Claudine's Return (1998) User Reviews

Christina does a great job, in an otherwise lackluster film.

[Adrian-25 · 4/10 · 28 February 1999]

Christina Applegate put in a great performance in her interpretation of the role of Claudine. The rest of the movie did not support her performance, however. The plot was weak, with the only substantive storyline occurring in the first 15 mins., and the last 15 mins. The rest of the movie could have been cut, and the audience would not have missed much. Tibaldi's direction used a lot of close shots, and free camera work, that actually detracted from the story. In scenes where the audience might have wanted to pay attention, we were getting distracted by the edgy camera motions. There were a number of subplots that never played into the story, and ended up like flotsam on a beach, with no purpose.

Understanding her character

[hcoursen · 3/10 · 31 March 2010]

I agree with the negative reviews. The film drifted aimlessly -- an unfortunate effort to simulate the aimlessness of the lives depicted. And, come on, no state would permit anyone to drive a windshield-less car after it has rolled over. That is, even assuming the car were drivable. The cops would not have released it. The last few minutes strained credulity in other ways as well. The little blonde girl! But so say more would be to utter a spoiler. The only reason I respond is to suggest that so far the reviewers have missed the subtext for Applegate's character. She was in love with a boy once. "We were just kids." Obviously, that was her brother, who committed suicide once their incestuous relationship was (apparently) found out. She fled. Her return to Charleston was motivated by that memory, as was her screwed-up persona. To be fair to the film, it did sketch in that background -- including her holding on to her brother's photo. It wasn't clear, of course, and, indeed, the film muddied things up in all kinds of ways. But -- the back story does answer some questions.

not what you might think it is

[rawkfist69 · 4/10 · 15 September 2005]

The main reason I'm posting this comment is point out that there are NO NUDE scenes featuring the femme fatal Christina app legate so if you mistook the R-rating,and the cover showing Appplegate pole-dancing as an implication that you're gonna see a "money shot" then do yourself a favor, don't make the same mistake I did when it first came out and don't bother renting it. Its actually a really depressing movie, so if you're into soppy love stories then you might enjoy it. The acting was OK, I suppose, but frankly the overall wasn't my cup of tea. There are, however, love scenes although about as soft-core as a soap opera. Is it just me or should they start labeling what you get to see in a movie and who you get to see it on right on the box next to the rating?

INCREDIBLE! A MUST SEE!

[geekguy91 · 2 September 2004]

I picked up this movie one day, thinking it would be lousy and horrible because of its stupid-looking cover, but my friend had strong convictions in his admiration of not only the movie but also the actors (and actresses) and also the director, etc.

So, thinking this would be a boring experience, I reluctantly watched this, but as the movie progressed, I was captivated by the performances, the direction, and the incredible plot line. The cinematography is deserving of an Oscar nomination, and so was Christina Applegate. But I must applaud Antonio Tibaldi for his excellent direction, and also his wonderful script!

Applegate's Claudine is just right, perfect, from the makeup to the acting. I applaud this movie also because it is not perverse like other movies, and Applegate does not have to show skin to make this movie wonderful. Also, might I add that after reading these atrocious comments others wrote, I must say that most of these other commenter's are perverted losers who just want to see 'a breast' or two. They do not care about real quality film-making.

I would recommend this movie to anybody who would wants to be emotionally moved.

An Erotic Journey Of Desire... NOT!

[videoport · 1/10 · 13 June 2000]

This film has been repackaged as an erotic picture [retitled Kiss Of Fire] with a very racy cover that implies one will get more than a brief exposure to Miss Applegate's talents. Well forget it. This is an idiotic "drama" with no point, little plot, and amateurish camera work. Disney has added the tagline "An Erotic Journey Of Desire!" to a movie that is really just a crappy chick-flick!

It's pretty bad

[ghigau · 2/10 · 31 January 2003]

The reason you have not heard of this film is that no one saw it, and that is the way it should be. Applegate is almost decent, but the accent seems variable, and she doesn't transition us through her mood swings, which probably is more the fault of the director, editor, and writers than hers. Somehow I did not get why she was as nutso as she was. Just a spoiled little rich girl all twisted by unhappy events? Persons of modest strength survive the traumas of life, why couldn't Claudine? It was a bit like destroying your life with drugs and alcohol because someone had a better senior prom dress. Wasn't that Valerie Perrine in the end as the stepmom? Where was her credit? Did she decline one when she saw how bad the film was? If so, she showed marvelous taste.

Pretty scenery. (mild spoilers)

[EasilyBemused · 5/10 · 22 October 2004]

Definitely more in the chick-flick genre, this film's storyline drifts along like a late summer afternoon on a southern swamp. There's plenty of sunlight through trees, a clichéd convertible ride, and a liberated bird that was probably meant to be symbolic but didn't quite make it there.

If you're expecting an erotic film rather then one that involves a character with mother issues, you'll be disappointed.

There isn't anything painfully bad about this movie. The acting, especially Christina Applegate's, isn't over the top, and the supporting characters are at worse mediocre. There just isn't any real depth, or anything catching about it. Bits and pieces of imagery from it will linger in your memory exponentially longer then the plot will.

Applegate good, movie really doesn't make much sense

[jmatrixrenegade · 6/10 · 4 September 2000]

I admit I got this movie partly as a goof and partly because I was interested to see Christiana Applegate in a movie the box suggested (name change to "Kiss of Fire" and more, it was rather funny really) was a trashy genre film. I actually enjoyed Applegate, who does not have much of a career outside of "Married ... w Children" (sadly, since she has potential), in the low budget film "Streets," I hoped this was similiar fare. It turns out to be a character study with some seedy elements and bad (and somewhat inconsistent) accents. It would have been nice if I knew a bit more about the characters I was watching, and the ending was rather sudden and pointless. Also, the whole little girl symbolism was just one of the stylistic touches that just didn't work.

