Recensioni degli utenti

You really have to admire Brian DePalma as a director. He's directed some of the finest thrillers in the last 30 years and even his misfires are interesting to watch like "Snake Eyes". I really enjoyed how well made this film is. If you don't like the story, thats your business. But this film is so finely detailed and shot that I put it in the same boat as "Mulholland Dr." and "Blackhawk Down". Interesting films that some viewers had mixed reactions to but the direction of these films was so expertly crafted that even the most ardent critics had to admit to the talent of the director. This film starts out at the Cannes Film Festival where a group of thieves are attempting to steal some diamonds off of a model by having Laure Ash (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos) seduce her in a lesbian encounter in the ladies bathroom. Things go wrong and Laure takes off with the diamonds. Seven years later Laure is married to an American diplomat and is in Paris with her husband when a papparazzi named Nicolas (Antonio Banderas) takes a picture of her. She doesn't want to be photographed because the former members of her gang are still looking for her. What I have just mentioned is just scratching the surface. This is a psychological thriller that has so many twists and turns that the casual film viewer will probably be in over their head. But this is a film that gives many hints along the way as you watch it. You have to pay attention to this film and one key scene takes place when Laure and Nicolas are having coffee in a cafe. Laure is sitting next to the window. Outside, a poster is being put up for a film called "Deja Vu" and the reflection of Laure on the glass is centered in the middle of the poster. DePalma uses many overhead shots to allow the viewer to get full view of certain scenes. Some viewers and critics have said they were disappointed with the casting but I admire the job that Rebecca did for this film. Okay, she's not Jodie Foster as far as being an actress is concerned but Foster couldn't exude sexuality like this if her life depended on it either. I thought it was believable that her character could manipulate Nicholas the way she did. How could he not? She was a combination of sexuality and vulnerability inside a very smart and devious mind. And for a film called "Femme Fatale" you had better find an actress that is smart and utterly beautiful at the same time. I found her performance to be bold and brave. DePalma uses each shot to send signals relating to the story. It sounds like a very difficult shoot because each scene has so much meaning. He doesn't have cameras following characters for nothing. Each shot has a reason. The details to this filming are enormous and difficult. DePalma again shows us the attention to details of his complex artistry. If your one of those shallow film watchers that only views films from the incredible mediocrity of Hollywood than your probably going to be lost watching this film. For the viewers that remember and care about risk taking when making movies, than you can appreciate the effort made by DePalma. If you don't like it, thats okay. But you should appreciate his effort and nerve as a director.

As I've always supported Brain's work, I guess I'm not very objective in my opinion. This film is a kind of "best of" of this brilliant director. The fans or the people who loves a certain kind of formal achievement can be hooked by this movie. But the others... The screenplay is the real wickness of this movie: too many non-senses can "hurt" most of the audiance (at the end, I've also heard some laughts!). Even for me, I've sometimes had hard-time because the story seems to have no logical ("why did she do this?" "and him, why is he there?", etc...) But when you see the Key of the movie, I mean the real theme, you can accept most of the things you've seen. Or not... Forget the screenplay and watch! That's the only way to appreciate this movie.

This movie keeps your attention 100% of the time, whether it's to read the captions to see what's going on or to figure out what the hell's happening and where you are. Rebecca Romijn-Stamos establishes herself as a major film presence in this movie. When she's on the screen, it's hard to keep your eyes off her.

The twists and turns and the searing performance of Romijn-Stamos will keep you engaged the the near-2 hours it runs, and you'll leave not quite sure what you've experienced, but glad you did.

