The Underneath Reviews

  • Apr 18, 2017

    The plot is a bit silly and trashy, but as usual I had a lot of fun with Soderbergh's fuckery. The non-linearity, the split-focus diopters, the extreme colour-coding, the ten-minute segment shot entirely from the perspective of a hospital bed, it's all a lot of fun to watch. The ending is really great and really terrible at the same time, and I think I loved it.

    The plot is a bit silly and trashy, but as usual I had a lot of fun with Soderbergh's fuckery. The non-linearity, the split-focus diopters, the extreme colour-coding, the ten-minute segment shot entirely from the perspective of a hospital bed, it's all a lot of fun to watch. The ending is really great and really terrible at the same time, and I think I loved it.

  • Sep 03, 2016

    Predictable but a good start by Soderbergh.

    Predictable but a good start by Soderbergh.

  • Oct 19, 2014

    Fantastic Film. One of Soderbergh's Best along with The Limey, Traffic and Side Effects.

    Fantastic Film. One of Soderbergh's Best along with The Limey, Traffic and Side Effects.

  • Sep 17, 2013

    A chaotic film noir that offered an unengaged and plodding dialog. 17/9/2013

    A chaotic film noir that offered an unengaged and plodding dialog. 17/9/2013

  • Sep 06, 2013

    Another movie that everyone in the world seems to hate, except me. This remake of the classic 1949 Burt Lancaster crime film Criss Cross updates the action to present-day Austin, Texas. Michael (Peter Gallagher), an amiable but untrustworthy gambler and reprobate, returns after many years away to see his middle-aged mom marry nice-guy Ed (Tom Dooley). Before long, he decides to stay in town, get a job at an armored car company with his soon-to-be stepdad, and tries to rekindle his romance with Rachel (Alison Elliott), the lover he ran out on years before to escape his gambling debts. But she's married to low-level gangster Tommy (William Fichtner), and still harbors some understandable resentment against Michael. Meanwhile, Michael's cop brother David (Adam Trese) keeps an eye on his older sibling, knowing how he tends to attract trouble. One thing leads to another, as these things happen in film noir, and before long Michael finds himself in the tightest spot he's ever been in. While not flawless, The Underneath benefits from a gorgeous visual style, an interesting narrative structure (prominently featuring flashbacks and flash-forwards), an excellent cast (also including Joe Don Baker and Shelley Duvall in bit roles), and just an all-around excellent sense of atmosphere. That's why I'm puzzled by the widespread disdain for it; even Soderbergh claims to hate this film. I think it's among the better neo-noir films to come out in the 1990s, and while it isn't quite on the level of, say, The Coen Brothers, I think it's one of Soderbergh's most interesting and underrated films.

    Another movie that everyone in the world seems to hate, except me. This remake of the classic 1949 Burt Lancaster crime film Criss Cross updates the action to present-day Austin, Texas. Michael (Peter Gallagher), an amiable but untrustworthy gambler and reprobate, returns after many years away to see his middle-aged mom marry nice-guy Ed (Tom Dooley). Before long, he decides to stay in town, get a job at an armored car company with his soon-to-be stepdad, and tries to rekindle his romance with Rachel (Alison Elliott), the lover he ran out on years before to escape his gambling debts. But she's married to low-level gangster Tommy (William Fichtner), and still harbors some understandable resentment against Michael. Meanwhile, Michael's cop brother David (Adam Trese) keeps an eye on his older sibling, knowing how he tends to attract trouble. One thing leads to another, as these things happen in film noir, and before long Michael finds himself in the tightest spot he's ever been in. While not flawless, The Underneath benefits from a gorgeous visual style, an interesting narrative structure (prominently featuring flashbacks and flash-forwards), an excellent cast (also including Joe Don Baker and Shelley Duvall in bit roles), and just an all-around excellent sense of atmosphere. That's why I'm puzzled by the widespread disdain for it; even Soderbergh claims to hate this film. I think it's among the better neo-noir films to come out in the 1990s, and while it isn't quite on the level of, say, The Coen Brothers, I think it's one of Soderbergh's most interesting and underrated films.

  • Mar 13, 2013

    Very boring and unrealistic.

    Very boring and unrealistic.

  • Dec 12, 2012

    (** 1/2): [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon13.gif[/img] I really wanted to like this, but I felt that the story jumped back and forth through flashbacks a bit too much. A near-miss for me.

    (** 1/2): [img]http://images.rottentomatoes.com/images/user/icons/icon13.gif[/img] I really wanted to like this, but I felt that the story jumped back and forth through flashbacks a bit too much. A near-miss for me.

  • Oct 06, 2012

    Stylish, but rather sterile and academic remake of the film noir classic "Criss Cross". Comparing it to the Coen Brothers' "Blood Simple", it's equal in visual flair, but is lacking in heart or characters you care about. Still, it's a Steven Soderbergh film, which makes it worth watching in my book. Plus, I'll watch anything with good ol' Joe Don Baker no matter what.

    Stylish, but rather sterile and academic remake of the film noir classic "Criss Cross". Comparing it to the Coen Brothers' "Blood Simple", it's equal in visual flair, but is lacking in heart or characters you care about. Still, it's a Steven Soderbergh film, which makes it worth watching in my book. Plus, I'll watch anything with good ol' Joe Don Baker no matter what.

  • Jul 25, 2012

    A FLEUR DE PEAU, le quatrieme film de STEVEN SODERBERGH est encore une fois une reussite, tant par la qualite de l'interpretation que par les choix habiles et la virtuosite de la mise en scene. SODERBERGH se permet tout et ca marche le plus clair du temps. Malheureusement, on denotera quelques longueurs. Un tres bon film.

    A FLEUR DE PEAU, le quatrieme film de STEVEN SODERBERGH est encore une fois une reussite, tant par la qualite de l'interpretation que par les choix habiles et la virtuosite de la mise en scene. SODERBERGH se permet tout et ca marche le plus clair du temps. Malheureusement, on denotera quelques longueurs. Un tres bon film.

  • Jul 16, 2012

    Soderbergh never disappoints.

    Soderbergh never disappoints.