Product Description

A REMAKE OF THE 1974 ITALIAN FILM OF THE SAME NAME. MADOONA STARS AS A RICH SPOILED WIFE OF AN EVIL INDUSTRIALIST WHO GOES ALONG ON A MEDITERRANEAN CRUISE WITH HER SPOILED RICH FRIENDS. WHEN MADONNA AND THE DECK HAND GET STRANDED ON A DESERTED ISLAND AN UNLIKELY ROMANCE ENSUES.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #28982 in DVD
• Brand: Sony
• Released on: 2003-02-11
• Rating: R (Restricted)
• Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
• Formats: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, DVD, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC
• Original language: English
• Subtitled in: English, French
• Dubbed in: French
• Number of discs: 1
• Running time: 93 minutes

Amazon.com
Madonna gives her most believable performance as Amber, a rich woman on a sea cruise who expects the world to obey her every whim. She and a high-spirited crew member (Adriano Giannini) are marooned on a small deserted island; the feud that sprang up between the two on the ship becomes an all-out war, then transforms into lustful desire as Amber finds that losing status opens up a new side to herself. Some people will want to see Swept Away for the simple pleasure of seeing Madonna be slapped; more demanding filmgoers will, sadly, be left wanting. Though the movie purports to be a satirical examination of capitalism (as was the original 1974 version), its vague discussion of money and power adds up to very little. The love story is surprisingly sincere, making Swept Away a standard romantic potboiler with gorgeous tropical backdrops. --Bret Fetzer

From The New Yorker
Guy Ritchie casts his wife, Madonna, and the hunky Italian actor Adriano Giannini adrift in this pointless remake of Lina Wertmüller's 1974 polemic (which starred Adriano's father, Giancarlo). The story, about a spoiled rich woman who gets stranded on a desert island with a socialist deckhand, let Wertmüller make some blunt observations about money and class. Ritchie wisely rejects any politicizing, but it's the only smart move he makes. As the characters taunt and tease each other in a battle of the sexes, the movie becomes histrionic and mind-numbingly juvenile. -Bruce Diones
Copyright © 2006 The New Yorker

Customer Reviews

More Art Film than Crowd Pleaser
Alright, first thing I'm going to do is establish my credibility. Yes, I have been a Madonna fan since 1983 and NO I do not think everything she makes is fantastic which I find annoying and cultish (you know, that glazed eyed look of her fanatic fans.) In fact, she's put out some real doozies (ahem... "Next Best Thing" anyone? What garbage!) Plus, I hated her album "Music" so this is to let you know I'm trying to be a fair viewer.

Okay, the movie. Well, I watched it out of morbid curiosity. I had heard so much bad stuff about this movie I just really wanted to see why it was so horrible. You know what? It wasn't that bad.

The storyline was somewhat interesting... fascinating really... take two opposite persons with different morals and values that defy the other and put each one in a place of power over the other and watch what happens. It is somewhat masochistic in a sense. In other words, it really is a clashing of personal values and defying them until the other gets fed up. The lower class Italian worker simply rebels more and more when he is being dominated by Amber... interestingly enough, Amber, the rich nasty woman, submits completely when she is in the passive position. She really doesn't even fight. Why? Because her place of power really is an illusion whereas his isn't.

Regardless, all philosophical musings aside, you probably want the dirt on the flick. Alright, it's totally Guy all the way when it comes to filming and directing. You get his humor and camera angles from "Lock, Stock..." So if you liked that movie, you might get a kick out of this one.

How was Madonna? Not bad. She was actually interesting in her character. She's starting to really loosen as an actress and beginning to forget the camera. Remember, I said BEGINNING.

She's getting there. Also, it seems like she trusts her husband as a director so she relaxes a bit. She delivers her lines softer, but without as much emotion in the first half of the film. I truly believe Madonna should take acting lessons. She's too conscious of the camera and we as the audience are too conscious of the most famous woman in the world. And she's aware of this.

Is this a problem? Yes, mostly due to the fact that she has a HUGE obstacle to overcome in order for her audience to believe her as an actress; she has to make her audience forget who she is in order for them to like her character that she's portraying. She did this 100% in "Desperately Seeking Susan" and 75% in "Evita."

If she took lessons in acting, like she did with singing, I think she could go somewhere. Otherwise, her marketable product is what's truly knocking her down. What an amazing contradition!

Otherwise, the film was interesting. The scenery was just beautiful, especially the nighttime scenes. There are moments between the two main characters that are genuinely fun and tender. I liked the interaction between the two of them and how loving they are towards each other. The ending (Spoiler) is truly sad which makes it more of an art film than a blockbuster movie. However, you can tell it was put together rather quickly and could have used more polishing. Not a waste, but not that bad.

Still, I plan on renting it when it comes out. I wouldn't mind looking at it again. Recommendations: big bang viewers, don't bother -- it's more of an insight to an artflick, something to chat about.

Forgive me Father for I have sinned, I promise to say 'Hail Mary' until Madonna has a hit movie
I must confess, when I first saw this movie I was one of those braindead Madonna-lunatics that followed every uncreative thing she flung out. I traveled all the way to NYC the day this film came out because it was too awful to get a full release. And I even proclaimed to everyone that would sit still long enough to listen just how "terrific Madonna is in it..." The day this movie came out a columnist with The Post gave it such a scathing review. And I was mortified and for some crazy reason I took such personal offense. I even wrote the Post a lengthy letter claiming their writers were biased towards Queen Madonna.

Please forgive me Father for I have sinned, I promise to say 'Hail Mary' until Madonna has a hit movie. After I regained my sanity I found out just how manipulative and incompetent Madonna really is.

She manipulated her husband with this horrible fiasco of a movie, "Swept Away." And she managed to ruin the poor man's career along the way. She manipulated her fans into seeing it. Because only her fans were incoherent enough to see "Swept Away." No one else would sit through this shipWRECK.

Why is this movie so bad? Because over the years Madonna has turned into a horrible skeleton of her old self, she is so transparent. Anyone can read a magazine through her. Even Leona Helmsley has more of a heart than the High Cabala Priestess. Madonna does not know how to act and her attempts have only gotten progressively worse. In the 1980's and early 1990's when Madonna made a bad picture it was funny and everyone chalked it up to a foolish pop star. But now it's just sad. And I suppose there's nothing more tragic than watching the old lioness lose her teeth.

In "Swept Away" Madonna arrogantly just reads her lines and then runs around calling herself an "artiest" or an "actress." I suppose if the rich and famous really are out of touch with reality Madonna would be a textbook case. To quote the old Madonna in one of her past lives, "ignorance is not bliss."

I saw Swept Away in the theatres
I was one of the lucky few to see Swept Away during it's brief run in the theatres. Madonna did an excellent job in the role of Amber. Anyone who is a true Madonna fan knows by now that she is not the best actress. But she put out one of her best performances to date in this role. It's sad that all the critics and their rumors were about to keep this movie from being widely released and seen by more people. This movie is a must see for any Madonna fan.