IMDb RATING
5.4/10
9.1K
YOUR RATING
An escaped con, on the run from the law, moves into a married couple's house and takes over their lives.An escaped con, on the run from the law, moves into a married couple's house and takes over their lives.An escaped con, on the run from the law, moves into a married couple's house and takes over their lives.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Featured reviews
I think on a certain level this film works quite well. First, throw out everything you know about the 1955 version. Next, abandon paying too much attention to how the plot progresses (gee, Kelly Lynch's character seems to disappear for extended periods of time, and it's amazing that the FBI ever found following her to be worth it. And she is supposed to be one of the smarter characters, but then again, you took what Lindsay Crouse's character said about her too seriously.) The film has a most curious tone, and just when you think it's going to turn into an art film, we get a shoot-em-up or some other plot contrivance to bring it back to earth. The soundtrack is a moody pastiche of 50's style orchestrations (no rock music!) and recalls moody post-noir thrillers of the late 50's-early 60's.
And what a fascinating line-up of players, performances, and characters. Kelly Lynch's acting directions must have been "look snappy, especially topless, act like you just ingested a gram of cocaine, and all will go well."
One of these first years Cimino will put together all the pieces and come up with a really good, coherent film. For a really good obtuse film, reference Walter Hill's "The Driver" with Ryan O'Neal.
Oh, and if you ever thought you could mess with Lindsay Crouse, this film should dispel that notion. She's much badder than Mickey Rourke - and that's the biggest surprise of the whole picture! And with a lot less screen time, too. And by golly I guess Mickey Rourke's character is just an obsessive lover of the enigmatic Lynch. That explains a lot.
Coolest line in the film: FBI agent says to Crouse (after she got shot in the leg) : "Where are you hit?" Answer: "In the ego."
And what a fascinating line-up of players, performances, and characters. Kelly Lynch's acting directions must have been "look snappy, especially topless, act like you just ingested a gram of cocaine, and all will go well."
One of these first years Cimino will put together all the pieces and come up with a really good, coherent film. For a really good obtuse film, reference Walter Hill's "The Driver" with Ryan O'Neal.
Oh, and if you ever thought you could mess with Lindsay Crouse, this film should dispel that notion. She's much badder than Mickey Rourke - and that's the biggest surprise of the whole picture! And with a lot less screen time, too. And by golly I guess Mickey Rourke's character is just an obsessive lover of the enigmatic Lynch. That explains a lot.
Coolest line in the film: FBI agent says to Crouse (after she got shot in the leg) : "Where are you hit?" Answer: "In the ego."
How do you even screw this up? How do you screw up a script that was already a successful book and film? I don't know, but somehow Michael Cimino did it. This mediocre movie is a 100-minute snorefest about a bad dude (played by Mickey Rourke, who contributes nothing to the role), who kidnaps a upper-middle-class family. Most of the other actors do good to very good jobs, notably Michael Morse who plays one of Rourke's cronies, and Anthony Hopkins in a role which is far beneath him. But the plot is nothing but totally predictable filler and just when you think it has gone nowhere, it goes even more nowhere. Since we already know that the script can be done well, there is no one to blame here except Michael Cimino for the non-direction this movie took. 5 out of 10.
Mickey Rourke avoids going to trial and holds Anthony Hopkins, Mimi Rogers and their family hostage in this amazingly dull motion picture. Michael Cimino's prodding direction turns what could have been a "High Noon"-styled film into a difficult viewing experience. The film's greatest asset is the fact that it runs less than two hours. 2 stars out of 5.
This is one of those movies that is very difficult to give a star rating because its high entertainment value is due to the fact that it's almost completely terrible.
A remake of the 1955 Humphry Bogart-Fredric March potboiler, DESPERATE HOURS is an unrelentingly bizarre piece of exploitation trash. There's virtually nothing "good" about it. The screenplay ranges from scattershot to just plain off-the-wall weird, the performances are some of the most over-the-top ever committed to film and the direction is borderline psychotic. Director Michael Cimino and producer Dino De Laurentiis once again prove that they are more capable than anyone else in the film industry of taking a potentially good idea and drowning it in excessiveness.
Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins are both excellent actors. They are also actors who go from mannered to berserk very quickly. Both chew the scenery as if their lives depend on it. Mimi Rodgers is wooden even during emotionally intense scenes, Shawnee Smith is distraught before the home invaders show up and Lindsay Crouse is both wooden and over-the-top at the same time.
Kelly Lynch is the only actor who turns in even an appropriate performance, evoking a sense of hopelessness and panic from the start that makes you feel for her character, even if she has dug her own grave. This doesn't help a bewildering early scene in which her blouse spontaneously pops open to reveal her bare breasts make any more sense, however.
There are a lot of interesting plot and characterization ideas floating around the proceedings but none of them are ever fully developed. It reminds me of Cimino's HEAVEN'S GATE and De Laurentiis's DUNE, two similarly flawed but occasionally brilliant disasters which have grown better with age. Maybe with time, viewers will begin to see the tight, complex thriller struggling to break through the mess that is DESPERATE HOURS.
But all this analysis begs the question, would the movie have been more entertaining had it been put together more coherently? The answer is: probably not.
A remake of the 1955 Humphry Bogart-Fredric March potboiler, DESPERATE HOURS is an unrelentingly bizarre piece of exploitation trash. There's virtually nothing "good" about it. The screenplay ranges from scattershot to just plain off-the-wall weird, the performances are some of the most over-the-top ever committed to film and the direction is borderline psychotic. Director Michael Cimino and producer Dino De Laurentiis once again prove that they are more capable than anyone else in the film industry of taking a potentially good idea and drowning it in excessiveness.
Mickey Rourke and Anthony Hopkins are both excellent actors. They are also actors who go from mannered to berserk very quickly. Both chew the scenery as if their lives depend on it. Mimi Rodgers is wooden even during emotionally intense scenes, Shawnee Smith is distraught before the home invaders show up and Lindsay Crouse is both wooden and over-the-top at the same time.
Kelly Lynch is the only actor who turns in even an appropriate performance, evoking a sense of hopelessness and panic from the start that makes you feel for her character, even if she has dug her own grave. This doesn't help a bewildering early scene in which her blouse spontaneously pops open to reveal her bare breasts make any more sense, however.
There are a lot of interesting plot and characterization ideas floating around the proceedings but none of them are ever fully developed. It reminds me of Cimino's HEAVEN'S GATE and De Laurentiis's DUNE, two similarly flawed but occasionally brilliant disasters which have grown better with age. Maybe with time, viewers will begin to see the tight, complex thriller struggling to break through the mess that is DESPERATE HOURS.
But all this analysis begs the question, would the movie have been more entertaining had it been put together more coherently? The answer is: probably not.
This is a very entertaining movie that delivers the goods from start to finish, and unlike other hostage movies, gives us some outdoor scenes, most notably a car (and plane) chase. It gives the film sone freshness. This is the first Mickey Rourke movie I've seen, and he makes an effective criminal. Also, the film does something with the cops (in the police car) I've never seen before: A 180 degree turn. And the finale is so over-the- top, it almost boggles the mind. It's a finale unlike anything I've ever seen. Lindsey Crouse, who plays one of the cops, goes over the top with her performance, that I couldn't tell if she was a mean cop, or one that took her job way too seriously.
*** out of ****
*** out of ****
Did you know
- TriviaAccording to some official sources, director Michael Cimino's original cut of this movie was mutilated by producers, resulting in a very badly edited movie, filled with plot holes. The only known proof of deleted scenes are some stills which show a few of them.
- GoofsAll entries contain spoilers
- Quotes
Michael Bosworth: A man is not a man unless he knows how to mix a proper martini and tie a proper bowtie.
- SoundtracksFight for Me
Performed by Cidny Bullens
Written by Cidny Bullens and David Mansfield
Courtesy of MCA Records
- How long is Desperate Hours?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $18,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $2,742,912
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $1,367,657
- Oct 8, 1990
- Gross worldwide
- $2,742,912
- Runtime
- 1h 45m(105 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content