Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

disgusting, overrated, pointless

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

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

With the clouds running through blue skies and the majestic mountains ever present you'll know Desperate Hours has American maverick, Michael Cimino at the helm. There are few auteurist directors who have this ability to impose themselves on an audience with the 'look' of their film stock within the first few minutes. Kubrick, Bergman and Tarkovsky come to mind, of course. Sadly, we are yet again left trapped between a conscientious artist trying to feed us caviar while the studio chew up some cardboard and spit it out:'According to some official sources, Michael Cimino's original cut of Desperate Hours was mutilated by the film's producers, resulting in a very badly edited film filled with plot holes. The only known proof of any deleted scenes are some stills which seemingly show a few of them.'It's sad to think Cimino didn't have the chance to re-cut this film like with Heaven's Gate. Still, the acting is fantastic; Mickey Rourke was at the height of his powers here. There is humour thrown between the tension; some of the more subtle exchanges and glances between the characters are masterful. Like in the 1955 version, there is subtext referring to class, and references to the changing nature of American society. Cimino also references the influence of advertising, although the theme is never developed (thanks again to you-know-who!) As Rourke's Bosworth spews out:'That's why America is becoming a second rate country!'The editing by Chris Rouse/Peter Hunt is a mess. Choppy and careless. The ending sees the most obvious intervention by the bean counters. I could almost hear the argument between director and producers during the closing scenes:'Give me more time. This doesn't make sense. There must be at least some character resolution!''No, Michael You've spent our budget. Don't mess with us, we're not United Artists. We'll tell the press!'For years I had avoided watching Desperate Hours based on the reviews; but if you are a fan of Cimino, it is easy to see past the choppy edits and plot holes. The cinematography is often a joy, as is the direction of the fantastic cast, costume/set designs and cars. At times I felt like shouting out 'Michael, you spoil us!' because you don't see many filmmakers today who are allowed to treat their audience as adults. Thank you Michael. RIP

Desperate Hours is a film that makes itself bigger than it is. Have I written that starting line in another review? I do like those movies, though. Just learning this is a remake, again I'm a bit embittered, as I thought this was a true blue original. I love this movie, every time, I see it, and yes there are some faults, and some real idiotic moments, really picking them out this time, but hey, that just adds a funny element to this movie, that didn't garner a cinematic release in Adelaide where instead, it played in a film festival showing at the State Theatre, Zandalee was also another. Following a court trial, convicted killer Michael Bosworth (Rourke, very good) absconds with two accomplices, one his ex con brother, Elias Koteas who doesn't have much to do in the film, and his childhood friend, ex con Albert, David Morse as we've never seen him before, a slow, fiesty, idiot of low intellect. His dying scene, is just another bombastic moment, but it's funny, tragic, and memorable. Part of this goes to the opening of the music score. The three crims, yeah for some reason, hold out, in the expensive confines of a well to do family. And it's not the really best time to be dropping in, or not? You'll find the real answer at the end of the film. The house is maintained by Nora (Mimi Rodgers, strong as always) and her teen daughter Shawnee Smith, really good and her little brother. She's separated from her much older ex, Hopkins, who's a real provider for the family, as well as being a responsible father, who, if you can believe, has been busy chasing young skirts half his age. Good for him. Then Rodger's family peace, is rudely and silkily invaded by Rourke, and company. Rourke plays such a smooth psychopath, who's very intelligent, and you don't know when he will lose it. He's made his character intriguing, though he has done better acting. How intelligent is he? Hey, he let Hopkins go by himself, to withdraw, a substantial amount of moolah, from the bank, while they stay holding court, risking the possibility of Hopkins, informing authorities, trusting him that much. I pondered that scene, when judging Rourke's manipulative, edgy, psychopathic character. That's exactly what you'd do, if you were dealing with that particular psychopath. You wouldn't tell authorities. And as for them crashing this family's home. Yeah wheels are turning, right? But think about how high profile, Bosworth is, and for him to escape, you pretty much would have to take shelter somewhere, a place, where the cops wouldn't automatically assume he's hiding. But we have another smart cookie, Crouse, the best performance in the film, as the defiant and bulldogged female FBI agent, heading her team of cops, sharpshooters, baiting Rourke by using his defence attorney/girlfriend, (Lynch, never looking hotter). The film relies on the interaction of characters, and I must say, I found this best, in the small exchange of hateful dialogue, between daughter (Smith) and Rourke. That worked much better than what transpired between him and Hopkins. There was no real chemistry at all, no real spark, which kind of annoyed me. Something you don't want happening between two leads. I really wish Koteas had a chance to do more, where he really bloodies it up in the end. DH may have it's share of faults, and is quite disfavored I see, but it's also bloody entertaining and to a point, unintentionally funny. Love film's opening score, and it's speeding car shots and masterfully breathtaking. Like a few of these hostage, mostly one set piece dramas, DH doesn't have the most tense atmosphere, as these others, but may'be I didn't feel like this, the first time I saw it. But I really understand the reasons for some of the character's actions, where other reviewers may think, "As if". May'be this could be the most misjudged thing about the film.

Lawyer Nancy Breyers (Kelly Lynch) is defending robber and murderer Michael Bosworth (Mickey Rourke) for killing a guard in prison. She helps him escape but she falls behind. Albert (David Morse) and his brother Wally Bosworth (Elias Koteas) drive the getaway. Brenda Chandler (Lindsay Crouse) releases Nancy to track down Bosworth. Tim (Anthony Hopkins) and Nora Cornell (Mimi Rogers) are splitting up their family with their children (Shawnee Smith, Danny Gerard). He's broken up with his girlfriend and looking to reunite but she insists on selling the house. Michael and his men take over the house and keep the Cornells hostage. He makes contact with Nancy as he waits for her to join them.Director Michael Cimino remakes the 1955 film. He's trying way too hard to be stylish. Some of the acting is too over-the-top. If he could dial some of it back, the movie could be an intense crime thriller. Micky Rourke can be an intense bad guy without any help but Cimino insists on pushing it. Everybody is overacting. The worst is probably Lindsay Crouse. Cimino is using every camera move and dramatic music. It's a little ridiculous to release Nancy but the call to her apartment is a little more ridiculous. The cops could easily be listening on the other end. It's not as if the message is in code. The movie could have been great but Cimino's relentlessness squanders the work of some great actors.

