Home
| Search
| Site Index
| Now Playing
| Top Movies
| My Movies
| Top 250 |
TV
| News
| Video |
Message Boards
Register
|
RSS
| Advertising
| Content Licensing
| Help
| Jobs
| IMDbPro
| IMDb Resume
| Box Office Mojo
| Withoutabox
| Follow us on Twitter
International Sites: IMDb Germany
| IMDb Italy
| IMDb Spain
| IMDb France
| IMDb Portugal
Copyright © 1990-2010
IMDb.com, Inc.
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
An
company.
Own the rights?
Buy it at Amazon Rent it at Blockbuster.comDiscuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsIMDb user reviews for
Prêt-à-Porter (1994) More at IMDbPro »
22 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Unfairly Maligned. Far better than people give it credit for, 7 June 2001
Author: zetes from Saint Paul, MN
And that's not saying that it's great either. It is not. But it's tremendously low imdb rating makes me wonder who the heck is voting here. Pret-a-Porter is a pretty good Robert Altman film that is no better or worse than Short Cuts, which, while I feel it is a good film, I also think it is overrated. This one is, however, heavily underrated, and they both got the same imdb score from me: 7/10 = 3/4 stars.
This is another attempt to make another Nashville. There's a humongous ensemble cast of actors, some of the best on the planet, a couple of the best who ever lived. The screenwriter doesn't connect it all very well, and lots of the characters seem superfluous or underdeveloped, unlike in Nashville where even the characters who are only in a couple of scenes are as familiar to the viewer as a close friend. I would particularly have liked the Danny Aiello/Teri Garr section to have been removed. It falls pretty flat. The Sophia Loren/Marcello Mastrioanni section, the section that most film buffs are going to be excited for, also plops by its end. And Kim Basinger, a good actress, truly deserving her L.A. Confidential Oscar, is not very good as the Southern U.S. reporter: her accent is difficult to get around, and her character is often annoying, too. Sometimes, though, her pieces succeed.
Many other of the vignettes succeed quite well, although there are never any fireworks about to shoot off. The Tim Robbins/Julia Roberts plot is very funny. The three publishers, Sally Kellerman, Tracy Ullman, and Linda Hunt's attempts to sign photographer Milo (Stephen Rea) to their magazine are all very humorous. The love quadrangle between the two designers, Forest Whitaker and Richard E. Grant, and their lovers is very good, also. Anouk Aimee's section is also great, maybe the best part (Rupet Everett is good, also). I loved her so much in La Dolce Vita and 8 1/2. I was aching for her and Marcello Mastrioanni to interact.
The ending is truly fantastic. It is very well directed and filmed. It's a good film.
14 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

An amusing shaggy-dog story, Emperor's New Clothes variety, 5 January 2005
Author: Theorist-3 from Buffalo, NY
It's hard to understand why so many reputable critics have vilified this film, which is in Altman's Nashville modeand indeed includes many of the elements that made that earlier film such a critical success. Both address the hypocrisy and viciousness of a big money-making industry, by interweaving a number of loosely connected stories acted by a large celebrity cast. Some of these stories work better than others, in both films; as a previous reviewer noted, in Pret-à-Porter, they all hinge on the central theme of betrayal, with a cumulative effect that is saddening as well as amusing.
The principal difference between the two films lies in the way they end. Nashville is closed off (to my mind, unconvincingly) by an assassination at a political rally. Ready to Wear ends with a breathtakingly beautiful, even erotic acting-out of the story of the Emperor's New Clothes, where almost none of the fashion-industry types realize that the bankrupt designer has clothed all of her models in...nothing. The only one who does get the joke is the clueless and incompetent reporter (Kim Basinger, from Texas, doing a fine retake on Geraldine Chaplin's annoying role in Nashville), who stalks off in a huff.
Apparently lots of critics stalked off in a huff, too. That's too bad, since the film has lots of good qualities. But you miss the point if you don't realize that it's all leading up to that big shaggy-dog-story punchline.
12 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

Threadbare Altman, 14 September 2003
Author: gbheron from Washington, DC
I missed Ready to Wear when it was released in 1994, and finally rented the film. I had great anticipation. The fashion industry was the next to squirm under Mr. Altman's cinematic scalpel. Altman assembled a large, talented ensemble cast as usual. The locale is the annual prêt-à-porter fashion show in Paris, as a multitude of characters descend on hotels, fashion houses, restaurants, and runways; their stories intertwining and crisscrossing across a pastiche of interlocking plotlines. It'll be just like Nashville, in other words, another Altman tour de force.
Oddly and sadly, it's nothing of the sort. Ready to Wear loses its way early, and drifts aimlessly along for its lengthy 133 minute runtime. The characters lack the depth of his other films; they're poorly defined and you never really feel you get to know them. The dialogue is shallow and lacks bite. Even the little things tend to annoy; why use sidewalk dog poop as a unifying symbol? What's the point to that?
All in all I found Ready to Wear disappointing and probably my least favorite of Altman's films.
14 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

