I can totally see a guy cheating on his wife with her. It's a little more difficult to see her as a willing homewrecker. She seemed too, dare I say, sweet? Vulnerable, anyway. But overall, I found her very convincing and a pleasure to watch. If there was a better option for the role of Alex, Close brought a unique feel to the part that, I think, gave the movie a freshness and individuality.

I don't think so. When Fatal Attraction was released, she was very much a "new face" in Hollywood. I hadn't seen her in Garp or The Big Chill. I'd argue that FA significantly raised her profile. As such, we viewers didn't have an impression of what Ms. Close "should be" and she was open to portray Alex the way she wished. As for her "looks," the frizzy hairdo and her intensity were quite attractive. She may not have had Kim Basinger's raw sexual allure, but she more than made up for it with the intensity of her performance.

Agreed, she had a "wild" look to her...almost dangerous...I can see why Douglas' character was attracted to her. It wasn't just the looks, she was flirting with him since the get-go. And say what you will about her not being as attractive as his wife..it was the thrill of it all! Evident during that first sex scene!

She looks effective for me, her looks kinda reminds me of Camilla (the hair and yeah, other woman)

Yeah, I always thought that. She may be able to act and she's great in things like The Shield. But she looks like a bloke.

I just watched this for the first time and thought Close was borderline outstanding in this and the best thing about the film by some distance. It is typical of the internet that a strong performance by a female actress gets redirected by blokes towards their physical appearance (more a point against IMDB than here). Whereas Michael 'Mullet' Douglas playing Michael Douglas for the umpteenth time won't garner a single critical post on his appearance or performance, never mind a thread. Something worth pondering.

There are also some really unusual notions about infidelity. Human males have multiple wives in some cultures, they don't just stick with a pretty one and shut up shop. Even with arranged marriages they'll impregnate all the wives, nobody makes them have sex at gunpoint. Same with chimps and other primates, a male, given the option, will have intercourse with pretty much all females. This will have been the same when homosapiens were hunter gatherers and our DNA and biological impulses are identical to our ancestors from 80,000 years ago.

But that is immaterial because Alex was young enough, slim, eminently presentable, available, had social status and a raging libido beneath the veneer of class and decency. She wouldn't have struggled for suitors.

It's a very odd casting choice, someone less attractive than the guy's wife. I don't recall anyone saying anything about Close being as much when the film was released, but geezus, seriously?

@Fergoose said:

It is typical of the internet that a strong performance by a female actress gets redirected by blokes towards their physical appearance

In this instance we are talking about a role in which physical appearance was a factor. Contrary to what you may hear from the media and the internet every 3 seconds men are not all evil assbags that relate everything to sex.

When they get a clearly hot actress to play a character that is supposed to be unattractive then I scoff just as much. That's something that Hollywood has usually been far more guilty of.

I went to see this film in a theatre when it originally came out. Personally, I didn't find Glenn Close to be all that attractive (and so, not affair-worthy)... I found the wife played by Anne Archer to be prettier, but hey, that's just my inclination. However, as Fergoose pointed out, with actresses entirely too much attention tends to be directed by men to their physical appearances (both online and off). For me, Glenn Close gave the best performance in the motion picture, hands down. It's because of a difference in perspective and a little kookiness that she becomes the film's "villain." Alex and Michael Douglas' character have a fling outside of his marriage. Due to Alex's refusal to accept the boundary that he puts up around the fling, she descends into a path of psychosis and, I guess, jealousy of his marriage with Archer's character. Close made this tricky development entirely credible for audiences, who flocked to the thriller in relatively big numbers.

In summary, would I have cast Close in the part for the film if I had been the head honcho? I doubt it. But she was the best part of the film anyway, and was not miscast.

I suppose Close's unattractiveness heightened the sense of craziness her character needed.