News: Having trouble registering?  Please feel free to contact us at help[at]clinteastwood.org.  We will help you get an account setup.


0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this board.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: PLAY MISTY FOR ME: Audience Reaction: 2. MISTY and FATAL ATTRACTION  (Read 3533 times)
Matt
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9239



View Profile WWW Email
« on: March 02, 2003, 09:17:51 PM »

In Clint Eastwood, Film-Maker, Daniel O'Brien writes: "Misty holds up fairly well, especially in comparison with its unofficial remake/rip-off Fatal Attraction (1987), a prurient and vacuous melodrama with Michael Douglas and Glenn Close in the Eastwood and Walter roles. While Eastwood would have been justified in contemplating legal action over such a blatant piece of plagiarism, he dealt with the matter casually, informing Fatal Attraction co-producer Sherry Lansing that she owed him a beer."

If you've seen Fatal Attraction, compare the two films. What makes one more enjoyable than the other for you? What other films would you compare to Play Misty for Me?
Logged
MC
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 332



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2003, 09:37:44 AM »

One big difference is that Fatal Attraction was nominated for six Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Director, Screenplay and Actress, while Play Misty For Me scored zip (although Jessica Walter did receive a Golden Globe nomination).

Another difference is that Misty's screenwriter is female, while Fatal Attraction was written by a man.

Unfortunately, it's been many years since I viewed Fatal Attraction, so that's all I've got for now...
Logged
KC
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28849


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #2 on: March 12, 2003, 09:28:18 PM »

Here's what Eastwood had to say about the comparison between the two films ... when he was asked by Michel Ciment and Hubert Niogret for an interview in the French film magazine Positif, July/August 1988:

Quote
Positif: One of the great success stories of recent American film is Fatal Attraction, which you had already made, so to speak, some years ago with Play Misty for Me. It's the same story.

Eastwood: I know that Universal complained, but it didn't go any further. Evidently, the story was changed a little. They did some manipulating, which we didn't do. The character is married, with a child, a rabbit ... But what I did wasn't bad ... When I directed Play Misty for Me, I got away from that sort of problem. The character had a girlfriend, but  I didn't have to go away with her. The character is separated from his girlfriend. The situation was more interesting to me in the original version. I don't think the manipulations improved the story. It was more ironic.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2003, 09:34:19 PM by KC » Logged
AKA23
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2012



View Profile Email
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2003, 05:26:49 PM »

Fatal Attraction was definitely a rip off of Play Misty for Me , and not as well done, either. I've never held it in high regard, and I think that it just is an illustration of how the film industry was beginning to become influenced by Eastwood and his directorial debut. Even today, there are still films that try to capitalize on the success of Play Misty for Me , and most have been rather unsuccessful. Even as recently as 2002, a movie called Swimfan seemed to owe a lot to Clint's film. I never saw it of course, in part because it looked ridiculous, but in advertisements and the trailer for the film you could see that it was going to be another attempt to try to improve upon the 1971 film, and it's yet more evidence that today's filmmakers are still trying to duplicate the earlier film.
Logged
Christopher
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121



View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2003, 09:11:51 PM »

I've never seen Fatal Attraction, but today, I was half tempted to rent it so I could make a comparison. However, I chose not to. For those of you that have seen it, do you recommend it? Or would it just tick me off because of how fond I am of Misty?

AKA, I'm glad you mentioned Swimfan. I had no idea what it was about, yet I still had no interest in seeing it, but I was amazed when I went over to the IMDb to read the synopsis. The similarities between it and Misty are just uncanny. ::)
Logged
Doug
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2553


"May I make a suggestion..."


View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2003, 01:13:19 AM »

I saw it way back when, when it first came on HBO, and I thought, what a rip off.  But even so it's not, in and of itself, a bad movie, just a typicially uninspired Hollywood flick.  Awards?  I can't believe it got nominated for anything, while Misty got...    I won't go there.  

And the ending ... oh, god, the ultimate in long, drawn out, fit-to-be-spoofed endings, so very unlike the neat, clear-cut ending to Misty.  That and the rabbit is about all I can remember of it.  I wouldn't call it a waste of time, you should get it.  I feel tempted to watch it again also, for an up-to-date comparison of the two movies.
Logged

"Yes, well, when I see five weirdos dressed in togas stabbing a guy in the middle of a park in full view of a hundred people, I shoot the bastards, that's my policy."  Frank Drebin, Police Squad.
Matt
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9239



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2003, 02:07:47 AM »

I've never seen Fatal Attraction, but today, I was half tempted to rent it so I could make a comparison. However, I chose not to. For those of you that have seen it, do you recommend it? Or would it just tick me off because of how fond I am of Misty?