This erotic action thriller starts with an exquisitely designed diamond theft set against an authentically recreated red carpet premiere at 2001 Cannes Film Festival. There mercenary thief Laure Ash (Rebecca Romijn) participates in a diamond heist. The scheme is for Laure to steal a necklace of valuable diamonds from the ensemble of a female attendant named Veronica (Rie Rasmussen). Posing as a French photojournalist, Laure gains access to the festival gathering, where she lures Veronica to the ladies room and begins to seduce her in a stall, during which Laure's two accomplices "Black Tie" (Eriq Ebouaney) and Racine (Édouard Montrouge). But a Spanish paparazzo named Nicolas Bardo (Antonio Banderas) chases her and takes her picture. Nothing is more desirable or more deadly than a woman with a secret!.

This haunting thriller flick is plenty of mystery, intrigue and suspenseful. A highly exploitative and fast-paced suspense/thriller, recognisably from the blood-spattered hands of expert cinéaste Brian De Palma. The film displays a great and catching musical score by Ryuichi Sakamoto who along with Pino Donaggio are De Palma's favorite composers, in Bernard Herrmann style and imitating former hits. There is much for De Palma buffs to savour in this thrilling and atmospheric handling of a complex story with deliberately old-fashioned treatment. This elegantly dreamy 'Femme Fatale' is as rich and rare as anything De Palma's made for a while. The cinéphile Brian De Palma is a genre unto himself these days, including his own trademarks and a plot twist which, as the writer/filmmaker admits, will alienate half the audience. The film sets luxurious scenaries and brilliant gowns at the 2001 Cannes Film Festival in France with some actual happeninings in the red carpet. The movie introduces us to Hitchcock style, adding Brian de Palma's own films from Marnie, Rear Window , Obsession, Blow-out to Dressed to kill. It can be the answer to De Palma's feminist critics , but tall willowy Rebecca Romijn makes a poised , confident heroine and the visuals are often impressive. Adding special characteristics techniques as ominous camera movements and split screen. The mechanics of suspense are worked quite well by the filmmaker and many frighten the easily scared quite adequately, but De Palma has made a habit of dwelling on their more sordid side-shoots. The result is provocative, surprising, outrageous and fun. Rebecca Romijn gives an essentially erotic acting as a woman tries to straighten out her life, even as her past as a con-woman comes back to haunt her. And Antonio Banderas is pretty good as a nosy photographer who gets involved in twisted problems.

It contains colorful and glamorous cinematography by cameraman Thierry Arbogast, as well as perceptible and thrilling musical score by composer Ryuichi Sakamoto. Displaying a professional and graphically mysterious direction from cinéphile Brian De Palma. ¨Femme fatale¨ is Brian De Palma's homage to Hitchcock and the reason for the chief amusement turning out to be inquire what scenes taken from Master of suspense. That's why takes parts especially from Hitchcock. The flick was well directed Brian De Palma in his usual style, but it turns out to be inferior to the other similar suspense films that he directed. This ¨Femme Fatale¨ (2002) ¨along with ¨Sisters¨, ¨Body Double¨, ¨Dressed to Kill¨, ¨Blow out¨ resulting outwardly another ode to Hitchcock with the accent on the killing, but on most occasion is really decent. Rating : 6/10. Acceptable and passable, it gets some riveting basic ideas and fascinating images .

Since De Palma directed the debacle that was Mission Impossible, it seemed like a genius director has lost it all but this latest movie by the "new Hitchcock" is perhaps one of his strongest since "Carlito's Way" and the masterpiece "Body Double". The story itself is quite simple : during the filmfestival of Cannes is a bunch of diamonds stolen but then the fun begins...you really have to be attentive during the whole movie as every minute De Palma puts you on a wrong foot just like we're used to by the master of the black thrillers... An absolute must!!!!

Brian De Palma's 'Femme Fatale' is pure movie-making. In fact, it is done so well you almost forget it is all close to nonsense. But who cares, 'Femme Fatale' is an exercise in style drenched in twists and turns. Instead of cheating De Palma gives us a lot of little hints, easily missed the first time you see it. Explaining the story could ruin a lot and is probably useless anyway.

