Indecent Proposal (1993)

What would you do if you and your partner, who you loved dearly were in some financial difficulty and in order to alleviate your difficult circumstances a stranger offered you one million for one night with you? What would you and your partner do? Would you immediately dismiss the proposal, regarding it as preposterous? Would you accept basing your argument on it being only a one-night stand and therefore meaningless? Would you do it for the much-needed money? Or would you refuse saying that money cannot buy love and that such an act would reduce you to the likes of a prostitute?

Confused? Well that is exactly the complex story this film weaves excellently. With a thought-provoking script that manages to challenge our every day perceptions of love and money and the depths we'd go to achieve them, along with some seriously moving moments guaranteed to shed a few tears from the female members of the audience and even managing to throw in a few comic moments this film is something special. A moral dilemma and it's repercussions on relationships and lives is played out with strong performances from the leads. Gripping, heartbreaking, entertaining and thought provoking, this offers a lot more than much of the 'fluff' produced today.

Overall rating: 8 out of 10.

Fmovies: I watched the movie for the first time, on TV. It's not a great film, but it certainly didn't deserve the 5.3 low rating. Something's going on here, and I think it's because most reviewers here are male, and we are threatened by the prospect of losing our wives to a Robert Reford look like billionaire, because we know for a fact we wouldn't stand a chance, even without the million bucks.

With divorce rate at 50% as it now, i am not even married but I suspect when a billionaire ( with a heart nonetheless ) came calling, my wife would leave me in a heartbeat.

sorry but everything does come with a price tag, even your marriage.

What would you do if a billionaire were consenting to pay you one million dollars (or more) for one night with your wife? This is the titular "Indecent Proposal", on which millions of viewers, men and women, have been debating for years, placing themselves in the same tricky situation than David (Woody Harrelson) and Diana (Demi Moore), the ill-fated couple who met the devilishly sexy John Gage (Robert Redford) in Las Vegas.

I remember when I was younger; there was a guy in my neighborhood who told me that in every woman, there was a potential prostitute. To confront him to his own contradictions, I carefully asked him whether that statement also applied to his family. The cynical macho nodded but felt the need to reformulate his thought, he meant that there was no woman in the world who wouldn't sleep with a man if she needed something, that's "potential prostitution" and I must confess I was almost convinced. And "Indecent Proposal" is all the more interesting because it confronts this option not to a woman, but a couple. The husband is part of the game and that's the strike of genius some distracted critics failed to grasp.

Think about it: did Jack Engelheard, the author of the original novel of the same name, take for granted that a single woman wouldn't have thought twice before accepting the deal? I bet he did and I happen to think the same. Refusing wouldn't be honorable but stupid, and I'm sure many women would agree with me. We're speaking of one million dollars for a sumptuous night, and not with the ugliest man in the world. I bet when today's women visualize the myth of the Charming Prince, they rather picture Robert Redford (or Brad Pitt) as a billionaire than the nameless Princes of Disney classics. We'd all need money to achieve our dreams and selling one's soul for one night with one handsome rich guy and one million dollars isn't too high a price.

But the film is cleverly provocative because it already admits the venal nature of women, which provoked the anger of feminists. But I'd love to see them in Diana's heels. The question isn't whether they would have accepted the night for one million, but how about two or ten, how high could John Gage raise the stakes before they'd say yes? That was the point and we got it, money can buy a body, but how about love? It all comes to David. And that's the subtlety the angry mob of feminists missed just like the intellectually eminent critics: the film also highlights the very hypocrisy of men who brand any woman who sleeps with other men as 'broad' or 'whore', by confronting them to the same situation. And I would have loved to ask the question to my macho friend, what if he was in David's place? Wouldn't there be, after all, in every husband or boyfriend, a "potential pimp"?

To answer that, watching the film isn't even necessary, it's all part of cinematic pop-culture, and we all have an opinion on the subject. In fact, if Adrian Lyne's film had one merit, it was to feature one of the most memorable premises of Cinema's history and handle it with a believable mix of realism and romanticism. It is crucial within the context of the film, because the theme is so sleazy it had to be washed up by a poignant love story. And on that level, the chemistry between Harrelson and Moore worked and built our empathy toward this couple of sweethearts, watching the ashes of their fantasy dreams gone with the wind o

Indecent Proposal fmovies. Demi and Woody are married, but they're poor. They meet Robert Redford, and he's REALLY rich. He takes a fancy to Demi, and since he's a gambling man he makes the couple an "indecent proposal:" one million dollars for a night with the little woman.

