Kiss Daddy Goodnight (1987) User Reviews

Uma, you are a dirty girl...

[VIOlencEandpAIN · 3/10 · 24 August 2008]

I picked this up very, very cheap in a bargain bin somewhere (I won't mention the name of the store, but I'm sure you'll figure it out anyway), deciding to give it a chance because of the early appearances of Uma Thurman and Steve Buscemi, as well as one of the few appearances of Paul (older brother of Matt and Kevin) Dillon. I won't call it out-and-out terrible, but it was not, by far, one of the better movies of its type.

This somewhat confused thriller features the lovely and very young Uma Thurman as Laura, a woman who takes on multiple identities and seduces older, wealthy men, drugs them, and robs them. Among her gentlemen is William Tilden (Paul Richards), a cultured man with a pet rabbit who buys her gifts in exchange for her (non-sexual) company. Unfortunately, it appears that Tilden has more than just an innocent fondness for Laura, and the relationship leads him to fuel more than a little of the conflict seen in this movie.

Meanwhile, a younger friend of Laura's, Sid (Paul Dillon), is down on his luck and she does her best to look out after him. Neither Sid nor Laura are exactly upstanding citizens, but their relationship is honest, for the most part.

Additionally, Steve Buscemi has a small scene as the sleazebag guitarist Johnny, for whom Sid spends much of the first part of the film searching.

While this movie does remain in my collection due to its relative obscurity and strange plot movements, it is not well done on any end of the spectrum except, perhaps, for the performances of Thurman and Richards, who work quite well together. The lighting is substandard and there have been numerous complaints listed on IMDb about the sound quality. This is definitely not a movie for everyone, although it does appear that some folks enjoy it. Rent or purchase this one at your own risk.

kiss this movie goodbye

[tsf-1962 · 4/10 · 16 January 2007]

This truly obscure neo-noir from 1988 is memorable as Uma Thurman's first starring role and also has a bit part from Steve Buscemi. Quentin Tarantino must have seen it since he cast both of them in "Pulp Fiction." The DVD retails at WalMart for $1.00, which is about what it's worth. "Kiss Daddy Goodbye" has an intriguing storyline but is so low-budget as to be literally unwatchable: the lighting is poor, the photography amateurish, and night scenes are literally invisible. On the plus side the eighteen-year old Uma oozes sex appeal and a sleazy sort of glamour which must have attracted Tarantino to her, and there are some gritty, realistic performances, particularly from Buscemi. The movie was produced with grants from the National Endowment for the Arts and the West German Kunstministerium, another example of taxpayers' money going to waste.

Uma Obsessed

[jjessexox · 5/10 · 23 August 2006]

If you're an AVID Uma fan, or have interest in the New York No Wave scene in the 80's, than this flick is..... well..... just OK. You can see why Uma became a successful actress. In this film she had nothing to really do and she still pulls out a decent performance. Steve Buscemi makes a pretty depressing appearance as a washed up musician. Paul Dillons acting was absolutely horrible. Skronk guitarist, Arto Lindsay, makes a creepy cameo as well. The soundtrack is avant Gard and makes an awkward yet fitting mood to this "film". Overall, It's just amateur film-making with known actors, bad lighting and no real flow to the story.

Utterly dreadful.

[Afracious · 1/10 · 27 March 2001]

This was Uma Thurman's first feature film, and she started her acting career right at the very bottom. She is youthful and attractive in this film, but that's all the film has going for it. It is utterly dreadful. Very, very amateur. Thurman plays a femme fatale who goes on dates with middle-aged wealthy men, and then drugs them and steals their money. Meanwhile, a deranged guy who owns a rabbit is obsessed with her. That's about it. Steve Buscemi appears briefly. The other character is played by Paul Dillon (brother of Matt). Strictly for staunch fans of Uma Thurman only; and even if you are one, beware.

A college film student effort

[Gordon-11 · 15 October 2008]

This film is about a young and attractive woman who lures men and then rob them. She finds her own life is in danger when she ends up in the opposite end of the game.

Even considering that "Kiss Daddy Goodnight" was made twenty years ago, it still seemed more like a college film student effort. The camera work is terrible. There is no consideration into how to make the camera angles and presentation of scenes more interesting. Lighting is terrible. Scenes are either very dark or are poorly lit. I refer to a specific scene where William and Laura talk by the entrance of Laura's apartment. The source of lighting takes no consideration into where light should come from. They just use spotlight to shine onto the two characters' faces. The end result is rather laughable.

