Mediocre movie. This time it's London that gets whored up by Sharon Stone. She is this crazy novelist sexy bitch. A psychiatrist, played by David Morrissey, evaluates her for a trial. She sucks him into her black hole of mind games -- I love mind games. The movie is already taking a beating at the box office, but it's not so bad, you can definitely wait for it to come out on DVD though.
Reportedly, Sharon Stone was turning down male co-stars left and right, and being a total control freak and that's why the movie got delayed so much (the original was released in 1992). And she ends up with David Morrissey? For one he is a troll, and his acting sucked ass. She was ok in it, but she can act, she could have done more. Watch Broken Flowers and Casino if you doubt me. She was brilliant in both.
Also, I loved that she was older for the role. I heard a lot of complaints about her age, but that's a bit of a bad double standard there. Dennis Quaid is constantly without his shirt. Pierce Brosnan and Harrison Ford get young girls all the time, and they act all sexy in their movies. Why can't Sharon do the same? She was hot in the movie, I don't think like it looked like she was trying too hard (ok, maybe a little), and her sexual interests weren't even young. You go Sharon! Just be less of a bitch next time and don't delay movies for more than 10 years, ok?
Now to our gay movie review. Not a lot of gay content here, not as much as I would expect after Sharon's character was labeled a bisexual killer everywhere since 1992, but what was there was pretty good.
In the first gay reference, this detective tells David Morrissey that Sharon had a girl buddy. The second time, Sharon says that this girl is good in bed. Also, we briefly see an artwork on the wall of the apartment of someone who died and the artwork depicts two hot girls kissing. All said and done naturally. Nice.
Apart from that, there is a lot of lesbian tension, especially with Charlotte Rampling (she is excellent), but not much actual lesbian content:
Even so, the small references were positive, non-judgmental, almost neutral (neutrality in most instances is actually pretty positive).
The Washington Blade has a great article on the gay reaction to the original Basic Instinct. Gays hated it, for good reason. In 1992, there were few representations of the gays in movies (we had only the killers and fuck-ups, like the killer in Silence of the Lambs). The world is different now, and I don't think Basic Instinct 2 throws a negative light on the gays. Quite the opposite.
Comments