At this point you need watch no more of the film because you can put the details together in your sleep. Of course Demi is going to accept the offer. If she doesn't there's no first half of the movie. Of course it will affect Demi and Woody's marriage. If it doesn't there's no second half of the movie. And of course everything will turn out okay by the time the credits roll. If it doesn't, there's no happy ending for the sake of box office.

The absolute best thing you can say about INDECENT PROPOSAL is that Demi Moore looks good in a black dress. As for the rest... The script is incompetent, the direction amateurish, the performances negligible. I suspect Redford, Moore, and Harrelson blush and change the subject every time the film is mentioned. Do them--and more importantly yourself--a favor. Unless some one offers you a million... Miss It!

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

Adrian Lyne does what he does beautifully, whatever that is. The gorgeous look of his films hide a serious lack of depth and a rather Machiavellian knack for attracting us, the natives, with shiny pretty things. We fall for it every time, or almost, we couldn't swallow Lolita, oh no, he should have left Lolita alone and shouldn't have made that outrageous statement, remember? "James Mason was all wrong in Kubrick's version of the Nabokov novel" Do me a favor Mr. Lyne, stick to "Flashdance" and suffer all the way to the bank. Sorry, I lost myself for a moment. Where was I? Oh yes "Inidecent Proposal" Imagine that premise in the hands of someone with serious intentions. A young happy couple and the devil. The stranger who, incapable of bearing goodness and happiness, decides to destroy it. Aware of their needs, he presents a solution to their problems. He doesn't care for her, he cares about their destruction. Juicy stuff. But, although Demi Moore and Woody Harrelson are great as the perfect foil for the devil's designs, the devil is Robert Redford. Mr. Redford is a personal hero of mine, instead of resting in his laurels, Sundance, the environment, Ordinary People, Quiz Show and so on and so on. But, I heard him say in a Charlie Rose interview that he would like to play different characters, dangerous, dark but nobody offered him that kind of part. What about this one Bob? This was a part that could transform this pretty candy floss into a classic. It needed guts. Where was the darkness? I looked into Redford eyes and I saw Redford. I would have gone with him for much less than a million bucks because in spite of the fact that involved accepting an indecent proposal there was no danger, really. He allows himself to be Redford all the way. The indecency is in the title in the gimmick but not in the spirit. As a result none of the promises are fulfilled and we're left with a pretty inconsequential movie. Oh well, I hope Mr Lyne learned his lesson. One never bad mouths James Mason, okay?

David and Diana had been in love since college and married into a dream life where both are happy and able to pursue their dreams together. However they hit upon hard times when Diana's real estate work dries up and soon the pair decide that the only option available to them is a literal last throw of the dice with their last few thousand in Vegas. Despite an early winning streak they end up worse than they started. About to head off, Diana catches the eye of gambling billionaire John Gage who uses her as a lucky charm to win another million or so. Afterwards they get together to play some pool and Gage turns the conversation to the idea of what money can and can't buy – specifically offering the Murphy's a cool $1,000,000 for one night spent with Diana.

When this film came out, the basic concept was enough to give it lots of free advertising by getting the nation asking itself "what would I do?" and all the hype over that allowed the producers of the film to avoid people finding out that there really wasn't much worth seeing passed this question. It should have been so different though, because it could have been a classic morality tale that went deep within the characters to see what is there. However it doesn't really do this and instead we are left with a rather vacuous affair that is given plenty of gloss but is essentially lacking in interesting things to say. The tensions between David and Diana never get beyond the level of strops and it never even makes an attempt at moral debate.

The fact that the characters are so thin doesn't help either. David and Diana are basic but the real failing is in Gage; he should be a rather sinister figure who plays with people like he plays with his money but instead he is just a twinkling eye and a sly smile – in fact, he is Robert Redford. This is part of the problem because, although the material is weak, the cast cannot do anything to improve the situation. Redford is far too smooth and playboyish to really convince in the main role – he cannot tap into any darkness or complexity and his failing is just one of the film's failings. Moore doesn't help either with a basic role where she doesn't seem to understand what her character is supposed to be feeling and therefore cannot convince in many of her scenes. Meanwhile Harrelson puffs and blows on cue but adds little. The support cast features turns from Platt, Cassel, Connelly and Thornton but aside from being recognisable faces they don't add much. Lyne directs with typical glossy style but he has no clue how to get deeper into the characters and story so instead just throws in lots of exploitative but empty scenes in the hope of somehow emotionally engaging his audience.

Overall this is not an awful film but it is so superficial and hollow that it is just bland and glossy. It only is made worse when you think of the potential it had to be a complex and insightful modern morally piece. Those happy with the substance and complexity of a slushy music video will enjoy it but the majority will leave it wondering what all the fuss was about and how such an interesting concept was so completely fouled up.