I can tell the film opens with a heist, probably one of the most erotic ones out there. Laure Ash (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos) is the one who goes away with a very expensive artifact betraying a whole lot of people. This event is what drives her the rest of the movie, but in what way I can not reveal. I can say that we move forward to seven years later and that Laure has changed her identity, more by mistake than on purpose. Another important thing I can tell you is that we meet a photographer named Nicolas Bardo (Antonio Banderas). He takes a picture of Laure while she is still Laure and he is the one who takes a picture of her seven years later, a photo that could spoil everything for her.

I should stop talking about the story. You have to see it for yourself, collecting clues and try to make something out of it. I love a movie like this. 'Memento', 'Mulholland Dr.' and 'Donnie Darko' are other examples. Maybe you can figure them out, if that is the filmmakers intention, maybe you can not. But it is not so much the conclusion I enjoy, it is the ride that brings us there. De Palma does it in a terrific way with a lot of love for the movies.

A director of this caliber should have done better. Nice idea but the devices used in this film were far too obvious. One saving grace of the film is that the female lead is truely smoking hot and does a nice job of acting the role, but the mechanics of putting the movie together felt too much like a film school project (clearly an "A" but still a project). Overall, worthwhile but a little disappointing given the potential here.

Mr. De Palma is not a critics' darling, and as such his latest, Femme Fatale, has come in for his usual roasting. Is it deserved? Not if you love a film that embraces the visual splendour and techniques that make cinema a unique art form.

Femme Fatale sees De Palma returning to his forte: the suspense thriller. It is a welcome return considering his recent fare have seen him straying to more mainstream efforts - Mission to Mars, Mission: Impossible - that were shells of his virtuoso films of the late 70s and early 80s.

The film leads off with a stunning 20-minute Jewel heist sequence that takes place during the Cannes film festival of 2001. Completely bereft of dialogue, a la Topkapi, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos's character has the enviable task of lifting a diamond dress from Rie Rasmussun in a bathroom encounter. His first original screenplay in 10 years, De Palma writes a tightly-plotted tale that certainly does not lead the audience by the hand, and the resulting twists it provides will allow different perspectives on the film's events with repeat viewings.

Antonio Banderas - usually lost without cause if not working with Robert Rodriguez - does what he needs to do with efficiency; Romijn-Stamos, the Femme Fatale of the title, provides the eye candy. The acting is not top drawer, but it does not need to be: we're here to see an auteur in his element: De Palma delivers. Cinema is more than a stage with a camera - De Palma uses his camera and cinema technique to brilliant effect. Huge swooping camera movements, split-screen, slow motion sequences, no dialogue and an enveloping orchestral score; De Palma's signature is prevalent. And that is good: a director should never be an autonomous entity, happy to turn out derivative drivel that get the masses in and out - directors for hire are too commonplace in Hollywood today - and that is something that De Palma could never be accused of.

Femme Fatale is a great example of a director working in a genre he loves and understands, and given the freedom to create. Total cinema? Its smell is sure intoxicating. Welcome back, Mr. De Palma.

I'm an huge Brian De Palma fan but that doesn't in my opinion mean that he can just get away with everything. "Femme Fatale" is definitely style over substance but is just style enough to save this movie? Absolutely not.

Biggest problem with this movie is the script. It's unnecessary difficult to follow at times, including the ending. On top of that the story just isn't interesting enough. Also the main character is an huge failure. I'm not blaming ex-model Rebecca Romijn-Stamos her acting skills for this, I simply blame it on the script. Her character never becomes accessible or interesting and remains difficult to understand and follow throughout the movie. Antonio Banderas is simply miscast, the role simply doesn't fit him. Thankfully there also are some well casted parts in the movie. Peter Coyote is always good in a movie. It was also great to see Gregg Henry in a De Palma movie again, even though his role in this movie was quite pointless. Another strong piece of casting was the beautiful Rie Rasmussen who in her small role perhaps leaves the biggest impression of the entire movie.

