Saw this when it first came out in 1993, when Sherilyn Fenn was the "It" girl. I only wanted to see it because it was directed by David Lynch's daughter and I wanted to see if she was as quirky as her legendary filmmaker dad. The first viewing made me think how great a Vincent Price vehicle this could have been. Like her father, Jennifer Lynch takes us on an eerie trip about obsession and control. Fenn is Helena, the one-time lover and object of a surgeon's (sands) affection. After an accident, he takes her to his house and amputates her limbs, then places her in a box and keeps her as his possession. Sands is subtly creepy and the film has a lot of psychological dynamics and is not as bad as its IMDb score suggests. This is a film you want to see when you're looking for something 180-degrees from run-of-the-mill.
136 Reviews
Not the Bomb it Seems to Be
gavin69423 December 2015
A surgeon (Julian Sands) becomes obsessed with the seductive woman (Sherilyn Fenn) he once was in an affair with. Refusing to accept that she has moved on, he amputates her limbs and holds her captive in his mansion.
After receiving an NC-17 rating by the MPAA, the film was given an R-rating on appeal and released in the United States in September 1993, but received critical backlash and was a financial failure. Gene Siskel was one of the film's few defenders, writing, "I went to the theater to see it expecting the worst," and he called it, "a brave little movie that explored the provocative issue of how some frustrated men channel their inability to love a woman into cruelty." Genre fans might like it, because of the familiar faces -- Sands, Fenn and Bill Paxton. It does suffer from having no one really likable in the plot, and a few twists that may not sit well with some people.
After receiving an NC-17 rating by the MPAA, the film was given an R-rating on appeal and released in the United States in September 1993, but received critical backlash and was a financial failure. Gene Siskel was one of the film's few defenders, writing, "I went to the theater to see it expecting the worst," and he called it, "a brave little movie that explored the provocative issue of how some frustrated men channel their inability to love a woman into cruelty." Genre fans might like it, because of the familiar faces -- Sands, Fenn and Bill Paxton. It does suffer from having no one really likable in the plot, and a few twists that may not sit well with some people.
A real one of a kind experience
Leofwine_draca13 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This one-of-a-kind movie is hated by many but certainly deserves some kind of kudos for its uniqueness. I found myself being drawn into this movie; from the initial moments, where I didn't think much of it; to the growing love between Sands and Fenn, to the violent, unexpected conclusion. Jennifer Lynch tries to inject as much of her father's surrealism as possible into the film, so there's lots of symbolism and weird stuff going on. Calling this film "quirky" is an understatement.
I remember this as being pretty controversial when it was first released, concerning as it does a man who kidnaps a woman, cuts off her arms and legs and puts her in a box. It's not in bad taste as you might think, although this supposed depravity certainly seems to be one of the film's main selling points (just check the video box for an example). What surprised me most about this film was the subtle message that real love isn't just about sex, but about what the person looks like on the inside instead of the out. There are certainly a number of surprises and twists as the film commences.
As I mentioned before, the acting is pretty bad but bearable. The best of the bunch is Sherilyn Fenn, who turns her ice-cold bitch into a realistic, if unlikeable, character. Julian Sands (WARLOCK) overdoes it a bit with his turn as a childish, confused doctor, but to be fair it was a difficult role to play and I can't think of many modern actors capable of pulling the role off totally successfully. Elsewhere, Bill Paxton (with a ludicrous wig) is a cliché and one of my favourite bit actors, Kurtwood Smith, appears as a fellow doctor. But these characters are all unimportant, as the film focuses primarily on Fenn and Sands, and how their relationship progresses as time goes on.
This is quite a slow-moving tale, well shot, and there's little in the way of action or gore as you might expect. The actual scenes of amputation are thankfully offscreen. The one thing I didn't really like about the film was the cheat ending, where the entire sequence of events turns out to have...well, couldn't they think of anything else? BOXING HELENA is a real oddity, and certainly worth a look in my opinion, despite the obvious shortcomings.
I remember this as being pretty controversial when it was first released, concerning as it does a man who kidnaps a woman, cuts off her arms and legs and puts her in a box. It's not in bad taste as you might think, although this supposed depravity certainly seems to be one of the film's main selling points (just check the video box for an example). What surprised me most about this film was the subtle message that real love isn't just about sex, but about what the person looks like on the inside instead of the out. There are certainly a number of surprises and twists as the film commences.
As I mentioned before, the acting is pretty bad but bearable. The best of the bunch is Sherilyn Fenn, who turns her ice-cold bitch into a realistic, if unlikeable, character. Julian Sands (WARLOCK) overdoes it a bit with his turn as a childish, confused doctor, but to be fair it was a difficult role to play and I can't think of many modern actors capable of pulling the role off totally successfully. Elsewhere, Bill Paxton (with a ludicrous wig) is a cliché and one of my favourite bit actors, Kurtwood Smith, appears as a fellow doctor. But these characters are all unimportant, as the film focuses primarily on Fenn and Sands, and how their relationship progresses as time goes on.
This is quite a slow-moving tale, well shot, and there's little in the way of action or gore as you might expect. The actual scenes of amputation are thankfully offscreen. The one thing I didn't really like about the film was the cheat ending, where the entire sequence of events turns out to have...well, couldn't they think of anything else? BOXING HELENA is a real oddity, and certainly worth a look in my opinion, despite the obvious shortcomings.
"Some vodka, lime juice, and two large pomegranates."
