IMDb RATING
3.9/10
1.7K
YOUR RATING
A reporter witnesses a brutal murder and becomes entangled in a mystery involving a pair of Siamese twins who were separated at birth, one of them forced to live under the eye of a watchful,... Read allA reporter witnesses a brutal murder and becomes entangled in a mystery involving a pair of Siamese twins who were separated at birth, one of them forced to live under the eye of a watchful, controlling psychiatrist.A reporter witnesses a brutal murder and becomes entangled in a mystery involving a pair of Siamese twins who were separated at birth, one of them forced to live under the eye of a watchful, controlling psychiatrist.
- Awards
- 2 nominations total
Featured reviews
As of this writing, there are only 14 reviews on IMDB with wildly fluctuating ratings. Most of the reviewers were not familiar with the 1972 DePalma film it's based on, & therefore can't be horror fans. Those of us who are know that it takes balls to remake a DePalma, who took horror to new artistic heights (rarely touched since) during horror's golden era.
It's been long enough since I had seen the original that I had actually forgotten the story, & I still liked this movie, even though psycho-thrillers aren't among my faves. I was shocked when the truth was revealed, & confused until the final scene. Fully engaged throughout.
This is a good movie even if you don't know it's origins. It took balls & it succeeded.
It's been long enough since I had seen the original that I had actually forgotten the story, & I still liked this movie, even though psycho-thrillers aren't among my faves. I was shocked when the truth was revealed, & confused until the final scene. Fully engaged throughout.
This is a good movie even if you don't know it's origins. It took balls & it succeeded.
While participating in a party for children in a clinic administrated by Dr. Philip Lacan (Stephen Rea), Dr. Dylan Wallace (Dallas Roberts) witnesses an incident between the host and the Spectator reporter Grace Collier (Chloë Sevigny) and he has a conversation with Dr. Lacan's assistant and former wife Angelique Tristiana (Lou Doillon). Her offers a ride to her to downtown and they have one night stand in the apartment of her twin sister Annabel. On the next morning, Dr. Wallace buys an ice-cream cake to celebrate the birthday of the sisters and returns to the apartment. Meanwhile the snoopy Grace that wants to expose the experiments of Dr. Lacan breaks in his office and finds that Angelique's apartment is monitored by many surveillance cameras. She witnesses Angelique stabbing Dr. Wallace to death and she calls the police. However the detectives do not find any evidence indicating a murder in the flat. Grace goes further in her investigation and discovers the hidden secret about Dr. Lacan, Angelique and herself.
"Sisters" is a messy story after a promising beginning. The screenplay is absolutely confused and the weird plot is unrealistic. The attractive cover of the Brazilian DVD with a picture of the sisters walking together is extremely beautiful and the best that I saw in this awful flick. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Almas Gêmeas" ("Twin Souls")
"Sisters" is a messy story after a promising beginning. The screenplay is absolutely confused and the weird plot is unrealistic. The attractive cover of the Brazilian DVD with a picture of the sisters walking together is extremely beautiful and the best that I saw in this awful flick. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Almas Gêmeas" ("Twin Souls")
Redo of Brian DePalma's "Sisters". Reporter Grace Collier (Chloe Sevigny) witnesses a murder from a computer cam and a window (don't ask). She gets involved with a creepy doctor named Phillip Lacan (Stephen Rea), his ex-wife/patient named Angelique (Lou Doillon)...and the murderer.
The original was no masterpiece but it was a quick strong thriller. There was no reason to remake it but that never stopped Hollywood. It starts off OK but falls to pieces as it goes on. For starters the acting is terrible. Sevigny and Rea can be good--but not here. They seemed drugged and just walked through their roles. Doillon is OK but she can't carry the whole movie. There are two VERY bloody murders that liven things up briefly. I saw the original so I kept comparing them and this one kept coming up short. Everything seems to be just going through the motions--there's no action or urgency in this. They make a few changes in a nod to modern technology but it doesn't help. To make matters worse the ending is completely changed...and it makes next to no sense! Why follow the old movie so completely and then just veer off into a completely different resolution...and a bad one at that? I wasn't even aware that this even existed till it popped up on late night cable TV. Obviously it bombed badly. Avoid this train wreck and seek out the original.
