Dangerous Liaisons

1988 "Lust. Seduction. Revenge. The game as you've never seen it played before."
7.6| 1h59m| R| en| More Info
Released: 21 December 1988 Released
Producted By: Warner Bros. Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

In 18th century France, Marquise de Merteuil asks her ex-lover Vicomte de Valmont to seduce the future wife of another ex-lover of hers in return for one last night with her. Yet things don’t go as planned.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with STARZ

Director

Producted By

Warner Bros. Pictures

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Alyssa Black (Aly200) Christopher Hampton writes the screenplay of his award-winning play in this Stephen Frears film about a debt between two wealthy French aristocrats that one of them cannot seduce the daughter of the other's cousin and also a beautiful yet married courtesan; in return there is the promise of a tryst if the results are successful.The film is quite well cast with its three leading players: 1. Glenn Close plays the manipulative Marquise Merteuil, a married yet bored countess who proposes the film's bet. Close is equal parts intelligent and dangerous as she holds a strange power over everyone in her inner circle particularly in co-star John Malkovich's Vicomte Valmont and Uma Thurman's Cecile who blindly trust her to keep her word, but are only two players who pay a price due to Close's manipulation and betrayal. Setting the wheel in motion, the actress floats between musings that outline her character's views and motives for her actions and also callous cruelty with her lack of emotion and absence of feeling in her double crossing until the final act where the Marquise becomes the victim of her own actions when her true colors are exposed. 2. While an unusual choice despite a theatrical background, John Malkovich proves his metal as the serial womanizer, Vicomte Valmont. While original stage actor Alan Rickman was offered the role, he turned it down to star in the smash hit "Die Hard" released the same year as this film, Malkovich's years of theatre do pay off as he makes the role his own portraying the Vicomte as a conscienceless man who is unashamed of his escapades. When he accepts the task of seducing the naïve Cecile and Madame de Tourvel (Michelle Pfeiffer), it is nothing more than a job to him which Malkovich plays with cockiness and a brazen attitude as he works his bizarre charm on Pfeiffer while trying to impress Glenn Close's Marquise with his skills as well. However when the Vicomte actually falls for Pfeiffer's Madame, the Vicomte's crafted image begins to slowly crumble as he tries to better himself but his path can only lead to destruction. While at times Malkovich goes over the top in his antics and line delivery, his heart is on his sleeve at the right moments and does his best to stay grounded. 3. The beautiful and talented Michelle Pfeiffer completes the complicated love triangle (quadrangle if one counts Uma Thurman's Cecile) as the devout Madame de Tourvel. Coming off as righteous and strictly faithful to her marriage, Pfeiffer banters well with co-star Malkovich as he works to break down her wall by staying serious yet sometimes breaking into a smile as she refuses to yield. When she finally concedes, Pfeiffer's romantic blindness makes her ultimate fate even more tragic as she is so innocent despite the fact she is being unfaithful to her absent husband. Watching the final heartbreaking scene between the actress and Malkovich becomes a showcase for Pfeiffer's emotional range as she veers from initial anger to sobbing hysterics as the Madame begs for the Vicomte to recant his rejection of her as she has hopelessly fallen for him.The film does have a notable supporting cast from Uma Thurman as Cecile des Volanges, future 'Doctor Who' star Peter Capaldi as Valmont's servant Azolan and Keanu Reeves as the Chevalier Darceny.The stage play translates well to the screen for the most part despite its slightly stilted look as the actors move around like they would on a stage in some scenes. The dialogue remains sharp and insightful for its time period and is a biting look at the dangers of its plot and the characters' motivations. The costuming and set design is exquisitely fetching and atmospheric while the musical score swings from light and playful to dark and haunting.
TonyMontana96 Review: This popular, alleged classic is a bad movie that a lot of people liked, now I say this because I just sat through 2 hours of attempted rape, arguing and unbelievable romance. The one and only thing that deserves respect here outside the look of the picture are the performances, Malkovich, Close and Pfeiffer especially, they know there character's and do try their very best to try and make the picture seem better, but it's all smoke and mirrors, the horrible script sucker's any chance of the film being watchable. Now I know it won three Oscars but this means nothing, Titanic won about ten, and that was a standard, baited romance, beating superb films like Good will Hunting and L.A Confidential, which proves how pathetic the academy really are. Malkovich play's a sex offender, Close play's an evil whore, Pfeiffer play's an innocent sex target, I don't know who wrote these characters but they are either repulsive, unlikeable or tragic.The film starts off well with an open setup, but as soon as the attempted rape kicks in, the film is an absolute catastrophe, one scene involves good old fashioned dishonesty, where Malkovich's character comes up