Starring: Johnny Depp, Frank Langella, Lena Olin, Emmanuelle Seigner, Barbara Jefford Directed By: Roman Polanski Average Rating: Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1 Audience Rating: R (Restricted) Binding: DVD Format: Anamorphic, Color, Dolby, DVD-Video, Special Edition, Widescreen, NTSC Label: Lions Gate Number of Items: 1 Picture Format: Anamorphic Widescreen Region Code: 1 Release Date: July 18, 2000 Running Time: 133 minutes Theatrical Release Date: March 10, 2000
The only point of this movie is the nudity... Because I've become somewhat of a Depp fan in recent years, I picked up The Ninth Gate from a $5 bargain bin at walmart.I had never heard of the movie and the premise was wonderfully intriguing and full of potential. Unfortunately the movie did not fully take advantage of this potential. I actually enjoyed the first 70% of the movie. The mystery alone had me glued me to the screen. In the last half our or so, however, all of the movie's worth was nullified. I enjoy a movie that leaves questions unanswered, but this movie left the WRONG questions. Because of this blunder, the story didn't matter to me and, in the end, it seemed that the entire point of the movie was to facilitate two nude scenes.
If you're into movies that are just for nudity, I'm sure there are better ones out there. If you're looking for a wonderfully compelling and thought provoking story, I suggest you look elsewhere. I, for one, want my $5 back...
~Ben H
Great movie! Great Movie! Everything about this movie is really good! Cast, acting, story, locations, filming.....a really goos thriller!
Johnny Depp is great! I love Johnny Depp! This is quite a thriller but Depp is believeable in any role. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Woman is the Devil There's something so cruel about Roman Polanski's "Ninth Gate", something so mean underneath the surface, that though it isn't always a frightening film, it certainly ranks up there with some of the more campy and direct movies about Old Scratch.
Unlike "The Pianist" or some of Polanski's more recent mainstream films, this makes no direct attempt to spoonfeed the viewer the meaning or message of the film. For all the eccentricity, though--and there's plenty of it--this actually isn't too tough to figure out.
Johnny Depp plays Dean Corso, a lowlife rare book collector who, like everyone else in the film, wants what he wants when he wants it. He is a dry, ironic, cynical intellectual whose dominant personality trait is his ego and desire for money. Depp's performance is amazing despite how little he is given to work with; the laughs never stop as his curt, smartass responses to every question asked flow like a bilious current. Contracted by a power hungry devotee of the Black Arts (Frank Langella in one of his ugliest and most frightening roles) Boris Balkan, his mission is to find an authentic copy of a book called "The Ninth Gate", a text which supposedly leads directly to the presence and power of Satan himself.
Here the mad surreality and black humor begin. It resembles very closely Roman Polanski's 1976 film "The Tenant", except this film has an almost complete absence of protagonists or decent characters at all. Everyone is more less a degenerate. During Corso's ominous escapades and his encounters with thoroughly sinister and foul people (all of whom die when Balkan discovers that they are not cooperating with Corso's search, leading one to believe he is indeed the Devil), a young woman who looks like a raggedy college student follows him constantly. At first she appears merely scary and irritating, like everyone else in this doomed, musty landscape: when Corso is physically attacked, however, we realize she is not an agent of Balkan's or a college student. She displays supernatural powers and yet she reacts to the constant deaths that occur with a kind of attentiveness towards Corso's reactions, looking for guilt or disgust and finding none--and she seems pleased.
The ending of the movie is so funny and so filthy at the same time that we know Polanski is refusing to compromise one little bit. Corso, at first a neutral amoral character, becomes obsessed with his quest for the book and gets in Balkan's way--his ending is particularly hilarious. Polanski also takes a shot at Satanists, as Balkan exclaims to a crowd of them, dressed in pentagrams and black robes: "Do you really think the Prince of Darkness would manifest himself in the midst of this nonsense?"
A good look at Corso's "Guardian Angel" at the end reveals just who she is and what her true intentions were the whole time. I'm not going to reveal what happens, but I am surprised so many viewers were "dumbfounded" by this movie. A great exercise in Polanskian madness!
memorable, highly satisfying, largely overlooked Probably no need to sum up the story here, if you are reading this - I suspect you are aware of the movie's plot, premise, and backdrops.
I found it to be a striking piece of work, the actors delivered performances that would make me forget I am watching a movie - and Roman Polanski is probably the last of the great directors.
The criticisms I hear don't really stand up, and I'd like to examine some of them here. The film is lambasted for being too much of a departure from the book...which would indicate these people do not grasp the reason for making a film in the 1st place. Why just do the book, detail for detail? It is brought to the big screen because a filmmaker has a strong vision....elements of the story he wants to highlight. That may mean doing away with parts of the book that less than essential to that vision (or the movie may wind being 6.5 hrs. long). Or that a character (and the ending) is too obscure - if that's the case for you, go watch a film adaptation of a Dr. Seuss book. A good artist provokes thought, so the consumer is forced to put forth some effort (the Mona Lisa, for example) in considering what the possibilities are. Did Hitchcock ever explain what caused a several day frenzy amongst the local winged creatures in West Marin County, California in "The Birds"? Nope - sure didn't. Or how about "the film drags and uses cliches". The film is *paced*, and the story *unfolds*, folks. Getting back to Hitchcock again, he has been quoted as saying, "...in making a suspenseful movie - you can light the fuse of the bomb - but never show it exploding (paraphrasing here)". Well, that's what Polanski does here - it's called "building tension". As for cliches, some may exist in this film and I suspect are used for a quasi-comedic effect or simply because they are a reasonable means of broadening the appeal of the film (as making movies is a business, too). I don't know if you can expect to be taken seriously if you say both "it's too obscure" and "it uses cliches". Jeez - make up your mind, how can it be both not obvious enough and too obvious at the same time??
I'd also like to say the cinematography and soundtrack are quite engaging. They make an already interesting movie even more appealing. The sets are detailed, the scenery is breathtaking, the women are sexy & beautiful, and the shots are all first-rate and inspired.
I am not saying everyone should love this movie, or that it's a modern day "Maltese Falcon". But it is solid entertainment, has some strengths, and should be given some credit for being a valid piece of work by some talented people. And the criticisms should be considered as, simply a matter of the film not suiting everyone's tastes. If it did suit everyone's tastes - there would no doubt be something very wrong with it (i.e. the modern film series where teenagers seemingly cheat death, but find it coming back around to make good on it's original purpose. hahaha - now there's your montage of tired cliches!!!).
Anything Goes Trivia
Trevor
Megaton Man