I saw Fatal Attraction when it came out in '87 but it had been so long that I didn't remember it at all, so I rented it to compare it to Misty for this discussion.  I'd heard nothing but negatives about it here on the board and I wasn't expecting much, so I was surprised to find that it is a pretty good film, worth viewing and interesting to compare to Misty.  I'm going to post some spoilers, so if anyone plans on seeing it and doesn't want to read anything about the film... stop now.

SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER
SPOILER

Think back to the 1980's and what was considered "in" at the time.  It was "hip to be square"... or rather, very rich.  And the cool place to be was no longer Haight Ashbury, but the financial capital of the world, New York City.  Success was measured in dollars and how beautiful your wife and house were. "Yuppies" replaced "hippies", Volvos and mini vans replaced sports cars, women were not only "working hard for their money", but they were wearing suits and running businesses.  When you think of the massive cultural changes between '71 and '87, the differences between Fatal Attraction and Play Misty for Me fall into place.  

Instead of a hip, west-coast DJ, we now have succesful east-coast attorney Dan Gallagher (Michael Douglas).  He's married to an absolutely beautiful wife, has a child, a dog, and drives a.... (you guessed it) Volvo.  One of the first things we learn about the Gallaghers is that they're looking to buy a home in the country.  It's the picture perfect '80's life.  In this way, Dave and Dan aren't that much different, they're just the epitome of the hip and successful male of their generation.

Dan's wife, Beth (Anne Archer) is beautiful, loving, demure, soft-spoken, casually elegant, intelligent, patient and understanding... and always backlit or soft-filtered. ;)  She's this film's Tobie.  Only she's married to the man she loves.  This is one of main variations in the two stories.  

Alex Forest (Glenn Close), is an attractive, but not beautiful; bold, but not slutty... career woman who knows what she wants and goes for it.  She's this film's Evelyn.  (In Misty, we never know if Evelyn is employed, but she lives alone... it's possible she works, but we just don't know for sure.)

We meet Alex just as Dan meets her, never knowing anything about her past or where she's from.  Although Dan is upfront with Alex, letting her know he's married right from the beginning, she nonetheless comes on strong and presses for an affair.  Dan, thinking it will be an easy, one-night-stand...  goes back to her place, has sex with her in every room... and leaves in the morning.  This doesn't go over well with Alex.  She calls him, wanting him to come back and spend more time with her, he tries to tell her that it was over between them, but  finds himself being cajoled back.  Their affair continues for another day, but this time when Dan tries to leave, Alex won't allow it.  She tries to stop him, but when he persists, she slashes her wrists and he stays to help her.

And the story continues... Dan tries to convince Alex that they don't have a relationship, Alex insists that she can't be used and discarded.  She tells Dan she's pregnant and that she's going to have the baby.  He wants nothing to do with it.   She starts stalking him, calling him at work and at home.  Her mental state deteriorates as she becomes more and more obsessed with Dan... she becomes more angry and more hostile... eventually trashing his car with battery acid, and spying on him and his family through the window of their house in the country.

Does all this sound familiar?  It should.   It's an hour and a half into the film, and so far, it's almost the same story as Play Misty for Me (one added detail... the pregnancy).  But now, Fatal Attraction starts to change direction.  Up until now, it was a very good thriller... it's about to turn into a horror film.  

Alex, in a rage after seeing how happy Dan and Beth are, boils their daughter's bunny and kidnaps their daughter for an afternoon of roller-coaster riding.  Beth, half mad from worry, crashes the car while searching for her daughter and winds up in the hospital.  When Dan finds out about all this, he breaks into Alex's apartment and nearly kills her in his rage.

There's more... ::)

When Beth comes home from the hospital, Alex shows up just as she's about to take a bath... butcher knife in hand.  They fight and Dan arrives in time to throw Alex in the bathtub and strangle her to death under the water.   He kills her and as he's getting up from the tub, in true horror fashion, Alex pops back up, knife still in hand... screaming like a banshee.  She's about to kill Dan when Beth appears in the doorway with a gun...  and cooly shoots Alex dead.  This time, she stays dead.  

