MovieChat Forums > Basic Instinct 2 (2006) Discussion > Reasons why Basic Instinct 2 did not wor...

Reasons why Basic Instinct 2 did not work,....

posted 14 years ago by seakicreativeservice-934-96321
5 replies | jump to latest

1. Basic Instinct 1 was a sexy movie, but the sex , nudity, and language was an ACTIVE part of the plot of the movie. Catherine used her beauty and cunning to manipulate people,ie. the infamous "crotch shot".
We as the audience agreed to her manipulation of the other characters because she made a very interesting view into a sexy, but dangerous "cat and mouse" game. Catherine also made a very interesting character, because she was slightly vulnerable, but cunning, and im sure this gave the viewing audience pleasure in watching this beautiful woman weave her web of lies,(or maybe she was telling the truth), you just never knew. The audience was kept on the edge of their seat every second. The remake has Catherine be evil and manipulative, no vulnerablity that is plausable or even real.

2. The male character is boring, stiff, and very "british". Catherine needs a character that is as commanding as she is, and even more manipulative, while maintaining their professionalism. Horribly miscast.

3. Sharon Stone is stunning, but all of her "charms" that motivated the first movie are completely transparent. We have witnessed all of her "ploys of manipulation", 15 years should have made her wiser, and even more cunning,this would have made for a believable character, that has simply progressed in life.
We all went to the theater to see what "tricks" Catherine has up her sleeve this time, it was a same that an older woman was playing the same "games" , as she was 15 years earlier, and we were disappointed as the viewer. What was overtly sexual, should have been coupled with intense plot twist had us to understand that Catherine has been fine-tuned her "craft" of behavioral and sexual manipulation. This did not happen, and we saw right most of the plot.

4. The location was boring, Italy, Paris, or even New York would have been better locations.

What we should have seen is a revisit of an intensely cunning and beautiful character that has a gift of manipulating anyone and everyone she chooses, insnaring each person into a web of lies,sexual angst, deceit,using their trust,lust, and vulnerability to utterly destroy them.

[–] anne_something 14 years ago

Here’s why the sequel didn’t work. Basic Instinct is not a conventional movie. It’s a retro styled, Hitchock type of a story. Its not meant to be real life or fully realistic. The characters and situations are very colorful and very stylized to the point where Verhoeven said that the movie can be even taken as supernatural story with Kathryn being the devil because she can be so precise in her plans and predict the future so precisely that it would be impossible in real life, not to mention a character that just does it for games. Then we have Nick Curran who’s your Hollywood, cigarette smoking, sunglasses wearing detective. And the interrogation room is designed to look like stylized dungeon, as Verhoeven said, interrogation rooms don’t look like this and aren’t lit like this.

So its all very stylized story, not a mirror of real life. But the sequel is actually a conventional story and that’s why Kathryn doesn’t work in it – when her personality is placed in real life environment and everyday characters, it cokes off as cheesy and just weird and in a very corny way. And the conventionality of the story just doesn’t work. The original was a work of art. The second one was just a thriller

Another thing about BI is that the lead male character is as interesting as the female - Nick is a cop who has temper/control problems, who accidentally killed bystanders while high on coke, has a drinking problem and violent sex fetish. Hes like an antihero. Hellova character, and this guys a detective! Because of Nick Curran Douglas is my favorite actor

In the sequel we just have a regular British psychologist. He has some backstory about a patient that he treated that went on to commit crimes but he himself is a regular guy and bland as a sheet of paper

[–] J. Spurlin 14 years ago

The world of the sequel is just as stylized as the one in the original movie. In fact, one of the few good things about this movie is the gorgeous, unrealistic cinematography.

The trouble is that it's just a rehash of the original, and the original succeeded by the skin of its teeth. Basic Instinct was outrageous and bordered on the ridiculous, but managed to pull it off. There was no way a sequel could work simply by stirring up the original ingredients and serving them again, especially since Sharon Stone was now middle-aged.

What would the Catherine of the first movie have been like in middle age? We don't find out. Instead, we get this inept imitation of the original character played as if she were the same age by someone who wasn't.

...Justin

[–] schoollydee11 14 years ago

All good points.

I think what was also missing in the sequel was the mystique of the 2 supporting females.

Let us not forget the character played by Jeanne Tripplehorn, Mick's girlfriend, IIRC, and Stone's lesbian lover.

Indeed, the original was Hitchcock-esque with plenty of spice.

[–] dyahrmarkt 14 years ago

@OP -

1 - I agree for the most part.

2 - Being "British" has nothing to do with it - there are many fine British actors who could have been a much more suitable lead. Stiff and boring he was, but being "British"???

3 - Agreed. She spent the entire film with her eyes glazed over. She didn't have that look at all in the first film and that's what made it work so well.

4 - Again, you seem to have some kind of beef with England here - London is a fabulous city to portray cinematically. What didn't work is that there wasn't much of a story to fill the background with.

[–] franzkabuki 10 years ago

"Catherine used her beauty and cunning to manipulate people ie the infamous "crotch shot".

The notion of her "manipulating" a roomful of police officers by showing them her c-nt, is ludicrous beyond belief. In anything remotely resembling the real life, she'd been slapped with indecent exposure (in addition to willful disobedience by arrogantly sucking on her cigarette when she's told not to) and that'd have been the long and the short of it.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan