Reviews (11)

MITCHUM IS MARLOWE
Director Richard Rush presented us a valentine with this incredible film, the third version made from the the 1940 Raymond Chandler novel. At least seven actors have portrayed Philip Marlowe. Robert Mitchum, played the part twice. The first time, in this film, he was nothing short of brilliant; just world-weary, battered, meloncholy, and tough enough to spark this tale into a full flame. His voice-over narrative hit perfect pitch; all gravel, too many smokes, and cheap booze. Mitchum, himself the veteran of several Noir classics, played the gumshoe as comfortable as one's favorite overcoat; a perfect fit. He shuffled lazy-lidded yet irascible and alert, as ready for a sap behind the ear, as he was to be the recipient of the sexual energy radiated off of Charlotte Rampling as Helen, the femme. She, likewise, postured perfectly in the Noir 1940's clothes and hairstyles. John Alonzo, fresh from shooting CHINATOWN, presented us with an LA bathed in just the right mix of golden light and shadow. Jerry Goldsmith delivered another spectacular score, overlapping jazz, blues, and swing, underscoring the action and dialogue masterfully. John Ireland, also a veteran of classic Noir, Anthony Zerbe, and Harry Dean Stanton gave tremendous support with their roles. There was even a couple of glimpses of Sly Stallone ( pre-ROCKY ) as a viscious punk. Some of the critics felt that this lush color film had to try too hard for that Noir feel. I disagree. This movie is a modern Noir classic, even in living color.

Movie Transcends the Material
The photography is perfect, the score is magnificent. Robert Mitchum was made to play a middle aged Philip Marlowe, and his voice over has all the weariness and angst the most die hard noir fan could ask for. The mid-30's sets are impeccable. So what is there to complain about? I think the culprit is Raymond Chandler.

One of the most quotable of the hard-boiled writers, his writing sang but his plots were so convoluted, the reader needs a scorecard to keep track of the story. Marlowe is hired by ex-con Moose Malloy to find his elusive love Velma. Until the bloody finale, that was the last time I was clear about the action.

I commend all the actors for delivering fine performances, particularly Sylvia Myles who played the hopeless alcoholic, Mrs. Florian. She was piercingly pathetic as a nice girl who couldn't quite believe she was a middle-aged drunk. Robert Mitchum allowed merciless lighting that occasionally made him look like a guy who has had one too many face-lifts.

This film version of "Farewell My Lovely" is probably as good as it gets. I recommend "Out of the Past" for Mitchum and noir fans.
-sweetmolly-Amazon Reviewer

The sets look really cheap.
'Farewell, My Lovely' is a likable detective film, but the sets look really cheap and fake. I didn't get the feeling I was back in Los Angeles in the 1930s; I felt like I was looking at a set that was trying to look like Los Angeles in the 30s. Robert Mitchum is alright, but he is a little too old.

"New" Old Time Detective Thriller
To many of the reviews I've read rave on about Ms. Rampling, and while she is good in her small role, this is a Robert Mitchum Movie, and he is very good in it.....

Actually, if it was B&W you'd look at it like an old Bogie film like "The Big Sleep",or any one of a dozen classic detective flix.....

Anyway, I happen to get my hands on one of the rare DVD's and it was in great shape. But it's the story...this is one of those films you get to watch 5 times before you actually follow everything that's going on......

I truly enjoyed it, and you will too.

the spirit is dead on
purists might debate whether the deviancies from the novel are to positive or detrimental effect, but Mitchum captures Marlowe in a casual and powerful way. the entire Chandler spirit is kept faithfully intact, creatively filled out by excellent lighting & cinemetography, keeping the viewer involved in the neo-noir attitude as if the film was actually made in 1941.

the anne riordan character is replaced by a newspaper hawker who is a little out of place and unexplained, but perhaps charlotte rampling was all the femme fatale they could afford so...better just hire some young kid to float the story.

jack o'halloran is truly believable as moose malloy, and sylvester stallone performs some of his finest work. ... Read more

Reviews (84)

Trippy
Zardoz is an extremely heavy-handed social satire. Like most head movies of the early 1970s, it is worth watching, if for no other reason, than as a relic of a period of time when directors really started experimenting with the medium of film (with quite varied results), e.g. using psychedellic images, etc. And, like many such films, while it often comes off as pretentious, it is never actually boring.

