Description

After World War II, writer-director Liliana Cavani interviewed a Nazi-concentration camp survivor who had been involved in a sadomasochistic relationship with a brutal guard.That interview was the inspiration for this perverse and explicit cult classic ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Not likely to pop up late night on TBS.
Despite the misleading cover photo, this is not another stab at exploitive and kitschy WW2 sick humor a la "Ilsa:She-Wolf of the SS", but a far more ambitious and artful work of cinema. Disturbing and repulsive, yet quite compelling, "The Night Porter" brilliantly uses a depiction of sado-masochism and pycho-sexual politics as an effective allusion to the horror of Hitler's Germany. Dirk Bogarde and Charlotte Rampling are both broodingly decadent as a former SS officer and concentration camp survivor, respectively, who end up in a twisted, doomed relationship years after the war. You would have to search high and low to find two braver performances than Bogarde and Rampling give in this complex story (Harvey Keitel and Holly Hunter in "The Piano" comes the closest). Like the film "Seven Beauties", the "sex" you think you're watching is really a subliminal lesson on the ugly politics of facism and oppression. Obviously, this is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but recommended for any cinema buff up for a challenge.

Mediocre at Best
I just received my copy of the Criterion Collection edition of Liliana Cavani's 1974 drama The Night Porter. Upon reflection, I cannot even imagine myself sitting through this film one more time. The premises are so interesting and the story has SO much potential. The synopses I read online for this movie made it seem so incredibly interesting.

At the beginning, when the story is beginning to be established, there are some extraordinary moments that, with amazing subtlety captivate one's imagination and disturb one at the same time. However, once these premises are established the film stagnates. It is extremely slow paced (something I have NO problem with), but once I understood the film, the last hour of it seemed excuciatingly boring. The underlying message is that people never change, or at least, a terrible event like the Holocaust keeps all those involved in it--both victim and victimizer--forever captive. Neither Max, his lover/victim, nor his ex-Nazi comrades can get away from the Holocaust. Cavani takes too long trying to visualize this.

Another detraction from the movie is that it is an English-language movie written by a non-English speaker. The acting by some of the secondary actors is just plain bad.

Though packed with potential for greatness and some superb moments, The Night Porter is ultimately disappointing.

Doesn't it sound exciting?
It's really not. Who'd a-thunk a film with subject matter as sensational as this could be so dull? And not even a respectable, important dull. This is BORING. You WILL be disappointed. Not that I expect you to move along and pick something else, but when you come back to this page to add your own "0 STARS" review, just remember I told you so.

a distubing film
This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film.

13 years after the end or WWII, a concentration camp survivor, meets her former captor/lover working as a porter at a hotel in Vienna. They then resume their odd, sadomasochistic relationship.

The film had much less [adult content] in it than I would expect from a film with relationships described that way. It also has several flashback scenes. The film still has nudity and [adult content] but less than many R rated films that are around today. There are several former SS officers living in Vienna who are hiding from the international community trying to jail them for their crimes.

The DVD has no special features which is not common for Criterion Collection releases, but as always had the liner noted and the film is presented in it's original theactrical aspect ratio.

Ehhhhhh. It was Alright...Nothing great.
I keep reading all these reviews (the ones that made me buy the flick in the first place) talk about how great this movie is.....It's ok. I wouldn't tell anyone to go out and rent it, alone buy it. I love Criterion dvds and collect them, this one is definitely on my watch a couple times list. It's not that I'm offended or anything, it's just kind of average. I watched it twice and I don't hate it but I wouldn't buy it for over $15. Criterion has no extras and the transfer is grainy. There is a hair in the lens for awhile too. ... Read more

Description

What begins as an innocent art class becomes a steamy triangle of erotic passions and forbidden love.A beautiful Japanese girl becomes the object of obsession in a devious relationship between the wife of a German diplomat and her husband. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

berlin affaire...
good film...for as the best, oh yeah...is drama, ok...but Gudrun Landgrebe great! for this eyes...like the film, great all, congratulations Liliana Cavani...but hope the new film in this way...for the woman of the family you understand? thank's!

