Basements (1987)

People are voting emotionally.

If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

ABC TV network has from time to time tried to work with more serious artists. This was a big experiment and Lynch's TWIN PEAKS was another go round with middlebrow if not high brow offerings. WILD PALMS falls in this category as well. In all cases they would attract a few household names to generate interest in the projects.I have not seen BASEMENTS. It was one of those projects I've always wanted to see because I am familiar with Harold Pinter. The fact that Travolta (who was in a career slump at the time and was reduced to appearing in cameos on SNL and Stevie Wonder videos)agreed to do it really intrigued me. Does anyone know where to find it?

I am the first one to SPIT upon....really, I cannot stand pretentious crud -- spit upon art that pretends to be art...Paintings of green with a yellow spot and selling for $250,000 (seriously), or boring movies and plays that border on insanity...BUT...Pinter's MASterpiece, The Dumb Waiter is indeed an 'absurdist' piece, but one that has a beginning, a middle and an end, and truly carries the viewer (or reader) through a psychological dialogue that ranks with Terry Gilliam's 'Brazil,' and Mamet's The Spanish Prisoner,' as films that take the absurdist and surreal genre and actually make films truly art-worthy.I love the Dumb Waiter -- and ironically, fell in love with it during a college drama class -- I wrote at length about it because I had been one to rant about stupid wannabe pretentious theatre, art, music, etc. and realized that Pinter is truly an artist. Truly. Other pretenders do minimalistic work because they can't do more, but this is great -- and the best acting Travolta has done besides Pulp Fiction... ...oh, and Battlefield Earth...(just kidding)

Now, I am one of the biggest John Travolta fans on earth, I have all of his movies, except for ones not out of video. I just recently got this movie, and I STILL do not understand it after watching it three times. I got the movie off of e-bay because it is out of print. Was it worth what I paid? Yes, because I am a collector of all his movies. For a regular person who isn't interested in it for the actor, I would tell you not to dare waste your money and time.

PLEASE NOTE: These comments contain SPOILERS!! I rented this film with high hopes. Of course, that in itself is usually a recipe for disaster.The play upon which the movie is based is very dear to me. I have performed in it and directed it three times. Given this, let make plain that I am not adverse to a director having a different vision than my own. That is to be expected and respected. The problem arises when the director has a vision that is counter to the work itself.First of all, I take issue with the casting of John Travolta in the role of Ben. In the text it is noted that Ben is the senior partner. With that in mind it becomes very difficult to believe that Tom Conti, who clearly has at least 10 years on Mr. Travolta, is the junior partner. Mr. Conti comes off as the world's oldest rookie. The most disturbing aspect of Mr. Travolta's perfomance (or lack thereof) is his horrendous dialect. Mr. Travolta's Cockney makes Kevin Costner's in Robin Hood appear brilliant! One would think that Robert Altman would at least see that a decent dialect coach were hired.The Dumb Waiter falls into a group of plays by Mr. Pinter that are known collectively as "Comedies of Menace." The setting is the basement of an abandoned building and, in my experience, provides a nicely clautrophobic atmosphere that heightens the sense of aforementioned "menace." For some reason, Mr. Altman chose to set the piece in a huge, airy, well-lit space. Picture the set for The Mary Tyler Moore Show, only bigger.My final, and most damning criticism of the piece is the ending. HERE COMES THE SPOILER!!!!! In the original text, Mr. Pinter clearly leaves the ending ambiguous. The word comes from on high that the target of the hit is about to arrive. Suddenly, Gus, stripped of his weapon and clearly roughed up, is thrust into the room. Ben instinctually points his weapon at Gus. Blackout. The end. In the film, we hear (but do not see) the shot and, over the credits, the cleaners (think Harvey Keitel in Pulp Fiction) are seen going to the site of the hit. Part of the beauty of the original is the fact that Mr. Pinter doesn't answer the final question for the audience. Mr. Altman, in effect, condescends to the audience by making that decision for us (and for Ben).There are far better adaptations of Mr. Pinter's work out there. Don't waste your time on this.