The society in Zardoz is an analogy for our own and you get a general picture of its setup in the first 20 minutes (so I'm not giving away any surprises). Sean Connery is part of a gang which is provided with weapons by a flying figure-head (literally speaking). This gang's role is to go around killing people, raping and pillaging and, consequently, they help control the population and keep it weak. The rest of the population does things like grow food and give it as offerings to the flying head, partly because it offers some semblance of control over the brutal gangs it created (and maintains) in the first place.

Sean Connery decides to jump on board the flying head for a ride and learns that it is not a god, but a machine built by an elite race of immortals who have all their needs provided for (via the flying head) by the rest of society while they live in leisure. The immortals also have (exclusive) access to all recorded art and knowledge, but seem incapable of producing any themselves. In other words, there are clear analogies to inner-city gangs, police states, law and order government, capitalism, media control, and their interdependence. The rest of the film is then concerned with Connery's interaction with the immortals, learning their weaknesses, etc., and the immortals' reactions to Connery when they realize that he is mentally and physically superior to them when freed from their continued interference and control of the rest of society. Like I said, rather heavy- handed satire, but definitely not unrealistic. People from the inner-cities will recognize its accuracy the most.

There are many campy touches, however most (not all) I believe are intentional. And the film has Boorman's usual stunning cinematography. This film is a cult classic which is at least always interesting if not always good. And keep in mind that Boorman, that whiz (wink wink), is not being entirely serious.

Zardoz does it!
No matter how critical an attitude I bring to it, I simply cannot dislike this film! Its premises, performances, and images are a godsend to a lover of "thinking person's" science fiction. I have no idea what previous reviewers mean when they talk of a hippie sensibility pervading the film. I saw it twice during its initial release and have just seen it again after twenty some odd years; it still holds its special relevance and the satire still connects. Plus, it's a pleasure watching a science fiction film without a surfeit of gratuitous computer generated effects. Most of the story is told with the use of splendid cinematography, interesting sets, and a simple straightforward script with a few compelling twists. Some may argue that the actors' lines are trite; they are, but to wonderful biting effect. The masks worn by the Exterminators are marvelous, as is the floating head of Zardoz. The aerial photography and sound effects are also used to great effect near the beginning of the film to set the stage for the entrance into the Vortex and Zed's "big boy adventure" among the Immortals. Though Sean Connery's Zed chews most of the scenery, my favorite character was Friend played by John Alderton, especially after he received his sentence and was banished to the world of the aging Renegades. Hilarious!
Even the time lapse ending was effective. Normally this device is used as a crutch for a filmmaker simply because he/she doesn't know how to develop a denouement. Not here; it works perfectly!
This DVD release is crisp and vibrant with stunningly saturated colors and fine sound. I concur with a previous reviewer; this has to be the finest use of the Second Movement of Beethoven's Seventh Symphony ever in a film, heard in both it's original scoring and in a special choral arrangement--slow, stately and at a funeral march tempo, the way it should be despite the composer's score markings! I haven't heard the director's narrative track and am in no hurry to do so; the film speaks well for itself.
In my opinion, this rightfully ranks as a "must have" for fans of lovingly-made, imaginative, and thought-provoking films. Bring an open mind and a sense of humor along with the popcorn; you're in for a treat!

Something to Think About ¿ Burt Reynold Was Originally Sched
One afternoon, 10 years after it was released, I saw Zardoz in a moviehouse in Georgetown and didn't get it - except that Sean Connery was still very sexy. Recently, the serendipity of watching The Swimmng Pool with Charlotte Rampling suggested giving this Boorman allegory another chance. I finally get it and had fun seeing it again. Three reasons to watch Zardoz are John Boorman's emerging vision and personal iconography, the power of Sean Connery's presence and acting (especially at the point in his career when he was trying to break from the Bond type-cast), and Geoffrey Unsworth's masterful photography.

Boorman and his actors put their hearts and talent on the line. Connery pulls off wearing the red loincloth and wedding dress, pulling a rickshaw and effectively performing scenes like the lecture on libido with subtle irony. Charlotte Rampling, Sara Kestelman, and other actresses can survive wearing go-go boots or performing nude while portraying strong women in conflict reacting to Zed's mojo. The whole cast of immortals are such good actors that you can giggle about the horror of wearing macramé tops and overly foofed hair, but they suspend your belief in the nightmare society these characters have created. Unsworth not only films this movie; he validates the vision with clear images that indulges Boorman's penchant for setting archetypes and going all Jungian on us. It is beautiful to watch and mostly poetic.

