Showgirls (1995)

There's a point in this film, where it takes a sharp, serious and dark turn, out of damn near nowhere, and it's that moment in the movie that encapsulates just how unfocused Showgirls is.If I was to take this movie seriously, it would be a 3.5/10. If I weren't to take it seriously, then it would be 6/10. The sexiness and erotica points of the film were done relatively well, however, the story, the acting and over acting, the pace and those hilariously ridiculous seizure fests they tried to pass off as dancing or some kind of choreography were just too shockingly laughable.Showgirls is sexy, especially Elizabeth Berkley, and is as progressive as any ordinary film tends and needs to be without being static, however, it ran longer than it had to, and that just stretched an already poorly handled story too thin. Its structure and pace doesn't allow one to feel the necessary emotions of sympathy, however parts like what happens in the beginning of the movie give it some edge. I'll meet Showgirls halfway and give it 5/10.

..................After Trump: Grabb'em by the Pu..y - this seems how American males see women. And it becomes clearer by the day. You all rag on it - this movie - your society. But that is who you have become as a nation. Do you like it ? Nobody else does !! Greatings from Europe.

I have yet to watch "Elle", but I rate this as Paul Verhoeven's masterpiece.First off, critics failed to realize that the bizarre and trashy quality was on purpose to reflect the character and her journey. The world of Vegas showgirls and strippers is surreal, beautiful on the surface and steeped in idiotic fantasy. Verhoeven makes this film a reflection of 90s American values that are MORE timely in 2016.The infamous "lap dance in a pool scene" is the biggest gag and hint at what this film is about. From this absurd moment on, Nomi's world comes crumbling and her false self is unraveled. Ignorant viewers thought it was just a misguided sex scene that unintentionally takes the film over the top. Verhoeven knows what he's doing in every second of the movie.Its undeniable that Showgirls is the best shot movie of the 1990s or very close to being, but it needs to be reappraised as a monumental art film that's sly and doesn't pander or take itself too seriously, unlike the films that win Oscars these days. If this film was made today and starred Amy Adams and was directed by PT Anderson, critics would respect it and think it was one of the most modern films ever. Now reflect that it starred a Saved By The Bell star, was directed by the Robocop guy and came out over 20 years ago. All of those things make it better, if you didn't know. 10 star film.

The general perception of this movie is in such stark contrast to what I thought and felt when I saw it in 1995, that I feel provoked to analyze what I liked about "Showgirls". There are many movies that mean much more to me, but this gap makes it much more interesting for me to write about this film than, say, write about one of my favourite movies by Fassbinder or Malick or Bergman.I had gone to see this movie for its supposed sexiness. And sexy it was, if you managed to ignore the somewhat wooden acting. But there was something going on underneath the surface of the story which I found much more interesting than well-shaped bodies and the obvious plot: I felt caught in the act. There was no difference between me and and the strip-tease and night club audience. The film was actually dissecting me and the role as a member of the audience I played in that setting.There is a scene which, in my mind, proves my theory (*** spoiler alert***): when Nomi takes brutal revenge, we suddenly switch perspective and watch the scene through the eyes of the miscreants who had beaten up her best friend, and who are now under vicious attack by Nomi (***end of spoiler***) - which means we, the audience, are found guilty by Verhoeven, which again is ironic, because it is his film in the first place that tricked us into this position (or did it?).