MPAA Rating: R/Genre: Erotic Psychological Thriller/Stars: Michael Caine, Angie Dickinson, Nancy Allen, Keith Gordon, Dennis Franz, David Margulies, Susanna Clemm, Ken Baker, Brandon Maggart, Anneka Di Lorenzo, Bill Randolph, Susanna Clemm, Mark Margolis; voice of: William Finley/Runtime: 104 minutes
It might come as a bit of a shock to some of you out there to learn this, not so much though if you either know me personally or if you’ve read any of my reviews over the 5 years I’ve been doing this, but every so often I do find myself enjoying a slice of cinema that is perhaps not one that is universally loved and adored by the masses, the awards-giving communities at large, or both. Not just because I am a weird individual by any stretch (though I know I most unashamedly am) to say nothing of the fact that I like it because I enjoy being a party of one when it comes to certain things in life. Rather, it’s because sometimes I simply see something in a film that I can either enjoy or appreciate and which, upon finishing it, I feel makes it one that, while not for everyone, I definitely feel is worth talking about and/or trying to recommend so perhaps it can find an audience who, after watching it for themselves, will appreciate it too. Perhaps this is why in 2012 when Cloud Atlas came out to a mixed response from both critics and movie-goers, I did everything short of drop flyers out of an airplane and then some to try and get people to give this slice of cinema the fair shake of the stick they would with zero hesitation give to something like the first Sinister which came out around the same time. The reason I bring this up to you today dear reader is because there is a slice of cinema from 1980 that I feel is worthy of being given this same treatment. That being the 1980 erotic psychological thriller, and film I happen to be reviewing for you today incidentally, Dressed to Kill. Indeed here is a film that when it first came out led to it being viewed as controversial by some, others flat-out labeling it as sleazy due to the content, and then there were those who enjoyed it yet definitely felt the film’s director, one Brian De Palma, was trying to crib off Alfred Hitchcock. Yet while I definitely understand where each of those groups is coming from, and yes De Palma is definitely borrowing from Hitch’s filmography here, there is also no denying that, when you rip off the sleaze label slapped on it to say nothing of ignore the controversy and take the film on its own merits, this is still a fairly engaging (albeit more than slightly vivid at points) little movie. To be sure, it isn’t perfect by any means, but with the aid of fairly solid work on both sides of the camera Dressed to Kill is one intriguing cinematic mystery that is sure to keep you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end and every nightmarish minute in between.
The plot is as follows: Taking us to the iconic locale of New York City, Dressed to Kill gets its thrilling narrative underway by introducing us to a woman by the name of Kate Miller. A woman who, despite possessing a fairly good life in many respects including fairly positive relationships with both her 2nd husband Mike and her aspiring inventor of a son Peter, nevertheless still feels like some vital piece in the puzzle of her life is missing. A piece that may or may not exist on the more carnal side of things if you get my drift. Perhaps it is due to this void in her life that we soon see that she has been attending sessions with a noted psychiatrist of some skill and affability by the name of Dr. Elliott. It is also perhaps because of that aforementioned void that we see, during her latest appointment, Miss Miller actually try to seduce the good doctor only to be firmly yet gently turned down due to Elliott’s desire to ensure that his happy marriage is not put at risk in any way despite him admitting to her that he does find her attractive to say nothing of trying to give her some fairly solid advice to try and remedy her particular situation. Thus we soon see as Miller, feeling both a little stung by the rejection bee to say nothing of frustrated at where she is at in her life, makes her way to the Metropolitan Museum of Art where, in a seemingly astonishing turn of events, we see that she and an enigmatic stranger turn a highly flirtatious game of cat and mouse throughout the hallways and corridors of the museum into a full-blown sexual affair that starts inside a cab and ends in the man’s apartment later that day. Yet when a surprising revelation causes Kate to hurriedly leave the man’s apartment following their dalliance only to then have to make her way back due to forgetting a rather important