Boorman stuffs the movie with cinematic references like Welles and Peckinpah, much like the immortals have stuffed their museum. In his commentary, he admits putting too much in the film and that he would do things differently with more money and experience. At the beginning, there are moments that almost feel like Monty Python's Holy Grail or Woody Allen's Sleeper, but the movie progresses past that. The set design was interesting, but I felt that the costuming was just a little too groovy. He also admits that some of this cult classic is laughable, but the actors and the camera take it seriously enough to trap us in the Vortex and follow Zed as he searches for the truth. I am a sucker for personal films, and everybody involved made this personal to their truth.

Given what has been going on in Silicon Valley, Zardoz is still very pertinent. The irony is that celluloid projections on glass, superimposed images on film and light refracting from faceted crystals simulated computers, which were used to depict John Boorman's vision of 2293. In any remake, instead of green bread, Boorman's successor would have to direct the brutals in assembling green pizzas, and a notion of a religious mystery commanding the terminators would be named by the corruption of the phrase - Stock Option. Their god would be called Ckoption. Nyahhh! Just watch Zardoz.

Strange, uneven and often beautiful
This is a very strange work, a large-scale but highly personal film with many beauties as well as some dubious elements. The opening fifteen minutes are among the most memorable: Boorman begins the movie with numerous striking compositions (greatly enhanced by this pristine DVD edition), and a dreamlike, largely silent progression which highlights his storytelling talent; Zed's 'learning sequence', later in the film, is also remarkably put together. The main character's quest for truth and knowledge is mostly compelling, but brought down a bit by Boorman's simplistic, rarely subtle views on sexuality and spirituality. On the other hand, his use of mythology, classical art and fairy tales is adept and intelligent, and the twist he gives to the Indo-European functional tripartition famously noted by Georges Dumezil (sovereign-religious / physical strength-war / fecundity) is quite provocative. 'Zardoz' is a cult movie par excellence: flawed but ambitious, its weaknesses are as definitive as its strengths in defining its special flavour. This unique film should be seen by adventurous viewers.

Director John Boorman's Classic
ZARDOZ is director John Boorman's classic tale of future events. This came at a time when Sean Connery was giving up his James Bond image. ZARDOZ was one of the greatest "sleepers"of its time. This DVD combined with the film's shocking ending is very good. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Queen of the costume drama Helena Bonham Carter finally got a chance to loosen her corset a bit with this exquisitely mounted (Sandy Powell's costumes were nominated for an Academy Award) romantic drama based on Henry James's classic novel. Set in turn-of-the-century London and Venice, Wings of the Dove is a statelydeparture--more PBS than MTV--for Iain Softley, director of Hackers and thebirth-of-the-Beatles biopic Backbeat. But there's enough romantic intrigueto perhaps fuel a week's worth of daytime TV talk shows: My Lover Seduced a Dying Heiress for Her Money.

Bonham Carter, who won several critics association honors for her performance (she was nominated for a Golden Globe and Oscar as well) stars as Kate, who isengaged in a secret affair with Merton (Linus Roache), a journalist whosepoor financial standing makes marriage impossible. Kate's manipulative aunt (Charlotte Rampling) threatens to disown her unless she marries the moresuitable Lord Mark (Alex Jennings).Opportunity--admittedly sordid--arrives in the form of Millie (Alison Elliott), an American heiress whom Kate befriends. When Kate learns that Millie is dying, she suggests to Merton that he seduce her to make her last days happy, and ensuring that Millie will leave Merton her money when she dies. Merton reluctantly agrees, just as Kate begins to have second thoughts that threaten to sabotage the scheme.

