Una coppia di sposi prova di tutto per convincere l'altro a lasciare la casa in una feroce battaglia di divorzio.Una coppia di sposi prova di tutto per convincere l'altro a lasciare la casa in una feroce battaglia di divorzio.Una coppia di sposi prova di tutto per convincere l'altro a lasciare la casa in una feroce battaglia di divorzio.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Nominato ai 1 BAFTA Award
- 2 vittorie e 9 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
A classic feature of Danny DeVito's (far too few) works as a director is that they are utterly evil. Cruel. Wicked. Merciless to their characters and merciless to the viewer. Although this is often combined with slight exaggeration, it is exactly what I love about them.
After seeing The War of the Roses the second time after having grown a little older, I still feel that particular satisfaction. But this time, there are a few more things I think about, a few more questions I ask myself. For instance: who is the bad guy in the film? Who is `to blame'? And although it's clear that the Roses both have extremely unmoveable and stubborn characters, which partly leads to the catastrophe, I came to the conclusion that Barbara is the driving force of the whole divorce story. She announces her wish to divorce upon grounds that are not quite convincing. Maybe people who do not like Michael Douglas can sympathize with her but her reasons are not fair. She invariably follows her instinct without paying any respect to other people. Kathleen Turner portrays her most believably in this insufferable phase.
Oliver Rose, on the other hand, is one of those people who are proud of doing everything in a perfectly correct manner. He is therefore very sensitive and easily confronted if one doesn't acknowledge his correct behavior. He then becomes completely helpless and unable to react properly. That makes him an ideal `victim' to Barbara's striking egoism.
I'm mentioning this only because it is a new aspect I found during second viewing, and I am sure it was also DeVito's intention to develop characters like this, so for him, the turbulent divorce story is not just a parable on how stupid people are in general. He of course reserved the best role in the film for himself he is the wise man who tells the parable and who emerges victorious in the end.
The War of the Roses with its merciless cruelness remains one of my favourite comedies of all time.
After seeing The War of the Roses the second time after having grown a little older, I still feel that particular satisfaction. But this time, there are a few more things I think about, a few more questions I ask myself. For instance: who is the bad guy in the film? Who is `to blame'? And although it's clear that the Roses both have extremely unmoveable and stubborn characters, which partly leads to the catastrophe, I came to the conclusion that Barbara is the driving force of the whole divorce story. She announces her wish to divorce upon grounds that are not quite convincing. Maybe people who do not like Michael Douglas can sympathize with her but her reasons are not fair. She invariably follows her instinct without paying any respect to other people. Kathleen Turner portrays her most believably in this insufferable phase.
Oliver Rose, on the other hand, is one of those people who are proud of doing everything in a perfectly correct manner. He is therefore very sensitive and easily confronted if one doesn't acknowledge his correct behavior. He then becomes completely helpless and unable to react properly. That makes him an ideal `victim' to Barbara's striking egoism.
I'm mentioning this only because it is a new aspect I found during second viewing, and I am sure it was also DeVito's intention to develop characters like this, so for him, the turbulent divorce story is not just a parable on how stupid people are in general. He of course reserved the best role in the film for himself he is the wise man who tells the parable and who emerges victorious in the end.
The War of the Roses with its merciless cruelness remains one of my favourite comedies of all time.
Director Danny Devito and the writers are to be credited for following
this story's dark premise straight to its grim conclusion, and not
opting for a cop-out 'happy ending'. Maybe that accounts for the
movie's relatively low user rating. Whatever. Turner and Douglas are
superb here. I saw Douglas on the Carson show after the movie came out,
relating how, after a day's shoot, he and Turner would get together to
remind each other that they were still friends. Seeing the movie shows
why they had to do this.
Note how the movie begins in the openness and light of Nantucket in summer and gets progressively darker, ending in the claustrophobic closeness of the nailed-up house. Note how Kathleen Turner's hair changes from sleek at the start to straw at the end. Note the role the Baccarat crystal plays. Note the frequent emphasis on the chandelier throughout. All masterful touches.
A classic black comedy for grownups. Don't watch this one with your spouse unless you are on really good terms.
Note how the movie begins in the openness and light of Nantucket in summer and gets progressively darker, ending in the claustrophobic closeness of the nailed-up house. Note how Kathleen Turner's hair changes from sleek at the start to straw at the end. Note the role the Baccarat crystal plays. Note the frequent emphasis on the chandelier throughout. All masterful touches.
A classic black comedy for grownups. Don't watch this one with your spouse unless you are on really good terms.
A very good movie, one that holds up well after repeated viewings. Even if you're familiar with the story, DeVito's methodical and precise direction makes it thoroughly absorbing all over again. This movie has the directorial perfection of a good Alfred Hitchcock thriller, but it's not either a thriller or a comedy; it's a unique mix of elements from several genres, that does contain some laughs and sardonic humor, but also has serious undertones, mostly thanks to Michael Douglas' three-dimensional character and surprisingly sensitive performance. Strongly recommended.
