Say Nothing (2000) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

Say Nothing is a watchable made-for-cable "erotic thriller". Nastassia Kinski is bringing a new element to the erotic thriller genre - she supplies the personality, but someone else supplies the nudity. The role called for a couple of nude scenes, both of which were body doubles. Miss Kinski may no longer have a body ready for prime time nude scenes, but her face is still exquisitely beautiful, and she's been around long enough to know what's required in these roles.
In the shower scene, the woman had a body that didn't resemble Kinski's in even the slightest way. The lovemaking scene was a bit more convincing, because the body double was similar to Kinski in  body tone and breast size. There was a brief flash of breast between limbs that I thought might have been Kinski's actual breast, but then I noticed two things:


There is substantial nudity from the Nastassia Kinski character, but it is all body doubles (see the main commentary). Kinski herself appears in bikinis.

1. The owner of said breast had moles on her chest and arms which did not match the moles on Kinski's body in the shots where her face was visible.

2. In the shots with Kinski's face, her red bikini top was barely visible in the tiniest corner of the screen - she was not topless at all.

The plot is the usual stuff. Kinski and her depressed, unemployed husband (Hart Bochner) are going through some difficulties. A rich guy (William Baldwin) has a one-night-stand with Kinski during a time when she is very vulnerable and out of town on business. That seems to be over amicably after that one night, until she finds out that her unemployed husband is now employed - by the guy she slept with. She thinks this is creepy, but when she confronts Mr Rich Baldwin Guy, he says "you told me your marriage was in trouble because your husband was unemployed, so I took a chance and hired him - what, exactly is so bad about that?" He makes a good point.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • Full-screen format

  • no features

Kinski responds, "oh, yeah, well if it's all so innocent, why is it that the sinister background music plays whenever you appear on screen.". She also has a good point.

So what the hell is going on? You'll have to watch it to find out, but I guess it's fair to say that it's kind of a reverse Fatal Attraction thing.

The Critics Vote

  • no reviews on line


The People Vote ...

  • made for cable


IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is a C or C-. Serviceable, watchable, but predictable erotic thriller which covers no new ground.

Return to the Movie House home page