One of the most rapturously reviewed films in recent years, Wings of the Doveis a must-own film for the Merchant-Ivory crowd. But guys: don't dismiss this as a "chick flick." Beneath its Masterpiece Theatre exterior beats the wild and untamed heart of Dawson's Creek. --Donald Liebenson ... Read more

Reviews (45)

A Movie for both Guys and Girls!
I first saw this movie when it was in the theaters. After much resistance, my girlfriend got me to go. And to my surprise this was an excellent film. Helena Bonham Carter is superb! The story takes place in turn of the century London. But don't be fooled by that this movie is something right out of a 90's soap opera (that's why the girls will love it). Helena and her boyfriend try to swindle a dying woman out of her fortune. Not to give too much away, but the boyfriend begins to fall in love with the dying woman which creates the conflict.......but wait a minute guys....this is for us also. You have a gigilo who is playing with two women. Big money is at stake....and to top it all off the beautiful Helena Bonham Carter gets buck naked at the end. Not only that but she crawls around that way for at least five minutes with tons of close up shots. So to conclude, guys pick this one up and watch it with your girlfriend or wife.

Helena Bonham Carter excels in despairing period tale
Adapted from Henry James' book and pushed forward into the 20th century, this is one of those rare period dramas that lulls you into thinking that you know what's coming and then pulls the rug from under you. The story has Kate (Bonham Carter) carrying out a love affair with Merton (Roache), although her aunt and benefactor thinks that marrying him would be below her. So it's a case of what does Kate want more - love or money? Pursued by sleazy Lord Mark she uses her friendship with millionaire Millie to fly off to Venice. And it's here that the plot takes a turn that few will see coming, as Kate's plots to have the best of both worlds become gradually darker as she forces Merton and Millie together.

What stays with you though is the bleakness of the movie, as Kate's corrupt plans corrupt any hope of future happiness, and it's a brave film that offers up a dark ending with no redemption in sight. The performances from all concerned are so perfectly judged that it will, in its last half, destroy your faith in basic human goodness and the truth in love. Bonham Carter and Roache are particularly impressive, playing the conflict between wanting to do what's right and doing what benefits them astutely. Moreover, there's a sex scene that is completely necessary to the story, tasteful and beautifully full of desperation, due in no small part to the acting. Surely there are few movies out there that can say that.

In a lot of ways this reminded me of the later 'House Of Mirth', so if intelligent period dramas are what you like then this is a fine example.

Miramax: ever hear of anamorphic?
I'd like to review this film, but Miramax (and others) are still polluting the market with non-anamorphic transfers. The single star is for that bone-headedness. The film may deserve 5 stars for all I know.

magnificent little drama
I love the premise of this story, very intriguing: a rich young woman named Milly is dying and her best friend Kate senses that Milly is in love with her boyfriend, Martin, so out of compassion (and hopes that she will leave Martin all her money when she dies), Kate works out a calculating plan to get Martin and Milly together. One problem, they start falling for each other, and Kate starts getting jealous, afraid that she will lose Martin's love. The last sequence of the film was riveting, and the final scene was simply heart-stopping. It'll make you gulp and sigh.

David Rehak
author of "Love and Madness"

Best and deepest of it's genre
Merchant Ivory produced ten movies from 1986 to the mid 90's, making up a distinct british subspecies of uptight-victorian melodrama, the kind that have brought Helena Bonham Carter and Emma Thompson to world fame.

This isn't one of their most famous works, but I like it very much. One reason is Alison Elliot, whom I fell for immediately. Julian Sands is also a talented actor when he's not playing a warlock or wizard.

Basically, this movie had punch. I could feel Sands' greed, and his shame at his base motivations. And I also felt Ms. Elliot's despair and resignation as her ilness progressed. She knew she was being doublecrossed, but still went forward and gave the money in an act of forgiveness and grace. The effect was sublime, and deeper than I expect from cinema these days. The production and cinematography were also quite beautiful.

Merchant Ivory haven't done very much lately. I do miss them. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

