Slam Dance |  | Director: Wayne Wang
Actors: Tom Hulce, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Virginia Madsen, Don Keith Opper, Adam Ant
Studio: MGM (Video & DVD)
Category: DVD
List Price: $3.98
Buy New: $2.79
as of 3/17/2010 17:50 EDT details
You Save: $1.19 (30%)
New (16) Used (3) from $2.48
Seller: previously-enjoyed
Rating:  7 reviews
Sales Rank: 47949
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, DVD, Full Screen, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
Languages: English (Original Language), Spanish (Original Language), English (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled), French (Subtitled)
Rating: R (Restricted)
Region: 1
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 100 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: MGMD1004623D
ISBN: 0792855884
UPC: 027616886644
EAN: 9780792855880
ASIN: B00008R9KO
Theatrical Release Date: November 6, 1987
Release Date: June 3, 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
A cartoonist (hulce) who had an affair with a girl who is murdered (madsen) gets himself embroiled in a high-level cover-up of a sex scandal involving his lover. Studio: Tcfhe/mgm Release Date: 06/03/2003 Starring: Virginia Madsen Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio Run time: 100 minutes Rating: R Director: Wayne Wang
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 7
Give this movie a chance.... March 29, 2008
Lady Weaver (Arizona)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Contrary to what other reviews say about this little movie, I love it. I saw it when it first came out, have seen a couple of times since, and recently watched it again on tv. It still held up. It has a quirky style and the surprise ending is wonderful! Tom Hulce is great in it, Virginia Madsen her usual sexy self and I love the little girl who played Bean. It's not a great movie but it does have charm and wit. I hope you give it a try....
A MOVIE THAT STARS TOM HULCE.....REMEMBER HIM? September 15, 2005
Magpie (NH United States)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Slam Dance tells the story of a Los Angeles loser named Drood who looks like Amadeus and draws unfunny cartoons for a living. He has an ex-wife with an out-of-control perm who works in a day care with a bunch of kids that look like they take the short bus (one of them hits Drood in the crotch with a rubber chicken). He also has a little daughter named Bean who likes him to take his teeth out and runs in during inappropriate moments like when Drood mistakes a nude prostitute for a secretary (don't ask).
Drood is cool enough at least to have Adam Ant play his best friend. Adam doesn't do a whole hell of a lot in this movie except wear late 80s mod clothes and come out with bad jokes like "How many surrealist painters does it take to screw in a lightbulb? The fish."
It seems that before the movie started Drood was involved with a mysterious blond played by Virginia Madsen, who made an 80s career out of playing mysterious blonds before she was in "Candyman." She was recently resurrected from the dead for the movie "Sideways" and earned an Oscar nomination for it. I'm glad the Academy is no longer prejudiced against walking corpses. But I digress. Virginia isn't in the movie very much except in flashback sequences and a reoccurring photograph where she's smiling at two men facing her wearing scuba masks looking like they're going to pee on her. But hey, she got on the DVD cover!!! She's been murdered and Drood is the main suspect. I guess because he slept with her. Among his other problems, Drood keeps getting stalked by a skinny guy wearing sunglasses and a red Members Only jacket. The guy beats up Drood a lot and sticks a gun in his face while saying stuff like "she thought you were so smart." Alluding to the concept that he knew the mysterious blond.
Flashbacks seem to be the main way Wang tells the story. And he makes that very clear about 20 minutes into the movie. Problem is, the flashbacks he's showing are things that we, the audience, viewed in the first 20 minutes as well. Why does he feel a need to show us these things again? It actually doesn't help the plot along and it just makes the movie longer. Maybe that's the point. Because actually there really isn't much of a plot to sustain the running time. To fill the gaps Wang uses the aforementioned flashbacks, music montages, and long gaps between dialogue bits. The dialogue is sparse in this film which is effective for two reasons, one because it helps to maintain the strange atmosphere (which the film has plenty of) but also because the dialogue sucks, so the less of it the better. One example:
Drood: Are you going to help me or not?
Adam Ant: No! You're a selfish f%@k! I'm calling the police.
Drood: Let me borrow your car.
Adam Ant: No.
Drood: Give me the keys.
Adam Ant: No.
Drood: I said give me the f%&king keys!!
You get the point. Somehow I don't think Wang was too concerned about the dialogue, he was more concerned about being stylish. And in that he succeeds. The film ultimately makes no sense but Wang uses a lot of deliberate pausing, an effective score, and great photography to wrap around a crappy script. Hey, it worked for me, I own it. It's a great film to have on when you want to go brain-dead or when you're playing the game, "Zombies." Other than that, forget it.
 From Amadeus to this? March 27, 2005
R. Crane (Washington, DC United States)
5 out of 12 found this review helpful
Apparently when this was first released it was largely ignored and it should have stayed that way. While Adam Ant was memorable in this film, the other actors should wipe it from their resumes. Hulce, the star of "Amadeus" was over-the-top, an over-emoting unbelievable character. At times the editing was confusing as the movie darted about. The only good thing I can find to say about this is that it is over. To compare this to Hitchcock is an insult to Hitchcock! Though I may stand alone in my opinion here, you may be the person who would agree with me, so, caveat emptor.
 Adam Ant Movie Lover May 28, 2002
Jon C. Domke (Mountain House, CA)
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
I originally watched this movie only becuase I'm an avid Adam Ant fan. I was totally suprised at what a sleeper hit this was. I'm not sure how a movie with Tom Hulce, hot off his Amadeus film, and Mary Elizabeth Mastratonio could have been missed at the box office. Adam Ant play his typical bad boy part with great zeal. A movie that will keep you watching and wondering. Also, a great part of the Police Detective played admirably by Harry Dean Stanton.
Hitchcock gets the big Wang treatment March 14, 2001
D. Hartley (Seattle, WA USA)
7 out of 7 found this review helpful
Indie director Wayne Wang ("Chan Is Missing") was given a shot at a higher budget film and proved to be quite a stylish moviemaker with this largely ignored thriller from the late 80's. Almost universally panned by critics at the time of release (for no readily apparent reasons) this is one movie that deserves a second appraisal; I think it's one of the better of the 80's crop of stylish "neo noirs"--on a par with "Someone To Watch Over Me", "The Bedroom Window" and "Something Wild". Wang uses the classic Hitchcock "wrong man" scenario to push his hapless cartoonist turned murder suspect Tom Hulce through a twisty Kafkaesque nightmare with a Los Angeles backdrop.A fair amount of subtle black humor gives the film a unique flavor, as well as an excellent supporting cast. There's a bit of 80's rock star stunt casting with X's John Doe as a corrupt cop, Adam Ant (surprisingly effective) as Hulce's shady pal, and you'll have to look fast for a dreadlocked Mark Anthony Thompson in a cameo as a bartender. Not for all tastes, but a sleeper worth waking up for.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 7
|
|
|