An Unusual Story Of Seduction During The Third Reich
It has long been fashionable in critical circles to bash the films of Liliana Cavani. Her films tend to show sleazy low life characters---------even when they live in palatial mansions. Her controversial NIGHT PORTER was unjustly accused of being deplorable, and insult to the intelligence of the average moviegoer, an offense to Jews and women, and generally condemned by everyone of cinematic importance. For me, she is the modern purveyor of film noir at it's darkest.

THE BERLIN AFFAIR tells the story of Mitsuko, daughter of the Japanese ambassador to Germany during the Nazi era. She is publicly quiet and demure, but in private, flamboyantly bisexual and seduces the wife of a high Nazi official-------and eventually the husband himself. This leads to a rather unusual ménage a trois with each member of the triangle becoming more and more jealous of the others. Eventually, this self-destructive relationship becomes harder and harder to resist in spite of the personal dangers to the individuals and their respective families and political causes.

It would be easy to dismiss this film as another sleazy sex opera from Cavani. But a great deal is going on in this film---------politically, sexually, socially, racially and artistically. There is a definite message for those willing to see it-------and it would be more fun for each viewer to find it for himself. Ignore Leonard Maltin's opinion and decide for yourself. ... Read more

Description

Mr. Ripley emerges from retirement to preside over one last deadly game, but can he persuade an innocent man to commit murder? ... Read more

Reviews (21)

Malkovich IS real Ripley
I think Malkovich captures more accurately the character created by Patricia Highsmith than Damon does. In "Ripley's Game" we see a more perverse and tactician criminal, very near of what Highsmith describes in her novels.

I also am grateful to see this film brought to the end of the 20th Century, plenty of mobile phones, terrific Alfa Romeo cars and modern costume design. The story per se doesn't have significant changes and the film is perfectly set out in another time. In "Talented Mr. Ripley" the story goes back to the 50's or 60's, that is, the time Ms. Highsmith wrote the Ripley's series.

The rest of characters are really interesting. Dougray Scott has an ascending role and not only has he got more presence in the film as it goes on, but this presence is more convincing little by little. Good job.

Another good thing is that you don't have to see the first part to enjoy completely this "Ripley's Game". Very recommendable.

"The most interesting thing about doing something terrible."
The actor, John Malkovich, interests me. At the heart of my curiosity lies this feeling that Malkovich really is a chameleon. Too many actors can just act one role--over and over again. Malkovich, however, is different in every role. So when I saw that he starred in "Ripley's Game", well, I just had to see it.

"Ripley's Game" is based on a Patricia Highsmith novel. Malkovich plays the main character--Ripley--and it's a role that allows him to stretch. Ripley is an effete art lover, living in Italy in a beautiful villa that's loaded with art, and Ripley's musician lover helps occupy Ripley's simply perfect life. Ripley, however, earned his money the violent way, and his past includes some rather unsavoury characters. One day, one of these characters, (Ray Winstone) shows up and demands that Ripley do him a small favour (and this involves bumping off a rival club owner--a Russian--in Berlin).

This is where a mild-mannered, gentle picture framer--desperate for a little cash--comes into the scheme of things.

The character of Ripley is problematic--he's a delicate, sensitive man who obviously enjoys the finer things in life--souffles, concerts, fine wines, and yet he's also a brutal killer. This is the sort of role that has to be handled very carefully--if a less-than-extremely competent actor took this role, the result would be a cliche-ridden film with a preposterous main character. Cavani's directing combined with the subtle talents of Malkovich avoided all the obvious pitfalls. I asked myself if Malkovich makes a believable baddie--and the answer is yes, I think he does. He carries off the role by a certain tone in his voice, and a certain look in his eyes. It's entirely possible to see our anti-hero, the beret-clad, Ripley garroting someone to death, and then being mildly annoyed if his expensive hand-made suit is a bit ruffled as a result. He's amoral, detached, and yet, there remains ... something--perhaps a grain of curiosity at the sacrifice of another. Four stars for this film--with one star deducted for an ending that could be seen a mile off--displacedhuman

Deliciously Perverse
John Malcovich gives an impeccable performance as middleaged Ripley, playing a perverse game making it up as he goes. Ripley's lover is a beautiful world reknown harpshicord player, who is aware of Ripley's true nature and loves him anyway. Mostly out of boredom Ripley starts a subtle game in which he seduces a perfectly good man to murder, and then steps in to save him, striking an unusual partnership which ends under unusual circumstances.