It may sound weird but I still enjoy watching this movie, despite me rating it poorly. Like I said before I'm simply a big De Palma fan so there still is plenty to enjoy for me here. The beginning of the movie, 'the Cannes festival heist' is extremely good and memorable and has De Palma his style written all over it. De Palma can build the tension in a movie like no other director can, even though the whole sequences reminded a bit too much of the other De Palma movie "Mission:Impossible". To be honest De Palma never has been the most original director in the business but the scenes are simply always constructed so well and are so highly memorable that you'll always forgive him for not being terribly original.

However in this case style alone is not good enough to save this movie. The movie leaves a messy, confusing impression afterward, which is simply due to the poor written story that 'tries too hard to be difficult' at times.

For De Palma fans it simply still remains a must see but everyone else can better skip this one, or should stop watching after the 'Cannes' opening sequence.

4/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This was a lot better than I expected, which wasn't a lot. It turned out to be interesting thanks in part to the stylish film-making and the nice job it did in keeping the audience's attention.

It got a few extra points for at least us males gaping at Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, who looked spectacular, but lost a few for some big credibility holes in the story.

The film also would have been much better with a different male lead than Antonio Bandaras, someone who could speak English so people could understand him!

With Brian De Palma directing, you get some stylish camera shots in here, so it's a good visual movie....a lot more than just girl-watching. It's a film you could enjoy multiple times, especially if you get a translator for Bandaras.

Brian De Palma crafts a typically engaging erotic thriller, one that has a great deal of respect for film noir and femme fatales of legend (especially "Double Indemnity" and Barbara Stanwyck). Rebecca Romijn-Stamos is quite easy to watch as Laure, a sexy criminal who double crosses her partners during an elaborate robbery (all of this while the Cannes Film Festival is going on). Then she finds an opportunity to live the straight life (and the high life) for a while, until she ends up back in Paris where she's at real risk of having her past come back to haunt her. Sealing her fate is a slightly shady photographer, Nicolas (Antonio Banderas), who is tasked with snapping a picture of her.

While the script itself is not flawless, De Palma still tells a pretty entertaining story, one that holds the viewers' attention regularly. Certainly his filmmaking skill was still quite sharp at this point, especially when one considers the true highlights of the film: that aforementioned jewel robbery, and a scene in a strangers' home. These take place without much dialogue, and it just goes to show how the directors' style can carry scenes practically by itself. The exotic French setting is also a real asset to the picture.

The mostly French cast acquits itself well, with Romijn-Stamos clearly having fun playing a bad girl who knows full well how bad she is. She can really wrap guys around her finger, such as the hapless Nicolas, or Watts (a very likeable Peter Coyote), the nice-guy American ambassador to France. Gregg Henry, a semi-regular in De Palmas' films, is also solid as a strong-arm man working for the ambassador. Eriq Ebouaney has a great screen presence as the formidable criminal mastermind "Black Tie", while Thierry Fremont is amusing as a French police inspector annoyed at having to deal with Nicolas.

One of the more interesting touches occurs around 12 minutes from the end. While some viewers may be annoyed at the use of such a device / revelation, it allows for our main character to second-guess herself, and make different choices.

A must if you are a De Palma fan.

Seven out of 10.

A woman (Rebecca Romijn-Stamos) tries to straighten out her life, even as her past as a con-woman comes back to haunt her.

The highlight of this film is the gay Antonio Banderas. How often do you get to see that? I do not think you have ever seen it before this or since (though I would love to be corrected).

Roger Ebert says, "This is a movie about watching and being watched, about seeing and not knowing what you see." De Palma is known for his theme of voyeurism, and there is that aspect here: not only are we voyeurs to the film, but one of the main characters takes photographs of people who would rather remain private.

Ebert also says, "Romijn-Stamos ... is a great Hitchcock heroine -- blond, icy, desirable, duplicitous -- with a knack for contemptuously manipulating the hero." This is an interesting observation. On the one hand it rightly praises Romijn-Stamos (this is her best role), but also has that reminder that many people see De Palma as derivative of Hitchcock (among others) and not necessarily in a complimentary way.