In this 1982 courtroom drama written by David Mamet and directed by Sidney Lumet, Paul Newman found the perfect role for a transitional period of his stellar career. As alcoholic Boston lawyer Frank Galvin, Newman shook off his screen persona as a handsome, blue-eyed hunk to portray an aging, weary man whose best years are behind him, with a shot-glass future that looks very bleak indeed. But when Galvin is given a chance to redeem himself--by proving medical negligence in the case of a comatose woman--he makes one final effort to regain his self-respect and tarnished reputation. He's an underdog against formidable odds, facing a powerful, politically connected lawyer (James Mason, slick as ever) who will do anything to win his case, regardless of professional ethics. Further complicating matters is a woman (Charlotte Rampling) who only appears to be worthy of Galvin's trust and love, until Galvin's best friend and colleague (Jack Warden) proves otherwise. Excellent as both courtroom drama and riveting character study, the film crackles with Mamet's sharp dialogue; and Lumet's direction is a brilliant example of forceful restraint. The film gave Newman one of the best roles of his career; many felt he deserved the Oscar (he lost to Ben Kingsley in Gandhi) that would belatedly be given to Newman for The Color of Money. Along with Hud, Cool Hand Luke, and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, The Verdict ranks highly as a signature performance by one of America's all-time greatest actors. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (37)

An outstanding courtroom drama
I agree with the other reviewers that Paul Newman gives the best performance of his career in this intense, well-designed film. There are numerous scenes which are shown without a cut, providing the viewers with an uninterrupted examination of the actors' interactions. Some include (without giving away too much): Newman's character (Frank Galvin) in conflict with the judge's actions toward the court proceedings, Newman and Warden preparing for the trial and the circumstances weighing heavily against them.
All the supporting actors are excellent. Among the noteables: James Mason as the powerhouse defense attorney with a malicious underhand, Milo O'Shea as the unsympathetic judge, Jack Warden as Newman's friend, mentor, and seemingly sole supporter, Charlotte Rampling as Newman's girlfriend with a shady side to herself.
There are a few plotholes and moments of overly dramatic "courtroom hysterics" within the film. Overlook them and enjoy an otherwise very strong movie.

The Very Best of Its Genre
Simply put there is no American film of this genre that comes close. Director Lumet darkly captures the naked power and corruption of the American civil trial system. Actors O'Shea (the judge), Mason (the 'prince of darkness' defense counsel) and Charlotte Rampling (whose shock is best left unrevealed) are the epitome of the seedy wheels of what passes for justice and 'love'. Newman, an alcoholic with one last prospect, struggles for redemption against mountainous odds, giving the most honest performance of his career. Warden is Newman's essential wiser alter ego. This film is no less than that rare cimematic device -- the allegory. Each character represents a larger truth -- in addition to Mason, O'Shea, and Rampling, Joe Seneca as a black, ancient (degraded) doctor for the vegetative plaintiff; Catholic archidiocese bishop Ed Binns up to his collar in fraud; a nationally-renowned physician with secret blood on his hands; and a simple honest woman who wanted nothing more than to be a nurse - Lindsay Crouse in a career performance. And there is the superb Mamet writing throughout. This is a courtroom thriller that will nail you to your seat to the very end. And absolutely true to life -- my view, at least, after 20 years as a lawyer. I also teach law and never miss a chance to show this film to my students. An amazing cinematic achievement, disturbing in its implications.

A grand film of triumph over failure
This film is one of the best in Paul Newman's stellar career, and he carries it convincingly with a spare, taut, no-frills performance. His Frank Galvin, an alcoholic has-been attorney with a bleak future is a defeated and pathetic figure, reduced to appearing at funeral homes during visitation hours to hustle business from bereaved family members. Even when long-time friend Mickey Morrissey [Jack Warden] hands Galvin a lucrative case on a silver platter, his star witness disappears to an unknown Caribbean island after having promised to testify against the hospital and Catholic Church for malpractice. Galvin's determination to see the case through is the first step to his recovery from the bottle and self-pity. The comatose woman's sister and brother-in-law who he represents in court have lost confidence in Galvin, he seems overmatched by the glib and polished Ed Concannon [James Mason] who represents the interests of the Church, and he has incurred the wrath of a biased, mean-spirited judge [Milo O'Shea]. To make matters worse, his girlfriend Laura [Charlotte Rampling] is little more than a Trojan horse in the Galvan camp and her true intentions come to light only after Mickey stumbles on the truth quite by chance. The movie was filmed under Boston's gray, overcast skies and has a gloomy forecast for Galvin in his quest for redemption and reward for a man who has been defeated by life but makes one last attempt to get off the deck and regain his self-respect and stature in his profession.