I hated it!!!
I did not like this movie. I have seen better movies on television. It was senseless and the main actor John Malkovich was terrible. He was a disgusting lover as well. I hated it and I sold my copy as soon as possible.

Searching for Patricia Highsmith
Patricia Highsmith is one of those novelists whose time, unfortunately, has come posthumously. Though she died in 1996, it has only been recently that her gifts as a novelist have been appreciated. Much of her core writing examined the psyches of homosexual characters, never exploiting them, only using their sexuality as an enhancement of their full character development. RIPLEY'S GAME, the most recent transfer of Highsmith's book to film, is part of a trilogy she wrote about the character of Tom Ripley, a sensitive, gentle soul who finds his way into the world of the wealth by means of criminal acts. In the first book of the trilogy THE TALENTED MR RIPLEY, Tom Ripley is driven by his need for acceptance not only in the (to him) inaccessible world of the wealthy, but also in his urgent need to be loved by other men. In the second novel, RIPLEY UNDERGROUND, Highsmith seems to drop the sexual overtones in favor of pushing Tom Ripley into the arms of a wealthy wife and monetary power, capitalizing on the greed for achievement overshadowing the need for love. By RIPLEY'S GAME the usual trademark Highsmith sexual innuendoes have nothing to do with Ripley, but are very much present in the life of Ripley's confidant in crime - Reeves.

This final installment in the Ripley stories has Ripley as teacher, instructing his pupil in the macabre methods of murder for gain. In the title role John Malkovich is his usual wily, brilliant, but misdirected self and his performance is superb (if similar to all of his other roles). Dougray Scott is Ripley's odd pupil Jonathan, Lena Headey his wife Sarah, Ray Winstone is Reeves, and with Chiara Caselli as Ripley's harpsichordist paramour all four add fine performances. There is beautiful photography of Berlin and Rome and the movement is kept at a keen pace by Director Liliana Cavani. So why just 4 stars? There is just not the flavor of Highsmith's lack of predictability here to justify that. But in all, it is an entertaining movie and sure to encourage more to read the works of Patricia Highsmith. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

WHEN A MAN AND A WOMEN CROSS THE FRBIDDEN LINE!
Exotic Morocco is the background for this psychological thriller. Marcello Mastroianni plays an exdiplomat in jail for the murder of his wife. He is soon visited by a young woman, who not only happens to be his lover, but his step-daughter as well. In turn, she meets an American engineer (beringer) and ultimately falls in love with him. A bizarre erotic triangle forms, as this tale of strange bedfellows comes to a shocking climax

Beyond Obsession - Not for the moral
You need closed captioning to understand the French & Italian in this film. I bought it for Berenger & actually threw it away after one viewing. It should have been rated R. There's nudity in 3 different scenes that will have you sick. The 1st is right at the beginning in a shower & it's totally uncalled for! Gist of movie is this: Young blonde is in Marakesh toiling for money any way she knows how doubling as a travel agent to finance her father/step-father in prison as an ex-diplomat. The American engineer is Berenger who takes a liking to the blonde & tries to make sense of her obvious obsession with the much older man played by Marcello Mastrionni (sp?). He tries to get her away from him when he takes leave from prison at odd times. (It seems one can do or have just about anything for money here!) Berenger finally takes her away to live with him in Italy & she finds peace UNTIL her father/step-father finds her & the obsession begins all over again. She actually leaves Berenger for the older man who has an unholy hold on her. It's pitiful & I don't recommend it. Sure, Berenger looks good as usual but it's just not worth watching all the filth to see his memorable paces he's put through. Skip this one.

