by numbers - just doing the thing because either Stallone dropped out or because of the money.

Not even the "sex-scenes" can save this terrible affair. Not even Berkov, now type-cast as Russian bad guys, can save it. Everything hurts...everything. The end explosion looks kinda cool, but it can't mask the fact that this film is flimsy at best - and at worst? Well, I just don't wanna think about that.

They could have made it a lot better than this trash. A die-hard with a woman as the hero could have been done a lot better. Its a shame with the buckloads of money they wasted on this trash seems to have gone onto Crawford's make-up.

My Rating: 0/10