Suture (1993)

Sick Product of a Sick System

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

This is one of those films that defy convention and easy description. I'm tempted to call it an "Arthouse Thriller", but that wouldn't do this film justice. If you enjoy a good intelligent thriller that will test the boundaries of your comfort level as well as your imagination, I recommend giving this film a chance. It is a unique and brave film. A similar film mind bending mystery is Last Year at Marienbad (1961) (L'année dernière à Marienbad).

Excellent modern noir, though could've had a better ending as I will explain later. Elements of Hitchcock and David Lynch could be seen/felt, but definitely had it's own style. Acting was great, though not in a completely realistic way, more like the other worldly, slightly dreamlike delivery found in a Lynch film, but it didn't get as bizarre or unfathomable as Lynch often does (don't get me wrong, I love David Lynch!). Direction, Cinematography and Editing, again, excellent. So many interesting shots and sequences. A lot has been said about the choice of actor for Clay and the fact that everyone in the film sees the brothers as identical. My interpretation is that they ARE identical twins and that there just happens to be a black actor playing Clay and a white one playing Vincent. If the director decides they are identical twins in the film and that everyone in the film will see them as that, then they are. If a director has a prop of the Grand Canyon made for a film that doesn't look like the Grand Canyon, but he decides it is and has all the characters in the film treat it as the Grand Canyon, then in that film, it is the Grand Canyon. Obviously this was done on purpose to give more weight to the theme of identity. I don't think race had anything to do with the story of the film except in the mind of the viewer, which is valid, as it is such an issue in our society and why i think the director chose a black actor (rather than another white actor) so that the viewer will think even more about identity. I believe the twins were born to Mrs. Lucerne and separated at birth. There is a sequence where she describes this. I think this is when he received the St Christopher. Why Vincent was kept by Mrs Towers we don't know. Why Clay didn't stay with Mrs Lucerne, we don't know. Mrs Towers must have known there was another twin because he was at the funeral. Where did the St Christopher appear from after going missing? Was it put there by Vincent or Mrs Towers?I would have given this 10 stars, but for the ending, which was OK, but could've had a choice of twists. 1. He assumes the identity of Vincent, but then some new evidence comes to light and he ends up being charged with the murder of his father. 2. Even better, the Clay we see at the beginning of the film before the explosion is a facade and he actually killed the father after finding out about the details of his birth. this is why he also shot Mrs Lucerne because she gave him away to a poor life in a poor town. He was then planning to kill Vincent and assume his identity, but Vincent got to him first. I think this is borne out by the fact that, once he realises who he is, he's not as nice a guy as at the beginning of the film. I think he decides to remain as Vincent because that was his plan all along. And then the new evidence comes to light and he ends up being charged with the murder of his father. I think Mrs Lucerne, Mrs Towers and the St Christopher could've been woven into a much better ending, but even so, one of the best films I've seen for a while

Very excellent film. The choice of black and white to shoot the film was a very good idea. So was the casting of the 2 brothers. I believe they are chosen to look completely different (although in the narrative they are supposed to look identical) is that the director/writer wanted to show how different their personalities are. Perhaps this could not have been conveyed so easily if 2 actual twins were cast. The dreams with the metaphorical flashback triggers were very clver, i.e. needles in the arm/Needles the town. They don't make films this thrilling anymore unfortunately. Hitchcock couldn't have done this any better.Anyway, this was an excellent film, check it out.

Although the story arc of this film is fairly conventional (murder setup, memory trauma, induced impersonation, final double-ironic betrayal) it is the ominous mood and the spectacular, yet understated gamble that the writers and director take with the audience's expectation in making the central duo -brothers- utterly different racially and physically. It is so obvious a thing to point out, but for me this reaffirmed, via an otherwise rather easily-contrived situation and plot, the whole modern interpretation of the film noir.The concept of all reality being a facade and prey to the unexpected warpings of fate, accident and whimsical doom-laden coincidence is a fundamental aspect of noir. With the twist of no one actually making the obvious connection between the brother's difference and Dennis Haysbert's character Clay gradually absorbing the life of his (not) dead brother without incident, the surreality of the film is magnetically compulsive and as noirish as some of the best films of the 1940s and 50s in dreamy, menacing atmosphere. I found myself deeply caring what happened to Clay on his odyssey towards a (false) identity and finally claiming it.The whole cast is good, but in this film Dennis Haysbert shows the gravita s and dignity and vulnerability that makes him the real star of the excellent TV thriller '24'. A landmark film of the '90s gone unnoticed!