Stange but somehow good.
This movie tends toward schlock, but it is surprisingly free from conventions which makes for an interesting rental. A truly international film (set in Marrekesh, starring Italian, American and African actors, dialog in French, Italian and English). The version I saw was unfortunately dubbed in certain sections, but I was amazed when it was actually Tom Berenger saying some of his lines in French. Mastroianni doesn't get to display his acting prowess but he looks mighty good (actually he looks a lot like Jean Reno). Good acting, interesting plot twists and a great location save this film from being strict melodrama.

This "film" is pure, unadulterated trash.
This is a sick, cornball piece of amateurish trash, trying to masquerade as a sophisticated European slice-of-life. Tom Berenger notwithstanding, this film is junque. Life is precious; don't waste time, money, or effort on going to see this dribble; file it in #13. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

WHEN A MAN AND A WOMEN CROSS THE FRBIDDEN LINE!
Exotic Morocco is the background for this psychological thriller. Marcello Mastroianni plays an exdiplomat in jail for the murder of his wife. He is soon visited by a young woman, who not only happens to be his lover, but his step-daughter as well. In turn, she meets an American engineer (beringer) and ultimately falls in love with him. A bizarre erotic triangle forms, as this tale of strange bedfellows comes to a shocking climax

Beyond Obsession - Not for the moral
You need closed captioning to understand the French & Italian in this film. I bought it for Berenger & actually threw it away after one viewing. It should have been rated R. There's nudity in 3 different scenes that will have you sick. The 1st is right at the beginning in a shower & it's totally uncalled for! Gist of movie is this: Young blonde is in Marakesh toiling for money any way she knows how doubling as a travel agent to finance her father/step-father in prison as an ex-diplomat. The American engineer is Berenger who takes a liking to the blonde & tries to make sense of her obvious obsession with the much older man played by Marcello Mastrionni (sp?). He tries to get her away from him when he takes leave from prison at odd times. (It seems one can do or have just about anything for money here!) Berenger finally takes her away to live with him in Italy & she finds peace UNTIL her father/step-father finds her & the obsession begins all over again. She actually leaves Berenger for the older man who has an unholy hold on her. It's pitiful & I don't recommend it. Sure, Berenger looks good as usual but it's just not worth watching all the filth to see his memorable paces he's put through. Skip this one.

Stange but somehow good.
This movie tends toward schlock, but it is surprisingly free from conventions which makes for an interesting rental. A truly international film (set in Marrekesh, starring Italian, American and African actors, dialog in French, Italian and English). The version I saw was unfortunately dubbed in certain sections, but I was amazed when it was actually Tom Berenger saying some of his lines in French. Mastroianni doesn't get to display his acting prowess but he looks mighty good (actually he looks a lot like Jean Reno). Good acting, interesting plot twists and a great location save this film from being strict melodrama.

This "film" is pure, unadulterated trash.
This is a sick, cornball piece of amateurish trash, trying to masquerade as a sophisticated European slice-of-life. Tom Berenger notwithstanding, this film is junque. Life is precious; don't waste time, money, or effort on going to see this dribble; file it in #13. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Unusual life of a saint
This film is rather unusual for the life of a saint, particularly St. Francis of Assisi. It does demonstrate the inner turmoil of a man coming from a wealthy family who gives up everything to strictly follow the gospel teachings to the letter. Mickey Rourke gives an interesting and truthful performance, better than might be expected.

My question about the general tone of the production is the frontal male nudity. Was it really necessary? The first time it is used to show the stripped corpses of the losers in a battle. Wouldn't showing the bodies face down have been just as effective? The other major section shows Francis romping in the snow leaving NOTHING to the imagination. This scene could have been just as effective without showing the male private parts. The use of the nudity means that it would be impossible to show this film to younger people when it could be valuable in illustrating the humanity of a saint.

This film is much better than the Leonard Maltin review would have you believe. It avoids the Hollywood glamor and glitz to give a truer picture of the actual time of St. Francis. But the nudity is unfortunate.

