Steinesongo Too many fans seem to be blown away

Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Yazmin Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

info-12388 — Sexual pickups always end badly— Transsexuals are mentally disturbed people— Black men on subway platforms are dangerous— Nerdy guys can build anything— If you really put your mind to it, you can wear anything and it will fit just fine, even a nurse's uniform clearly four or five sizes too small.This really has to be one of the worst films I've ever seen, with the one star given it for the cinematography. Everything else — acting, writing, direction, even the freaking music — is so bad that it becomes almost unwatchable halfway through. Never mind that the film starts and ends with naked women taking showers (and no, author of synopsis, Angie isn't taking a shower while her husband is shaving: that entire sequence is a fantasy she needs to get off while her husband is screwing her in the next sequence) with plenty of way over the top shots of naked breasts and vaginae. Never mind that the film's twist that the doctor is actually the killer is glaringly apparent looooong before anyone in the movie figures it out. Never mind tat the music score makes it sound like something from the Hallmark Channel. This thing is just a sad, sad, sad piece of work: misogynist, transphobic, far too sadistic in its use of close-up violence to inform the audience that sex is bad, no matter how it's being carried out.Appalling.

avik-basu1889 'Dressed to Kill' for me is one of the prime examples of a film which doesn't really make you think a lot, but has numerous individual scenes which leave you in awe because of the masterful filmmaking on show. Anyone who has seen a few films from the past will be able to figure out that the spirit of Alfred Hitchcock looms large over pretty much every minute of this film apart from some other influences like Dario Argento and other Italian suspense filmmakers of the 70s.Let me first point out the aspects of the film that I loved:1. Angie Dickinson and Michael Caine are very good. Dickinson is supposed to portray a sexually frustrated wife who can't help but crave constant sexual fantasies. She does it very well. Her acting has a lot to do with her facial gestures and expressions because a lot of her scenes have very few words. Caine on the other hand is fascinating as the psychiatrist who always remains mysterious. He is a character that one can't really figure out and Caine brings the complexity out brilliantly.2. De Palma shows here why he is a masterful technician. He uses all his film school knowledge and influences to the core. We see long extended takes, a number of tracking shots, the juxtaposition of saturated colours in the rest of the film with the darkness in some crucial scenes, the use of split diopter shots and split screens,etc. Anyone who loves the craft of filmmaking will find the film a very exciting watch due to the various techniques being used. 3. The soundtrack for the film composed by Pino Donaggio is great. The main theme is beautiful.4. The famous Art Museum scene has to be given a special mention although it is just a further representation of De Palma's masterful filmmaking. It takes a brilliant director to have the capacity to execute a wordless scene like this. A whole plethora of emotions and numerous changes in mood are conveyed just through the camera work, editing and Angie Dickinson's facial acting. 5. Lastly, I'll say that 'Dressed to Kill' still offers a fun, engaging film watching experience to anyone. It is well directed and the 104 minutes run time just flows by.Let's come to what didn't work for me:1. I have already mentioned that this film is heavily influenced by Hitchcock's work. It is impossible to not get constantly reminded of 'Psycho' and to some extent of 'Vertigo', but that's also the problem here. The ideas that were present in Hitchcock's films were well explored by him that made the films thematically deep. 'Dressed to Kill' however in a way comes across as a film that wants to be Hitchcock-esque, but fails in exploring its ideas as well as Hitchcock did. The film really isn't about anything. There are certain ideas present in the film, but De Palma doesn't really seem interested in exploring them. The overt similarities with Hitchcock's scenes to some extent bring out the shortcomings in De Palma's ability to add layers and depth to the story.2. Nancy Allen, Keith Gordon and Dennis Franz didn't really impress me with their performances. I unfortunately found their performances to be a little artificial.3. The film for the most part remains sensual and sexy in a tasteful way. However there are two scenes in particular in the film which unfortunately looked a bit distasteful and sort of exploitative and this is something that also bugged me while watching 'Carrie'.So overall I found the film engaging and well made. One has to acknowledge De Palma's filmmaking prowess. However there are some glaring flaws in the film too which prevent it from making the transition from good to great. The style is brilliant, but the substance, not so much.