We also have his split-screen, which has been used in more than a few of De Palma's films ("Blow Out" and "Phantom of the Paradise" immediately come to mind). Does it work? Oddly, yes.

The overall movie sucked a big one, but how can you care about the plot when Rebecca Romijn-Stamos is stripping. Her and the other girl making out in the bathroom would have been good enough to film for two hours and calling it a movie, but no. They actuallly had to act out a plot. That is what made it bad.

As I read the comments I can't help wonder how is it possible nobody thought this movie is an essay on cinema as well as a re-read of De Palma's own creations and obsessions. The questions on the board suggest that almost nobody pay attention even to the plot. 21 years before, "Blow Out", De Palma's most transparent reference to cinema craftsmanship and the relations between cinema and reality, and, what is most important, to cinema as knowledge (or even revelation), merged from an almost hopeless vision of the world: at the end of the film, Jack Terry, the character played by Travolta, had found the truth, but the price he paid for it is loneliness and madness maybe (just like Hackman at the end of Coppola's "The Conversation"); revelation is for him a sort of curse as he lost his second chance (one of the director's recurrent themes) as far as reality made the grade with its web of lies and corruption. "Femme fatale" shows that De Palma get older and wiser: even though reality is as corrupted and plenty of lies as two decades before, his faith on cinema as knowledge (what is cinema but a dream?) is stronger than then. He also has change his point of view about women. This turn, that started with "Carlito's Way" and even more on "Snake Eyes", is evident here, as he shows his own change of mind through a character that goes from his old kind of female character to the new one. (And those who wonder about the snake, read the Bible --Genesis.) At the very beginning of the movie, Laure's reflection on the tv screen reunites she and Barbara Stanwyck as the summa and the evolution of the femme fatale kind of character. That "DOUBLE indemnity" starts a game of doubles along the movie. Later, when the character of Lily appears, there's a choice to be made: Laure (of course, the reference is to Preminger's "Laura" though the film pays clearer homage to Hitchock's "Vertigo") has to decide to became Phyllis Dietrichson or to became Lily. The "dream strategy" is full of risk; in fact, when a writer/director uses it as a solution, the task is condemned to failure. But De Palma uses it masterfully, because dream is not a solution but a way: there are ten minutes of movie left after it to give that "dream strategy" a new sense and a justification that any film ever gave. As I wrote before, that dream is built as a movie watch by both audience and Laure. But the collage made by Banderas character is also a movie: a frame by frame (or scene by scene) construction of a reality that is out-of-time of that reality. De Palma, at the end of the film, tell us: that is what cinema is made of -different scenes shot under diverse lights in separate times, joined under one look and put together to make sense. We, as spectators, are the ones that can contemplate that work finished, and this final revelation, as the one at the end of "Citizen Kane", ask us to be able to join the pieces and reach knowledge cinema can give. There is a lot to write about this movie; these are only silly notes compared to the type of study "Femme Fatale" deserves. For those who are not interested on analysing a movie and just want to know if they will have fun watching it, I can only say that you can enjoyed the movie, with its twists and its suspense, even if you don't notice what I am talking about. "Femme Fatale" is an underrated masterpiece. Long live Brian De Palma (even if he has to live in France).

Not a bad film, but is confusing and loses focus in parts. This film is European Chic and has nudity, and shock aspects. Parts of this film copies the European plot twists, what ifs, and style. Like many European Chic style films it's plot becomes too smart. Over all, I like this movie, but they could have cut 2 or 3 scenes out and tried to clear up some of the confusion. 7 out of 10

Just when you thought Brian De Palma had got as low as he could, along comes Femme Fatale, a film so bad it's quite brilliant. If you thought previous efforts like Raising Cain and Body Double reached new levels of absurdity, trust me they were just dress rehearsals for Femme Fatale.