the film lets down the star
THE VERDICT is one of Paul Newman's most celebrated performances. He plays a down-at-the-heels lawyer named Frank Galvin who lucks his way into a big case involving two doctors who have been horribly negligent, sending a young woman into a coma.
Newman wonderfully gets at Galvin's desperation, and how he fights through an alcoholic haze. It's a thoughtfully worked out performance centered around Newman's wonderfully expressive eyes. Sadly, the rest of THE VERDICT could be taught in a Courtroom Movie Cliche 101 class. The lone lawyer vs the big firm (led by James Mason), altered documents, surprise witnesses, shenanigans by the hospital, it's all here. Even though I enjoyed the acting and the Boston atmosphere, I saw a lot of the plot coming.
The cast includes Jack Warden as Newman's only friend, Joe Seneca, Lindsay Crouse, Wesley Addy, and a chilly Charlotte Rampling as a mysterious woman who crosses Newman's path. The commentary by director Sidney Lumet is of the "everybody was great/this is where we shot" variety.

A Monumental Cinematic Treasure
THE VERDICT may date back to 1982, but few courtroom films since then can come close to matching the powerful production in this near perfect film written by David Mamet and directed with tension, grit, and tenderness by Sidney Lumet. Paul Newman's performance as the alcoholic has-been lawyer called upon to try a case of medical malpractice is one of the finest acting performances in history. He is more than ably abetted by his sidekick Jack Warden. The lawyer for the defense is the haughty and evil James Mason and the real surprise in the cast is Milo O'Shea in a terrifyingly real role of a smarmy Judge. Charlotte Rampling, still one of today's finest actresses, plays the understated love interest. Minor roles become major when they are in the hands of such gifted actors as Lindsay Crouse and Julia Bravasso. But one unsung hero of this fine film is the cinematographer who manages to make every shot appear like a Renaissance painting, so sensitive is he to light and shadow and frame composition.

THE VERDICT is a powerful story of the underdog's struggle for truth in the judicial system and as such is a reminder of how the Law, when stripped to its essentials, is there to protect us. There is no pat ending, only a feeling of breathlessness as all of the details of the story are left to our imagination - well, almost. A strikingly powerful, meaningful, brilliantly executed film. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

MITCHUM IS MARLOWE
Director Richard Rush presented us a valentine with this incredible film, the third version made from the the 1940 Raymond Chandler novel. At least seven actors have portrayed Philip Marlowe. Robert Mitchum, played the part twice. The first time, in this film, he was nothing short of brilliant; just world-weary, battered, meloncholy, and tough enough to spark this tale into a full flame. His voice-over narrative hit perfect pitch; all gravel, too many smokes, and cheap booze. Mitchum, himself the veteran of several Noir classics, played the gumshoe as comfortable as one's favorite overcoat; a perfect fit. He shuffled lazy-lidded yet irascible and alert, as ready for a sap behind the ear, as he was to be the recipient of the sexual energy radiated off of Charlotte Rampling as Helen, the femme. She, likewise, postured perfectly in the Noir 1940's clothes and hairstyles. John Alonzo, fresh from shooting CHINATOWN, presented us with an LA bathed in just the right mix of golden light and shadow. Jerry Goldsmith delivered another spectacular score, overlapping jazz, blues, and swing, underscoring the action and dialogue masterfully. John Ireland, also a veteran of classic Noir, Anthony Zerbe, and Harry Dean Stanton gave tremendous support with their roles. There was even a couple of glimpses of Sly Stallone ( pre-ROCKY ) as a viscious punk. Some of the critics felt that this lush color film had to try too hard for that Noir feel. I disagree. This movie is a modern Noir classic, even in living color.

Movie Transcends the Material
The photography is perfect, the score is magnificent. Robert Mitchum was made to play a middle aged Philip Marlowe, and his voice over has all the weariness and angst the most die hard noir fan could ask for. The mid-30's sets are impeccable. So what is there to complain about? I think the culprit is Raymond Chandler.

One of the most quotable of the hard-boiled writers, his writing sang but his plots were so convoluted, the reader needs a scorecard to keep track of the story. Marlowe is hired by ex-con Moose Malloy to find his elusive love Velma. Until the bloody finale, that was the last time I was clear about the action.

I commend all the actors for delivering fine performances, particularly Sylvia Myles who played the hopeless alcoholic, Mrs. Florian. She was piercingly pathetic as a nice girl who couldn't quite believe she was a middle-aged drunk. Robert Mitchum allowed merciless lighting that occasionally made him look like a guy who has had one too many face-lifts.

