Watch now

£9.81 + £1.26 UK delivery
In stock. Sold by RAREWAVES USA

Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering.
More Buying Choices
Books2anywh... Add to Basket
OOdals Add to Basket
Prestivo2 Add to Basket
Have one to sell? Sell yours here
Sorry, this item is not available in
Image not available for
Image not available


Informers [Blu-ray] [US Import]

Billy Bob Thornton , Kim Basinger , Gregor Jordan    Blu-ray
3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
Price: £9.81
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
In stock.
Dispatched from and sold by RAREWAVES USA.
Looking for Bargains?
Check out the DVD & Blu-ray Deals of the Week page to find this week's price-drops. Deals of the Week end on Sunday at 23:59.

Special Offers and Product Promotions

  • Note: Blu-ray discs are in a high definition format and need to be played on a Blu-ray player. To find out more about Blu-ray, visit our Hi-Def Learn & Shop store.

  • Important Information on Firmware Updates: Having trouble with your Blu-ray disc player? Will certain discs just not play? You may need to update the firmware inside your player. Click here to learn more.

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Product details

  • Actors: Billy Bob Thornton, Kim Basinger, Mickey Rourke, Jon Foster, Austin Nichols
  • Directors: Gregor Jordan
  • Writers: Bret Easton Ellis, Nicholas Jarecki
  • Producers: Bret Easton Ellis, Brian Young, Jere Hausfater, Marco Weber, Miggel
  • Format: AC-3, Dolby, Subtitled, Widescreen
  • Language: English
  • Subtitles: English
  • Region: All Regions (Read more about DVD/Blu-ray formats.)
  • Number of discs: 1
  • Classification: R (Restricted) (US MPAA rating. See details.)
  • Studio: Sony Pictures
  • DVD Release Date: 25 Aug 2009
  • Run Time: 98 minutes
  • Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
  • ASIN: B00275EGO2
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 224,652 in DVD & Blu-ray (See Top 100 in DVD & Blu-ray)

Customers Who Viewed This Item Also Viewed

Customer Reviews

4 star
3 star
1 star
3.5 out of 5 stars
3.5 out of 5 stars
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars What was the point? 26 Sep 2009
I gave this film two stars because the cast act superbly as you'd expect from so many big names, it is beautifully produced on a big budget and the blu-ray transfer is superb. Apart from that what was the point of it. Brett Easton Ellis wrote the screenplay so there can be no complaints about it departing from the original narrative. The plot is a series of interconnecting strands about the pointless and empty lives lived by the glitterati in LA and so delivers a pointless and empty film, think of a moving copy of 'Hello' and you'll get the picture. Although well drawn and acted no characters will gain your sympathy as they are all the architects of their own demise and none of them ultimately achieve any redemption, the film just ends.
Comment | 
Was this review helpful to you?
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars 8 Sep 2014
Format:DVD|Verified Purchase
Excellent video
Comment | 
Was this review helpful to you?
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on (beta) 2.7 out of 5 stars  62 reviews
18 of 20 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars An accurate depiction of the feeling of desperation... 29 Sep 2009
By Kirby L. Wallace - Published on
As I began watching this movie, the immeidate parallel that I drew was "Less Than Zero." I didn't know until it was over, and googled the cast, that I found out that it was written by the same guy. Very similar in mood.

In fact, I think the mood is more the point of the movie than anything else, and in that respect I can testify for it's accurate portrayal since I was exactly the age of characters at exactly that time. The dress, the look, the "searching", the feel of opulent loneliness, or exquisite desperation... It really did feel exactly like that in the early to mid eighties club scene.

Others have criticized the story line for being shallow, but hey, we were shallow. There were a couple of places that I thought seemed a bit "contrived", but even those mirrored some of my own sentiments from that time. I'm speaking of one instance where two of the guys are talking, and one of them is beginning to question his lifestyle and the other is definately not. He begins talking how he needs "someone to tell him what's right and what's wrong..." and I'm thinking, "Well, that came out of nowhere..." But when I look back, I did a lot of the same questioning myself, after coming home from a night on the beach clubs.

