Final Analysis

This is an entertaining crime drama with good performance by Kim Basinger and fine score by George Fenton.

This movie has some promising elements. There is a premeditated murder plot with some intricacy, twists, and atmosphere. Kim Basinger does a good job playing a beautiful mystery woman with a troubled past and an exotic, violent illness ("pathological intoxication"). She conveys soft, placid (if overly simple) beauty one minute and psychotic rage the next, and creates a character that rivals Catherine Zeta-Jones' in Traffic for turning on a dime into a memorably driven, tough, and hard-hearted soul.

Uma Thurman looks and acts her slight part adequately enough as Basinger's delicate, spaced-out sister, a patient of psychiatrist Richard Gere. Paul Guilfoyle hams it up as a boorish criminal defense lawyer pal of Gere's. A police detective is tough, crude, and menacing, on cue (barking "Don't yank" a part of his anatomy, at Gere).

But the film collapses under the weight of its many flaws. Gere is completely unconvincing as an "eminent psychiatrist." This has less to do with how he looks than how the movie presents him. At no point does he say or do anything that credibly establishes such a character. His attempts seem limited to occasionally speaking in jargon or hushed tones. He appears gullible and ignorant, as when it takes a lecture by someone else to tip him off by chance to a colorful passage in Freud's work that is key to the criminal's scheme; even one of the plotters had expected Gere to be familiar with it. His supposedly joking answer to Basinger that as a psychiatrist he simply repeats, as a question, whichever last two words are spoken by his patient -- "'Your mother?'" -- hits a little too close to home. It is a truer description of how Gere comes across here than he thinks. Nor does the film give any background that might help explain the personal vulnerability that makes him such a dupe. The character is little more than a dim, steady facial expression and a resume.

Thurman's character amounts to no more than a stagey plot gimmick. She never comes alive as a real person with a real relationship to anyone. The prosecutor is played with gruff style and no substance by Harris Yulin. He is given so little to say and do, and the character accomplishes so little, if anything, that I could not even find him listed in the credits.

Even worse is the Eric Roberts character, Basinger's intense husband with mob ties. It is a tired, superficial, trying caricature that drags the movie down to the level of countless low-budget, rip-off "romantic thrillers." The unoriginal character and portrayal recall cinematic gems like "Play Murder for Me" and "Dead On" (both with Tracy Scoggins), "Tryst" (with Barbara Carrera), and probably dozens of other "abusive husband" exploitation flicks and TV show episodes (ala "Silk Stalkings").

The weaknesses in the characters are only compounded by the weaknesses in the story. The plot flaws become so damaging and distracting that they sap entertainment value right out of the film. Watching the movie becomes like trying to drive a stick-shift down a road full of sink-holes (the film does feature a "ditch"). The abrupt, midstream shift in tone and pacing does not help.

No explanation is ever offered for how the killer was able, in real time, to "hide" the murder weapon from the police - don't they search a crime scene? don't they have search warrants for other hiding places? And this is a plot point that drives most of the movie.

We are supposed to believe that the prosecutor would proceed with a first degree murder trial not only without a murder weapon but without establishing the accused's motive, not even bothering to investigate until afterward exactly who was in line to receive a $4 million payout.

We are supposed to believe that Gere can install himself on the psychiatric board responsible for evaluating the fitness for release from an institution of his own, indefinitely confined lover.

We are supposed to believe -- and cheer -- that two outside professionals would arrive for an interview without introducing themselves or their reason for being there, and that another character would suddenly switch a lifelong allegiance, all so that Gere can stage an elaborate trick on someone he later acknowledges is mentally ill from childhood abuse, only apparently to arrange an even more haphazard, convoluted, and contrived manipulation later by behaving cavalierly and roughly to a patient.

We are supposed to believe that murderers can walk out of mental institutions simply by switching clothes with someone else in a bathroom.

We are supposed to believe that Gere would enlist a psychiatric patient to steal for him, without giving any warnings or taking any precautions to protect the young man from the vicious homocidal maniac with whom this puts him at odds (to compensate for this colossal error, the movie prematurely discloses the man's fate, creating a witness and another potential crime to prosecute and thus undercutting the suspense of whether the killer of the earlier victim will escape unpunished).