Witty, scathing, and a delight!, 18 January 1999
Author: Paul Klenk (paulklenk) from New York, NY
It was truly exciting to see `Ready to Wear' in the theaters when it first came out. Seldom do films delight and amuse us at this level. But this is like a Woody Allen film: either you love it or hate it. Since the story is too complicated to explain (and the best thing about this film), I'm sticking to mostly non-plot aspects in this review.
One of the challenges in your first viewing will be this film's utter lack of exposition. You will be asked to board this train while it is moving; in fact, you will need to leap from track to track. The story is not unfolded as much as it is thrown at you in pieces. Two minutes after you are tossed into a conversation (already in progress), you will be asked to join another. Unless you have a mind as competitively poised as a super-model, you'll miss much of the movie the first time.
Don't let the immersion in the world of fashion fool you into thinking this is a movie `about' fashion. Fashion is merely a backdrop, a setting for Altman to play his scenes. That he so thoroughly masters his subject is merely a tribute to his intelligence and sophistication.
Like Milos Forman in `The Firemen's Ball,' Altman has created a wonderful menagerie of human foibles with which to lampoon us. Our pettiness, our lack of shame, our corruption and our low regard for each other are portrayed so truthfully and cleverly that we don't notice who is the real subject of the satire. We smugly assume it is the fashion world on trial.
Even the opening credits were fun - what a collection of personalities (all stitched on garment labels)!. Every casting decision was a good one; every performance was satisfying. The only thing funnier than Danny Aiello in drag, is watching him being told he looks like Barbra Streisand. And the only thing funnier than that is realizing it's true.
While we're trying to figure out a murder, we are also being dazzled by the constellation of world stars of all kinds parading before us. That Altman dared to attempt such a feat (the group photo at Versailles alone must have been a challenge) is not half as astonishing as that he pulled it off. But the stars, too, are merely a backdrop to funny stories and situations. No one but Altman could make an Elsa Klensch cameo so surprisingly hilarious. The interview about the pouf skirts was just plain funny. But will most of the audience appreciate it? `I doubt it.'
Another delight is Altman's pervasive references to clothing, so dominant you will miss half of them. A cab driver, identifying a murderer, tells the police `all white people look alike.' How does he tell them apart? `By their clothes.' Film is confiscated from a fashion shoot, because the murder suspect was inadvertently captured in the background. But his face was cutoff in every shot. `We don't know what he looks like,' the detective complains. `But we know what he was wearing.' Every conversation, every plot, each detail is so thoroughly self-referencing to fashion; but mostly, there are dozens of funny moments. Even the red herring of murder is based on our mistaking an innocent fashion item for an omen of death.
11 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

Just some jumbled-up fun, 2 August 2002
Author: DocPeters from The Pacific NW
Like everyone else, I note this didn't have much of a plot, etc. etc. But it was just a hoot to watch. I died every time Richard E. Grant came on the screen -- he's a phenomenal character actor. I say, lighten up! This wasn't just satire/social commentary... there was subtle homage to everything from the Marx Brothers to Fellini. In other words, don't analyze too hard; just enjoy!
7/10
18 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

The worst film by Robert Altman is still the best film of the year., 24 April 2004
Author: DK Bengel from Dallas, Tx
This review is written specifically for those who have not seen 'Pret-a-Porte' and are confused by the mixed reviews on this site and from the Critical Press in general. To you, I would say the following: Don't take my word for it...see it for yourself and figure out what YOU think of it. It is my opinion that the worst film from Robert Altman is still the best film of the year (with rare exceptions) and so, naturally, I would recommend this film to anyone. However, Director Altman does NOT make films for everyone. He often makes films for the 'Advanced' film-goer. His work is often dis-jointed and overlapping to an extent that it requires one to actually ay attention to the goings' on rather than to spoon-feed the answers to the audience. Couple this with his tendency to allow the plot and the character to meander, evolving slowly over the course of the film and you often get a movie that is distinctly 'un-Hollywood', which can turn some film goers off. So I would recommend that you not only sit through this film, but allow yourself to actually watch it without any preconceived ideas of how a movie is supposed to be. Then I think you will find a witty, sexy satire that is more about our own vanity and betrayal than it is about the fashion industry.
But like I said, don't take my word for it (or the words of anyone else, for that matter): If you are curious, please watch it. And make up your own mind.
4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

