A beautiful but naïve aspiring television personality films a documentary on teenagers with a darker ulterior motive.A beautiful but naïve aspiring television personality films a documentary on teenagers with a darker ulterior motive.A beautiful but naïve aspiring television personality films a documentary on teenagers with a darker ulterior motive.
- Nominated for 1 BAFTA Award
- 7 wins & 17 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
There are some good things here - most notably the performances of Nicolle Kidman and Joaquin Phoenix - that nevertheless fail to coalesce into a satisfying whole because of the confusion of the central story. Kidman is great as the feather-brained harpy who will stop at nothing to be on television - the absolute narrowness of her world-view to the parameters of what fits onto the TV screen makes her a kind of female counterpart to Jim Carrey's Cable guy. But her single-minded devotion to this aim causes her subsequent actions to make little sense: would someone as ambitious as her really stick around in a nowhere New England town (humorously named Little Hope) rather than set out for the big time of New York or Los Angeles? Such a transplant would have given the movie a kick, since it would have set Suzanne's fundamental cluelessness against the reality of the television industry and how it actually works (to perhaps more humorous results than are displayed here).
But even if you can buy Suzanne remaining in her isolated little hamlet (and it must be said that the setting does allow for some subtler, more understated humor than the scenario drawn above would have), does it make any sense whatsoever for her to get involved with, much less marry, the Matt Dillon character? If we're really supposed to buy her as someone who thinks about nothing but television and making it in that medium, then what could she possibly see in Dillon, who is barely even familiar with TV? Any explanation would probably be lame, but what's lamer is the fact that the filmmakers don't even try to supply one! This leaves you with the sick feeling that it only happens in order to get the plot moving - the worst possible reason for ANYTHING to happen!
This fundamental flaw in plot logic really sinks the movie before it even has time to get going. That's a shame, because there are SO MANY good things here: Kidman's performance is wonderfully perky and shallow in all the right ways, and the candy-colored outfits that have been designed for her are a scream just in themselves. The narrative style is inventive, being told in flashback as a series of interviews - "Hard Copy" style, or even "Oprah" style - with the main participants, which in itself forms a meta-critique upon television and its reconstruction of the world (although, curiously, the film keeps dropping in and out of this style, and so waters down its effect). Finally, Phoenix is at once both hilarious and heartbreaking in his portrayal of a trailer park teenager so besotted with Kidman and the sophistication she supposedly represents (the joke's on him, of course) that he'd literally do anything for her, which is exactly his undoing. Watching him, I kept thinking of Dustin Hoffman's groundbreaking performance in The Graduate and how it operated on the twin levels of satire and true sympathy all at once. Phoenix, in my opinion, hits the same bulls-eye.
Other enjoyable performances come from Ileana Douglas as Dillon's sister, wonderfully nasty and sarcastic when discussing Kidman (and then surprisingly touching and vulnerable when you're least expecting it) and Wayne Knight as the head of the cable station where Suzanne comes to work. If you know Knight only as Newman on TV's "Seinfeld" and so believe him only capable of wild over-acting, his performance here is a treat: his baffled and understated responses to Suzanne's dippy ideas and shenanigans are some of the funniest things in the picture.
But in the end it all comes to nothing. The good things in this movie just can't salvage the fact that the central story has not been worked out with enough rigor. The film spins its wheels beautifully, but it simply has nowhere to go.
But even if you can buy Suzanne remaining in her isolated little hamlet (and it must be said that the setting does allow for some subtler, more understated humor than the scenario drawn above would have), does it make any sense whatsoever for her to get involved with, much less marry, the Matt Dillon character? If we're really supposed to buy her as someone who thinks about nothing but television and making it in that medium, then what could she possibly see in Dillon, who is barely even familiar with TV? Any explanation would probably be lame, but what's lamer is the fact that the filmmakers don't even try to supply one! This leaves you with the sick feeling that it only happens in order to get the plot moving - the worst possible reason for ANYTHING to happen!
This fundamental flaw in plot logic really sinks the movie before it even has time to get going. That's a shame, because there are SO MANY good things here: Kidman's performance is wonderfully perky and shallow in all the right ways, and the candy-colored outfits that have been designed for her are a scream just in themselves. The narrative style is inventive, being told in flashback as a series of interviews - "Hard Copy" style, or even "Oprah" style - with the main participants, which in itself forms a meta-critique upon television and its reconstruction of the world (although, curiously, the film keeps dropping in and out of this style, and so waters down its effect). Finally, Phoenix is at once both hilarious and heartbreaking in his portrayal of a trailer park teenager so besotted with Kidman and the sophistication she supposedly represents (the joke's on him, of course) that he'd literally do anything for her, which is exactly his undoing. Watching him, I kept thinking of Dustin Hoffman's groundbreaking performance in The Graduate and how it operated on the twin levels of satire and true sympathy all at once. Phoenix, in my opinion, hits the same bulls-eye.
Other enjoyable performances come from Ileana Douglas as Dillon's sister, wonderfully nasty and sarcastic when discussing Kidman (and then surprisingly touching and vulnerable when you're least expecting it) and Wayne Knight as the head of the cable station where Suzanne comes to work. If you know Knight only as Newman on TV's "Seinfeld" and so believe him only capable of wild over-acting, his performance here is a treat: his baffled and understated responses to Suzanne's dippy ideas and shenanigans are some of the funniest things in the picture.
But in the end it all comes to nothing. The good things in this movie just can't salvage the fact that the central story has not been worked out with enough rigor. The film spins its wheels beautifully, but it simply has nowhere to go.