The last half hour of this film was so Hollywood-overdone that it takes away from the beautifully crafted, realistic and harrowingly effective psychological thriller that the film had been.  But similar to Misty, in the end the "villain" is slain and the "lovers" can live happily ever after, if they choose to.  I can see where a plagiarism suit could have been won if Eastwood had pressed for one... there were so few differences between the two films.

Fatal Attraction originally had a different ending which was offered on the DVD, and I felt it was better than the "Hollywood" ending, but test audiences didn't like it so they came back nearly 8 months later and shot the bathroom scene.  In the original ending, Alex commits suicide in the same fashion as the geisha in Madame Butterfly (the opera itself is a part of the storyline in Fatal Attraction and interestingly is even mentioned in Play Misty for Me by Evelyn).  Dan's fingerprints are on the knife (he had wrestled it out of Alex's hand in a previous scene) and he is arrested for Alex's "murder."  Beth finds evidence to clear him, and we're left with an open ending, but with the hope that all will be well.  It was a more plausible ending, but it didn't contain the same thrill factor that most audiences were wanting... so to hell with realism, they decided to make the audience happy.

Overall, I liked both films.  I felt Fatal Attraction, was a good, well-written character-based drama that features some good performances.   Although I thought the film was horribly compromised in the last half hour, most of it was very well done and Glenn Close was excellent in her role.  I thought Anne Archer (who received an Academy Award nomination for best supporting actress) was good, but that her character was maybe TOO good to be true.  (If there's a woman that perfect anywhere in the world, I want to meet her.)  Michael Douglas did a decent job with his role, but I never was particularly impressed with his performance.   As for the sex scenes...  (I've heard this film called "trashy" "smutty", etc.) they didn't bother me at all.  They served a purpose... to let us see what kind of relationship Alex and Dan had...  no romance, no love ... just raw, passionate, no-holds-barred sex.  I felt it was important enough to understanding Alex and Dan's relationship that it didn't seem gratuitous.  However, I can understand that some would be offended by it.

I liked Play Misty for Me better than Fatal Attraction.  I thought Jessica Walter was every bit as brilliant as Glenn Close, but I enjoyed Eastwood's performance more than Douglas's (I'm sure that's no surprise) and I thought that overall Misty was more realistic.

It's a shame that Misty didn't receive the attention that Fatal Attraction received.  So many people credit FA as the original film that started many copycat films such as Disclosure and Basic Instinct, but whoever says that obviously hadn't seen the true original.  

On one of the documentaries, Fatal Attraction producer Sherry Lansing said that they had shopped that script to about 16 studios and no one wanted to see a film about this subject matter.   It's amazing how wrong those studios were as it was one of the biggest films of the entire decade.  

Maybe Eastwood was just ahead of his time...
Logged
KC
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28849


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2003, 02:26:54 AM »

... so to hell with realism, they decided to make the audience happy.
Exactly the kind of compromising Eastwood has always refused to do.

Great comparison, Matt. Thanks! :D
Logged
Agent
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1738



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2003, 11:14:47 AM »

Here’s what Jessica Walter says about Fatal Attraction, taken from an interview with  MercuryNews.com.


Quote
When the subject invariably turns to that other stalker movie, 1987's ``Fatal Attraction,'' with Glenn Close obsessing over Michael Douglas, Walter flashes her Evelyn side.

``Ugh! That film! A total rip-off! And you can quote me on that.''


« Last Edit: March 21, 2003, 11:15:08 AM by Agent » Logged

"I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it." - Clint Eastwood
KC
Global Moderator
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 28849


Control ...


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2003, 08:06:59 PM »

Thanks, Agent! That's a great interview!
Logged
Christopher
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121



View Profile Email
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2003, 02:49:46 PM »

My brother told me he just recently watched Swimfan, which is mentioned above. I told him he should watch Play Misty for Me. ;D

I still haven't taken the time to watch Fatal Attraction yet. I suppose I may get around to watching both Fatal Attraction and Swimfan sometime. I'm kind of curious about them.
Logged
mgk
Member Extraordinaire
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2071


View Profile Email
« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2003, 08:05:32 PM »

 Thanks, everyone! This thread is now locked.  Please post any additional thoughts you have on this topic in the General Discussion forum.
Logged
Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
 




C L I N T E A S T W O O D . N E T