There isn't a plethora of funny lines in "The War of the Roses" (it's just not that kind of comedy), but the blistering cynicism about marriage makes them stand out all the same (the stabbing victim in the hospital claimed most of these). If you want to call this a cautionary tale of divorce, I'm just fine with that. Watching these people bitterly drift apart is uncomfortable, and the filmmakers know this because the whole third act is the literal destruction of everything they've labored so long to build. The absurdity is almost a salve.
It's a comedy, but also dark as hell. The dialogue, on the other hand, that's fantastic.
7/10
It's a comedy, but also dark as hell. The dialogue, on the other hand, that's fantastic.
7/10
DeVito is a hit-and-miss director. He's turned out some very good films and some very bad ones. Sometimes his satire just falls short ("Death to Smoochy," for example); however, "War of the Roses" is his strongest directorial effort to date.
It's got everything - a clever script, great interaction between its two stars, exciting thrills, funny gags (without ever resorting to unnecessary crudity), and to top it all off, the direction is very effective - DeVito is heavily influenced by Hitchcock and that is very clear in the final sequence, which is reminiscent of "Vertigo" and "Rear Window." Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner play the Rose couple - two once-happily-married people who are now, after many years together, bitter and at the end of their frustration. Deciding upon a divorce, they begin to split apart; however, negotiations regarding belongings begin to go awry as Oliver Rose (Douglas) demands more from his wife, claiming it's his money that purchased their enormous house and all objects inside.
DeVito turns in a performance as the narrator, and Oliver's lawyer, who tells us at the start we are about to watch a sad tale about divorce. By the time the film has ended we've seen events spiral totally out of control - beginning with absolute believability and ending in absolute absurdity.
That's the crucial part of all this. Black comedy relies on whether the dramatic arc of the content - the leap from reality to lunacy - can be believable. Many times in DeVito's film, it isn't. "Smoochy," for example, was clever satire at first, and fairly reminiscent of real-life people and events; then it turned into an over-the-top revenge rampage.
"War of the Roses" is more careful, and the arc is subtler. It's believable because the characters are given such room to grow and their conflict blossoms throughout the picture.
I'd classify "War of the Roses" as one of the funniest, cleverest and most underrated black comedies of the 1980s - it's one of my personal favorite movies and never fails to crack me up. A cult film? Maybe; but I think many more people would enjoy it if they gave it a chance.
It's got everything - a clever script, great interaction between its two stars, exciting thrills, funny gags (without ever resorting to unnecessary crudity), and to top it all off, the direction is very effective - DeVito is heavily influenced by Hitchcock and that is very clear in the final sequence, which is reminiscent of "Vertigo" and "Rear Window." Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner play the Rose couple - two once-happily-married people who are now, after many years together, bitter and at the end of their frustration. Deciding upon a divorce, they begin to split apart; however, negotiations regarding belongings begin to go awry as Oliver Rose (Douglas) demands more from his wife, claiming it's his money that purchased their enormous house and all objects inside.
DeVito turns in a performance as the narrator, and Oliver's lawyer, who tells us at the start we are about to watch a sad tale about divorce. By the time the film has ended we've seen events spiral totally out of control - beginning with absolute believability and ending in absolute absurdity.
That's the crucial part of all this. Black comedy relies on whether the dramatic arc of the content - the leap from reality to lunacy - can be believable. Many times in DeVito's film, it isn't. "Smoochy," for example, was clever satire at first, and fairly reminiscent of real-life people and events; then it turned into an over-the-top revenge rampage.
"War of the Roses" is more careful, and the arc is subtler. It's believable because the characters are given such room to grow and their conflict blossoms throughout the picture.
I'd classify "War of the Roses" as one of the funniest, cleverest and most underrated black comedies of the 1980s - it's one of my personal favorite movies and never fails to crack me up. A cult film? Maybe; but I think many more people would enjoy it if they gave it a chance.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizWhile shooting the scene where Michael Douglas (Oliver Rose) and Kathleen Turner (Barbara Rose) are sitting in the chandelier, director Danny DeVito pretended to break for lunch while the two actors were 30 feet above ground.
- BlooperIn the final scene in the chandelier, Barbara goes from being barefoot, to shod, back to barefoot again.
- Citazioni
Oliver Rose: I think you owe me a solid reason. I worked my ass off for you and the kids to have a nice life and you owe me a reason that makes sense. I want to hear it.
Barbara Rose: Because. When I watch you eat. When I see you asleep. When I look at you lately, I just want to smash your face in.
- Curiosità sui creditiThe fanfare in the 20th Century Fox logo at the beginning of the movie segues into the opening theme of the movie.
- Colonne sonoreOnly You (And You Alone)
Written by Buck Ram and Buck Ram (as Ande Rand)
Performed by The Platters
Courtesy of PolyGram Special Projects a division of
PolyGram Records, Inc.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- La guerra de los Roses
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 26.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 86.888.546 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 9.488.794 USD
- 10 dic 1989
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 160.188.546 USD
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was La guerra dei Roses (1989) officially released in India in Hindi?
Rispondi