This is black comedy at its finest,a wonderfully incisive film.I've seen it many times and it gets better with every viewing.This is one of Gus Van Sants best films,right up there with Drugstore Cowboy.This was the film that proved Nicole Kidman was a force to be reckoned with.Its a brutally good part,and she doesn't waste it.Giving a genuinely unhinged performance,as well as a jaw droppingly sexy one.The performances are all excellent though,Dillon plays the poor dumb schmuck who doesen't know what he's let himself in for with ease.Joaquin Phoenix is great as probably the dimmest character in movie history!Best of all is Illeana Douglas as Dillons wonderfully cynical sister."What did i first think of her?-Four letters beginning with 'c',you know......cold!" This is beautifully put together using mock docu footage,flashbacks,and straight filmaking.Clever,intelligent,and razor sharp,films like this are all to rare.Look out for director David Cronenberg,in a wickedly good cameo!
While Gus Van Sant's mockumentary approach does not always work great with Buck Henry's expertly sharp and funny screenplay, 'To Die For' is held together by a brilliant Nicole Kidman performance. Kidman - with her divine looks and devilish smiles - owns every second of this picture that even when she isn't on screen her presence is felt. Kidman is surrounded by an outstanding supporting cast, from Matt Dillon to Joaquin Phoenix to Illeana Douglas to Casey Affleck, giving memorable performances in their own right
A lot of people dislike To Die For. The film's detractors largely find fault with its tone and subject matter. It is really the epitome of black comedy, and anyone expecting either pure comedy or pure suspense will be very disappointed.
That said, To Die For deserves a place in film history as one of the sharpest satires of television and fame, ranking alongside films such as Network. Forgive the cliche, but Nicole Kidman's performance is truly a revelation -- she shows talents that were clearly invisible in earlier travesties such as Far & Away and are only now beginning to resurface. But the real discovery in this film is the magnificent Illeana Douglass. It is scandalous that few people mention her amazing work when discussing To Die For. If for nothing else, the film should be seen for the work of Kidman and Douglass. (Note also that To Die For has one of Joaquin Phoenix's earliest roles.)
As other commentators here have suggested, you are not guaranteed to love this film. Nonetheless, as far as I'm concerned, it's required viewing if you're a film fan.
That said, To Die For deserves a place in film history as one of the sharpest satires of television and fame, ranking alongside films such as Network. Forgive the cliche, but Nicole Kidman's performance is truly a revelation -- she shows talents that were clearly invisible in earlier travesties such as Far & Away and are only now beginning to resurface. But the real discovery in this film is the magnificent Illeana Douglass. It is scandalous that few people mention her amazing work when discussing To Die For. If for nothing else, the film should be seen for the work of Kidman and Douglass. (Note also that To Die For has one of Joaquin Phoenix's earliest roles.)
As other commentators here have suggested, you are not guaranteed to love this film. Nonetheless, as far as I'm concerned, it's required viewing if you're a film fan.
In Little Hope, New Hampshire, the beautiful and hot Suzanne Stone (Nicole Kidman) wants to be famous and is an aspiring TV personality. She marries Larry Maretto (Matt Dillon), whose father owns a restaurant, and convinces him to use this savings for the university buying a Mustang for her and a condo. Then she accepts to work for the local station receiving minimum wage to develop her own projects, including one with youths in a public school. She meets the punks Jimmy Emmett (Joaquin Phoenix), Russel Hines (Casey Affleck) and Lydia Mertz (Alison Folland) and records hours of tapes interviewing them. When Larry invites her to work at the restaurant in a talent show that he wants to implement, Suzanne sees a threat to her planned career and decides to get rid of her husband. She seduces Jimmy and convinces him that she is in love with him. Then she tells that Larry is a brutal man and Jummy decides to kill him. What will happen to Larry?
"To Die For" is a great tale of ambition and manipulation. Gus Van Sant uses the documentary style to show a beautiful and sexy woman that uses her limited intelligence and her body to reach what she has planned for her career. The cast has great performance and Nicole Kidman is perfect in the role of Suzanne Stone. The screenplay has a sort of black humor and the conclusion is ironical. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Um Sonho Sem Limites" ("A Dream Without Limits")
Note: On 19 March 2025, I saw this film again.
"To Die For" is a great tale of ambition and manipulation. Gus Van Sant uses the documentary style to show a beautiful and sexy woman that uses her limited intelligence and her body to reach what she has planned for her career. The cast has great performance and Nicole Kidman is perfect in the role of Suzanne Stone. The screenplay has a sort of black humor and the conclusion is ironical. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Um Sonho Sem Limites" ("A Dream Without Limits")
Note: On 19 March 2025, I saw this film again.
Did you know
- TriviaAfter working in this movie, Casey Affleck brought director Gus Van Sant a screenplay by his brother Ben Affleck and Ben's friend Matt Damon; it became Will Hunting (1997).
- GoofsAt Larry Maretto's burial, the Catholic priest says "in nominis patris et filius et spiritus sanctus", getting most of the endings wrong; correct is "in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti", which any priest would know.
- Quotes
Jimmy Emmett: Any time it rains, or when there's thunder and lightning, or when it snows, I have to jack off.
- Crazy creditsA scene plays out behind the end credits where Janice skates on the ice at the location where a significant moment in the story took place.
- SoundtracksSusie Q
Written by Eleanor Broadwater, Dale Hawkins and Stan Lewis (as Stanley J. Lewis)
- How long is To Die For?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Todo por un sueño
- Filming locations
- Black River, Georgina, Ontario, Canada(final skating scene)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $20,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $21,284,514
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $386,510
- Oct 1, 1995
- Gross worldwide
- $21,287,694
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content