The original was no masterpiece but it was a quick strong thriller. There was no reason to remake it but that never stopped Hollywood. It starts off OK but falls to pieces as it goes on. For starters the acting is terrible. Sevigny and Rea can be good--but not here. They seemed drugged and just walked through their roles. Doillon is OK but she can't carry the whole movie. There are two VERY bloody murders that liven things up briefly. I saw the original so I kept comparing them and this one kept coming up short. Everything seems to be just going through the motions--there's no action or urgency in this. They make a few changes in a nod to modern technology but it doesn't help. To make matters worse the ending is completely changed...and it makes next to no sense! Why follow the old movie so completely and then just veer off into a completely different resolution...and a bad one at that? I wasn't even aware that this even existed till it popped up on late night cable TV. Obviously it bombed badly. Avoid this train wreck and seek out the original.
Separated conjoined twins are investigated by a diligent reporter in this pointless and plodding remake of a mediocre yet vastly superior Brian DePalma film. Horridly acted with characters that one simply can not care about. The more well-known actors that appear in this mess should feel ashamed. I'm more than a tad angered that I waisted my time on this one. I guess I was sucked in by the usually dependable Stephen Rea. Consider this a lesson learned to steer clear of Douglas Buck written/directed films
My Grade: D-
Eye Candy: Lou Doillon shows T&A; Chloe Sevigny gets topless
My Grade: D-
Eye Candy: Lou Doillon shows T&A; Chloe Sevigny gets topless
Brian de Palma's 1973 Siamese twin opus, SISTERS, is a film ripe for remaking; it has a low budget, rough-around-the-edges feel to it that would definitely benefit from some Hollywood gloss and an enhanced budget. Sadly, this 2006 remake is an equally cheap and inferior version of the same story that muddies its narrative from the outset.
The film looks and feels like it was made by amateurs. The director is clearly way out of his comfort zone because he delivers a movie that looks cheap and like it's a movie, instead of natural feeling. Don't hope for pacing or tension or excitement because those qualities are out of action. The cast is also a disappointment and it feels like a lot of the performances are rushed, as if the actors were in a hurry to get on with it and then just go afterwards lest they become too associated with the production.
Stephen Rea is a case in point; he barely registers in the pivotal surgeon role and THE X-FILES' William B. Davis is even less noticeable. Chloe Sevigny (AMERICAN PSYCHO) is horrible as the reporter lead, Lou Doillon inferior to Margot Kidder in the twin role and the only actor who makes an impact is THE WALKING DEAD's Dallas Roberts. Stick with the original and give this redundant outing a miss.
The film looks and feels like it was made by amateurs. The director is clearly way out of his comfort zone because he delivers a movie that looks cheap and like it's a movie, instead of natural feeling. Don't hope for pacing or tension or excitement because those qualities are out of action. The cast is also a disappointment and it feels like a lot of the performances are rushed, as if the actors were in a hurry to get on with it and then just go afterwards lest they become too associated with the production.
Stephen Rea is a case in point; he barely registers in the pivotal surgeon role and THE X-FILES' William B. Davis is even less noticeable. Chloe Sevigny (AMERICAN PSYCHO) is horrible as the reporter lead, Lou Doillon inferior to Margot Kidder in the twin role and the only actor who makes an impact is THE WALKING DEAD's Dallas Roberts. Stick with the original and give this redundant outing a miss.
Did you know
- TriviaThis film is a remake of Sisters (1973).
- GoofsDr. Kent names "methanol" as one of the drugs used to treat Sophia. Methanol is highly toxic and not only has no therapeutic value but would have killed her if given in any significant quantity.
- ConnectionsRemake of Soeurs de sang (1972)
- SoundtracksSuite No. 1 for Cello Solo: Prelude
Composed by Johann Sebastian Bach
Arranged by Edward Dzubak and Gretta Cohn
Assistant Engineer: Eli Cohn
- How long is Sisters?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Languages
- Also known as
- Sisters - Soeurs de sang
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $5,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 32 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content