Rijndri Load of rubbish!!

PodBill Just what I expected

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

martex34 I picked this up for $1 while looking through dvds at a dollar store. The synopsis was what attracted me (love old-Hollywood "user" films with murder). The next thing that made me look was the actress, Michelle Pfeiffer. She is always good film material for looks as well as ability and she did not prove me wrong with this one. The others involved, also, were good in their roles - especially Darren McGavin, Hector Elizondo, and Lois Chiles.....you could feel the venom dripping from their lips at times. Would like to commend the work of Brian Kerwin as well....nice looking hunk with plenty of chemistry in the sex scenes. Certainly worth the $1 I paid for it and more. Too bad about the ending. A complete bummer. Did they run over budget and have to stop or was it just a bungled script accident? Almost killed what could have been a neat "Hollywood-noir" film.

krazy_n_wild_horses I wouldn't give this movie a rating, it's not worthy. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer fan. I love her and would watch anything she made. Even in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, kept the viewer watching...waiting...for something to happen but nothing ever did. It had some good story lines but they ended abruptly as soon as it started. Some of the other characters had potential but nothing became of it.Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good. I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand. The worst thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good grief. I agree with the review that said .99 would have bought 3 cans of cat food and watching my cat eat would have been more exciting. Well said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the film because it sums it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud.

tobybarlowny I thought there was an interesting intersection of themes in this short piece. I think the art direction and the pacing is quite nice. I think it's actually one of Michelle Pfeiffer's more interesting works as an actress. The piece was engaging enough that I went and tracked down the John O'Hara short story it was based on, which is quite lovely. The filmmakers managed to convey the same feeling of distance the story possessed, which is rare for an adaptation. I actually just read an old Paris Review that interviewed Budd Schulberg, who worked on this as well, he was quite a character. So I suppose I'm simply pleased this little piece exists. I would recommend it for many reasons and I'm quite surprised that it has garnered such negativity from other reviewers.

summerisle The original version "Naticia Jackson" was part of the series "Tales from the Hollywood Hills" and runs 56 minutes. The home video edition called "Power, Passion and Murders" combined two episodes from the series (the other episode is "A Table at Ciro's"). The problem is, that they inter-cut both stories instead to show just one after the other, which is pretty confusing. Try to watch the original, which is an excellent piece about the classic days of Hollywood in the 30's. Michelle Pfeiffer is unbelievable good as the screen goddess Natica Jackson (reminescent of Veronica Lake, Jean Harlow, Rita Hayworth and all the others).