The movie is a series of pretty much independent character stories, in the same sort of vein as "Crash", but without the obviously clear connections between all the characters. They seem less connected to each other than in Crash. I'm not sure what Renfro's and Rourke's characters had to do with anything, though, and that whole plot line could have been dropped from the movie entirely with no sense of loss at all. Not sure what they were there for other than to perhaps lend a hand to the feeling of depression which I think this movie is intentionally trying to create. Same for Bassingers and Thornton's character line.

In fact, so independent are the stories from each other that you could drop almost any of them with no noticeable impact. The movie is the sum total of it's parts, but the sum would certainly be a bit less with any of them missing. Altogether, they create an "air" of emptiness, loathing and desperation that really were the mood of 80's nightlife. "To Live and Die in LA" has the same sort of grittiness to it.

What will help you survive this movie is to look at it differently than you are accustomed to. If you go in expecting the characters introduced at the beginning are going to be redeemed by the end, you will be disappointed. If you expect this to be a movie where all the knots are untangled by the end, where the rough edges are made smooth, the dillemas resolved, and harsh reality eased and made more bearable... you will be disappointed. This movie goes the other way and makes the smooth edges rough - the closing scene is particularly jagged.

Also of note is the soundtrack. It includes a lot of the "big names", but it's nice to see a movie about the 80s that doesn't neglect to remind you that there was lots of music on the scene other than "Flock of Seagulls". The soundtrack includes a lot of the other 99% of songs that never really made it to the Top Ten. This has the effect of intensifying the feeling of authenticity. You recall the music being like that, but not necessarily who did it. And that's the way 80's music really was. It was ubiquitous yet largely unknown; extremely transient. The only thing I can think of conspicuously missing is any reference to Miami Vice, although a character in the opening scene is dressed much like Don Johnson just before he gets killed.


The sex is gratuitous and I could have done with less - a LOT less, in fact. But I think it may have been made excessive, but not specifically gratuiotous. I think there was a reason: it was to make a very hard impact on the closing scene. The dying Christie, laying on a cold, sunless beach, pale, ravaged now with AIDS. And on her pale, bruised covered thigh, a fly lands and crawls about for a while, while her former lover looks at her. This is the same beautiful body we were seeing before, now only weeks later cold and nearly dead with flies crawling on it. The contrast between soft and beautiful, and diseased and infected, on the same skin in so short a period of time. That really was a bit of a shock.
17 of 21 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Mis-comprehended Satirical masterpiece. 25 Mar 2010
By J. Freedman - Published on
Bret Easton Ellis is not the everyman's writer. He is a literary writer and a noble, hilarious satirist. The Informer's is mood and tone perfect a translation of his literature to film. This appeal won't necessarily be the right kind of appeal for most people, however the implicit satirizations of social convention, indifference, vanity and acceptable decadence ring true as important motifs worthy of cinematic exploration.

This movie does not have a plot with a start and an end. We meet doomed souls, with very sad lives, where everything gets worse and nothing is ever answered. How unlike real life is it? Is it the pre-occupation with narcissim and nihilism and hedonism that these men and women so lose themselves to it, merge with the emptiness and become...nothing. Several of the actors bring true emotional gravitas to their performances and it is scalding. Mickey Rourke is terrifying. Kim Basinger is sad and weak and desperate and conniving. How could anyone sympathize with any of these characters? That's right you can't. The beauty is in the subversion, as these questionable people hold up well underneath current civil concepts of social stature. These are the wealthy status symbols that have obtained the American Dream, and have lived it so raw that no meaning can possibly be gained from it. This is a lesson in casual moral truth. The Informer's is a very important satirical piece, written by a genius satirist. Within fifty years, this film as well as his literature will be regarded as some of the most sadly insightful criticisms of society, social status elitism and the prosperity inherent to it. He tears it apart, perhaps some of the caricatures are too exaggerated, but they were envisioned with feverish dispassion and precision.