The plot could have been promising, but it is not engagingly told. There is simply no suspense or thrill. To sum up, "Kiss Daddy Goodnight" is rather disappointing. If it was not for Uma Thurman, this film would have found no viewers at all.

A dreadful waste of time

[dragonseatpeas · 1/10 · 12 January 2006]

Continuing my valiant quest to watch every film Steve Buscemi has ever been in I haplessly stumbled upon this god-awful waste of 80 minutes. The plot is awful, the dialogue is poor, the acting is dreadful (even Buscemi's 3min role is pointless with no real relevance to the story)-I can only assume they needed the money-and to top it all it looks like that the whole thing was shot by a 7 year old after sneaking out in the middle of the night. It is truly one of the worst films I have ever seen. If you seriously need a Uma fix then watch Kill Bill again-hell even watch the Avengers or Batman and Robin-at least they were so bad they are laughable unlike this piece of crap.

Don't even bother-trust me.

sloppier than a school dinner

[rob-236 · 1/10 · 10 March 2002]

This film is sloppier than a school dinner. Awfully cheap picture quality, lighting was terrible, sound even worse – the background sound most of the time drowned out the actors voices. The acting, apart from a 17-year-old Uma Thurman and a cough and a spit part from the ever-reliable Steve Buscemi, was also abysmal. Paul Dillon, obviously a relation of Matt, was a needless and very dislikable character who made me want to fast forward every time he appeared on screen. This monstrosity of a film was cheekily re released again to look as though it was a new Uma film, I have seen it floating around on DVD in second hand shops and car boot sales on numerous occasions - and now I know why. Avoid.

Awful

[jrmille2 · 1/10 · 2 May 2006]

Where to start? Extremely poor lighting-most of the time you couldn't tell what was going on. The actors' are hidden in shadow the majority of the time. It's like someone shot the movie in their unlit basement at midnight. Didn't someone at least have a snakelight or something?

The dialogue is pitiful, mundane and the movie plods along at a molasses pace. You spend most of the movie wondering "what just happened?", and trying to figure out one scene while it moves on to the next.

The editing is choppy. You'll see characters go into one location, no explanation as to why there there, and then in next scene they're at a different location. It gives the editing job done on "Plan 9 From Outer Space" a run for it's money. Finally, to top it off, Paul Dillon's unibrow is incredibly distracting.

I'd skip this movie. My roommate bought it for $1.99 and it wasn't worth that much.

A thriller without the thrills, or much else

[dave13-1 · 2/10 · 10 February 2012]

The only reason I rented this thing: it was the only item in the mystery section of my local video store I hadn't seen. Imagine a bunch of bananas. You choose the most appetizing looking one to begin, then the next most appetizing and so forth. When you get to the last banana, you now have in your hand the one you rejected every single time before, plus it's less fresh now. Do you even want to eat it? The movie is like the last banana. Having passed it over in favor of dozens of other choices over a period of years, I finally watched it and wished I hadn't. Ignore the ad copy. It promises suspense, cat-and-mouse intrigue, but don't all movies of this type make such claims and don't most largely fail to deliver? Well, this one delivers like Canada Post on Xmas, ie. never. There is no suspense, no character interest or visual interest whatsoever, just a shadowy murky look that a film school dropout might mistake for film noir if he wasn't paying very close attention. Uma looks great, of course, but she was 17 when she did this, her first feature, and lacked the experience necessary to light up the screen the way she did just a few years later in Henry and June and Pulp Fiction. Her character is indolent, passive and boring - a mixture of victim and victimizer but not a very rich or interesting mix. Her actions fail to shock when she commits crimes nor is she in any way sympathetic when she is herself in jeopardy. It's a thriller devoid of thrills. Recommended only for insomniacs looking for a quick cure.

Dreary drama....

[gridoon · 4/10 · 7 February 2002]

....or "dreary thriller", maybe. You see, this flick begins like a low-key drama (some scenes, like Dillon's meeting with Buscemi, have a documentary-like feel that reminded me, believe or not, of Andy Warhol), then turns into a straight slasher thriller. Uma Thurman makes a promising acting debut, however - and am I wrong to believe that Dillon is Matt's identical twin? (He even acts like him). (*1/2)

why was this included in the pack?

[dark_nebulae2003 · 2/10 · 28 September 2006]

not even close to a horror film. therefore, i'm not even sure why this was included in the brentwood DVD pack, but it was. so again, here i was expecting to be scared, when i was just plain bored. this about as much of a 'horror' flick as was Scream. i really hate it when it Hollywood misadvertises like that.

this is way more of a suspense than anything. uma thurman fans will also apply, but will need to beware just in case.

the film looks older than what it is. and i always found that weird how Hollywood also lock away films for years and then releasing them whenever. great score though.

