Cape Fear
Cape Fear
R | 15 November 1991 (USA)
Cape Fear Trailers

Sam Bowden is a small-town corporate attorney. Max Cady is a tattooed, cigar-smoking, Bible-quoting, psychotic rapist. What do they have in common? 14 years ago, Sam was a public defender assigned to Max Cady's rape trial, and he made a serious error: he hid a document from his illiterate client that could have gotten him acquitted. Now, the cagey Cady has been released, and he intends to teach Sam Bowden and his family a thing or two about loss.

Reviews
Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?
Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.
Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.
Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.
arclt For anyone who has seen the original of this movie, this remake is a joke. I am no longer a DeNiro fan...even so...I always thought this is the worst performance of his life.
juhanparna Scorsese has done a great directing work and acting is amazing in this film. I personally thought it was gonna be a cool thriller, but it was quite disturbing. In the movie there is also included teen-problems, which is not nice to watch itself, but this movie has a lot to deal with rape (Although a clear rape scene is not shown, that's good). Also shown is women being tortured and mistreated. There is some hardcore violence. Gives off a lot negative vibes.But Overall, it is a well made movie. Some scenes and shots are really cool and memorable. Although I really don't recommend this to be watched under 16 (it deserved a R rating).
asc85 Scorsese's career has been one where there have been many ups and downs in the quality of his films. But I thought he hit it out of the park with Cape Fear, and I thought it was the best film of 1991, as well as one of the scarier pictures I have ever seen. I know people in 1991 went crazy over The Silence of the Lambs, but I thought Cape Fear was far superior to this.I'll be the first to say that the De Niro character was at times a bit over-the-top, and was portrayed in a near super-human way at times, which stretched credulity. Nevertheless, there were so many good things about this movie that I was able to overlook that. Juliette Lewis was great in one of her first major film roles as the free-spirited daughter of Nick Nolte and Jessica Lange, and definitely deserved the Oscar nomination that she received.
zkonedog The original "Cape Fear" is a bone-chilling tale of pre-meditated violence. While all the elements of that original are indeed here in this remake, the new elements that director Martin Scorsese adds to the tale only cheapen that visceral sense of terror.For a basic plot summary, "Cape Fear" tells the story of lawyer Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte), wife Leigh (Jessica Lange), and daughter Danielle (Juliette Lewis). When Max Cady (Robert De Niro), an ex-con freshly released from prison who was unsuccessfully defended by Sam, begins to terrorize the family, they must make some difficult decisions in order to deal with such a terror.All the basic elements of the classic Peck/Mitchum thriller are present in this version of the tale, but its the new elements that downgrade the experience. I realize that Scorsese wanted to be his own little twist on the story, but unfortunately all the additions are negative rather than positive:For example (spoilers included):-Making the family a "troubled unit" does no service to the plot. Gregory Peck as the stout, unshakeable lawyer is better than Nolte's more ambiguous soul.-The subtle romantic hints between Danielle and Cady are utterly ridiculous. For this story to really work, the daughter character needs to be pure as the driven snow, not on the verge of being roped into a romantic relationship with him! Of all the changes made to the original in this effect, I found this change to be the most "unforgivable".Finally, though no fault of anyone's, the performance of Robert Mitchum in the 1962 version is un-matchable (e.g. iconic). De Niro gives it his best effort, but it just isn't quite as good.Overall, then, I will be steering people AWAY from this version and TOWARDS the original after this viewing. This isn't a bad movie, per se, but it clearly takes a back seat to the expertly crafted '62 version.