item (hint hint: her wedding ring), we see that by doing so she has also set something else in motion. That being no more or less than taken the first steps into what will transform into a waking nightmare. One that will not only involve her and her son Peter, but also Dr. Elliott, a snarky yet good hearted female escort named Liz, a cynical and suspicious detective named Marino, but also one other person that I most assuredly think is definitely worthy of mention here. That being a mysterious, to say nothing of more than slightly unhinged, fellow patient of Dr. Elliott’s by the name of Bobbi. A patient who, among other things, has a fondness for not only pilfering the good doc’s razor of all things, but who very well might be quite capable of murder most foul. As for the circumstances that bring all of these characters together to say nothing of what we ultimately discover along this nightmarish cinematic lane that I think I will leave for you to find out for yourself dear reader……
Now right off, it should be said that the assorted departments operating behind the camera on this distinct slice of cinema all do an incredibly skilled job at bringing this film vividly to life. Without any question whatsoever, this starts with the work done in the director’s chair by Brian De Palma (The Untouchables, the first Mission: Impossible movie from 1996, Scarface “83”, and the first take on Stephen King’s Carrie from 1976 among others) and while this is by no means his best work, it also is by no means his worst either thankfully. Indeed there are several elements to De Palma’s directorial work at the helm here that really help to make this a genuinely gripping slice of cinema. The first is that De Palma manages to do an excellent job at utilizing such creative tools including split screen and long tracking shots in order to not only enrich the story that he is telling us here or to organically construct a palpable degree of suspense, but also to submerge you, the viewer even further into the aforementioned narrative. Along with that, it should also be pointed out that De Palma is one heck of a director when it comes to building suspense in as organic and slow-burn of a manner as possible. As a result, yes this slice of cinema might be a bit slow for some audiences’ tastes, but for those you willing to stick with it I promise it’ll be worth it. In addition to his work at the helm, we see that De Palma is also fairly successful when it comes to being the scribe of the screenplay that this film is operating off of. Yes, you can definitely see the degree of influence that Alfred Hitchcock had in virtually every minute of the runtime, but overall there is no denying that De Palma is incredibly skilled at giving audiences a truly riveting mystery complete with provocative themes, a fairly multidimensional cast of characters, and some genuinely surprising twists that definitely will keep you hooked from beginning to end. Besides the work done by De Palma as both scribe and helmer, the film also possesses top-tier work from Ralf D. Bode (Saturday Night Fever, The Accused, and Coal Miner’s Daughter) in the cinematography department. Indeed, much like his work on Gorky Park, we see that, through the utilization of such techniques as attention to detail and wonderfully methodical camera work, Bode is able to do a fantastic job of not only organically raising the uncertainty present, but also in making the film incredibly alluring visually despite the rather explicit content on display. Lastly, I most assuredly think that this section would definitely be amiss if I didn’t take some time in it to talk about the work done by frequent De Palma collaborator Pino Donaggio (The Howling, the 1978 Piranha, 1973’s Don’t Look Now, and 2004’s Seed of Chucky among other entries) on the score for this cinematic outing. Indeed not only does the musical accompaniment do a wonderful job of really synching up with the equal parts suspenseful as well as explicit vibe permeating throughout the rest of the film, but Donaggio also manages to display tremendous skill at elevating the ominous uncertainty felt by the audience through such means as utilizing trombone glissandi among others. Suffice it to say that, when also taking into account top-notch work from the editing department as headed by Oscar-winner Gerald B. Greenberg (The French Connection, Apocalypse Now, and The Untouchables to name but a few) among others it’s clear that even though this slice of cinema is by no means perfect, there is also no denying that the work done behind the camera is most assuredly skilled and is able to make this as engaging of a delightfully sleazy viewing experience as it turns out to be.