In reality, DESPERATE HOURS (1990), a remake of the classic Humphrey Bogart-Fredric March film of the 50s, is a BAD movie, but still watchable due to it's badness! It boasts a talented cast of actors (Anthony Hopkins, Mickey Rourke, Lindsay Crouse, Mimi Rogers, David Morse, Kelly Lynch, Elias Koteas), all of whom had either had been in,or were about to be in, acclaimed works.It came out a year before Hopkins would do "Silence of the Lambs (1991)", for which he would take home the Best Actor Oscar, and go on to do several more acclaimed films in the 90s, receiving Oscar noms for most of them. Rogers would star in "The Rapture (1991)", for which she may have robbed a nomination for Best Actress. Lynch had just done "Drugstore Cowboy (1989)", one of that year's most acclaimed films. Crouse was 3 years removed from starring in arguably David Mamet's best film "House of Games (1987)". Morse was on his way to having a very successful career in small roles most notably, "The Green Mile(1999)". Koteas gave a scene-stealing performance a few years earlier in "Some Kind of Wonderful(1987)" and was among the army of cast members in one of the 90s most acclaimed films "The Thin Red Line (1998)". Last but certainly not least, is arguably the most famous (or should I say infamous!) of this eclectic cast, Mickey Rourke, who had just come off a dynamic decade in the 80s with hit and acclaimed movies such as "Body Heat (1980, his film debut)", "Diner" (1982), "9 1/2 weeks (1986)", "Year of the Dragon (1985)", and "Barfly (1987)". And to top it all off, "Desperate Hours" was directed by an Oscar-winning director, Michael Cimino (of "The Deer Hunter" fame). So what went wrong? I think the main problem with "Desperate Hours" is that it takes itself too seriously. There is no character filter or décorum. EVERYTHING is over-the-top, starting with the very loud and abrasive opening courtroom scene that sets the odd tone of the film. The judge yells. The lawyers yell. The accused gets to yell (which makes no sense). The accused in question is dangerous, sociopathic criminal Michael Bosworth (essayed by Rourke), who is about to be sentenced. His hot lawyer and lover (Lynch) helps him escape, then he goes on the run with his younger brother (played by Elias Koteas) and his brother's very big and very slow best friend (Morse).The 3 fugitives seek refuge in an affluent suburban neighborhood in the home of the fractured Cornell family, who are taken hostage by Bosworth and his cronies. The husband-father Tim (Hopkins) is just visiting as he and wife Nora (Rogers, who I actually believe delivers the most convincing performance of the film) are estranged and about to be divorced due to Tim's affair. The Cornells have 2 children, the teen-aged May (played by then-unknown Shawnee Smith, now of "Becker" and "Saw" fame) and Zack (played by Danny Gerard). In hot pursuit of Bosworth is FBI agent Brenda Chandler (Crouse), who end up using the lawyer as bait to help entrap Bosworth.This movie is incredibly awkward yet somehow, I find it immensely enjoyable! Everything is so over-the-top to the point it's hard to look away: the acting, the zooming camera shots, the hyper score. This remake came out in 1990, a year where movies were in transition of moving away from the dated look of 80s movies, but not yet adopting the dated look of the 90s movies. By having it's own unique style and not conforming to either decade, it actually makes the movie look kind of fresh when one watches it over 20 years later, as the focus is more on the beautiful scenery and setting, especially that huge mansion, than anything else.I know that a kidnapping-hostage situation SHOULD BE intense, but the actors' performances seem more like histrionics and hyperventilating acting than natural reactions to events. Characters are overly emotional at even the most minor moments that might call for subtlety. Yet the unintentionally laughable acting adds to this movie's watchability! I know it's wrong to laugh in a movie like this, but it's hard to avoid when the dialog and characters are so odd and weird. As Bosworth, Rourke pontificates with painfully long and confusing monologues. Hopkins basically does this odd-looking squint throughout the movie, I guess because his character is stabbed early on and so he must act as if in pain, but it seems over-the-top (honestly, though, I thought he carried this over-the-topness into "Silence of the Lambs"! LOL). Koteas plays it way too nice to be believable as a bad guy. Crouse sports an incredibly odd accent that I can't tell where she's supposed to be from! I don't know whether Morse is supposed to be stupid or mentally disturbed (maybe both). Smith and the other kid are terrible (but can be forgiven being essentially child actors). Lynch is an emotional mess in EVERY scene she's in. Rogers is the ONLY actor that rise to the occasion with a genuinely believable performance of a mother afraid for her family, yet that makes her out-of-place since everyone else is so off-kilter! And it's really all of this bad acting that makes the movie work. It's simply so BAD that it's actually GOOD! It's a fun ride watching these actors basically out-awful each other. The self-importance of the movie adds to it's awfulness. In particular, watching Rourke go nuts on everyone and needlessly pontificate is a hoot! Unfortunately, this movie signaled the downfall of his career as he literally started making nothing but crap in the 90s and even late into the 00s before a career-resurgence with an Oscar-nominated performance in "The Wrestler" some almost-20 years after this dubious film. Still, I have to say, if you want to be entertained and have a good laugh with a group of friends at a riff-able movie, this is one is definitely a contender!