In the Cut (2003)

ridiculous rating

It is a performances centric movie

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

I was very surprised by how much I liked this film. Reviews were mixed. But the film is beautifully paced, and directed by a master of the medium. This is a worthy addition to Campion's oeuvre. The night- time scenes outdoors in NYC are visually striking, especially when it is raining. Meg Ryan's insecure, withdrawn, armored character was the perfect foil for her "charming" sex-kitten roles. In this film she is a mature woman coming to grips with issues of repression and sexuality. Jennifer Jason Leigh's role as the wild sister is masterfully done as well. And Mark Rufallo's hard-boiled detective is played to perfection. The script is great as well. Nothing gratuitous occurs. The nudity and sex scenes are believable and are erotic without being needlessly prurient or overtly violent. They are believable and lovely. Perhaps this is because it is a woman who is directing the action in bed. Mark's character learned about sex as a teen, from an older woman who he regards kindly. He is respectful and caring despite being 100% macho cop. Kevin Bacon is wonderful as a scorned - and neurotic - lover. Sharrieff Pugh as a black student of Franny's is both sensitive, aggressive, and compelling to watch. The only flaw that I have with the film is that Franny (Meg) doesn't ask certain questions that to the viewer seem obvious. But if she did ask them early on the film would have been much shorter, and that would have been a shame. While the plot has some obvious turns, there is enough tension to keep the viewer involved. I won't answer the critics who didn't like the movie. If you are a fan of film noir and don't mind nudity you will love this film. I certainly did. I have no qualms about recommending this to aficionados of the genre.

It was 1993 and Jane Campion made "The Piano". I enjoyed that movie, even though the characters are all very strange. But of all her movies I believe I enjoyed that one most.Then in 1999 she made "Holy Smoke." That one started well with interesting characters but the second half just wasn't very interesting.Now I have come to look up an old movie I missed, "In the Cut" from 2013. It has a number of really fine actors so I looked forward to it. Overall I came away very disappointed. Yes, Meg Ryan as Frannie, miss sweetness, bares it all. It was really strange seeing her naked and in sexual situations. Jennifer Jason Leigh as her sister Pauline is sad and skanky. Ruffalo as Detective Malloy is busy in bed and busy in investigations, but he never seems to accomplish much.I know that in the real world people lead sad lives and make bad decisions, sometimes people get murdered, but they usually have some fun and joy also. This movie has no joy, it is a burden to watch.I'd guess that Jane Campion fans really like this movie, but I don't.

The acting is fine. So are the directing and cinematography. But who cares? The story is so full of holes that it's hard to believe Campion wasted her time on such junk. A creepy ex-boyfriend and a student who happens to be fixated on serial murders? Nah, they're just filler, a couple of obvious suspects, though Meg Ryan's character isn't even bright enough to suspect them as she sleepwalks through her life. No, the killer is there in the background, waiting for the big reveal in the last five minutes. The plot stinks to high heaven.Roger Ebert's review sums it up nicely: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/in-the-cut-2003

...is where the director must have been during the filming of this mediocre movie.We've all been there at one time or another and often don't recognize as quickly when it happens to us, but I always have to wonder when I see a film like this, where there's at least a relatively talented cast assembled, doesn't anyone watch "the dailies" anymore? If they did on this picture they must have been asleep at the time. Unless of course it was the act of watching them that put them there. Which is something that will surely be relatable to anyone who has, or does, view this film.It would seem to open well enough. SEEM being a key word. We're given a stream of mildly interesting urban images that establish the setting and touch lightly upon a subtle style in the cinematography that might, that could and that eventually does, hint at the possibility of more colorful things (events)to come. However the switch to sepia by the time the title card is placed, along with the very telling opening song, are two signs of where you can expect to be by the end of this picture.Some bland, out of focus, or obscured, sex scenes are intermittently sprinkled through the story. Though not entirely for the sole purpose of simply keeping your attention, but like the rest of the performances in this film, they too seem somewhat strained.There's not really much more to say; the standard thriller technique of "finger pointing" at everyone and anyone, of course is present. On an up note; Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance and character are both more interesting than the convoluted story we are meant to follow. Though that may be prejudicial on my part, as I've always been fond of her talent.If you're the type who likes to have a film going in the background while you're focused on something more important, but always get frustrated because you miss the significant points of the film, then this might be just what you're looking for. Personally, I wouldn't have felt any loss had this film remained "In the cut."