Inspiring, thoughtful, beautiful film
I picked up this film while researching the life of St. Francis of Assisi. Of the several films I've seen on his life, this is the best by far. I was not familiar with Mickey Rourke or his career, but it didn't take me long to realize that he is a very gifted actor. His portrayal of St. Francis was sensitive, contolled, subtle, but when the moment called for action, he was prepared and delivered. The film as a whole was magnificent -a true example of ensemble acting at its finest. One really got the nitty-gritty feeling of life in the 12th century, just as Europe was coming out of the Dark Ages and there was an explosion of change. G. K. Chesterton's book on the saint covers this in more detail.

St. Francis and his little band of followers never intended to begin a world-wide movement of a monastic order, and his confusion, disappointment, and frustration at the response to his "rule" was palpable and heartbreaking. Each of the young men in the original group were as diverse as could be, yet they were all brought together under the loving care and friendship of Francis. The humor and antics balanced their rather grim existence and made them all the more human. There were moments of intense sadness, but also joy. Chiara's enigmatic smile at the end I will leave to your own interpretation. It was a superb touch to the ending of a stunning film.

A Much Maligned Masterpiece
I strongly believe that this is one of the top ten films of the 1980s. People tend to malign it for one of the following reasons: 1) they hate Mickey Rourke 2) they don't like the Christian themes 3) they like the Christian themes but are upset by the nudity 4) they don't like the way the film ends.

Regarding the Rourke haters, I feel they simply have no class. Mickey Rourke's career followed much the same path as Errol Flynn's, which is reason to malign him personally but not his work. Rourke in his heyday had a charisma and screen personality that rivaled Valentino, Flynn, or Bogart. Regarding the anti-Christians, you don't have to be a believer to enjoy the story of a remarkable man. As for the prudists, the nudity is brief and natural, nothing tasteless. Finally, as for the ending, in real life people who later were "sainted" (like Francesco d'Asisi) or "deified" (like Jesus) did not get carried away by angels. They experienced failures and then they died, often miserably and alone, just like everyone else. This film presented that cold reality much like it probably happened; that is precisely what makes it so poignant and relevant.

As for Rourke's performance, I thought it was brilliant, especially in the latter scenes. And Helena Bonham Carter is a first rate actress, of that there can be no serious discussion. The fact that Mickey Rourke later went on to drink away his career and take stupid roles is no fair reason to malign this film. Would you also malign Sir Laurence Olivier's Henry V because he later played Zeus in the awful Harry Hamlin feature, Clash of the Titans? Let him who hath never sinned cast the first stone against this film! (and let's get a reprint fired up...)

St. Francis is martyred a second time......
I typically like Mickey Rourke, at least in his earlier (pre-90s) films but let's face it, he is a better Satan than Saint.
It is a shame the story of the life of one of the most intriguing men in history is put across in a disjointed storyline.
To make matter worse, Rourke provides none of the subtly in the character of Francesco to show inner growth, the gradual "conversion of the heart." It takes subtly in acting: not so much in what is said, but what is not said. And even when Rourke talks, the dialogue stiff, he seems uncomfortable, stilted (trying to stifle a Brooklyn accent?) In short, Rourke stinks. Perhaps he was directed badly.
The plot needs better flow. The viewers are bouncing all over the place, we're not sure how Francesco gets to the visit with the Pope and back, among other things.
Good idea. Poorly done.
If you've got to see it, rent it.

If you Love God and Spiritual Truth, Watch this Movie
i looked at the other reviews, and they seemed to come from unenlightened beings. How can any one who hasn't seen the light comment on anything to do with spiritual truth. This movie is extraordinarily well done and highly inspirational. Anyone on anykind of spiritual path should see this. i have a new found love for the Christian tradition because of this movie. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Unusual life of a saint
This film is rather unusual for the life of a saint, particularly St. Francis of Assisi. It does demonstrate the inner turmoil of a man coming from a wealthy family who gives up everything to strictly follow the gospel teachings to the letter. Mickey Rourke gives an interesting and truthful performance, better than might be expected.

My question about the general tone of the production is the frontal male nudity. Was it really necessary? The first time it is used to show the stripped corpses of the losers in a battle. Wouldn't showing the bodies face down have been just as effective? The other major section shows Francis romping in the snow leaving NOTHING to the imagination. This scene could have been just as effective without showing the male private parts. The use of the nudity means that it would be impossible to show this film to younger people when it could be valuable in illustrating the humanity of a saint.