TxMike16 July 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I vaguely recall some controversy in 1993 when "Boxing Helena" was released, didn't see it then, but always had in the back of my mind to rent the video some day. After seeing Sherilyn Fenn in "Just Write" recently, it re-kindled my interest in "Helena." This movie was written and directed by David Lynch's daughter, only 24, so considering all that, I suppose it isn't such a bad film. But not real good either, just interesting.
some SPOILERS - Fenn plays a beautiful "bad girl" bitch, and a young surgeon with whom she had a brief affair is obsessed with her. She doesn't want anything more to do with him, but his attraction is so obsessive he won't take "no" for an answer. He even climbs a tree at her house and watches her with her lover, played by Bill Paxton before he became a star two years later in "Apollo 13". Lured to her house to retrieve her address book left there at a party, she is running away and gets hit by a pickup. The rest of the film we see his obsession carried out, imprisoning her, amputating first her damaged legs, then her arms, all the while obsessing over her while he quit his job at the hospital.
However, as we find out at the very end, everything after the truck hit her was a dream of his. He had actually called an ambulance, she had undergone surgery, he had been sleeping down the hall, he hears a voice, "Doctor, are you back with us." We learn nothing more about what happens to him or to her. All of which makes the film kind of fall flat like a punctured souffle'. When you then think back on what you saw, and realize it was all a dream arising from his obsession with her, you think, "So what?" I didn't expect "Boxing Helena" to be a very good movie, still, I was expecting something more.
It is noteworthy that this first movie of Lynch's daughter is, thus far, also her last.
some SPOILERS - Fenn plays a beautiful "bad girl" bitch, and a young surgeon with whom she had a brief affair is obsessed with her. She doesn't want anything more to do with him, but his attraction is so obsessive he won't take "no" for an answer. He even climbs a tree at her house and watches her with her lover, played by Bill Paxton before he became a star two years later in "Apollo 13". Lured to her house to retrieve her address book left there at a party, she is running away and gets hit by a pickup. The rest of the film we see his obsession carried out, imprisoning her, amputating first her damaged legs, then her arms, all the while obsessing over her while he quit his job at the hospital.
However, as we find out at the very end, everything after the truck hit her was a dream of his. He had actually called an ambulance, she had undergone surgery, he had been sleeping down the hall, he hears a voice, "Doctor, are you back with us." We learn nothing more about what happens to him or to her. All of which makes the film kind of fall flat like a punctured souffle'. When you then think back on what you saw, and realize it was all a dream arising from his obsession with her, you think, "So what?" I didn't expect "Boxing Helena" to be a very good movie, still, I was expecting something more.
It is noteworthy that this first movie of Lynch's daughter is, thus far, also her last.
Couldn't he have started sawing with the head?
Lumpenprole14 August 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Spoilers
Julian Sands plays a contemptible wuss who furtively lusts after an impossible jerk of a woman. One day a happy accident knocks her out and the Sand's character gets to chop off her legs and keep her imprisoned in his mansion. Then there is a long long stretch of undrama as Sand's finishes boxing Helena - cuts her off the from the world and gradually snips away at her body till she is just a trunk and a head to be propped up and tended to. Then Helena's crazy boyfriend storms the gates and doesn't want her.
Just writing that down I can't help thinking that it's a funny idea. Maybe I'm warped, but the concept of an old-fashioned guy slowly giving in to his urge to objectify a woman he can never have (so that he actually turns her into something like a gory, statue bust of herself) seems like it'd be hilarious to watch. It's masterfully done in Bunuel's That Obscure Object of Desire. Boxing Helena tries to hit the same notes about how the will to control, destroy, degrade, and infantalize are all the logical extremes of some notions of `love.' It fails because the characters are poorly written.
The plot demands that the characters be unlikable. Chopping up a likeable `heroine' to make a point about obsessive control just doesn't work outside of a light slasher flick. The guy doing the chopping can't be all that saintly either, cuz he's giving into some pretty awful urges. But in order for the plot to work, you have to at least see why the Helena character might spark an obsession and the chopper must be at least slightly sympathetic. Otherwise it's just an obsessed crazy guy chopping up a jerk. Boxing Helena is an obsessed crazy guy chopping up a jerk.
The Sands character is loathsomely spineless. He's a creepy, simpering bore. Helena is a demented moron who wants to use people, but is too stupid to get more out of her looks than a thuggish oaf boyfriend. Watching them interact was torture.
Ending on a `it was just a dream' note is just plain baffling. It implies that Sand's character is a whining, sniveling waste even IN HIS DREAMS! There's black humor and then there's `I just wasted two hours of your time watching a worthless character wish for something pathetic, badly.'
Final note: the symbolism was about as subtle as a brick in the head - over and over.
Julian Sands plays a contemptible wuss who furtively lusts after an impossible jerk of a woman. One day a happy accident knocks her out and the Sand's character gets to chop off her legs and keep her imprisoned in his mansion. Then there is a long long stretch of undrama as Sand's finishes boxing Helena - cuts her off the from the world and gradually snips away at her body till she is just a trunk and a head to be propped up and tended to. Then Helena's crazy boyfriend storms the gates and doesn't want her.
Just writing that down I can't help thinking that it's a funny idea. Maybe I'm warped, but the concept of an old-fashioned guy slowly giving in to his urge to objectify a woman he can never have (so that he actually turns her into something like a gory, statue bust of herself) seems like it'd be hilarious to watch. It's masterfully done in Bunuel's That Obscure Object of Desire. Boxing Helena tries to hit the same notes about how the will to control, destroy, degrade, and infantalize are all the logical extremes of some notions of `love.' It fails because the characters are poorly written.
The plot demands that the characters be unlikable. Chopping up a likeable `heroine' to make a point about obsessive control just doesn't work outside of a light slasher flick. The guy doing the chopping can't be all that saintly either, cuz he's giving into some pretty awful urges. But in order for the plot to work, you have to at least see why the Helena character might spark an obsession and the chopper must be at least slightly sympathetic. Otherwise it's just an obsessed crazy guy chopping up a jerk. Boxing Helena is an obsessed crazy guy chopping up a jerk.