This film version of "Farewell My Lovely" is probably as good as it gets. I recommend "Out of the Past" for Mitchum and noir fans.
-sweetmolly-Amazon Reviewer

The sets look really cheap.
'Farewell, My Lovely' is a likable detective film, but the sets look really cheap and fake. I didn't get the feeling I was back in Los Angeles in the 1930s; I felt like I was looking at a set that was trying to look like Los Angeles in the 30s. Robert Mitchum is alright, but he is a little too old.

"New" Old Time Detective Thriller
To many of the reviews I've read rave on about Ms. Rampling, and while she is good in her small role, this is a Robert Mitchum Movie, and he is very good in it.....

Actually, if it was B&W you'd look at it like an old Bogie film like "The Big Sleep",or any one of a dozen classic detective flix.....

Anyway, I happen to get my hands on one of the rare DVD's and it was in great shape. But it's the story...this is one of those films you get to watch 5 times before you actually follow everything that's going on......

I truly enjoyed it, and you will too.

the spirit is dead on
purists might debate whether the deviancies from the novel are to positive or detrimental effect, but Mitchum captures Marlowe in a casual and powerful way. the entire Chandler spirit is kept faithfully intact, creatively filled out by excellent lighting & cinemetography, keeping the viewer involved in the neo-noir attitude as if the film was actually made in 1941.

the anne riordan character is replaced by a newspaper hawker who is a little out of place and unexplained, but perhaps charlotte rampling was all the femme fatale they could afford so...better just hire some young kid to float the story.

jack o'halloran is truly believable as moose malloy, and sylvester stallone performs some of his finest work. ... Read more

Reviews (191)

A Puzzle for You to Solve.
Sarah Morton (Charlotte Rampling) is a middle-aged British mystery novelist. Burned out on writing and tired of the climate in London, she accepts an invitation from her publisher, John (Charles Dance), to spend some time relaxing at his villa in Southern France. The change of scenery gets her creative juices flowing, but shortly after Sarah has settled in, John's daughter Julie (Ludivine Sagnier) turns up with plans to stay. At first Sarah is annoyed by Julie's daring and promiscuous lifestyle. But gradually Sarah takes an interest in the young woman and allows herself to be sucked into Sarah's emotional intrigues.

There is a lot that I would love to say about this film, but the nature of "Swimming Pool" is such that I can say very little that will not spoil the film for those who have not yet seen it. "Swimming Pool" is an unusual and ingenious variety of mystery. I will say this much: Pay close attention. Things are not as the seem.

François Ozon's screenplay may be the best of 2003. It's certainly the most sinuous. I'm sure that some will say -not without some justification- that it's too clever for its own good. My one reservation about "Swimming Pool" is that it may be too subtle. Too much of the audience is left thinking that the events of the film are to be taken at face value. And the film doesn't begin to make sense if taken at face value. The audience is given enough information to figure out what has transpired. -But just enough. We do have to figure it out for ourselves. Normally, a film of this kind would explain itself a few scenes before the end. But François Ozon has chosen not to spell anything out for his audience. I enjoyed the puzzle. It's gratifying once it clicks and everything makes sense. But I fear "Swimming Pool" is too esoteric for wide audience appeal. I give it an enthusiastic recommendation, though. "Swimming Pool" is one of the most original, clever, and intriguing movies that I've seen.

The DVD: Previews are unfortunately unavoidable. Bonus features include one theatrical trailer and deleted scenes. Most of the deleted scenes are entirely inconsequential, but one actually confuses matters, so I don't recommend them. Dubbing is available in French. Subtitles are available in French, Spanish, and English. I sure wish there were an interview with writer/director François Ozon, but no such luck. There are more bonus features, including a commentary by Ozon (presumably in French), on the French Region 2 DVD 2-disc set for anyone who is interested.

understated psychological thriller
I had seen 8 WOMEN, the previous film by Francois Ozon, but that did not prepare me for SWIMMING POOL. Sarah (Charlotte Rampling) is a mystery writer vacationing at her publishers home in France. She's enjoying the peace and quiet, until the arrival of Julie (Ludivine Sagnier), the publisher's sexy teenage daughter. Where Sarah is repressed, Julie is a free spirit. The personalities of the two women clash at first, but Sarah is subtly inspired by Julie's impulsiveness. Things come to a head when both women develop an attraction to the same man.
The tone of the film is very cool and quiet throughout, and the casual viewer may miss the signs of Sarah's awakening. (Note how what Sarah eats changes throughout the film.) Both central performances are impeccable, and Charles Dance (GOSFORD PARK) lends able support as Sarah's slippery publisher.
The DVD package is disappointingly slim, I would have enjoyed a commentary or two, but the final deleted scene does help explain the film's surprise ending. Recommended for world cinema lovers.