Alongside the fairly solid work engaged in by the various teams operating behind the camera on this particular slice of cinema, it should be said that this film is also equally as blessed to contain a collection of just as engaging performances in front of the camera by an extremely well-chosen cast of talented individuals even if some are perhaps given a bit more to work with than others among the group. Without a doubt in my mind, this starts with the work done here by screen legend Sir Michael Caine in the pivotal role of Dr. Elliott and honestly I definitely feel like this might be one of the more underrated efforts of his career. Indeed as Dr. Elliott, we see that Caine does a wonderful job of giving us someone who is analytical to a fault to say nothing of trying to get to the bottom of this mystery for his own personal reasons whilst also providing a vital degree of both composure and calm amidst the chaos occurring to the various characters in this story including himself. Suffice it to say it’s a fantastic turn and one that works beautifully in synch with the creepy atmosphere present in the story. Alongside Caine, we are also treated to a terrific turn from Angie Dickinson in the integral part of Kate Miller. Indeed there’s not a whole lot I can say about this character for fear of spoilers, but what I can say is that Dickinson does an incredibly skilled job at showcasing for us a woman who may love her son Peter yet who is suffering from a more than slightly extreme sense of dissatisfaction. Not just with where she is at in her life, but also in regards to the current state of her marriage to her second husband and how neglected he makes her feel thus causing her to make a series of choices that are best left for you to discover on your own. Besides Caine and Dickinson, the film also provides us with a solid performance from Nancy Allen (the first RoboCop from 1987, Carrie from 1976, and 1981’s Blow-Out among others) as Liz Blake. Yes, in other movies this might be the stereotypical “damsel-in-distress” type individual, but thankfully we see that Allen does a wonderful job of throwing this stereotype to the curb and instead giving us someone who is resilient and unashamedly pragmatic. Not just in how she conducts herself on a personal and professional level, but also in regards to doing whatever it takes to aid Liz’s son Peter in getting to the truth at the core of this heinous mystery. Last, but by no means least this section of the review would definitely be severely lacking if I didn’t take some time to talk about the work done by actor/director Keith Gordon (Jaws 2, and Arnie in the 1983 take on Christine) as Peter Miller. Indeed Gordon does a wonderful job here of giving us a young man who is a fantastic mix of intelligent, highly resourceful, and driven to ensure that justice is done whatever it takes. Suffice it to say that when you also take into account wonderful work from Dennis Franz (who I swear is just playing Detective Andy Sipowicz from NYPD Blue here) and David Marguiles (the Mayor from the first 2 Ghostbuster films) among others it’s clear that this slice of cinema most assuredly has its issues here and there, but the work done by this cast of players definitely does what it can to help make up for them and then some.
All in all and at the end of the day is Dressed to Kill a flawless in every way and then some cinematic effort by any stretch of the imagination? Sadly no though most assuredly not due to lack of effort on the part of either the cast or crew involved in bringing it to life. With that in mind however, does that make this the worst slice of cinema that anyone either in front of or behind the camera has been a part of during their respective careers? Honestly no, but if you are inclined to think so then I definitely feel like some of the movies that Brian De Palma has made after the first Mission: Impossible movie back in 1996 as well as a fair number of films that Michael Caine would make later on in the 80s to say nothing of The Swarm from 1978 would most assuredly love to have a word with you and I can’t by any stretch of the imagination promise you that is a meeting that will be pleasant by any means. All sarcastic comments aside, it should be said that Dressed to Kill is not going to be a cinematic brew that is going to be for every single one of you out there. Not just because of the more than slightly explicit subject matter at the heart of the movie, but also because the film does operate very much as a slow-burn thriller to say nothing of the fact that a fair amount of the characters in this don’t get a whole lot in the way of substance to work with. Should you be able to get past those distinct components however, I have no doubt that you will find more than a fair amount to both enjoy and appreciate here. Indeed the story being told is genuinely riveting, the work at the helm is very much on-point, the work done by the cinematography department is spot-on, the musical score is delightfully in synch with the rest of the film, and the performances by the undeniably talented cast of players (with particular regard to the turns contributed here by Caine, Dickinson, Gordon, Allen, and Franz) are all extremely well performed even in light of the aforementioned inequal amount of substance dilemma the film is faced with. Suffice it to say then that, should you be able to get on its particular explicit wavelength, Dressed to Kill “80” is definitely one fairly compelling and legitimately riveting cinematic mystery that I have no doubt you will enjoy watching time and time again….even if it will definitely ensure that from here on out you will find yourself having second thoughts about making homemade art with a mysterious stranger the next time you go to your local art museum rather than just simply enjoying the art on the walls if you get my drift. Make of that what thou dear reader! On a scale of 1-5 I give Dressed to Kill “80” a solid 3.5 out of 5.