This film is much better than the Leonard Maltin review would have you believe. It avoids the Hollywood glamor and glitz to give a truer picture of the actual time of St. Francis. But the nudity is unfortunate.

Inspiring, thoughtful, beautiful film
I picked up this film while researching the life of St. Francis of Assisi. Of the several films I've seen on his life, this is the best by far. I was not familiar with Mickey Rourke or his career, but it didn't take me long to realize that he is a very gifted actor. His portrayal of St. Francis was sensitive, contolled, subtle, but when the moment called for action, he was prepared and delivered. The film as a whole was magnificent -a true example of ensemble acting at its finest. One really got the nitty-gritty feeling of life in the 12th century, just as Europe was coming out of the Dark Ages and there was an explosion of change. G. K. Chesterton's book on the saint covers this in more detail.

St. Francis and his little band of followers never intended to begin a world-wide movement of a monastic order, and his confusion, disappointment, and frustration at the response to his "rule" was palpable and heartbreaking. Each of the young men in the original group were as diverse as could be, yet they were all brought together under the loving care and friendship of Francis. The humor and antics balanced their rather grim existence and made them all the more human. There were moments of intense sadness, but also joy. Chiara's enigmatic smile at the end I will leave to your own interpretation. It was a superb touch to the ending of a stunning film.

A Much Maligned Masterpiece
I strongly believe that this is one of the top ten films of the 1980s. People tend to malign it for one of the following reasons: 1) they hate Mickey Rourke 2) they don't like the Christian themes 3) they like the Christian themes but are upset by the nudity 4) they don't like the way the film ends.

Regarding the Rourke haters, I feel they simply have no class. Mickey Rourke's career followed much the same path as Errol Flynn's, which is reason to malign him personally but not his work. Rourke in his heyday had a charisma and screen personality that rivaled Valentino, Flynn, or Bogart. Regarding the anti-Christians, you don't have to be a believer to enjoy the story of a remarkable man. As for the prudists, the nudity is brief and natural, nothing tasteless. Finally, as for the ending, in real life people who later were "sainted" (like Francesco d'Asisi) or "deified" (like Jesus) did not get carried away by angels. They experienced failures and then they died, often miserably and alone, just like everyone else. This film presented that cold reality much like it probably happened; that is precisely what makes it so poignant and relevant.

As for Rourke's performance, I thought it was brilliant, especially in the latter scenes. And Helena Bonham Carter is a first rate actress, of that there can be no serious discussion. The fact that Mickey Rourke later went on to drink away his career and take stupid roles is no fair reason to malign this film. Would you also malign Sir Laurence Olivier's Henry V because he later played Zeus in the awful Harry Hamlin feature, Clash of the Titans? Let him who hath never sinned cast the first stone against this film! (and let's get a reprint fired up...)

St. Francis is martyred a second time......
I typically like Mickey Rourke, at least in his earlier (pre-90s) films but let's face it, he is a better Satan than Saint.
It is a shame the story of the life of one of the most intriguing men in history is put across in a disjointed storyline.
To make matter worse, Rourke provides none of the subtly in the character of Francesco to show inner growth, the gradual "conversion of the heart." It takes subtly in acting: not so much in what is said, but what is not said. And even when Rourke talks, the dialogue stiff, he seems uncomfortable, stilted (trying to stifle a Brooklyn accent?) In short, Rourke stinks. Perhaps he was directed badly.
The plot needs better flow. The viewers are bouncing all over the place, we're not sure how Francesco gets to the visit with the Pope and back, among other things.
Good idea. Poorly done.
If you've got to see it, rent it.

If you Love God and Spiritual Truth, Watch this Movie
i looked at the other reviews, and they seemed to come from unenlightened beings. How can any one who hasn't seen the light comment on anything to do with spiritual truth. This movie is extraordinarily well done and highly inspirational. Anyone on anykind of spiritual path should see this. i have a new found love for the Christian tradition because of this movie. ... Read more