Absolutely amazing

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

I would never have expected such inspired entertainment from such malevolent characters. The cat and mouse game that the Marquise de Merteuil (Glenn Close) engaged in to whet the sexual appetite of Vicomte de Valmont (John Malkovich) was cunning yet vile, and one has a difficult time placing these characters in an Eighteenth Century setting, as their machinations would have been perfectly at home in a Twentieth Century 'Dallas'. I liked the Marquise's description of Valmont as a virtuoso of deceit, that was all too fitting, but was just as undeniably true of herself. Adding to the rich tapestry of emotion, corruption and guilt in the story, the costuming was exceptionally extravagant and finely detailed, one simply marvels at the refined taste of the era's decadent near-royalty. As much as these characters tried to make you hate them, there's a perverse pleasure in seeing that they all eventually earn their due. In their case, all's well does not end well.

Acres of silk, a top-notch cast, and glimpses of nudity couldn't even begin to disguise the plain fact that Dangerous Liaisons (from 1988) was nothing but a fuggin' tedious bore. There was absolutely no question about it.Here's a brief list of some of the more fitting adjectives that I think best describes the ugly, distastefulness of Dangerous Liaisons' story, in a nutshell - Vicious, Humiliating, Misogynistic, Malicious, Treacherous, Hateful, Scandalous, Cynical, Sadistic.Set in 18th Century France - Dangerous Liaisons' story concerned the utterly horrid, backstabbing antics of rich and bored aristocrats. (Like, didn't these frickin' wealthy bastards have anything better to do?)In this slimy, little "real-life" game of villainous betrayal - Glenn Close played a detestable, butch-dyke Marquise and her despicable, little, two-faced conspirator-friend was played by the effeminate, mealy-mouthed John Malkovich (who was very badly miscast for his part).As an added disappointment - Keanu Reeves' performance as an oafish, little rich-boy was so wooden, in fact, that it made that little puppet-boy named Pinocchio look as if he were really all flesh and blood.

Dangerous Liaisons is a period drama starring Glenn Close, John Malkovich, and Michelle Pfeiffer, based on the novel and play Les liaisons dangereuses (the former by Pierre Choderlos de Laclos and the latter by Christopher Hampton). Set in 18th century France, it follows the Marquise de Merteuil (Close) and the Vicomte de Valmont (Malkovich) as they engage in detrimental games of decadence and private pastimes replete with repulsive pleasure and perversity. With any medium of entertainment, it is always the outré characters that intrigue and even captivate us into wholly engaging in that medium. Dangerous Liaisons is no different but the characters take a more detestable mien. But Christopher Hampton and Stephen Frears (the scriptwriter and director respectively) take on a subtler approach to the film's primary subjects: sex and seduction. Although, in the end, we find that the key themes revolve around ardour and more evidently, betrayal. Close is nearly great as Merteuil but the bona fide performances came from Malkovich and Pfeiffer. Malkovich has a certain perverse charm to him that, although appears slightly unfitting to the majority of the roles he has played in his career, fits well with the character of the Vicomte. The naturality of Pfeiffer's performance is what sets her apart from the rest of the cast. The film won three Academy Awards (Oscars), for Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Costume Design and Best Art Direction, all well deserved wins.The film however lacks a certain punch. Frears is a good director on his own right and the film is languorous but the deficiency of gusto and if I may say so, a level of confidence points out to how it is not as compelling as it may seem. There arises a slightly incidental feeling in us as we indirectly notice the director hesitate to take risks that could have great payoffs (if done right) and instead dismiss himself from anything that may break the seeming perfection of his film. There's something odd about that.All in all, Dangerous Liaisons is an interesting film but not as irresistible as Valmont was to many of his past preys...

more than beautiful. or seductive adaptation. its basic virtue - to explore the bitter taste of cruelty. and this is one of aspects who defines the impressive performance of John Malkovich as a Valmond looking to save him like an early Dorian Gray. the entire game becomes a form of survive against yourself. and this is the detail who does the film different by other adaptations. the show of struggles, secrets, plans, victims, illusion of power and expected fall. Glenn Close is fascinating as Marquise de Merteuil. the great virtue of Stephen Frears - to impose a story with fine precision to the viewer in a total show. the costumes, Keanu Reeves, the music, Uma Thurman, the sparkles of dialogues, the end who seems illustration of final of Tosca. a film who remains more a trace and not exactly a simple adaptation.