Nonetheless, I do recommend people to watch the film for Christiana Applegate's performance. Not only does she look great in the film (no nudity, sorry, though she does a good dance scene), but she gives a rather good performance, and the accent isn't that bad (shock really to hear it given her past roles and all). Actually, she is the film -- the loser she hooks up is written and performed in such a lackluster fashion that you soon wish he would just go somewhere. The role would have even been better if it was written better; for instance, what motivates her to moonlight as a stripper? what about the hints of bisexuality? what is the point of the final scenes? The fact Applegate still shined suggests she has a future as an actress, if only she gets some good roles to show her talent.

strange, confused hybrid, but Christina's SMART.

[sparklygirlx · 8/10 · 14 March 2006]

this was a fairly confused film, that seemed to suffer from a failure of a sense of 'place'--at times i felt i was in hipster berlin, in some basement bordello, at times on a wild georgia coast. their was something odd and peculiar about the location, sets, and sexuality of the main characters, that i could never really put my finger on. nevertheless, Christina applegate turns in a surprisingly subtle, smart, and wry performance, the cinematography is LOVELY in the outdoor settings, and there are comic, as well as a few almost mystically beautiful moments. along with some very clunky and dumb ones. one gets the feeling the film is very much a MISS, but that their must have been something interesting underlying the story that never quite made it to the surface. atmospheric, Christina is great, but ultimately, only an interestingly, occasionally downright muddled misfire...

Much better than expected

[BLKahuna · 2 May 2001]

This is a surprisingly great movie.

Christina Applegate's performance as well as that of Stephano are extremely well done and offer great depth. The characters are interesting and the many ancillary characters help to create a slightly bizarre atmosphere.

I thought the screenplay, direction, cinematography and sound were all top notch and added a lot to the overall feeling of the movie. The camera work, especially, was very creative and interesting.

This is not a feel good movie and it dances at the edge of the darkside of humanity. If you feel like an interesting, off-the-beaten-path, moody flick - this is a good choice.

interesting, if slightly confused failed art-house film...

[aurora99x · 10/10 · 13 April 2005]

An interesting failure for Ms. Applegate--seemed to be something of a character study/ bittersweet non-romance gone astray...the cinematography was beautiful, Applegate's performance intelligent, hard, and playful--yet something about this film felt strangely detached, strangely out of place and out of time--at times it was difficult to tell if one was in the sex-district of Berlin, or a small fishing village off the coast of rural Georgia (the intended setting)...one wonders if something got lost in the trip from script to screen however, as it feels like some fundamental tension that should be present in order to hold a story together is somehow missing...new title and DVD image suggest that Mirimax is choosing to market this as something of a schlocky camp-fest: though there is clearly more brewing underneath the surface. whatever's brewing beneath is never really realized, however, so the picture of Christina going up in flames on the cover is not necessarily a bad metaphor for the movie itself--a moody misfire, another straight to video; some intelligent acting on the part of the actress, however--lovely intro and conclusion which the whole of the story, unfortunately, never comes to realize...

interesting attempt

[sparklypictures · 9/10 · 17 May 2006]

Christina Applegate gives very intelligent performance...the film itself has a fairly confused feeling to it--sort of dogma-95 by way of southern Gothic--and never really comes together, all the way--the overwrought sexual relationship also gets in the way of what might have been a more interesting character portrayal...one gets the feeling that one sortof story might have been intended, and another sortof story actually portrayed in the film. there also seem to be some language issues on the part of the male lead, stefano dionysi--who puts int something of a strained, lackluster performance. however--the cinematography is beautiful, the overall structure of the story moves in interesting directions, and Christina, again, is humorous, smart, and very much up to complicated character portrayals--a very interesting , though slightly failed attempt.

Few Kisses, Little Fire

[Doogie-01 · 13 August 2000]

I'm sorry to say I rented this with a clear head. Under-developed story, little use of Applegate's ability as a fine actress, and no nudity ruined this film. I kept thinking to myself "If there was just the occasional breast, the movie would be fine." I was wrong, but what the hey?

The characters were sorely undeveloped. The story was never shown to the viewer. The "past" that Applegate is trying to conquer and escape is never shown.

And what kind of morons do the writers think we watchers are? The blonde kid in the car? The flash to the future? Come on.

Never rent this. Ever.

My dish: 1 out of ten, and that's my being gracious.

!

[jmex · 10/10 · 17 November 2017]

I guess if you're a lady you may think this is a good movie. If you're a guy you have no tongue left after the nightclub scene w/ Claudine. The scene with Claudine you can call it, your tongue is now out of your mouth. That is all. Imagine it's like a zillion begillion miles or light-years going straight down to hell with lotsa saliva too, pacific oceans' worth. Taste was never so unimportant anyway, I agree there is great depth to her performance and a good soundtrack.

TERRIBLE!!!

[lthseldy1 · 7 August 2000]

This movie was BORING! This movie did not have a good plot and was basically about an Italian admirer trying desperately to get back with Christina Appalgate after a lacklusting love affair. The fake accents were terrible and made Applegate as we knew her from her "Married with Children" days look pathetic in this slow moving film. Do not waste money on this one unless there is a pillow beside you and an alarm clock.