A Kiss Before Dying

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

A thriller, not a great one, but a thriller nonetheless, 2007-07-16
This is the type of movie that separates me from most movie critics. They said this was awful, poorly directed, incompetently acted, foolishly presented and an insult to the 1956 original and book. One critic went so far as to say Sean Young played two roles (twins) which gave her the opportunity to play two roles poorly. br / br /I don't argue with any of that. My wife guessed one of the principal clues about 5 mintues into the movie. However, I have to say this movie was interesting from the opening scene and it kept me and my wife involved throughout. It may have been bad but it was effective. It had great studio values and the overly dramatic musical score gave some scenes an affect they didn't have otherwise. Its violent scenes had more of a surreal-life 1970s aura than the cliinically, computer graphic displayed overlay of a 1990s movie. It is also the first film I've ever seen where a train runs over someone (not too graphically). br / br /If you haven't seen "A Kiss Before Dying", the story involves a disturbed young man (Matt Dillon) who romances one sister, then her twin, (and kills a few people in the process) to gain access to her rich dad's wealth. It's taken from a popular 1950s book by Ira Levin and this is the second film treatment, the first coming in 1956 with then-young Robert Wagner in the role of the psycho. br / br /Critics everywhere lamabasted this film as being inane, overdone, sophomoric and so excessively violent it bordered on exploitation. All I can say about that is I tried to watch "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" the night before and was so bored by the silly thing I turned it off after a half-hour. Meanwhile, I stood attentive to "A Kiss Before Dying" to the bitter end, which I might add introduces questions not resolved during the story. br / br /Maybe this says something about my taste in movies. I'm betting it also says something about the entertainment values in films and I think there's more of it in this one than a lot of people want to admit.

0 of 0 people found the following review helpful:

not quite as good as the original film, 2007-05-12
This movie is a remake of an earlier one. The origi nal was far better... br /better script, acting, and atmosphere.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

YOUNG AND FOOLISH, 2005-03-25
Sean Young is the main reason this adaptation of the classic novel and 1956 film doesn't come up to snuff. She's a lovely lady, but her performance in this one is so uninspired and apathetic, one cannot feel for her or cheer her on in her quest to find out who murdered her twin sister. The audience knows early on that Matt Dillon is the nasty culprit, a true sociopath who will stop at nothing to get what he wants. A contrived and convoluted script doesn't help either. For instance, after Young finds out who her husband really is, what makes her sure that he killed her sister? And how does Dillon know that Young is at his mother's house? The supporting cast gamely tries, even Diane Ladd as Dillon's mother, and James Russo as a cop turned security guard. But it's all laid out so methodically lame, it just doesn't work out. By the time Dillon gets his just desert, who really cares?

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

watchable , 2005-03-14
but just that. As a thriller, it has a long way to go, largely because of a bad script and medicore acting. Sean Young is so average it's sad. You can't tell if her character is grieving, scheming, uncaring or just plain stupid in many parts. Matt Dillon tried hard, but he also couldn't rise about his level of mediocrity. Still, as noted earlier, it's watchable as opposed to a complete piece of trash.

0 of 5 people found the following review helpful:

Stick with the Original, 2005-03-14
Yet another example of Hollywood's inability to come up with original material. Ira Levin's novel (even Ayn Rand liked it!) had been effectively adapted for the screen in 1956 but heaven forbid that the urge to fix things unbroken should remain unfulfilled! "Fixing," in this case, includes gimmicks. Instead of two mere sisters we have...ta DA!...IDENTICAL TWINS! And not merely content to have a psycho male character, why not have the normal female character played by a real-life SUSPECTED psycho?! Sean Young has given me the creeps since No Way Out, and it seems my hunch was justified; I later read assertions of some pretty bizarre behavior (it has been my experience that where smoke is evident, fire must be nearby). In addition, we have the antagonist staging his own death to throw his mama off the track, a cigarette lighter, ...you get the idea. br /Unlike the (much more tasteful) original, this film is sometimes explicitly sexual, so if viewing AKBD is, for some reason, essential to your well-being and titillation is a priority, go for this one by all means, especially if fidelity to the source material isn't important (be aware, though, that it's much less suspenseful than the original). The print looks and sounds good and is widescreen, so things could be worse (I guess). br /Speaking of weirdness, just to give you an idea of what we're dealing with here, either Young has managed to channel Virginia Leith (the original's female lead) or is bending over backwards to sound just like her. Imitation is most often NOT the sincerest form of flattery; not only is lifting someone else's style cheap and indicative of a lack of talent and/or incentive, it's just REALLY creepy. br /Rental material, for sure.