Any film which has in its opening moments a lesbian sex scene combined with a jewellery heist in the toilets of the Cannes Film Festival surely signals more bad taste scenes to come, and yes ole Brian doesn't disappoint. The longer the film went on the more the audience laughed, with dialogue usually reserved for porn films - " I don't want you to kiss my ass, just f*** it' - you know you're onto a winner.

The final 15 minutes provided more laughs than any comedy for many a year, surely De Palma's career can only go in one direction, it can't get much lower than this - can it?

I have to give Femme Fatale ten out of ten for all the wrong reasons - truly a classic.

Brian De Palma made a return to the thriller genre in which he made his name after the gigantic blip that was Mission to Mars, which he suffered two years earlier. But is his return to the genre a hit or another misfire? Neither, actually; it's decent.

The plot follows the escapades of a young lady that screws the mob out of a heist of diamonds, stolen during a thrillingly executed heist at the Cannes film festival. After assuming a new identity, she later returns to Paris where she must evade her past by any means necessary.

Brian De Palma obviously has a talent for filmmaking; this is evident in the majority of his works, particularly the earlier ones. It's not as abundant in this film as it is in some of his others, but that flair is still shown to a certain extent. He does, however, seem to spend a lot of the movie piling on the style, when he would have been better served building character and giving the audience something to care about. Anyone that knows De Palma, knows that he is the man that "does Hitchcock". Here, he doesn't tribute Hitchcock, but rather the melodramatic noir thrillers of the 40's and 50's. This is clearly shown at the start of the movie from the shot where Rebecca Romijn Stamos is sat on a bed, watching the classic noir; Double Indemnity.

Having only seen Stamos previously under heavy make-up in the delicious X-Men films, it was nice to see her here in a 'normal' role, especially as I was one of the people that saw her sex appeal, even under all that attire. De Palma teases the viewer with her at first; he keeps her face hidden behind various objects and camera movements, but when she finally appears; she doesn't disappoint; Rebecca is one beautiful woman. Especially when she dons that brown wig. Starring alongside Stamos, is Antonio Banderas. I like Antonio a lot; I rate him as an actor, and not just for his role in the spectacular Desperado series. However, he isn't at his best in this film. In a role that requires him to don a silly gay accent at certain points, Banderas doesn't quite look at home. Maybe it's just because I'm used to seeing him flying round shooting bad guys, but he struck me as being a little bored.

It may or may not be a good thing that the film is done partly in French, as on one hand it makes it more realistic, and firmly places us in France; but on the other, we have to read subtitles in an American film, and when I watch an American film; I'm not expecting to read subtitles. Especially not ones that disappear before you have a chance to read them fully, as they often do here. Another thing about Femme Fatale is that it never manages to be as sexy as it pretends to be. Despite making almost full use of the lead's assets, it is ultimately more tease than strip. This could be seen as a nod to the classics to which the film owes itself, but for a film that states itself as being a 'steamy thriller', I was expecting slightly more steam.

The film boils down a final and surprising twist. Throughout, the film keeps you guessing, despite being largely hinged on coincidence; and the twist does come as a surprise, but it is that awful, clichéd twist that everyone dreads. However, to De Palma's credit; he does almost make it good. To pull off a twist like the one in this film, the storyteller needs to be talented enough to not make the audience demand their money back when the movie finishes. When the twist first hit, my eyes were starting to role but credit has to be given to De Palma because even though the twist he's working with is silly, he manages to bring the film to a close which wraps it up, and does tie all the loose ends together. And although I'm still not sure if that was the right route for the film to take, it is well done.

Overall, Femme Fatale is an enjoyable thriller that is bound to keep most audience members on the edge of their seats throughout. It doesn't echo the brilliance of Dressed to Kill, Carrie, Sisters or most of De Palma's earlier oeuvre in the thriller genre; but it is the best film that the man has made since The Untouchables, and is therefore recommended.