Back in 1990, people didn't have to deal with the horrible slate of fly-by-night movies that die at the box office after one week. So many movies that would have been rejected by the studio heads for mainstream distribution back then have been allowed in (Glitter, Freddy Got Fingered, Tomcats, Ready To Rumble, the N'SYNC movie, Teen Movie, and 30 lame horror films, etc.), and then throw in the over-hyped blockbusters. Altogether, a good enough reason for a true lover of cinema like myself to stay clear of movie theaters.
Because of all that, I think this movie deserves to be looked at again. If it was the worst film for 1990, then yes, it's a contender. Carre Otis is very beautiful, but her presence as an actress is awful. She either stands there and looks pretty or delivers small lines in a forced manner. Mickey Rourke, playing the same character he portrayed in the "pre-quel" 9 1/2 Weeks, just walks around trying to be cool. Jacqueline Bisset and Bruce Greenwood do a good acting job, but their role in the film are to support the growing sexuality between Otis and Rourke. And yes, the storyline is nothing but an excuse for Zalman King's arty sex coupling.
BUT, if you compare this film with the drivel coming out these days, then this movie is much better. First, it was highly controversial (for a reason or two). Second, I think the sensuality is very erotic, because of the behind the scenes relationship of Mickey and Carre, or in a lot of the other assorted scenes. Third, Rio is a truly beautiful setting for sin, and the movie depicts it's partying attitude in spades (almost too much). And finally, this movie doesn't lie about it's intentions. If you wanted a sexually charged erotic drama/thriller, it doesn't disappoint. Yes, it's pretty slow, but the it's erotic build-up is very good. Bonus: no fake bodies.
Bottom line: It's not Citizen Kane, and for 1990 it was terrible, but for 2001-02, it's a heck of a lot better than today's releases.
