Redundant and unnecessary.

One of my all time favorites.

It is a performances centric movie

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

No, it isn't a great, or terribly good, movie. I've certainly seen worse. And it is certainly too bad that this seemed to ruin Elizabeth Berkley's career. I didn't find her acting to be all that bad. I think that she was a victim to her role. She might not have had the star power or charisma to overcome a bad role, but I think she played it exactly the way Verhoeven wanted. Not sure that the nudity was a problem either, as I don't recall 1995 being all that puritanical. The rest of the acting was OK, too. I've never been a fan of Kyle MacLachland, but his skeevy smarminess was well-suited to his character. Gina Gershon seemed to have great fun chewing the scenery. No, the problem with the film was that every character was intensely dislikeable. (With the exception of Gina Rivera's Molly character) The exposition of Nomi's problems came way toward the end of the movie, when it was really too late to give her a break for all of her previous behavior. I think most of the blame for this being a poorer movie than it needed to be was Eszterhas's.

..................After Trump: Grabb'em by the Pu..y - this seems how American males see women. And it becomes clearer by the day. You all rag on it - this movie - your society. But that is who you have become as a nation. Do you like it ? Nobody else does !! Greatings from Europe.

What a waste of film. Why each copy of this didn't spontaneously combust will forever be a mystery to me. There aren't accurate words to describe how poorly acted and directed this piece of garbage is. Unless you're a pubescent boy looking for some cheap thrills, there is absolutely no reason to watch this. When I saw that it "won" ten awards I was aghast. Who, or what, could possibly vote for this? Then I read what organization presented these "awards." They are quite appropriate. Do yourself a favor, don't even be tempted to watch this dreck, even if only for curiosity's sake. And if you DO come across a copy of this, would you please destroy it? A grateful world thanks you.

The general perception of this movie is in such stark contrast to what I thought and felt when I saw it in 1995, that I feel provoked to analyze what I liked about "Showgirls". There are many movies that mean much more to me, but this gap makes it much more interesting for me to write about this film than, say, write about one of my favourite movies by Fassbinder or Malick or Bergman.I had gone to see this movie for its supposed sexiness. And sexy it was, if you managed to ignore the somewhat wooden acting. But there was something going on underneath the surface of the story which I found much more interesting than well-shaped bodies and the obvious plot: I felt caught in the act. There was no difference between me and and the strip-tease and night club audience. The film was actually dissecting me and the role as a member of the audience I played in that setting.There is a scene which, in my mind, proves my theory (*** spoiler alert***): when Nomi takes brutal revenge, we suddenly switch perspective and watch the scene through the eyes of the miscreants who had beaten up her best friend, and who are now under vicious attack by Nomi (***end of spoiler***) - which means we, the audience, are found guilty by Verhoeven, which again is ironic, because it is his film in the first place that tricked us into this position (or did it?).