Il bacio della pantera

In general terms, the basic premise of both original 1942 CAT PEOPLE and the 1982 Paul Schrader remake are the same: an exotic European beauty is given to transforming into a black panther when sexually aroused. But Schrader unravels this fantasy concept in some very overtly Freudian directions, setting his version in against the decadent charm of New Orleans, introducing a theme of incest, and ramping up the original with a lot of nudity, a lot of sex, and some of the most graphic violence around. The result is an American blood-and-gore horror film with a hypnotic European sensibility that equates both sexual frustration and orgasm with violent death.

The story line concerns two orphaned siblings (Natasha Kinski and Malcom McDowell) who are reunited in New Orleans as adults--but they are, unbeknownst to the sister, the descendants of a mutant race who can only mate with their own kind without transforming into ravening beasts who must then kill to regain their human form. When sister Natasha rejects her brother's advances and then falls in love with a hunky zoo director all hell breaks loose.

In some respects the film is extremely, extremely frustrating, often sliding over the edge from a sexually provocative shocker into moments of annoying silliness--but on the whole it works extremely well as a both a sexual fantasy and a semi-camp statement in gratuitous sex and violence. Kinski is ideally cast as the sexy but virginal Irena; you can literally see the "cat" side of her nature emerge more and more as the film progresses. McDowell is equally interesting as her mad brother, and John Heard, Annette O'Toole, and particularly Ruby Dee offer excellent performances in the supporting cast. The New Orleans backdrop is extremely effective, and (speaking as one who has been there) the darker side of the city is perfectly captured; the Moroder score--which includes some sultry vocals by David Bowie--is also extremely good.

A great many people will loathe CAT PEOPLE, and the reasons will be diverse. The film is extremely bloody, often to a can-you-stand-to-look-at-the-screen degree; there is tremendous nudity and considerably sexual activity; and the combination of sex and violence into a sadomasochistic eroticism is quite disturbing. Beyond this, more critically inclined viewers may find themselves annoyed by the script's silliness and the fact that it does not always go as far over the top as it leads you to expect, and certainly the film's very literal depiction of fantasy elements will not be to every taste. But if you have a hunger to walk on the wild side, CAT PEOPLE (which is rapidly gaining status as a cult film) will suit your need as guilty pleasure.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

Cat People (1982)

*** (out of 4)

Irena Gallier (Nastassja Kinski) arrives in New Orleans to visit her brother Paul (Malcolm McDowell) but soon falls for a man (John Heard) she meets at the local zoo. It doesn't take long for the young woman to realize that there's something not quite right with her or her brother and soon her sexual design brings something else out in her.

Paul Schrader's remake of the 1942 film really doesn't have too much in common with that Val Lewton production. I think Schrader and screenwriter Alan Ormsby made the right decision in not trying to just remake that film and instead taking on a different approach. That approach was like several other remakes from the 1980s in that it added up a notch of sexuality. CAT PEOPLE didn't get too much credit when it was released outside the full frontal Kinski but that's really too bad because the film itself is quite good.

I think Schrader did a very good job with the material and I thought he managed to milk the sexuality for everything it's worth as well as create a very interesting lead character. I thought the film did an extremely good job at the psychological stuff as the lead character is constantly wondering who she really is and the very also questions what we're actually seeing. The director managed to build up the psychological drama as well as the sexuality in the material. Some have argued that there weren't enough horror elements, which I can understand them saying that but even the original played with your mind more than actually showing you anything.

A major reason for the film's success is the performance of Kinski who is simply wonderful in the lead role. The film works because you can believe her as this sweet and innocent woman that we meet at the start of the film. She plays a virgin here and the actress makes you believe that as the innocence just leaps off the screen but she also handles the character once she begins to change. The supporting cast is also great with McDowell is especially believable in the role of the creepy brother. Both Heard and Annette O'Toole offer excellent support as does Ruby Dee and Ed Begley, Jr. in their small roles.

The sexuality of the film is certainly something that sets it apart as is the full frontal nudity from the lead actress. I'd argue that the film runs a bit too long as some editing might have helped but there are still plenty of effective scenes. Even the start inside the hotel room with the leopard was quite intense. Schrader's CAT PEOPLE has never really gotten the credit it deserves but it's a nice little gem.

Cat People is smart. Like most remakes that stand a chance, it keeps what worked in the original and reinvents it, twisting the narrative into something else. It's just a shame that this new narrative, for all its sexual implications, isn't terribly interesting.

The beautiful Kinski stars as a young woman who reunites with her religious fanatic brother in New Orleans and begins to realize that he's involved in a series of murders. Is he just a run of the mill serial killer or is he a "cat person" devouring hookers and tourists all around the French Quarter? Also, could she have this trait within her as well?

I'm not sure if it was the Blu-Ray I watched this on or if it was poor sound mixing in general, but the dialogue is so quiet and muffled that I had to turn the volume all the way up just to hear what everyone was saying before having to crank it down every time there was an attack scene. Eventually, I just turned on the subtitles and treated it like a foreign film.

There's a lot to like about Cat People. It has moments of the style, the acting is pretty good, and there's a twisted sexual perversity running throughout the story., but it's a bit overlong at nearly 2 hours and there's not enough to justify this runtime. We still don't really get a feel for most of the characters and Kinski's mid-film switch from sheltered, repressed virgin into femme fatale fails to convince.

Erotic thriller with Nastassja Kinski starring as a young female who's gone searching for her own, inner self. In many ways a remake of the 1942 original, but also in many ways not a remake - a film that stands its own ground, this has a quality of sexual awakening and excitement that the original didn't have. Fabulous music by Giorgio Moroder (also featured is David Bowie's hit-single "Putting Out the Fire") accompanies many of the bloody and sexually occupied scenes that hammers on like they belonged in a artsy-fartsy porn flick. Kinskis performance at the center is typically her: odd, tactless, awkward, outlandish and sensual - in other words, highly enjoyable. She's fantastically beautiful, and she moves through a New Orleans during the fall, shot by John Bailey. And even though the level of thrills ain't always sky-high, the film has a charm and atmosphere that makes it a interesting, stylish and sexy cult picture.

"Cat People" is one of those movies that, by all rights, shouldn't be shown on network TV. That's not a comment on quality; it's one of the best erotic thrillers ever made (next to "The Hunger"). But when you have a movie where, for the last half hour, the female lead is mostly undressed ... how can you *show* the last half of the movie?

Very simply stated, they *don't* show it. I tried to watch Cat People on USA or some other network one night, and the last half hour had been cut down to about five minutes and made absolutely no sense. Worse, I was watching it with someone who had never seen it before, and when it was over, she was thoroughly confused and unimpressed.

So, number one: See this movie, if you haven't already! And number two, when you do ... rent or buy the video, or catch a revival on one of the premium cable channels.