with a ploy to read these terrible letters about himself, that drag his name through the mud, his plan is too bust in on his assistant while he's with a woman, and tell her he won't tell on her, along as she does something for him. Her reaction, she lies on her back naked ready to be mounted, are you kidding me, so she was ready to be raped in other words, which is disgusting, he never actually has sex with her, but for a moment the film instantly implies women will keep their secrets by sleeping with men, now I don't mind a bit of humour towards women or men, sexism in the right context, can be mildly amusing, but rape has never been funny and never will, Dangerous Liaisons is like a commercial for rapists, they have a step by step guide to commit there heinous act.Other despicable moments include an innocent Uma Thurman, who plays a young, confused girl with a wicked mother who constantly tries to marry her off to men she has no interest in, half way through the picture it shows she has a secret lover played by Keanu Reeves, now she is forbidden to be with him as he is not rich, and does not come from a privileged family, so Malkovich decides to help her for his own sick gain, he gives her the key to her bedroom that allows her to be with Reeves without anyone busting in, whilst keeping the key in a safe place. One night Malkovich decides he's going to open her door with that key only he has access to and feel her up while she's asleep, she wakes, confused, and Malkovich tells her that she must do something for him, so in basic terms, he rapes her, and what I saw didn't look consensual, she tried to fight him off, and he later tries to do it again, only she has barricaded the door, so director Stephen Frears has made a film about rape, and it's not the same as romance, this film is utterly repulsive and even tries to make jokes about it's horrible subject, and not once did I laugh, it was disgusting and fairly offensive.The only positives aside from the actual acting, are the appropriate costume designs and the right setting, which shows the exact setting of the 17th century, but despite the correct look, the film's story and writing are dreadful, with plenty of awful, meaningless dialogue, unnecessary situations and a story that is nothing more than one of debauchery and rape. Keanu Reeves cannot do an English accent, which I had already learned from Coppola's Dracula, which I saw long before this and Uma Thurman and Reeves may have some good scenes together but there romance isn't very strong, and there performances are only passable. As for the alleged romance between Malkovich's character and Pfeiffer, it's a trainwreck, the writers may have saw love, but I saw a woman trying to fight off a stalker and an attacker, not for one minute did it seem or feel that she loved him, and that is another reason why I detested this film. It has dreadful romance, detestable characters and a wretched story. Overall Dangerous Liaisons is a disgusting piece of tripe that uses an A-star cast to showcase rape, sexual harassment and unwilling romance.
Amy Adler In pre-Revolution France, two extremely wealthy people play games with others' lives. The Marquise (Glenn Close) picks up and discards men one after the other. This may be because she has long been in love with a notorious rake, the Viconte (John Malkovich). He, too, refuses to fall in love and plays with the hearts of many women. This horrible twosome also likes to egg each other on. Thus, when the Marquise learns that a gentleman of her acquaintance is insisting on marrying a beautiful virgin, Cecile (Uma Thurman), she asks the Viconte to seduce this young gal first. There will be a reward. Cecile is soon the victim of this scheme. However, the Marquise proposes a more difficult challenge to the count. There is a lovely young bride, Madame de T (Michelle Pfeiffer) whose husband is often away. This lady is beautiful and has a spotless reputation for resisting the advances of any other men. Ah, here is a challenge indeed. Thus, while the Marquise begins a romance with a much younger man (Keanu Reeves), the Vic begins his subtle assault on Madame. What will be the consequences of these terrible games with others hearts? This lovely to look at film, with sumptuous sets and costumes, is truly sad and depressing at its core. Yes, the actors are all very fine and it is at times amusing to witness the evil plotting of the two main characters. However, as the movie is based on a long ago play, it truly shows that there is never anything "new" under the sun as wickedness is indeed present at every age, every century. No, don't see this one if you are feeling blue already, as it will not restore your good spirits. But, most film fans will want to view this one at least once, as it is an exploration of "hearts of darkness" as few others do quite as well.
Red_Identity Okay, gave it a go today. I think it has the same problems that Cruel Intentions has, which seem to come from the source material. It just becomes repetitive and sort of dull. And I actually expected something campier than what I got. It's just far too subdued for the material. Call me crazy, but I prefer Cruel Intentions. Both are far from great, but at least Intentions had some more fun camp in it. Malkovich did nothing for me. I've never liked him much as an actor and this is no exception. Close is spectacular though. She makes the role work in such a quietly perverse way, in a way Malkovich fails to. Still, don't see all of the love for this, although it's not bad at all.