The Sands character is loathsomely spineless. He's a creepy, simpering bore. Helena is a demented moron who wants to use people, but is too stupid to get more out of her looks than a thuggish oaf boyfriend. Watching them interact was torture.
Ending on a `it was just a dream' note is just plain baffling. It implies that Sand's character is a whining, sniveling waste even IN HIS DREAMS! There's black humor and then there's `I just wasted two hours of your time watching a worthless character wish for something pathetic, badly.'
Final note: the symbolism was about as subtle as a brick in the head - over and over.
not dark enough
SnoopyStyle4 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Dr. Nick Cavanaugh (Julian Sands) was raised to be a surgeon. He's a top surgeon and a bit peculiar. His mother dies and he decides to move back into the family mansion. He is still obsessed with Helena (Sherilyn Fenn) whom he slept with once a long time ago and she knows it. She's a wild party girl going out with douche Ray O'Malley (Bill Paxton). Nick's girlfriend Anne Garrett sees the obsession and has a fight with him. He tricks Helena to his home and she runs off into the street. Her legs are crushed in a hit-and-run. He performs amputations and keeps her in his home. Dr. Alan Harrison (Kurtwood Smith) comes looking and Nick gives him the chief of surgery position. After more near-misses and constant resistance from Helena, Nick amputates her arms.
Jennifer Chambers Lynch shows that her directing skill is at a TV movie level. With the ending, she shows that she doesn't have the guts to push all the way. It's all a dream and it's a cop out. Julian Sands is good at being a creep and in this one, he's a pathetic creep. Sherilyn Fenn is a beauty. The movie should look and feel much darker. Instead it feel cheesy and a bit campy.
Jennifer Chambers Lynch shows that her directing skill is at a TV movie level. With the ending, she shows that she doesn't have the guts to push all the way. It's all a dream and it's a cop out. Julian Sands is good at being a creep and in this one, he's a pathetic creep. Sherilyn Fenn is a beauty. The movie should look and feel much darker. Instead it feel cheesy and a bit campy.
With a bigger budget and some directorial finesse, "Boxing Helena" might've been a contender...
moonspinner557 May 2002
Poorly-made, scrappy and off-putting erotic drama executed without the courage of its own idea. Lurid story concerns an obsessed surgeon's relationship with an indifferent vixen. Amusing in parts, the film occasionally goes out on the proverbial limb, but it's also messy and unfocused. Perhaps the behind-the-scenes troubles with original star Kim Basinger got in director Jennifer Lynch's way. In any event, Lynch hasn't been given the chance to purge this demon from her resume...one look at it and you'll know why. It's a curious mix of sex, fantasy and horror, but so perplexing and muddled, the provocative angle of the whole scenario gets lost. *1/2 from ****
Wicked
paul_haakonsen16 February 2010
This thriller is one of a kind. The story is compelling and interesting.
"Boxing Helena" will lure you in, and once you are caught, cut off your limbs. This is a thriller with lots of depth and detail.
The characters are interesting and well cut out. Each bringing lots to the story, and you can immerse yourself in the characters, because they are so well brought to life. Of course, the cast have a lot to do with this as well, and the casting was perfect for each role. The scenery in the movie works well, because it has that touch of personal space to it. It is not scary or dark sets, and it works well for the movie.
The movie is not a gory or really scary one, but it will keep you thrilled with its sense of psychological dread. The story goes forward at a constant flow, never leaving you bored.
"Boxing Helena" leaves you with something to ponder about once it has ended, and I like that in a movie, that means you actually got something for your money. I recommend that you give this movie a chance if you like a movie with some depth.
"Boxing Helena" will lure you in, and once you are caught, cut off your limbs. This is a thriller with lots of depth and detail.
The characters are interesting and well cut out. Each bringing lots to the story, and you can immerse yourself in the characters, because they are so well brought to life. Of course, the cast have a lot to do with this as well, and the casting was perfect for each role. The scenery in the movie works well, because it has that touch of personal space to it. It is not scary or dark sets, and it works well for the movie.
The movie is not a gory or really scary one, but it will keep you thrilled with its sense of psychological dread. The story goes forward at a constant flow, never leaving you bored.
"Boxing Helena" leaves you with something to ponder about once it has ended, and I like that in a movie, that means you actually got something for your money. I recommend that you give this movie a chance if you like a movie with some depth.
Great concept ruined by pure incompetence
PlutonicLove13 August 2003
One of the most intriguing concepts imaginable is brutally mangled by Jennifer Chambers Lynch's highly incompetent and infuriatingly redundant direction and appalling writing, which (combined with Greame Revell's score) makes Boxing Helena' seem like a particularly ham-fisted episode of The Red Shoe Diaries'.
Doctor Nick Cavanaugh lacks any kind of character definition or motivation and the titular Helena is portrayed an insufferable hag, incapable of inducing even the slightest bit of empathy in the viewer. In fact, my apathy was almost palpable all through the maddeningly predictable plot, a feeling confirmed by the even more maddening cop-out ending.
I love David Lynch to death, but the spawn of his loins apparently didn't inherit a smidgen of his talent.
Doctor Nick Cavanaugh lacks any kind of character definition or motivation and the titular Helena is portrayed an insufferable hag, incapable of inducing even the slightest bit of empathy in the viewer. In fact, my apathy was almost palpable all through the maddeningly predictable plot, a feeling confirmed by the even more maddening cop-out ending.