A little too... something, 20 August 2006
Author: OnlyZuul from United States
I've seen it a couple of times. I understand Altman was maybe trying to create a disjointed, farcial almost surreal type atmosphere, but I found the lack of cohesiveness and clear cut thread annoying and it caused me to not care about the film or its characters. Being just a regular jane and not blessed with 15 or so credits in Film-making at NYU, the subtly of the art was lost on me. I desperately wanted just a little exposition to grab onto, and all the film's inside jokes and vague, obscure references to Italian films I found to be self indulgent. I'm not saying this film was bad - just bad for me. I think he could have pulled off the same feel and frenzied little European farce with a TOUCH more connective tissue in the plot. Not a lot, just a little for the audience to care about the story, the characters and whatnot. The thing I found in the film that I even cared more than a fig about was the Simone storyline.
6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Altman amusingly strips the fashion industry bare, 22 August 2001
Author: Geofbob from London, England
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is an entertaining spoof built around a Paris fashion week, and was actually filmed during that event. It's a typical Robert Altman film, with multiple story lines, fast cutting from one setup to another, and overlapping soundtracks, which all make it hard to follow at the cinema, and very suitable for rental so it can be replayed. It would take too long even to begin to summarise the subplots and characters, but in addition to a galactically stellar cast; there's a host of guest celebrities, including lots of couturiers; and of course dozens of models on and off the catwalk, in and out of designer clothes, and in the climactic scene without clothes at all.
It is always healthy - both for laughers and laughees - to laugh at powerful people who take themselves too seriously; and by poking fun at the fashion industry and its surrounding media circus, Altman is performing a social service, as well as being a true artist. But I don't find his satire as cruelly biting as some people do. He treats some characters sympathetically or neutrally - eg the designer played by Anouk Aimée and Marcello Mastroianni's mystery figure. And even the extreme characters - eg Richard E Grant's screamingly gay designer or Kim Basinger's gushing TV reporter - are only a little more exaggerated than some real-life equivalents.
The final nude catwalk parade is not only a visually delightful and neat solution to the problem of a designer having lost her collection; but is also a postmodern take on the fairytale of the emperor's new clothes - nowadays, the crooks wouldn't have to pretend they were making clothes for the vain emperor, but would be able to sell him nudity, so long as it had a trendy designer label!
10 out of 17 people found the following review useful:

A Rare Miss From the Master, 7 February 2007
Author: DeanNYC (thedeanofnyc@yahoo.com) from New York, NY
When you think of a Robert Altman film, what *should* come to mind are elements like bitingly sharp satire, clever takes on human interaction and a brilliant portrayal of the subject matter; in other words, a mirror is held up to the topic examined and reflected back to the audience with maybe a tweak, a twist or a knowing wink.
That's not the case with "Prêt-à-Porter" or "Ready To Wear," as it was released in its US theatrical run.
The problem with this film is a complete lack of focus and understanding about what happens during Market week in the fashion industry, what is important about it, and for this film, most crucially, what's interesting about it! The result shows that this time, the Auteur didn't do his homework.
The plot of the film is multi-layered, like all of Altman's work, so there's a lot going on, but each layer is more preposterous than the previous. Perhaps had only one of the threads been so off track, it could have still worked. However, with every element being a farcical storyline, it is simply too much to stomach.
Even with the all-star cast gathered on location in the City of Light, dealing with theft, love, murder, manipulation, a bald tattoo, a lot of champagne and a cliché about the sidewalks of that European capital, and... oh yeah! the world of fashion... you can confidently skip this chapter of the Altman story and know you didn't miss anything.
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

What do the critics know?, 16 August 2006
Author: therryns-1 from United States
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I am completely baffled at the bad reviews this movie received. Robert Altman apparently shot first and came up with a story board later, and we are the richer for it. Just as the finale of this romp is definitive statement on the putative subject of the ready to wear fashion week,so this movie is a statement on movie making, and the conclusions would appear to be the same. Altman's confidence in dispensing with the conventions of plot, character development, the classic forms of boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy jumps off the Eiffel Tower, girl moves in with Godzilla, is as stunning as the final scene. The sheer pleasure of watching Altman's usual suspects perform at the top of their game is enough reason to watch the movie. I will never look at Forest Whitaker and Rupert Everett in the same way. As for Sophia Loren and Marcello Mastroianni, blame it all on pasta. And as for the clothes and the people and the sad old boobs of publishers, frosting on the cake. What a complete visual joy!
Add another review
Related Links