Oslo Jargo (Bartok Kinski) *Plot analyzed* Scissors (1991) attempts to showcase Sharon Stone's "acting ability", but as we learn, as in her other films as well, she has very little of it. She is horrendous here. It starts out well and basic, with some 1990's color and nods to Dario Argento (Italian film director) and Brian De Palma.Angie Anderson (Sharon Stone), a 26 year old virgin with mental problems and an excessive addiction to scissors and doll collecting, nearly gets raped in her apartment elevator. The doorman must be the most useless ever, as there's TV cameras and he's reading a book but doesn't see a thing. Why he never got fired, I don't know. Angie Anderson (Sharon Stone) fights off the attacker with the help of her new "scissors". Enter Steve Railsback, who plays two roles, Alex Morgan and Cole Morgan, Alex Morgan who helps her, and his brother Cole Morgan, who hates her.Later, for no apparent reason, Angie Anderson (Sharon Stone), gets locked in some odd apartment that looks like it was decorated by the late Abominable Dr. Phibes. It gets convoluted from there and very idiotic. Don't be misled, this isn't a horror film at all, it's more of a thriller, lacking any "thrills" or sense.It's probably best to watch this without your brain.

MarieGabrielle This film was made in 1991, and it is sort of odd. Sharon Stone however, looks great (she is more understated, young and fresh). Steve Railsback ("Helter Skelter", and the more recent "Ed Gein") is strange and menacing.The film itself has some odd cinematography and sets, including the apartment where Stone is abducted. Sort of a cold, Los Angeles modern look to it. It was marketed as suspense/horror. Probably more suspense/mystery. Ronny Cox as Stone's psychotherapist and Michelle Phillips as his politician wife, so there is a message somewhere lost in the script. It is not the worst, and Stone looks beautiful, so it's worth a shot. 6/10

pnay75-1 I first saw "Scissors" some ten years ago, and I had kept some memories of it when I saw it again on tv. It fulfilled my expectations, as I remembered it as rather interesting, though somewhat far-fetched.Several reviewers have wondered about the necessity of showing Sharon Stone's beautiful bare breasts. I think it signifies that, though she reacts frigidly to men's advances, her sexuality is nevertheless present and no longer repressed when she is alone. Most writers rightly stress the excellency of the impersonation of Sharon Stone, on her (delayed)way to stardom. However I should like to point out that Steve Railsback, a very underrated actor, is quite remarkable too in the dual role of the neighboring twins. I think the film is worth a 8.

aorourke Warning Possible Spoiler! This movie was so bad I finally took the time to register just so I could complain about it. It looked dismally cheap and the only thing frightening was how sordid the Sharon Stone character was to watch. While Basic Instinct showed a smart, funny & ok violent exhibitionist, here the character was a mentally ill woman constantly being infantilized and shown with her legs spread & breasts falling out of her clothes. Add to that the completely absurd plot -- how does a semi-employed shizophrenic afford a deluxe apartment and a private psychiatrist? While the suspense was probably supposed to be which male character trapped her in an apartment, the only thing worth caring about was who was finally going to feed her poor cat.