I love David Lynch to death, but the spawn of his loins apparently didn't inherit a smidgen of his talent.
A Sick, Weird, Bizarre and Erotic Love Story
claudio_carvalho20 February 2004
Doctor Nicholas "Nick" Cavanaugh (Julian Sands) is a successful surgeon, who lives with his colleague Anne Garret (Betsy Clark). She intends to get married with him. Nick is obsessed by the tramp Helena (Sherilyn Fenn), with whom he had some kind of shallow relationship in the past. Nick tries to get close to Helena again and one day, he convinces her to go to his home, to get her address book back. Helena discusses with Nick, and is hit by a car in front of Nick's mansion. When Helena wakes up, she is without both legs and abducted by Nick. Nick is taking care of her at his home. She tries to escape, and like a Venus of Milo, Nick removes her two arms, and keeps her hold to a wheelchair. A surprising end finishes the story.
"Boxing Helena" is a polemic, sick, weird and bizarre love story. But also, it is very well produced, and has an unconventional screenplay. It is not a masterpiece, but it is not so bad: it is indicated to a very specific audience. However, it became famous when Kim Bassinger refused the role of Helena, after signing a contract with the producers. Due to the notoriety of this problem, this movie hit the wrong target-public. Everybody wanted to watch the film Kim Bassinger refused to act. The beauty of Sherilyn Fenn is amazingly highlighted in this film performing a bitchy woman. The director Jennifer Chambers Lynch is the daughter of David Lynch, and tried to follow her father's steps, with a very bizarre film. Unfortunately, this was her unique movie. In my opinion, the 'IMDB User Rating' of 3.8 is very unfair. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): 'Encaixotando Helena' ('Boxing Helena')
Note: On 01 April 2014, I saw this movie again.
"Boxing Helena" is a polemic, sick, weird and bizarre love story. But also, it is very well produced, and has an unconventional screenplay. It is not a masterpiece, but it is not so bad: it is indicated to a very specific audience. However, it became famous when Kim Bassinger refused the role of Helena, after signing a contract with the producers. Due to the notoriety of this problem, this movie hit the wrong target-public. Everybody wanted to watch the film Kim Bassinger refused to act. The beauty of Sherilyn Fenn is amazingly highlighted in this film performing a bitchy woman. The director Jennifer Chambers Lynch is the daughter of David Lynch, and tried to follow her father's steps, with a very bizarre film. Unfortunately, this was her unique movie. In my opinion, the 'IMDB User Rating' of 3.8 is very unfair. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): 'Encaixotando Helena' ('Boxing Helena')
Note: On 01 April 2014, I saw this movie again.
A train wreck
Shazzer3010 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Kim Basinger never spent $9 million so well as she did pulling out of this stinker.
Horrid dialogue, cheesy acting and Art Garfunkel sporting two puffs of hair on either side of his head (like a hippie Bram Stoker's 'Dracula') make this rotter an unintentionally hilarious film. But it's obvious that Jennifer Lynch wanted so badly to strike a bizarre chord just like her famous daddy that she was willing to sacrifice everything...apparently, even her dignity.
BH is the tale of a whiny doctor (Sands)who's mama didn't love him. Gee, do you think he'll grow up resenting women? When gets a whiff of wench-o-la Helena (Fenn)he's obsessed and begins to stalk her. Her macho-man boyfriend Ray (Paxton, modeling a mullet Billy Ray Cyrus would have been embarrassed by)does nothing to instill the audiences confidence in Helen's ability to choose men. It's also never stated what this woman does for a living, but she's got some pretty sweet accommodations, and even a full bar in her bedroom.
When Dr. Nick can't get Helena to go for him, a severe accident involving a truck and Helena gives Nick the opportunity to have her recouperate in his home. Unfortunately, he's also used the opportunity to his advantage by cutting off her legs. When she deigns to slap him, he removes her arms. All throughout the film, we see shots of the Venus de Milo. Plot point shoved home! And apparently, Lynch would have us believe a man can hack off your limbs and still make you fall for him. But the obsurdity of that pales in comparison to the "Bad Movie-Making 101" ending. Rent it purely for comic relief.
Horrid dialogue, cheesy acting and Art Garfunkel sporting two puffs of hair on either side of his head (like a hippie Bram Stoker's 'Dracula') make this rotter an unintentionally hilarious film. But it's obvious that Jennifer Lynch wanted so badly to strike a bizarre chord just like her famous daddy that she was willing to sacrifice everything...apparently, even her dignity.
BH is the tale of a whiny doctor (Sands)who's mama didn't love him. Gee, do you think he'll grow up resenting women? When gets a whiff of wench-o-la Helena (Fenn)he's obsessed and begins to stalk her. Her macho-man boyfriend Ray (Paxton, modeling a mullet Billy Ray Cyrus would have been embarrassed by)does nothing to instill the audiences confidence in Helen's ability to choose men. It's also never stated what this woman does for a living, but she's got some pretty sweet accommodations, and even a full bar in her bedroom.
When Dr. Nick can't get Helena to go for him, a severe accident involving a truck and Helena gives Nick the opportunity to have her recouperate in his home. Unfortunately, he's also used the opportunity to his advantage by cutting off her legs. When she deigns to slap him, he removes her arms. All throughout the film, we see shots of the Venus de Milo. Plot point shoved home! And apparently, Lynch would have us believe a man can hack off your limbs and still make you fall for him. But the obsurdity of that pales in comparison to the "Bad Movie-Making 101" ending. Rent it purely for comic relief.
Am I disturbed for loving this movie?