The movie gains momentum by the loose and abberant connections that character's have with each other. If you read the book, you would know that Peter (Mickey Rourke's character) was a child trafficker, that sells children to West La Vampires (basically people that pretend to be vampires to be hip, but are in actuality cannibals). The elucidation of the film in its true form, is that of a social horror, a social tragedy, a society of people disaffected and misguided by their own ambitions. Their are attributes to these characters that can have initial appeal, and this may or may not fool you. You can laugh at its absurdity, and recoil at its reprehensibleness. Either way the comedy creates a reactionary state to the film watcher, just as the literature does to the reader. You will be appalled, but perhaps fascinated at the characters decay, the moral etoliation. The movie will make you cringe, an very possibly un-nerve you in some scenes. This film does not belong in any clear cut genre. Their is drama in it, but it is satire, and horror with a beautiful mock-superficial appearance.

The motif of false idolatry. Oh. Famous muscians! So many people listen to a musician and identify with their music, but cannot truly see the humanity behind it, only believe in the illusion of the lyrics and what they would mean if they were real. In the film Bryan Metro is a pedophile. He is a reptilian abomination, that lives and lies in a state of bizarre decadence and irredeemable moral decay. His only saving his grace? He loves his son. As would any father. Their is humanity to each character, but only the vaguest glimmer. Why are famous musicians so reveered in our society? So beloved? Should a musician that is also a pedophile, or extremely physically abusive be reviled, or worshiped by fans? Can you think of any famous musicians that were pedophiles or were very abusive to women, but were culturally worshiped? What is the morality of that? Is ignorance then worthy of derision? People lose themselves in the fiction of the lyrics, the sound of the music, so that that entity becomes something more than just a person, irregardless of any moral or ethical decisions he/she makes. Art is a human expression, then what is the significance of it progenitor? According to the satire of The Informer's, absolute nothingness. The Informer's has a mock-superficial pretense, and it is merciless in its proficiency at creating two dimensional characters that only have the vaguest trace of humanity within them. How poetic their decay is.
The Funeral scene is hilarious. Model and acting headshot's with Pat Benetaur music playing, followed up with the group of the deceased best friend's saying terrible callous things about the person who thought they were his best friends? The satirically educated can't help but to laugh at this funeral. Why would a man stand topless in the middle of the desert to look sexy for a picture, why would this be displayed at a funeral, why would they have a Sushi bar at a funeral wake? Absurdity, hilarious if you look at it through a fine lens. To the non-satirically educated watching this movie is like swallowing the broken glass of a vanity mirror. Just as in the literature, the film characters will tempt you with their physical appeal, socio-economic status, intelligence and pleasure indulgence. How different are these people from anyone? Their are definite distinctions made in an almost abstract caricature as to what defines the significance of a person. This film is a reflective piece about a brain-dead society. He proliferates its appeal while at the same time revealing its primitivism. Given fifty years this movie will be regarded as a very sad, yet very important and insightful period piece about American society, specifically LA, but it also does have a general view of our civilization, through the wonderful, eccentric satirical genius, of Bret Easton Ellis.

Having characters with extremely flimsy pathos and some so far beyond redemption that hope vanishes, is a tricky venture for any story teller. Wouldn't it then be to the films benefit to see that he doesn't rely on the sympathy, or the forced emotional reaction that typical dramatic pieces entail? No, this film is full of anti-pathos, mock-carictures, of people that many would consider to be of very high stature and importance in our society (envious of or deeply hated). In that regard this movie is fearless, it has no sense of the common of the world, and in doing so alienates most of the audience that could have appreciated this film, for its extremely unique mood, tone, and societal insight. If I could name a genre for this movie it would be classified under "mock-superficial satirical horror disguised with beautiful aesthetics". Yes this movie is way too sophisticated for your average movie goer and frugal film critics. It's pretend shallowness is a ruse for its true message, which is very difficult to comprehend, try to wrap your mind around it, and your head just reels, you don't want to take it in, its too much revelation in sadness. It is truth revealed by lies. It is satire, and The Informer's is a very rich, full bodied satire. A comedy that never relies on nonintellectual chaps for its laughs and for its terrors.

