Sliver (1993)

the leading man is my tpye

Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

One of my all time favorites.

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Joe Eszterhas' erotic thrillers are like cinematic junk food: not nutritious, but tasty. "Sliver" plays almost like a gender-reversed "Basic Instinct", but lightning doesn't strike twice: the sex scenes are unremarkable (except maybe for the fact that you see more nudity from William Baldwin than from Sharon Stone in them), and there is nowhere near the same tension (or action). On the other hand, Eszterhas' subplot about the ethics of voyeurism and about "real life" as the ultimate soap opera was prophetic in the pre-"Big Brother" era. Baldwin's poor acting is a detriment, but Stone is very good in a role far removed from Catherine Tremell; nice, funny little turn by Colleen Camp as her colleague. **1/2 out of 4.

At the time of its initial release "Sliver" was billed as an erotic thriller. Its Hungarian-American writer Joe Estzerhas was highly popular due to his successful scripts which were huge box office hits in Hollywood. This influenced Australian director Philip Noyce to such a large extent that he decided to helm a film project based on his script. This film was made in early nineties, a highly productive phase for actress Sharon Stone who starred in two successful "erotic" thrillers. Sliver features a very risky romantic relationship between a heterosexual couple in which the 'true identity' of the male lover is not known. It is the excessive use of surveillance cameras as a tool to spy upon people which propels the film's central premise. Actor William Baldwin plays the role of the character who takes immense pleasure in pursuing this activity. Apart from its excessive focus on mystery as a narrative device to mesmerize viewers, director Phil Noyce and Screen writer Joe Eszterhas are able to move their film forward with extreme caution as the answer to the vital question about who is the killer is neither revealed nor understood by audiences until the very end. This substantial quality enables Sliver to be hailed as an intelligent thriller.

If the sight of Sharon Stone and William Baldwin gyrating their way through a series of long and drawn-out sex scenes is appealing, then I'd recommend SLIVER, one in a wave of erotic thrillers that populated the mid-1990s in the wake of BASIC INSTINCT. For movie fans in general, though, SLIVER is a bit of a non-starter.The film's biggest flaw is an overly familiar script, which has an interesting premise involving voyeurism but does little with it (other than inviting the viewer to participate, a theme which has been done to death these days anyway). Sharon Stone moves into a high-tech apartment block where people are being murdered, and we're supposed to care about what happens next.There are flashes of interest and inspiration throughout, usually involving the supporting cast. Watching Tom Berenger chewing dialogue is always a delight, and ROME's Polly Walker shows up too, although sadly not for very long. The talents of CCH Pounder and Martin Landau also end up wasted in favour of dull, slightly wooden turns from Stone (who displays none of the charm and allure she essayed in BASIC INSTINCT) and a sweaty, unpleasant Baldwin.The thriller aspects are unevenly handled, and Aussie director Philip Noyce (who directed DEAD CALM, one of my favourite thrillers) drops the ball more than once, failing to elicit suspense from scenarios which should be tense and atmospheric. SLIVER isn't all bad; the most undemanding of movie fans might even enjoy it, but I'm afraid I've been here way too many times to see anything even remotely interesting.

Sliver starts out fine, but it ages like milk, and by the end, it kind of stinksDumb would be the easiest way to label Sliver, but to be more specific, I would call it immature. This is the kind of material where high profile people have low profile brains, resulting in a motion picture which intends to be dramatic by relying almost entirely on characters doing and saying vulgar, improper things: icky flirting, gratuitous sex and biggest of all, invading the privacy of others.Voyeurism is the main topic here. Having its roots Hitchcock, Sliver tries to take the peeping tom effect to the highest high it seems. Director Phillip Noyce sells it to us well visually, but he is unable to use it effectively as a plot device or for suspense. The cast are unable to perform with solidity, the story is unable to achieve focus, and the end product is not recommendable, even for those who get off on erotic thrillers. Try looking somewhere else.