Bored_Dragon29 April 2019
As a teenager, I caught this movie partially on TV, and, not knowing its name, for years I was searching for it to watch it properly. A few years ago I accidentally bumped into it on some list of the most controversial films of all time, recognized it, and finally got it. The years of waiting paid off - I was thrilled.
I do not want to go into the particular story because I can not do it without spoilers. I will only say that this is convincingly the most morbid love drama I've ever seen, which at the same time provokes fascination and repulsion. In some instances I was sympathetic with the psychopath, in the other with the victim, while at the moments I was wondering who was actually crazier. The first choice for the role of Helena was Madonna, but the contract was then signed with Kim Basinger. Kim gave up in the last minute, she was sued for nine million dollars, and the leading role went to fantastic Sherilyn Fenn, who perfectly portrayed the role of an arrogant "ice-queen", so cold-blooded that even in this extreme situation I could not unreservedly sympathize with her. Maybe I'm too subjective, because of her role in the series "Twin Peaks" and my fascination with this film, but I really think that with Kim this would be a complete failure.
Something disturbed like this can not come from a normal mind. As apple does not fall far from the tree, it is hardly surprising that the script was written by the then nineteen-year-old daughter of David Lynch. A few years later, Jennifer directed the film and won Razzie Award for the Worst Director. Besides the award for the worst directing, there is a rating of 4.6 on IMDb, Metascore 26 and 18% on Rotten Tomatoes. But when you put it all on one pan of scales, and then Sherilyn Fenn climbs on the other side...
9/10
I do not want to go into the particular story because I can not do it without spoilers. I will only say that this is convincingly the most morbid love drama I've ever seen, which at the same time provokes fascination and repulsion. In some instances I was sympathetic with the psychopath, in the other with the victim, while at the moments I was wondering who was actually crazier. The first choice for the role of Helena was Madonna, but the contract was then signed with Kim Basinger. Kim gave up in the last minute, she was sued for nine million dollars, and the leading role went to fantastic Sherilyn Fenn, who perfectly portrayed the role of an arrogant "ice-queen", so cold-blooded that even in this extreme situation I could not unreservedly sympathize with her. Maybe I'm too subjective, because of her role in the series "Twin Peaks" and my fascination with this film, but I really think that with Kim this would be a complete failure.
Something disturbed like this can not come from a normal mind. As apple does not fall far from the tree, it is hardly surprising that the script was written by the then nineteen-year-old daughter of David Lynch. A few years later, Jennifer directed the film and won Razzie Award for the Worst Director. Besides the award for the worst directing, there is a rating of 4.6 on IMDb, Metascore 26 and 18% on Rotten Tomatoes. But when you put it all on one pan of scales, and then Sherilyn Fenn climbs on the other side...
9/10
It took a long time for the profundity of the movie to sink in.
heck9917 June 2001
After first viewing this film, I was more than a little disappointed. Then the deep and profound nature of the film began to sink in more deeply. Whatever was really meant by the film's makers, I took it to be a great statement of the frustration men and women feel toward relations in today's society. The depth of feeling, as well as the "on the edge of your seat" scenes really are great. Maybe "being male" I am already emotionally retarded, so the absorption time for the movie's really great statements were meant to be. Either way, this movie is definitely worth every thinking person's time.
When you find her...don't let her get away.
michaelRokeefe26 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Jennifer Chambers Lynch directs this darkly absurd love story. Dr. Nick Cavanaugh(Julian Sands)is a surgeon who becomes dangerously obsessed with a tramp of a vamp Helena(Sherilyn Fenn)that has ended a brief affair and desires to move on. The "love sick" doc lures Helena back to his home for one last chance to woo her. His romantic overture causes the winsome Helena to race from the house and into the street where she is run down by a truck. Not wanting to lose his love goddess to a hospital, Dr. Nick scoops up Helena and takes her back to his home lab where he amputates her arms and legs in order to keep her captive and under his control... his own trophy in a wheelchair.
The beautiful Fenn was not the first choice to play Helena. Kim Basinger would be found guilty and financially punished for backing out of a verbal agreement to play the part in this weird love story. Director Jennifer Lynch did not shy away from borrowing her father's(David Lynch)bizarre and unconventional style.
The beautiful Fenn was not the first choice to play Helena. Kim Basinger would be found guilty and financially punished for backing out of a verbal agreement to play the part in this weird love story. Director Jennifer Lynch did not shy away from borrowing her father's(David Lynch)bizarre and unconventional style.
Once again, I'm one of the few...
william_r_alford13 March 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Serendipity allowed me to just see 'Boxing Helena' for the first time tonight, ten years after its release. I found it amongst my wife's old tapes; she said that it was stupid and suggested that I record over it. That was enough to prompt a viewing first. I just wanted those few of you writing positive reviews to know that you are not the only ones who... liked it? Enjoyed it? Found it interesting? None of these phrases seems to capture my appreciation for the film. The overwhelming numbers of negative reviews do not intimidate me. I'm not afraid to be the only one who likes something: While I was listening to the likes of Television, The Ramones and Iggy Pop back in the day, everybody else my age was into metal, disco or 'classic rock.' I was so out of touch! - Madonna and Kim Basinger saw the script and bailed. Kim even sacrificed $8M and crippled her career rather than appear in such a turkey. - Director Jennifer Lynch was doing a poor imitation of her father, the great David. - The imagery was sledgehammer obvious, 'Hmm...I wonder if Little Boy will grow up resenting his parents?' - The ending sucked. I don't know why Kim and Madonna bailed and I don't care. [James Caan bailed on several successful movies including Kramer vs. Kramer.] Attractive as they are, they could only wish to be able to do what Sherilyn Fenn did with the part. The combination of fierce independence, courage, bluntness and irresistibility of Helena was Fenn's alone to depict. 'Boxing Helena' is certainly not for everyone. I think that anyone who suspects that a friend is going off of the deep end over a romance should arrange a viewing. My take is that the plot line portrays an obsession taken to its logical conclusion. The childhood flashbacks, the piteous groveling by the perpetrator and the mercilessly accurate assessments by the captive demonstrate the true nature of obsession: It has very little to do with love or even the desire's object. It is about an unhealthy perspective of self and world. I don't give a damn about whether a film is 'derivative' or 'predictable;' is it watchable? Sex or good food is predictable too, what's your point? I don't know if Jennifer Lynch was imitating her father. I think that those who compared the two were prejudicing themselves. Some of you liked most of the film except the ending, but I did. I think that having lived an obsession in the safety of a dream, Nick got a second chance to 'wake-up' and back away. Otherwise it would have been just an elaborate slasher flick, which is all some shallow reviewers got out of it. Most movies could have been done better. This one gets the point across nicely. I think that some of the people who hated it found that the premise hit too close to home. Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't do either criticize.
