gabriel2001-1
There's a lot more to this movie than meets the eye. This is a brain movie, and so those who might easily dismiss is as the sum of its symbolisms, or the transparency of plot line, just don't get it. (I feel a need to dismiss those who would dismiss the film). But from the postings, I see most people do get it, or at least are groping towards an understanding. So what if the plot is a reversal of "In The Company of Men". What is the film saying about women's sexuality when they go into business?--Leave it at the front door? (First generation of feminist thinkers).--Use it or lose it baby? (Generation Next). So this tension is beautifully played upon by the two protagonists. (And who's the antagonist?--Nick (clearly a shill), Business (you're getting warmer)--Our culture at large? (Bulls Eye!) Stylles character wants to assert it's hyper-cool attitude: a "free-lancer" (look it up in the dictionary: A Medieval Knight with no allegiance to prince or crown--available to the highest bidder). Plays the post-modern game of business like nobody's business. She's the working girl for the 21st century. Just tell her how much you have to spend and she'll tell you when the ride is through.Channing: Old School, played by the rules and now she's on top. And what a price she's payed. Allienation, Loneliness, Confusion about means and ends. Now vulnerable, but she's always lived by her wits, and she's not going to fold now.This is a movie I can confidently recommend to my young adult daughters.
No_Miss
The Business of Strangers is about a middle aged CEO Julie (Stockard Channing) who befriends and spends a night with a sadistic underling Paula (Julia Stiles). It's the old cliché: the criminal gives the successful non-criminal new insight about themselves by talking them into committing crimes. Usually this makes a good movie but in this case it's hard to believe someone as powerful as Channing's CEO would allow Paula to order them around. And Stiles character is not deep enough to believe she would be capable of such acts. Overall the movie misses the mark.
beiovedophelia
Yet another independent film director trying to scream at the world how artistic he is by accepting a vapid script. In a review I read of this movie, Stiles' character was described as a fragile wall flower who shows her true colors towards the end of the movie. This could not be farther from the truth. Even in the beginning scenes one can get the feeling of utter angst, and self-loathing steaming off Paula. To when you see her waiting in the bar, and a man comes to talk to her, with Paula telling him to "f*ck off". Real fragile there, right? Her character completely gives off the airs of a 20-something nobody stemming from a rich family who has nothing to do but mess with peoples lives, and act vindictively. This by far overshadowed what could have been an amazing performance by Channing. The story itself was utterly vague, a tactic used by many independent film makers in order to supposedly let the viewer decide for themselves what is really going on behind the scenes. In the end it came out being just so vague that I had all together absolutely no clue as to the intents of the other. I think the whole black mail thing towards the end could have been more developed, whereas instead it came out as an empty threat. In the end I only found myself laughing at Paula's feeble attempts at seeming tough, and hardened by the world, as well as the men in it. To me, this film was just another one that the critics eat up because of its supposed "artistry" while holding no form, or poise at all. I give it a strong (D-)
imdb-3022
Stockard Channing balances toughness and vulnerability in this intimate glimpse of how deception digs its hooks into a hard-driving corporate executive who meets a cool bohemian (Julia Stiles) with a plan and decides to go along for the ride.There's an uneasy and unconvincing bonding between the two - not the buddy kind of Thelma and Louise - that puts this story on edge. Channing brings as much life to her character as possible, yet the path she follows doesn't ring true. While she has reached a pinnacle in her career that leads to the inevitable, "What now?" question, her falling in with the Stiles character doesn't make a good enough answer.It could be the basic incongruity of this camaraderie, though, that makes it a viable thriller. I wanted to yell, "No, don't do it!" to each of the main characters at various times. And I felt that sense of dread when things started the inevitable downward spiral from bad to worse.These bad-to-worse actions of the two main characters can elicit a squirmy discomfort on the part of the viewer. Sometimes the movie's just too hard to watch. Yes, there's tension and excitement. But there's also a little too much mean-spirited violent behavior (not necessarily raw violence) that makes for difficult viewing.The movie feels like a stage play, demanding that the dialog carry the story. Unfortunately, it lacks wit and compassion, and the thin plot and weak resolution don't help out any. The best part is Channing. 6 stars.
AD
