Basic Instinct 2

Basic Instinct 2

DVD - 2006
Average Rating:
5
2
Rate this:
Now living in London, writer Catherine Tramell sets her lethal sights on Michael Glass, the control-freak psychiatrist assigned to evaluate her as a risk-addicted suspect in the "accidental" killing of a star soccer player. Turns out Catherine's just getting started (or is she?), and that's bad news for Glass's ex-wife, a tabloid journalist, and the Scotland Yard detective who's desperate to put Catherine in jail. Has Catherine finally met her match when the doctor is lured into her seductive games?
Publisher: Culver City, Calif. : Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, 2006.
Edition: Theatrical version.
Branch Call Number: FIC Basic
Characteristics: 1 DVD (114 min.)
Additional Contributors: Barish, Leora
Bean, Henry
Alternative Title: Basic instinct two

Opinion

From the critics


Community Activity

Quotes

Add a Quote

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

Tell me something you're afraid of.
-Boredom.
Is that why you like to take risks?
-I do like to take risks.
Like taking drugs and having sex in a speeding car? Like talking to me without having your lawyer present?
-Actually, that was your idea.
Like being on trial for murder? That's risky. You could end up in prison.
-Not if I'm innocent.
Innocent people end up in prison all the time.
-Not rich, innocent people who are represented by Henry Rose.
In that case, it isn't really exciting unless you're guilty.
===
So we've been considering those who wish to control others... through their insecurity and their narcissism. To study Nietzsche psychobiographically may seem naive. Wasn't it Nietzsche's work itself, which... through deconstructive and post-structuralist readings... induced the death of psychobiography?

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

I'm a writer.
-Really? What do you write about?
Oh, the lurid, the sexual, the violent.
-The basic instincts. They're the most powerful, aren't they?
===
I believe her behavior is driven by what we call a risk addiction. A compulsive need to prove to herself that she can take risks... and survive dangers others can't. Especially the subsequent encounters with the police or the powers that be.
-Why would a person do that?
The greater the risk, the greater the proof of her omnipotence. Her existence, really.
-When you say she has a risk addiction... is this condition likely to get worse?
All addiction is progressive. The addict always needs to take greater risks.
-If other people are hurt or killed... as a result of her behavior, that's not likely to stop her?
I think the only thing that'd stop her... I suspect the only limit for her would be her own death.

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

Everything that comes out of her is a lie. Even the truth's a lie with her. It's her way of getting you to think what she wants you to think. That's her art. The art of mind-fxcking. She might be a talented writer. When it comes to mind-fxcking, she's the all-time genius.
===
You don't believe me when I say I did it. You don't believe me when I say I didn't do it. What is the point
of talking to you, anyway?
===
I've been speaking to Lieutenant Phil Walker... the San Francisco Police Department.
-Paranoid Phil. Now there's a blast from the past.
===
You know, how some guys are into blonds... and some guys are into killers.

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

***SPOILER ALERT***
The story, true crime or fiction part 1 of 2:
It's about an American. A blond. A novelist. People around her just keep dying. But the question is: Who's killing them? Is the beautiful blond novelist a serial killer? Or is it the crooked cop? Her analyst isn't sure. But he goes crazy trying to find out. But that's just half the story. There's a twist. You see, the novelist never really killed anybody. And neither did the cop. The real killer all along... was the shrink. Yeah, from the moment he saw her... he knew she was the smoke screen he was looking for. His best opportunity to get even. First... he'd deal with that scumbag journalist.

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

***SPOILER ALERT***
The story, part 2 of 2:
You see, you don't just go around stealing another man's wife. It's humiliating. Not that she was a complete innocent. That weekend slut. Jesus, how could she let that sleazebag touch her? It's hurtful. And there's some hurts you don't just get over. Jealousy. Jealousy can make us do crazy things. But getting away with it... that was genius. "Unfit to stand trial." No prison for him, just a happy ending... in a quiet, sunlit, peaceful psychiatric institute. Of course, that could all be a fiction. He might really be insane.

Comment

Add a Comment

j
jimg2000
Oct 12, 2016

**the lurid, the sexual, the violent -The basic instincts** Loved the 1992 Basic Instinct but avoided this sequel till now because of the rock bottom ratings from critics: 4.2/10 IMDb, 7% Rotten Tomatoes and 1.5/4 Roger Ebert.
Agree with most reviewers that the plot was a hard sell that the psychiatrist (Morrissey) thought with the lower brain than his head, allowed a dangerous narcissist to get inside his head and turned it into mush, or did she? Anyway, liked the actors, choice of London locales as the phallic Gherkin, but it was a tough act to follow the original sexy psycho thriller when Stone was 48 in 2006.

t
Twiggzette
Nov 01, 2013

This movie is so perverted and sexual that it should not be in the Santa Clara Library collection.

Age Suitability

Add Age Suitability

There are no age suitabilities for this title yet.

Summary

Add a Summary

There are no summaries for this title yet.

Notices

Add Notices

There are no notices for this title yet.

Explore Further

Subject Headings

  Loading...
No similar edition of this title was found at OPL.

We did not find this title in the collection. Try searching for Basic Instinct 2 in the catalogue to ensure that OPL does not own related editions.


Suggest for Purchase

  Loading...
[]
[]
To Top