I really didn't enjoy this...
Scarlet_Fever4 June 2004
Not going to say much really, at the time i saw this i was viewing 3 or 4 films a week and it is one of only 2 films i have watched that i considered walking out of half way through (the other being Carry On Columbus).
This film made me feel very uneasy, i felt like i was watching something i shouldn't if you know what i mean. And I came away wishing i hadn't.
To be honest, i think this says more about me than the film itself - the premise was well advertised and i knew what to expect, so i should have known better than to buy a ticket for it.
It didn't appeal to me, but i suppose there is an audience for it, i am just not able to appreciate it on any level other than it's technical merit - it is well made and well acted, but i found the subject matter questionable enough to make me consider walking out.
This film made me feel very uneasy, i felt like i was watching something i shouldn't if you know what i mean. And I came away wishing i hadn't.
To be honest, i think this says more about me than the film itself - the premise was well advertised and i knew what to expect, so i should have known better than to buy a ticket for it.
It didn't appeal to me, but i suppose there is an audience for it, i am just not able to appreciate it on any level other than it's technical merit - it is well made and well acted, but i found the subject matter questionable enough to make me consider walking out.
lengthy surgery with no anesthesia...
Jonny_Numb14 October 2005
God almighty, what is this royal puke stain of celluloid? If you thought the French were notorious for long-winded tales peppered with shallow existentialist talk and imagery, "Boxing Helena" proves that Americans (lucky daughters of well-loved directors included) can do it just as horribly. Julian Sands plays Nick, a neurotic, sexually dysfunctional doctor who is smitten with the bitchy Helena (Sherilyn Fenn); Helena wants nothing to do with Nick; Helena gets in a freak accident, loses both her legs, and Nick imprisons her in his lonely mansion. This sounds like a great setup for a meditation on the nature of obsession, but the characters change so little from their miserable, cloying, and/or unlikable selves (save for passages of inexplicable, out-of-character behavior) that the film becomes an overstated, one-note gag that isn't funny. While Sands is indeed grating as the well-intentioned drip of a doctor, it is Fenn who sits at the crux of "Boxing Helena"'s paradox: why would anyone want to preserve someone so beautiful on the outside but completely rotten on the inside? Personally, I was waiting for Sands to amputate her head so the movie could finally be over...
Dull psychosexual captivity tale
drownsoda9027 June 2016
"Boxing Helena" follows a wealthy surgeon (Julian Sands) with mommy issues who saves his female neighbor, Helena, whom he's obsessed with, after she is hit by a car in front of his house. After amputating her legs, he goes a step further and turns her into a living Venus de Milo and holds her captive in his home.
This film has a notoriously bad reputation, and my natural thought prior to seeing the film was "there's no way it's that bad." I was kind of wrong. It is pretty dreadful in a lot of ways. The film was directed by Jennifer Lynch, daughter of David Lynch, who wrote the script for the film when she was nineteen. It is not a bad concept by any means; it's a clear-cut meditation on obsession and power, with shades of Samuel Richardson's "Clarissa," as well as further commentary on male sexuality and the female body.
It sounds fascinating, doesn't it? It unfortunately really isn't. The problem with the film lay wholly in its execution, which is amateurish, Lifetime TV-movie-of-the-week status, even by early '90s standards. Unbelievable dialogue doesn't help matters, and the film plods for much of its duration, lacking the sufficient writing necessary to really carry it. The actors here try their best, but even in spite of decent performances, they mostly become voiceboxes that showcase the script's weakness. Julian Sands and Sherilyn Fenn are both great actors and actually have some chemistry on screen, but again, the dialogue renders their performances mostly unconvincing. Bill Paxton, Kurtwood Smith, and Art Garfunkel are also along for the ride here in supporting roles which, again (mainly in Paxton's case), are melodramatic and really shed further light on the weakness of the script.
The film wraps itself up just as uneventfully as it opens, and left me feeling like I'd just witnessed a massive lost opportunity; a solid concept spoiled by feigned pathos, weak dialogue, and amateurish cinematography. Sands and Fenn are the highlights here, but even they can only do so much. It's worth watching for the camp factor, which is where the film has ultimately found an audience. 4/10.
This film has a notoriously bad reputation, and my natural thought prior to seeing the film was "there's no way it's that bad." I was kind of wrong. It is pretty dreadful in a lot of ways. The film was directed by Jennifer Lynch, daughter of David Lynch, who wrote the script for the film when she was nineteen. It is not a bad concept by any means; it's a clear-cut meditation on obsession and power, with shades of Samuel Richardson's "Clarissa," as well as further commentary on male sexuality and the female body.
