Boxing Helena

I don't understand why people don't appreciate this movie. You have to realize that the beginning of the movie establishes how obsessed the main character is with Helena. She reminds him of his mother. Then he does not just have a "dream" about what happens like some people suggest. He is taking medication and drinks it down with a glass of wine. It is suggested that if he does not take the meds strange things happen to his mind. The hallucination helps him to realize how he needed to stay away from Helena before his obsession made something bad happen. It is established in the movie that he has some serious psychological problems to deal with because of his mother. I also find it amazing how they managed to turn the tables and have Helena realize that no one would ever love her the way he does. The seen where Bill Paxton comes in and is repulsed and Helena begs him to leave is amazingly powerful. I loved Julian Sands and Sherilyn Fenn. They were both perfect. He was pitiful and she was raw. Keep an open mind and watch for the meanings behind what the actors are doing.

Saw this when it first came out in 1993, when Sherilyn Fenn was the "It" girl. I only wanted to see it because it was directed by David Lynch's daughter and I wanted to see if she was as quirky as her legendary filmmaker dad. The first viewing made me think how great a Vincent Price vehicle this could have been. Like her father, Jennifer Lynch takes us on an eerie trip about obsession and control. Fenn is Helena, the one-time lover and object of a surgeon's (sands) affection. After an accident, he takes her to his house and amputates her limbs, then places her in a box and keeps her as his possession. Sands is subtly creepy and the film has a lot of psychological dynamics and is not as bad as its IMDb score suggests. This is a film you want to see when you're looking for something 180-degrees from run-of-the-mill.

A surgeon (Julian Sands) becomes obsessed with the seductive woman (Sherilyn Fenn) he once was in an affair with. Refusing to accept that she has moved on, he amputates her limbs and holds her captive in his mansion.

After receiving an NC-17 rating by the MPAA, the film was given an R-rating on appeal and released in the United States in September 1993, but received critical backlash and was a financial failure. Gene Siskel was one of the film's few defenders, writing, "I went to the theater to see it expecting the worst," and he called it, "a brave little movie that explored the provocative issue of how some frustrated men channel their inability to love a woman into cruelty." Genre fans might like it, because of the familiar faces -- Sands, Fenn and Bill Paxton. It does suffer from having no one really likable in the plot, and a few twists that may not sit well with some people.

This is an hypnotic, powerful tale of obsession and eroticism. Sherilyn Fenn is wonderful as Helena and gives a performance way beyond the cherry-sucking antics of Twin Peaks. Despite the torture inflicted on Helena, Fenn's portrayal never allows you to feel abject horror, as her Helena remains caustic, tough and impossible to break throughout the film. Julian Sands is good, although he maybe over-eggs the pudding a bit in some of the more gruelling scenes. The first sight of Helena propped up in bed without legs is never forgotten and the special effects make her amputations incredibly realistic. It's just a shame that the ending is such an appalling cop-out, sanitised for viewers who couldn't accept that love and need can blossom in the sickest of circumstances. In fact, I felt tears of frustration well up at the ending because I felt so cheated! If only it had been braver, this would have been a film of groundbreaking proportions. Fenn is great though and acts the hell out of Kim Basinger, the original choice. Watch it but don't build yourself up for the ending.

Don't pay any attention to the silly people giving this 4.8 and trust me when I tell you that this is a deep psychological journey into the depth of one person's narcissistic rejection that is so damned possibly true that it needs to be watched if only for the education and warning. The 4.8 is due to pretentious 'pro' reviewers thinking that the film is in bad taste etc when in fact it is a tour de force worthy of so much more... If Daddy Lynch had of made it then it'd of gotten a 7+ but because it is the daughter of the great man then the haters are out to hate. A heavy heavy film...