popcorninhell There's no doubt that director Brian De Palma has made an indelible mark on filmmaking as an art-form. His expansive filmography spans six decades and includes some of the most lavish and inspired horror films, the most feverishly opulent crime thrillers and in the case of Scarface (1983) one of the few remakes that is leaps and bounds better than the original. He's become such a legendary figure that esteemed contemporary director Noah Baumbach has released a documentary on De Palma's life's work aptly titled: De Palma (2015). Yet despite some truly inspiring work, De Palma's oeuvre is not without its faults, most of which are very much present in Dressed to Kill.The story concerns itself with the troubles of Doctor Robert Elliott (Caine) who is being stalked by a mysterious killer. Using the good doctor's razor, the killer victimizes the women in Elliott's life including middle-aged patient Kate Miller (Dickinson) and evening escort Liz Blake (Allen). The story is largely told from the perspective of these two women, who along with Detective Marino (Franz) and camera wunderkind Peter (Gordon) attempt to get to the bottom of it all.While in the day, the film was controversial and critically lauded for its dive into sexual proclivities, by today's standards, the film is an exercise in mischievously lechery. The camera leers at the women of the film with an emphasis on eroticism and seems to take delight in objectification. This is despite the fact that we're constantly pulled into either Kate or Liz's head-space. Both seem to approach their sexuality as a means to an ends; one a textbook nymphomaniac while the other works as a high-priced call girl. Yet both are undercut (literally) by the doctor, the detective, the killer; basically every important male character in the film. It's a weird game of sexual politics that is meant to evoke and heighten the suspense but only succeeds in making the audience feel unclean.Of course, that may be the point of the film. By forcing the audience to explore the dimensions of their own voyeurism, presumably they feel the shock and impact of Dressed to Kill final reveal. Such a technique has been used successfully by Hitchcock, David Lynch, David Fincher and even by De Palma himself in films like Obsession (1976) and Body Double (1984). Yet if you can't divorce yourself from modern mores, you may find yourself bewildered by the the film's more exploitative elements that go beyond titillation. The fact that the film exists primarily for the sake of shock value certainly takes away from some admittedly artful suspense building.The other element plaguing Dressed to Kill is its unbearably 80's aesthetic. Dressed to Kill is stuck somewhere between the loud palette of Scarface and the empty consumerist sleekness of Valley Girl (1983); and that's despite the fact that the grimy streets of crime-ridden New York City are front and center. Every time the city injects the frame with any kind of personality (which NYC does in nearly every film), Brian De Palma fights it with an attention- grabbing camera technique that emphasizes story details with the force of a bullhorn. I'm sure, just like the sexuality, De Palma's techniques were revolutionary but by today's standards, their distracting at best.While certainly not a terrible film, Dressed to Kill is weighted down by distracting visual elements, uncomfortably outdated notions of sexuality and a story that doesn't provide enough juice among its pulp. What's meant to be subtle is overt and what's overt should have been more subtle.

secondtake Dressed to Kill (1980)A nifty little thriller. The opening shower scene with Angie Dickinson showing all to the world was something of a sensation at the time, but I don't know that it makes much sense to the movie. It's all for the starved men in the audience, or maybe for the audaciousness of it, to let you know that this is going to be a stylized, almost fun, thriller.And it is fun! De Palma is a director who knows how to needle the viewer. His fans like being needled, I think (or like knowing that other people are being needled). Examples abound—"Carrie" and "Body Double" come to mind—where the sensational plot is partly an excuse to unleash some good old male voyeurism and sexism. Which is why the movies work so well for a certain audience.And they are well made, certainly, and edited with a clipped economy. "Dressed to Kill" has the advantage of Michael Caine in a leading role (though underused, for a two hour film). The rest of the cast is mediocre, frankly, holding up the character types needed for the main conflict.Oh, if you have any feelings for transgender issues, this movie will only reinforce the old stereotype that people with mixed or cross gender issues are sick and need help. Too bad, and shame on you, Mr. De Palma, for perpetuating that kind of thing. 35 years later, I know, but really.Final word—there are many brilliantly made sections of the movie, including a long stretch near the start in the museum that is a kind of hyped up Hitchcock style ("Vertigo"). Indeed, Hitchcock is being made love to all along here —"Psycho" with this movie's main character's double nature, and even "Rear Window" with the peering through windows. Which makes it a movie very much worth seeing. Caveats in place.