Rare Cult Gem - For Lovers of Cool Artsy Noir!!

[czarnobog · 10/10 · 7 January 2006]

I was thrilled to stumble across this little beauty. From the opening frames it grabbed me, with its slick artistic photography, cool sexy costumes and make-up -- basically great production values all around for such a low budget indie. Uma Thurman is incredibly appealing as a hip bad girl with a streak of naiveté which matches that of Paul Dillon, a punky street kid who's not quite as savvy as he imagines. Their stories are interwoven with that of Paul Richards, a perverse father figure with fantasy designs on Uma. The story follows the growing pains of these characters as they wrestle with their moral shortcomings and reap their karmic comeuppances. Judging from the user ratings, this one is divided between lovers and haters. If you like dark twisted movies whose characters are deeply flawed, with a fast-paced, tension-filled storyline and sumptuously photographed details, give it a whirl. If you like standard Hollywood fare and think J-Lo is an artist, you'll probably hate this.

Clapton on a Wall Mart guitar

[franklamondue · 7/10 · 4 May 2008]

There are allot of negative posts for this film. Luckily I did not read any before seeing it. Having picked up 'Kiss Daddy' on hap-hazard whim at a movie stop, I was pleasantly surprised for several reasons.

First; The characters are well thought out, and the actors do a good job making their performances honest.

Secondly; Most of the film takes place at night, I liked this, because it showcases some very nice/colorful lighting. Although not all the film is well lit, I found this to give more of a realistic feel. The sore/audio also has a very gritty sense, but it works.

Although the picture transfer itself is poor (early-80s TV network) this too seems to fits. Giving one the feeling of actually being in a big, dirty, down-town area.

Thirdly, and most importantly are the narrative, directing, and compositional aspects of this film.

The story is dark yet intriguing, seemingly simple at first. But as the characters develop and the plot unravels it becomes apparent that someone put allot of thought into developing this story and its layout.

Perhaps the strongest point of this film is it's directing. Not only is it surprisingly competent film making for such a low-budget 80s flick, but there are some incredibly strong compositional elements. The editing is so tight and well paced that I found myself literally on the edge of the couch, just waiting to see what technique would be employed next.

'Kiss Daddy Goodnight' is without a doubt a low-budget, independent 80s film. But it is also a hart-felt work of love by those who made and acted in it. Reguardless of the bad packaging, low-budget, and bad transfer, one leaves with a feeling similar to that of hearing Eric Clapton belt out a beautiful tune on a Wall Mart guitar.

Boring and pointless

[ThrownMuse · 2/10 · 14 December 2004]

This is Uma Thurman's first movie. She plays a 20-something living in the East Village who goes home with men, drugs them, and steals their valuables. Then someone starts stalking her. That's really all there is here. This movie is boring, ugly, and poorly made. It isn't scary or creepy or anything. You know who the stalker is straight away because of the spoiler-ish movie title. Uma does an okay job, but her character is so boring and unlikeable that you could care less if she's being stalked. I suppose if you are an obsessive Uma fan, you might want to check this out. Oh, and Steve Buscemi is in one scene. File this under "horror flicks with random and non-sensical rabbit scenes." My Rating: 2/10

Lo-Fi, Beauteous, Cozy, Grungy, East Village.

[cd332-livejournal-com · 15 May 2002]

I watched this on my betamax last night again. The opening credits and music is fuzzy and lo-rez, wholly impressionistic. I am not one for expensive special effects, nor demanding of a well-crafted story or skillful acting. This movie just gives me a warm feeling, and at some level I think that's all it sets out to do. Uma is scintillatingly beautiful, ala '88 makeup trend at the time. This was the first movie I ever saw her in - before she became known - and I fell in love with her androgynous look immediately. Buscemi shows up, as well as a great cameo by east village music master Arto Lindsay (Ambitious Lovers) as a cab driver. Everything looks exactly the way it did in NYC '88, down to the horribly trashy dive clubs. If you watch movies for a certain feeling, you'll enjoy this one. If you watch movies in order to wax poetic like a fluke critic, then move on to some Oscar list.

Among the very worst debuts for any future big star

[bellino-angelo2014 · 3/10 · 29 November 2021]

This is Uma Thurman's first movie and I guess she did it only for the money as she later went on to star in great movies such as THE ADVENTURES OF BARON MUNCHAUSEN, PULP FICTION, the two KILL BILLs and more. I guess this is the proof that anyone can debut with garbage yet survive it.