We are supposed to believe, for the sake of a quick, shock-effect touch at the end, that, after two court trials had thoroughly publicized the events of the case, a character at the heart of the case would appear to be recycling the exact same modus operandi for future use. And so on.

The movie suffers badly under the relentless battering of these accumulated character and plot problems. Simply dismissing them, as some reviews do with an air of glib pseudo-sophistication, all-knowing cynicism, empty flippancy, or lazy, unintelligent flicking of the "not helpful" button on any review honest enough to point them out is not a serious response. Nor do they simply disappear because the movie inserts some attractive visuals, such as of bridges and lighthouses, or ramps up dramatic music (somewhat frantically and mechanically, starting about halfway through). Any meaningful review has to come to terms not only with the elements of the movie that are promising and likable but with the substantial flaws that prevent it from being satisfying.

I would have given this movie 3 1/2 stars but I won't! I won't because there are absolutely NO extras on this DVD. U don't even have the optoin to a special featres menu! Only Start Movie, Jump to a Scene, and Language selection. I just hope that Warner Bros. can find it in thier hearts to release a special edition WITH GOOD EXTRAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Final Analysis" is a silly love story/psychiatrist movie/court room drama that attempts to shovel us as many twist and turns as it can, only to fall more and more into the stupidity category. That doesn't mean the movie is bad, because it's not bad, it's just not that good. It has it's entertaining parts, but some of it just falls flat. The movie stars Richard Gere as Isaac Barr, a therapist is treating his mentally disturbed patient Diana (Uma Thurman) when he meets her gorgeous older sister Heather (Oscar Winner Kim Basinger). Barr and Heather begin having an affair, despite the fact that Heather is married to a gangster (Eric Roberts...Yeah, I thought it was funny too). Everything's going well, until Heather kills her husband and has Barr go to court with her and keep her out of jail. Then, right after we're done with the tiring court scenes we jump into way too many silly twists (although the first few were pretty smart). I mean, despite being extremely flawed, this movie does have some O.K. moments. I certainly didn't hate the film; but there are a lot of things wrong with it, besides the plot. Richard Gere is good in his role, there are parts you see him playing frequently. Kim Basinger, most of the time, is playing the person Alec Baldwin makes her out to be in court. A disturbed and mean woman. While Basinger is a fantastic actress, there are times here where she gives a blatant display of overacting. Thurman is great, but her character isn't drawn out that well and some of her motives aren't explained. There are a lot of events in this movie that could've been resolved a lot more easily than the characters choose to do them. Then, there's Eric Roberts who is already the victim of constant ridicule on shows like "South Park" and "Family Guy." It's in this movie it becomes clear why he gets this ridicule. Acting is about not letting other people know you're acting; In this film it looks like Roberts was doing facial impressions of old gangster movies. The way he walks and the way he talks in this movie is really bad sometimes. Overall the movie is mildly entertaining, has some semi-witty dialogue, overacting/bad acting, and two, that's right TWO, bad endings. So, why am I not giving this movie a D or an F. Because it somehow manages to be pretty amusing at times.

GRADE: C-

I bought the code 1 of final analysis from Singapore video shop...hee hee and watch have watched it. The story is about two sister whom one of them is a killer and the other is a non killer where the killer finally fell to her death while trying to shoot investigating officer with a gun. (The killer is trying to tell the investigating officer a story and in the end killed his would be bridegroom to death with a dumbell, she later caught the investigating officer for finding out what caused her to kill and she decided to get rid of him). The other woman whom is the sister of the killer finally found a suitable boyfriend. A recommended buy....

Review by:

Ang Poon Kah
PhD (Prof) in political science from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in Neuroscience from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in Technology from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in Security System from Cambridge University and NUS
PhD (Prof) in Computer from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in film from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in Business from Cambridge University and NUS.
PhD (Prof) in Electronics Engineering from Cambridge University and NUS.
Bachelor degree in computer studies from Techco University
Zakkers film director