Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Ever since the late Michael Cimino made everyone's worst-of list with 'Heaven's Gate' and sunk a studio in the process, it's been too easy to bash his post-HG work. This is an electrifying remake that proves Cimino could still direct action films like no other. The famous synergy between the director and Mickey Rourke is in full supply, while Hopkins and Rogers sympathetically act out a disintegrating marriage amidst the terror of being taken hostage with their 2 kids. Only Lindsay Crouse overdid the uber feminist FBI agent in charge: too much male-bashing and not enough criminal collaring. As for Rourke's portrayal of Michael Bosworth being too over-the-top: of course it is! He's playing a psychopathic killer at the end of his rope! There's something here for everyone: bravura performances and stunning cinematography that stretches from the claustrophobic isolation of a home under siege to the infinite reach of Utah's natural beauty. Don't come to the movie with preconceived notions, just let Cimino's direction work its magic. Even if the film was butchered by the studio in postproduction it still rocks!

The 1955 movie "The Desperate Hours" is a pretty good movie. If it has one flaw, it's that it's now kind of dated in one aspect, that being that the bad guys come across as kind of tame by today's standards. I thought that problem would be fixed in this remake, but surprisingly it isn't. For the most part, Mickey Rourke's character and his two partners don't come across as that threatening. In fact, at times they are almost nice and considerate. Needless to say, it's pretty hard to be creeped out by these guys. Another reason why there's little tension also falls on the protagonists. Though they suffer abuse several times during the course of the movie, except maybe for the young boy Zack, they are not very sympathetic. They don't seem to be suffering that much, and they have attributes that kind of sour themselves towards us, like when it's revealed Hopkins' character had an affair.The characters are the main reason why the movie doesn't work. But there are other problems as well. They include an often inappropriate musical score, several sequences where linking footage seems to be missing, and inappropriate flamboyant directorial touches by the man at the movie's helm, Michael Cimino. The one positive thing I can say about the movie is that it's well photographed by Doug Milsome. Though to tell the truth, I think a more gritty look would have been appropriate for a hostage taking story. Anyway, in the end the only thing audiences will get out of the movie is some explanation as to why Michael Cimino's career never really recovered after "Heaven's Gate".

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!

I am a big Mickey Rourke fan from his string of hits in the 80's. I kind of fell off the bandwagon during the 90's, finding his choice of films to be somewhat uninspiring. Still a great actor, just seemed to be having some trouble picking quality projects. Seeing 'Sin City' brought me back (great role, great acting, great film!), so I picked up 'Desperate Hours' and watched it last night. While the supporting characters could have been better written (Kelly Lynch & Mimi Rogers' characters fell flat), the scenes between Rourke & Anthony Hopkins were wonderful! Elias Koteas as Rourke's brother was forgettable, but David Morse's character of Albert was very interesting. Somewhat like a big dumb 'Lenny' to Rourke's 'George'. Like another reviewer I was reminded of Humphrey Bogart's 'Duke Mantee' in the 1936 film 'Petrified Forest', but Rourke's 'Michael Bosworth' was a little more homicidal and more of a loose cannon. If you like Rourke & Hopkins, you will enjoy watching 'Desperate Hours.'