All of the characters are essentially hollow. Their is an INTENTIONAL lack of depth. This is how their lives are satirized. This is how he makes the movie-goer a hypocrite. Watching this movie is a negative experience, but it is fascinating, their nothing else like this out there.
To emphasize this; after the child abduction, Peter tells Brad Renfro's character that they never left desert, and that all their is is "the dust the sand and the rocks". Desolation, moral poverty, destroyed dreams, aimless souls, morally corrupt cultural superiors. When does it stop. It stops very suddenly when we realize that every relationship has failed, and that the only fleeting chance of true love and romance in the film is extinguished when it dies on the beach, in a beautiful cinematic shot of Christie's dire physicality on a sun-less beach. For every question there is no answer. The final shot is also symbolic of her moral character's moral dissolution, how profoundly lost her innocent soul truly is. Despite her disease and carelessness she just wanted to be a hot popular girl, she wanted to have fun all the time, she wanted pleasure, and money and fun. Doesn't this compel many people?

Sadly the film's negativity un-did its own possible popularity, commercially and critically. That is not important, though. This is a great period piece about a society that is afraid to look at itself in the mirror. When confronted with this reflective piece, we recoil in shock, disgust, terror and confusion. The fact that this movie willfully brings forth such powerful human emotions in the movie goer is perfect credence to the films significance. Positivity doesn't necessarily make a movie important. Nor is this movie a "great tragedy" film. It's a reflective satirical horror film. This is a satire with teeth and claws and a giant maw. Fearless and foreboding and sullen. I have nothing good to say about this movie, other than that it is misunderstood by most movie goers and film critics. The flaw is not in the film, only in the hypocritical and appalled minds of the movie goers. You shall not grieve for the fates of these character, only observe in detached fascincation and disgust as their lives unravel into destruction and anti-revelation.

A magnificent film. Not for the faint of heart, or weak of mind. A background in satirical writings, especially Ellis's works, would be preferred before this movie could be understood, or what should be said, comprehended.
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars An accurate, but empty, adaptation 26 Aug 2009
By N. Durham - Published on
In adapting his own novel, Bret Easton Ellis' The Informers depicts the hollow, self-obsessed world of early 1980s Los Angeles with enough vivid detail to keep you enthralled. Among the denziens of The Informers are a Hollywood exec (Billy Bob Thornton) playing both his ex-wife (Kim Basinger) and his newscaster mistress (Winona Ryder), while his son (Jon Foster) finds himself among a group of young and privilaged who are in the thick of drugs and sex, including his girlfriend (Amber Heard). Also on the plate here are an empty-souled rock star (Mel Raido), a distant father (Chris Isaak) and son (Lou Taylor Pucci), and a lonely belhop (Brad Renfro in his final film role) caught in a dangerous web with his amoral, ex-con uncle (Mickey Rourke). While there is certainly to truly enjoy in The Informers, what the film does manage to accomplish is being an accurate enough adaptation of Ellis' own novel. And, while the film is faithful, well-made, well-acted, and well-directed by Gregor Jordan, it ends up leaving the viewer feeling nearly as empty as the characters that it portrays, so much so that it'll leave you wondering just what the point of it all is. Still, there have been worse adaptations of Ellis' work in the past, and in that regard, The Informers is certainly worth a look at the very least.
16 of 21 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Underwhelming and unengaging look at the decadent 80s 30 Aug 2009
By Z Hayes - Published on
Intrigued by the premise of the decadent 80s in LA [and all the star names associated with this movie], I decided to rent it. The result however was completely underwhelming, and left me feeling disappointed and annoyed at wasting my time on it. The movie plays out ala "Crash" in the sense that you have all these characters that are kind of linked with each other through certain circumstances. There's a Hollywood honcho [Billy Bob] who has a tumultuous and strained relationship with his wife [Kim Basinger] because of his dalliances with a newscaster [Winona Ryder]. His son [Jon Foster] is heavily involved in a world of sex and drugs, a world which includes his promiscuous girlfriend [Amber Heard]. There's a father-son pair who can't seem to connect with each other [Chris Isaak and Lou Taylor Pucci], a disillusioned rock star [Mel Raido], and a doorman [Brad Renfro, whose appearance in this movie was his last prior to his death] who is forced to put up with his con artist/criminal uncle [Mickey Rourke] and his nefarious activities [which include the kidnapping of minors].