It sounds fascinating, doesn't it? It unfortunately really isn't. The problem with the film lay wholly in its execution, which is amateurish, Lifetime TV-movie-of-the-week status, even by early '90s standards. Unbelievable dialogue doesn't help matters, and the film plods for much of its duration, lacking the sufficient writing necessary to really carry it. The actors here try their best, but even in spite of decent performances, they mostly become voiceboxes that showcase the script's weakness. Julian Sands and Sherilyn Fenn are both great actors and actually have some chemistry on screen, but again, the dialogue renders their performances mostly unconvincing. Bill Paxton, Kurtwood Smith, and Art Garfunkel are also along for the ride here in supporting roles which, again (mainly in Paxton's case), are melodramatic and really shed further light on the weakness of the script.
The film wraps itself up just as uneventfully as it opens, and left me feeling like I'd just witnessed a massive lost opportunity; a solid concept spoiled by feigned pathos, weak dialogue, and amateurish cinematography. Sands and Fenn are the highlights here, but even they can only do so much. It's worth watching for the camp factor, which is where the film has ultimately found an audience. 4/10.
Boxing Controversy...
aalia17 November 2001
Boxing Helena is a highly controversial film about a man's sexual obsession.
Kim Basinger was initially offered to act as Helena, but she declined because she believed it was degrading to women. However, we should decide for ourselves what our own opinions are.
It appears to be more degrading to men. Nick is obsessive, Ray is the typical slob, the other men are more or less submissive or weak. Aside from the relatively poor cinematography, the film conveys a side of life that many film makers seek to avoid, and for this it should be given credit.
Kim Basinger was initially offered to act as Helena, but she declined because she believed it was degrading to women. However, we should decide for ourselves what our own opinions are.
It appears to be more degrading to men. Nick is obsessive, Ray is the typical slob, the other men are more or less submissive or weak. Aside from the relatively poor cinematography, the film conveys a side of life that many film makers seek to avoid, and for this it should be given credit.
When Madonna turns the movie down, you know you have a dud
lovecraft2314 June 2009
Dr. Nick ("Hi Everybody!") Cavanaugh (Julian Sands) is obsessed with the sexy but incredibly unlikable Helena (Sheryl Fenn) who he once had an affair with. When she pretty much rejects the guy, she ends up being hit by a truck. Does this deter him? No! It just means that he'll amputate her and keep her for himself.
Directed by David Lynch's daughter Jennifer, "Boxing Helena" is a movie that at first sounds like a perverse, strange little movie. Instead, it ends up being more of a mix of a pretentious art house movie and a dull 90's soft-core flick (complete with Enigma's song "Sadeness" playing during a sex scene.) Worst yet, the whole thing is a mess. The acting is atrocious, with Sands playing an unlikable, uninteresting, unsympathetic and spineless man, while Fenn plays a character so bitchy that you wonder why any man would want to be with her. Even Bill Paxton (someone I normally like) is unable to lift this up any, as he is also terrible (though that's more due to the terrible script.) At least his hair is outrageously bad, though it's no match for the one Art Garfunkle (yes, THAT Art Garfunkle) has. Add a terrible ending and obvious symbolism (a bird in a cage, how clever!) to the mix, and you get a terrible movie.
Little fact: While more is known about Kim Bassinger and the movie, what is less talked about is that Madonna was also offered to play Helena, but turned it down. When the star of "Swept Away", "The Next Best Thing" and "Shanghai Surprise" turns the movie down, you know you have a dud.
Directed by David Lynch's daughter Jennifer, "Boxing Helena" is a movie that at first sounds like a perverse, strange little movie. Instead, it ends up being more of a mix of a pretentious art house movie and a dull 90's soft-core flick (complete with Enigma's song "Sadeness" playing during a sex scene.) Worst yet, the whole thing is a mess. The acting is atrocious, with Sands playing an unlikable, uninteresting, unsympathetic and spineless man, while Fenn plays a character so bitchy that you wonder why any man would want to be with her. Even Bill Paxton (someone I normally like) is unable to lift this up any, as he is also terrible (though that's more due to the terrible script.) At least his hair is outrageously bad, though it's no match for the one Art Garfunkle (yes, THAT Art Garfunkle) has. Add a terrible ending and obvious symbolism (a bird in a cage, how clever!) to the mix, and you get a terrible movie.
Little fact: While more is known about Kim Bassinger and the movie, what is less talked about is that Madonna was also offered to play Helena, but turned it down. When the star of "Swept Away", "The Next Best Thing" and "Shanghai Surprise" turns the movie down, you know you have a dud.
An interesting, if odd, watch
bowmanblue26 May 2020
I've always been a fan of David Lynch's weird and wonderful films and TV shows, therefore I've also always had an interest in the output of his daughter, Jennifer Lynch. 'Boxing Helena' was one of her first films and, to put it mildly, it was an ordeal for everyone involved. Besides the drama offscreen involving the trouble with casting and actors dropping out, the film wasn't particularly well received and is actually quite hard to find these days, leading to Jennifer Lynch not really dabbling in the big screen for quite some time.
It's about a rather troubled surgeon who becomes obsessed with the titular 'Helena' and - believe it or not - ends up amputating both her arms and legs in order to 'care for her.' Yeah, it's an odd sell, but if you know anything about either Lynch, you'll probably see it as 'normal!'
Now, based on that mini synopsis, you may be inclined to automatically see Helena as 'the victim' - which of course she is, but in most cinema victims' cases, you automatically feel sorry for them. Maybe not her though. Perhaps one of the film's (many?) flaws is its characters who are all pretty much fundamentally unlikable. The main star is weird and his 'hostage' not an awful lot better on a personal level. Yes, there is some 'character growth' over the course of the story, but it's certainly a hard watch.