Laura (Thurman) is a girl that loves to stroll around town at night wearing a different wig every night and hanging out with older and wealthy men. However she will have more than what she bargained for when one night she is chased by someone who wants to kill her, but the reason was quite forgettable.

The editing was sloppy, the acting flat and the direction lackluster. Only of interest for masochists that want to see where some actors and actresses started or for bad obscure movie fans.

Difficult to follow!

[JohnHowardReid · 3/10 · 26 March 2018]

This noir film is great on atmosphere, light on plot, and the story, such as it is, is difficult to follow because the characters are not well labeled or are simply not identified at all. The pitch black lighting photography certainly does not help. Even worse, the story details on the DVD cover seem to be deliberately misleading. Nonetheless, Uma Therman gives the admittedly moody but confusing scenario, a good run.

There is decidedly too much film noir photography. At least eighty per cent t of the film is photographed in either complete or semi-darkness and It is hard to identify what is happening plot-wise, let alone who is who. Even worse still, essential plot details are not supplied at all and elements of the story are left unexplained even at its conclusion.

Mind you, there's a great moody atmosphere throughout. In fact, that's just the problem. Too much of the movie is in the dark, both literally and figuratively.

The movie has plenty of atmosphere but no coherence. The plot, if there is a plot, either doesn't make sense or doesn't exist at all. Or maybe it has simply been edited out of the murky Legacy DVD, on which the running time is quoted as "approximately 89 minutes."

a real sense of warmth despite the coldness of the action

[christopher-underwood · 8/10 · 25 May 2007]

I had very low expectations of this unusual little film and maybe that contributed to my enjoying it so much. As others have pointed out it is not a well lit film and indeed some sections are dark to the point of the action becoming almost invisible BUT this is compelling enough for one to make the effort. Low key, down beat, depressing I guess for some but the (damaged) character developments are believable and the movie seems to have a life of its own contriving to draw the viewer into a world he maybe would rather keep away from. Several meaningful moments and a real sense of warmth despite the coldness of the action and the aura of doom surrounding everyone, from the aspiring guitarist to the love torn pensioner and his rabbit. Ulma Thurman is excellent throughout and shines even in the film's dimmest sections. There is also a most effective (if again depressing) cameo from Steve Buscemi and if you make it this far you will certainly make it to the end of a very decent 'one off' of a film.

Uma Thurman at 17 is the only reason to see this movie.

[TxMike · 16 June 2005]

There must be more than one version of this movie available. Amazon appears to have it for around $15, with a running time of 90 minutes. The version I picked up at a large discount store cost only One American Dollar and has a running time of 75 minutes. I suppose they cut the frontal nudity of Buscemi! Anyway, for one dollar I figured it would be worth it, to have a copy of Uma Thurman's first starring role, as a 17-year-old girl. Truthfully, I was expecting the movie to be really bad. The story is moderately interesting and it is clear that young Uma had what it took to become a successful actress. The really bad things are (1) Paul Dillon's acting, as her friend Sid. (2) The cinematography, especially the night shots, is really bad. (3) The background music is irritating. (4) The soundtrack is substandard. Still, it is well worth the one dollar it costs.

SPOILERS: Laura (Thurman) survives by hustling dates with older men, letting them take her back to their place, drugging their drinks, then stealing money and valuables. Sid (Dillon) shows up to look for old friends and try to re-form a band. His only real reason to be in the story is to help save Laura during the ending. Laura's neighbor William is an older man who had a daughter much like Laura, is secretly in love with Laura, follows her at night by hired taxi, eventually kills Laura's mom, and when all this is exposed in the end Laura is trapped and forced to stab him with the dagger she had stolen during one of her schemes. Not all ends badly, as laura and Sid embrace and appear to be headed towards blissful love.

Buscemi has a small role as a former band member, but now married with children and not interested in joining up again.

Watch It For Uma...

[azathothpwiggins · 29 June 2022]

Yes, this is indeed Uma Thurman's first film. She plays Laura, who gets men to pick her up so that she can drug them and rob them blind. While continuing with her "career", Laura hardly notices the increasingly weird behavior of her elderly friend, William. Soon, she's being stalked by someone in a mysterious dark sedan.

Meanwhile, Laura's friend, Sid (Paul Dillon) moves in with her. He's trying to find a fellow musician named Johnny (Steve Buscemi). Yep, they're "gonna get the band back together".

As debut films go, KISS DADDY GOODNIGHT is rather languid, but Uma isn't bad. It's obvious that she would go on to bigger and better things...