The story arcs seem compelling, but they are never explored with any great level of depth, and the connection between these various arcs are at best, tenuous. I just felt underwhelmed by most of the performances - Billy Bob just seems to have this vacant expression on his face for most of the movie, Amber Heard's performance highlight was exposing her delectable bits and pieces, Brad Renfro blubbers throughout, and the list goes on. The exception was Kim Basinger who is actually quite compelling and credible in the role of the betrayed wife.

"The Informers" tries its best to engage viewers' attention and elicit sympathy, but I felt emotionally disconnected from the major players, and felt the movie was shallow and under-developed in its' theme and characters portrayals. A rental at best.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Sex, Drugs and Self-loathing 30 Jan 2013
By John Ashley Nail - Published on
In glamorous L.A. during the early 1980s, bisexual drug dealer Graham (Jon Foster, this generation's Andrew McCarthy) thinks he might be in love with his girlfriend (Amber Heard), even while his girlfriend seems to be spending more time with their man-wh*re pal Martin, who sometimes joins the couple for three-ways. Graham's dad (Billy Bob Thornton), a studio exec, wants to get back together with Graham's mother but he can't quit his neurotic newscaster mistress (Winona Ryder, looking surprisingly frumpy as the other woman). Graham's mother (Kim Basinger) doesn't seem to know what she wants but she's sure she doesn't want to get back with her husband, instead whiling away her days in a medicated fog, occasionally breaking up the monotony of her existence with some afternoon sexing from Martin. In addition to Graham's screwed up family you have a boozy skirt chaser (Chris Isaak) trying -- and failing -- to bond with his son during a trip to Hawaii; a wasted rock star (Mel Raido) wreaking sexual havoc while on tour in L.A.; and, on the other side of the tracks, Brad Renfro, in his final film, as a pathetic doorman whose life becomes a whole lot more desperate when his criminal uncle (Mickey Rourke, almost upstaged by facial hair that resembles a fungal growth) shows up at his house with a teen girlfriend and kidnapped boy in tow.

Just from reading those story elements one might think "The Informers" is based on a Burt Hirschfeld novel. If only. Instead, the movie is based on a book of stories by Bret Easton Ellis, which means all this debauchery is slathered with generous helpings of self-loathing and ennui. Though not a sequel to Ellis' debut novel "Less than Zero," the movie could just as easily be titled, "Less than Zero 3: The Informers" ("Less than Zero 2" would be "Rules of Attraction").

Slickly directed by Gregor Jordan, "The Informers'" disjointed narrative, with all its sex, drugs and sleaze, should be more intriguing than it is. Supposedly this is satire, but it's a decidedly unfunny one. Parents are self-absorbed and immature; their neglected children are bored sociopaths. To say these characters are lost souls would imply they have souls to lose. Only Brad Refro's doorman seems to have any humanity, though to be fair Graham appears to at least *wish* he had feelings. In lieu of emotions, most characters in "The Informers" settle for sensations, be they from lines of cocaine or passionless sex (for all the beautiful naked bodies in this movie, the sex scenes are about as arousing as a deodorant commercial). It's telling that the only display of pure joy in the movie is when Graham makes a drug delivery to a music video shoot.

"The Informers" isn't a bad movie so much as it's a pointless and dreary one. By the time I reached the final credits I felt as dead inside as its characters. It's a shame the vampire story thread from Ellis' book didn't make it into the movie; the actual undead might have livened up this parade of walking corpses.
Were these reviews helpful?   Let us know
Search Customer Reviews
Only search this product's reviews

Customer Discussions

This product's forum
Discussion Replies Latest Post
No discussions yet

Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight
Start a new discussion
First post:
Prompts for sign-in

Search Customer Discussions
Search all Amazon discussions

Look for similar items by category