I'm not sure whether I enjoyed it or not. The whole production has this whole feel like it's a cross between a made-for-TV movie and a daytime soap. The acting is a little odd, but I'm not sure whether that's deliberate or not as all the stars are certainly fine actors in their own right, but they seem to have been told to 'play up' to the whole melodrama feel.
I've seen 'Boxing Helena' twice now - once when it was first released in the cinema and now thirty years later. Back then I thought it was more of a horror/love story. Now I guess there are underlying themes my teenage self didn't pick up on, such as the power struggle/dynamic of a toxic relationship. I don't know whether I'd recommend it or not. Just expect something weird and be in a bit of a forgiving mood to overlook its flaws. It didn't put me off either Lynch though and both have gone on to do even better (and weirder!) things.
It's about a rather troubled surgeon who becomes obsessed with the titular 'Helena' and - believe it or not - ends up amputating both her arms and legs in order to 'care for her.' Yeah, it's an odd sell, but if you know anything about either Lynch, you'll probably see it as 'normal!'
Now, based on that mini synopsis, you may be inclined to automatically see Helena as 'the victim' - which of course she is, but in most cinema victims' cases, you automatically feel sorry for them. Maybe not her though. Perhaps one of the film's (many?) flaws is its characters who are all pretty much fundamentally unlikable. The main star is weird and his 'hostage' not an awful lot better on a personal level. Yes, there is some 'character growth' over the course of the story, but it's certainly a hard watch.
I'm not sure whether I enjoyed it or not. The whole production has this whole feel like it's a cross between a made-for-TV movie and a daytime soap. The acting is a little odd, but I'm not sure whether that's deliberate or not as all the stars are certainly fine actors in their own right, but they seem to have been told to 'play up' to the whole melodrama feel.
I've seen 'Boxing Helena' twice now - once when it was first released in the cinema and now thirty years later. Back then I thought it was more of a horror/love story. Now I guess there are underlying themes my teenage self didn't pick up on, such as the power struggle/dynamic of a toxic relationship. I don't know whether I'd recommend it or not. Just expect something weird and be in a bit of a forgiving mood to overlook its flaws. It didn't put me off either Lynch though and both have gone on to do even better (and weirder!) things.
You can't vote low enough for this rubbish
Bry-231 August 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Too bad the voting scale starts at "one." This might be the worst movie I've ever seen -- worse than "Sgt. Pepper," worse than "Xanadu," even worse than "The Beastmaster." Like "Beastmaster," the best part of "Boxing Helena" is a scene of merely prurient interest -- namely, the sex scene with the girl-at-the-panties-counter-in-"Christmas Vacation," Nicolette Scorsese (no relation, apparently, to Marty). Exceedingly pretty girls, naked, are almost reason enough to give a movie a "one." The limitations of this voting system are the other reason this earns any vote from me. C'mon -- "It was all a dream"-endings went out with seventh-grade Creative Writing! Does anyone know if the original novel ended this same way?
Cult Classic...
dillllinja-8311118 February 2021
Don't pay any attention to the silly people giving this 4.8 and trust me when I tell you that this is a deep psychological journey into the depth of one person's narcissistic rejection that is so damned possibly true that it needs to be watched if only for the education and warning. The 4.8 is due to pretentious 'pro' reviewers thinking that the film is in bad taste etc when in fact it is a tour de force worthy of so much more... If Daddy Lynch had of made it then it'd of gotten a 7+ but because it is the daughter of the great man then the haters are out to hate. A heavy heavy film...
Instant Cult Classic
melissa.ricks3 April 2001
I agree with other viewers that the contrived ending is weak. The entire movie is swiss cheese, but it has all the elements of a cult classic: The twisted concept, The Box, the blatant symbolism, Julian Sands and Twin Peaks' Sherilyn Fenn.... PLUS David Lynch's daughter directing? What more could you want?
Frankly, I was fascinated with Sherilyn's character. She retains her superiority and strength under the absolute worst conditions. She is a role model for readers of "Women Who Love Too Much" and other such drivel. And the campy camera shots of Venus De Milo were great!
If you like cult films, add this one to your list. I believe it will even get better with time. I give it a 7 out of 10 on my Cult Classics scale.
Frankly, I was fascinated with Sherilyn's character. She retains her superiority and strength under the absolute worst conditions. She is a role model for readers of "Women Who Love Too Much" and other such drivel. And the campy camera shots of Venus De Milo were great!
If you like cult films, add this one to your list. I believe it will even get better with time. I give it a 7 out of 10 on my Cult Classics scale.
Run away. Run far away...
moonh2o27 September 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Don't waste your precious time, let alone your money, with this pathetic flick. Any script w/ "I woke up & it was all a dream" as an ending would be laughed at by every producer w/ two IQ's to rub together. Only the daughter of an established filmmaker could have gotten it into production, which says more about David Lynch than his daughter.
It's not even a "fun" bad, it's a just a tortuous jaunt through Jennifer Lynch's pathetic attempts at intellectualism. Nothing's worse that watching someone desperately try to say something profound, and what they come up with would bore a ten-year old.
The only people who might like this are those who are physically obsessed w/ Sherilyn Fenn, and for those, for cripe's sake, just buy the _Playboy_....
It's not even a "fun" bad, it's a just a tortuous jaunt through Jennifer Lynch's pathetic attempts at intellectualism. Nothing's worse that watching someone desperately try to say something profound, and what they come up with would bore a ten-year old.
The only people who might like this are those who are physically obsessed w/ Sherilyn Fenn, and for those, for cripe's sake, just buy the _Playboy_....
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
