Overrated and overhyped

How sad is this?

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

I don't know what to make out of this movie. I guess its one of those movies that were MEANT to be good, but just didn't turn out to be that. What are the reasons? Well, lets see...the probably biggest reason was wrong casting of the leading lady. Sean Toung must be the most passive and expressionless actress ever, so instead of feeling sympathy for her, we only feel annoyed by her presence. Second problem is the plot: its too thin. Matt Dillon's character, tho a villain, is at first not introduced as a typical "peerless" killer type, but then as the film progresses he becomes just that. He murders both Dorrie's old boyfriend and her friend in a professional manner, without breaking a sweat. It all looks just too smooth for a guy thats not a professional killer. Also the way he just appears at the end, where he suddenly becomes DEUS EX MACHINA a'la John Ryder, it just looks unconvincing for some reason.This movie's theme is ambition, the thirst or hunger that, if big enough, can make a man possessed with it do anything. Even murder. But its at character study that this movie again fails. Despite losing her brother, sister and mother, Ellen remains on bad terms with her only remaining family member, her father. This is kinda strange, no? Even when he accepts Jonathan/Jay, she shuns his company and criticizes her fiancée/husband for spending too much time with him. Jonathan/Jay on other hand, is a sweet and nice guy who, when he's not killing, helps out Ellen in her work with drug addicts and he even helps a beaten up woman junkie/prostitute to a hospital. Ahem...this REALLY clashes with the image of a guy who kills to fulfill his ambitions, no? So what is he, a sort of Jekyll/Hyde character?? There are also just too few engaging characters in this movie and aside from Thor, Ellen's dad, there aren't ANY other major characters here, Ellen's friend from the social center being a poor candidate. Unfortunately, Max Von Sydow in the role of Thor Carlsson is not given enough time or space to really flourish in his deadpan role.So, this film just fell too short of achieving its goals because it simply had too little going for it. Even Matt Dillon, the only bright spot here, feels wasted in such a poorly conceived and unrealistic role. The plot, however thin, is the only thing that will keep you watching it and thats only because you wanna see how it ends. Although you deep down inside already know how: the wretched sister gets her revenge and gets the killer. This is a movie that wanted to show us the ugly, dark side of ambition...well, it certainly showed us that, but in a less satisfactory way than I hoped for. I give it a weak 5.

Tacky murder-mystery about a twisted con-man romancing the daughter of a wealthy business tycoon shortly after murdering her lookalike sister. Writer-director James Dearden completely revamps Ira Levin's book from the 1950s (even more so than the '56 version starring Robert Wagner and Joanne Woodward), but the changes are less effectual--and the lead performances by Matt Dillon and Sean Young are unconvincing. Dearden gives the violence a visual jolt, and the movie may well pass muster for those searching for something to watch on a dull weekend, but it's incredibly sloppy around the edges. Young (in a dual role) is so determined to be taken seriously as an actress that her archness mitigates the camp-lasciviousness of her persona (she might have been slinky or kinky, but settles instead for starchy). Tellingly, this was Young's last starring role in a 'quality' production, although Dillon's career managed to survive. *1/2 from ****

If you're a Matt Dillon fan, or have a curiosity about the dark side of human nature, then you'll enjoy this movie. The biggest problem with this film is there are way too many coincidences. Also, some parts are downright unbelievable. Here are some of the holes: The first murder: it's hard to believe that if you murder someone on the rooftop of a high-rise building that someone from a nearby building wouldn't have seen anything and reported it to the police. Why wouldn't the cops check for prints on the victim's shoes or purse? Why wouldn't they take a DNA sample from the fetus in order to determine the father of the unborn child? The second murder: what did Jonathan do with Jay's body? Why wouldn't the cops check for prints on Jay's car? Why wouldn't millionaire Carlsson have investigated the background of "Jay Farraday" and discovered discrepancies with Jonathan's alter-ego? The third murder: how could the killer work in New York, but find the exact moment to follow his girlfriend to Philadephia? How was he able to see what kind of car the murder victim was driving, and then go back to his own car so that he could follow him to his apartment? The fourth murder: the detective traced the victim's call to the killer's phone and could have seen how many minutes they spoke, yet did not ask for the killer's alibi. Dorothy just happened to be listening when her old acquaintance's murder was announced on the radio. Wouldn't the killer have been smart enough to weigh down the suitcase with the sliced up body and wrap it up so that it wouldn't come open in the ocean? He had an incinerator in his building. Why wouldn't he use it? The worst coincidences: the killer could murder a sister, then go to her identical twin and have her fall in love with him and marry him. What are the odds in a city of 7 million people and thousands of restaurants of Jonathan/Jay running into a former co-worker from another city at the same time that he had Dorothy with him (a rarity in itself)?

The large part of the fun of watching A Kiss Before Dying is looking out for the number of Hitchcock movie moments the film is paying tribute to: from Psycho's shower shots and the lonesome mother's house our Norman Bates has escaped from, to the bleaching of the heroine and taking the Kim Novak role a la Vertigo with possibly lethal consequences. I was hugely amused and never mind the creaking plot. On a technical level, I loved the Technicolor hue of the film, very Hitchcock period too. I'm not sure why the lead actress, Sean Young, got a double Razzie award for her dual role. It seems undeserved. I'm sure there must have been far worse performances in 1991 to choose from.