Glenn Close isn't in both, Swoosie Kurtz is.
-
lei3 — 16 years ago(November 02, 2009 08:57 PM)
Yeah I think I may SLIGHTLY prefer CI over DL. I can't say why reallymaybe because you can clearly see that Sebastian is falling for Annette, while in DL- you almost always second guessing- does he love her right now or is he just pretending?
So yeahI still like DL, but I might prefer CI just a teeny tiny bit more -
skutremur — 16 years ago(November 16, 2009 08:44 PM)
Dangerous Liaisons is pure cinema art with great casting and directing.the other one is pure hollywood crap for tv,it's just an adaptation for the common ignorant to get close to art.as the original is not for the "narrow minded modern hollywood soap opera lovers".ART IS NOT A DEMOCRACY ,IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY
-
quende — 15 years ago(June 22, 2010 04:56 PM)
"Cruel Intentions is for teenagers/ Dangerous Liaisons is for adults."
I couldn't agree more!
Although even if I had been a teenager I would still have preferred Dangerous Liaisons because it's simply a much better movie. Better script, better actors and of course much more beautiful for the simply reason that it's set in the 18th century and I'm a sucker for that.
Click:
http://www.whirlwind.nu
You can go to hell, hell, hell! -
CaptainDgro — 15 years ago(July 30, 2010 09:29 PM)
The problem with DL is that John Malkovich's character is a jackass and the viewer can't possibly be bothered to care what happens to him. Even after the turning point where he had supposedly fallen in love with Pfeiffer's character, it wasn't romantic at all. It was more of a "I'll marry you and have your children, and then backhand the **** out of you for no reason when no one else is looking" kind of love. Although that's the 18th century for you, I suppose. But oh yeah, Glenn Close was awesome and they put a lot of work into the costumes and ****. If that's the sort of thing that can validate an entire movie for you, well more power to ya I guess
At least in CI Ryan Phillipe's character is likeable and his relationship with Reese Witherspoon's character seems genuine, like something you could root for. I think anyone who said that CI was too anti-tragedy for a tragedy film has to examine it a little more closely. For example, yeah Witherspoon's character is alive at the end, but do you think she was happy about it? The **** she went through in that story would weigh heavy on any human being long after the fact. Pfeiffer just died like a *****. You can have a tragedy without inventing convoluted deaths. -
wiked_wich — 15 years ago(March 06, 2011 10:38 PM)
Interesting.
I prefer DL more for the richer story and dialogue and better cast in it, but also like CI for the modern-day story-telling. Overall, DL is superior to me.
Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability. -
sarizonana — 14 years ago(November 15, 2011 08:58 AM)
I like much more DL
It has much better performances by everyone
Especially Glenn Close no one can't compete with her.
Now I have to say that I liked cruel intentions too, it's not a masterpiece but whoever made the adpatatiion in to the modern days did a very good job.
I can understand the people who prefer CI.
There are some people who hate period dramas, so it's normal thier preference forvth teens version.
Anyway the story it's fantastic one of best fictional stories I've seen adapted to the screen and it's too flexible.
Producers could make thousands of adaptations of this story
The next ones could be with college students, it could with all adults in a corportatte world,they could take it back to the 18th century and still make a very successful remake.
I would never get tired of DL adaptations, Two Dangerous Liaisacions would have been much more exciting than the two snow whites coming soon -
Aibhlin — 14 years ago(November 26, 2011 07:57 AM)
If only Cruel Intentions had kept its original script the two movies could at least be comparable, despite CI's weaker cast
Seriously, if you haven't read the original script, go read it now. Much more real and intriguing than the watered-down, censored version.
One girls fears in the night are another girls paradise -
heartsinwonderland — 14 years ago(November 28, 2011 05:05 PM)
(Spoilers!)
Dangerous Liaisons. It has superb acting, and Glenn Close is perfect. It doesn't feel quite as extreme as CI. The ending is much better too. Sarah's character in CI was just plain awful and evil, and showed no emotion towards the death in the film. Glenn showed many emotions, and you see her breakdown at John's death. She loved to seduce, play games, and mess with people, but in the end she realized she went too far. Sarah was just plain monstrous.
Cruel Intentions tried to hard.
If being crazy means living life as if it matters, then I don't mind being completely insane. - RR -
madman_salv — 14 years ago(March 25, 2012 01:26 PM)
I think both are brilliant to be honest.
But I don't know, even though I adore Sarah Michelle Gellar, the ACTING in DL was better, however, the ending of Cruel Intentions just has that something (IMO of course).It could be down to the song choice they used for that specific ending scene. -
charlespdk — 13 years ago(May 22, 2012 12:35 PM)
I know I'm kind of necroing this thread, but whatever. I just saw DL and looked into the novel when I realized that this was the same plot as CI and made the connection. This maybe an issue of my age (25) but I prefer CI. Now, DL is the better made movie, of course. Who would argue that Gellar's performance is better than Glenn Close or that the Kumble made better decisions than Frears (a multi-award winning director)? Still, I'm pretty disinterested in period films like this especially one with a bunch of English actors being French. The plot itself is laughable in its condemnation of aristocratic privilege not matter how seriously you try to take it.
I prefer CI because it's simpler and has more fun with what it's doing. It doesn't take the premise so seriously and drag us down with its dumb morals and gravitas. It does portray those evil rich kids, but evil rich kids that I can at least recognize. And as far as movies about teens being bad go, it ranks pretty high up there. If CI is a better example of a teen movie is DL a better example of period films? I'd it's not, but that's just my opinion.