Nudity, yes; get over it!
Wow! Swimming Pool is an intelligent, and fantastic film. Don't expect to be a passive viewer, and wait for everything to be explained to you. There is nudity. Enjoy it. Get over it. This is a film about a writer, who's become locked into a series of books she's sick of. At her publisher's house in France, she spends several days with writer's block. She creates a character, and writes the best book of her career. I recommend Secret Window starring Johnny Depp, to be seen with this movie!

I recommend this film
This film gets your attention from A to Z . Charlotte Rampling's
play is excellent and sustains perfectly an interesting scenario.
Ludivine Sagnier is not masterful but plays well her part.
Although this film has it's nude and erotic moments
you should buy another film if this is only what you are looking for.
The film is not a 'nail biter ' but, always intelligent and
sensitive, it will not let you down. The conclusion of the
film is not perfect, but certainly interesting.

Good,,but,,,what just happened?
This movie was good but what just happened? Why is Julie two different people? One in braces and the one we saw all through the movie. Are they one in the same? Why is she waving at both of them ? ... Read more

Description

After World War II, writer-director Liliana Cavani interviewed a Nazi-concentration camp survivor who had been involved in a sadomasochistic relationship with a brutal guard.That interview was the inspiration for this perverse and explicit cult classic ... Read more

Reviews (35)

Not likely to pop up late night on TBS.
Despite the misleading cover photo, this is not another stab at exploitive and kitschy WW2 sick humor a la "Ilsa:She-Wolf of the SS", but a far more ambitious and artful work of cinema. Disturbing and repulsive, yet quite compelling, "The Night Porter" brilliantly uses a depiction of sado-masochism and pycho-sexual politics as an effective allusion to the horror of Hitler's Germany. Dirk Bogarde and Charlotte Rampling are both broodingly decadent as a former SS officer and concentration camp survivor, respectively, who end up in a twisted, doomed relationship years after the war. You would have to search high and low to find two braver performances than Bogarde and Rampling give in this complex story (Harvey Keitel and Holly Hunter in "The Piano" comes the closest). Like the film "Seven Beauties", the "sex" you think you're watching is really a subliminal lesson on the ugly politics of facism and oppression. Obviously, this is not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but recommended for any cinema buff up for a challenge.

Mediocre at Best
I just received my copy of the Criterion Collection edition of Liliana Cavani's 1974 drama The Night Porter. Upon reflection, I cannot even imagine myself sitting through this film one more time. The premises are so interesting and the story has SO much potential. The synopses I read online for this movie made it seem so incredibly interesting.

At the beginning, when the story is beginning to be established, there are some extraordinary moments that, with amazing subtlety captivate one's imagination and disturb one at the same time. However, once these premises are established the film stagnates. It is extremely slow paced (something I have NO problem with), but once I understood the film, the last hour of it seemed excuciatingly boring. The underlying message is that people never change, or at least, a terrible event like the Holocaust keeps all those involved in it--both victim and victimizer--forever captive. Neither Max, his lover/victim, nor his ex-Nazi comrades can get away from the Holocaust. Cavani takes too long trying to visualize this.

Another detraction from the movie is that it is an English-language movie written by a non-English speaker. The acting by some of the secondary actors is just plain bad.

Though packed with potential for greatness and some superb moments, The Night Porter is ultimately disappointing.

Doesn't it sound exciting?
It's really not. Who'd a-thunk a film with subject matter as sensational as this could be so dull? And not even a respectable, important dull. This is BORING. You WILL be disappointed. Not that I expect you to move along and pick something else, but when you come back to this page to add your own "0 STARS" review, just remember I told you so.

a distubing film
This review is for the Criterion Collection DVD edition of the film.

13 years after the end or WWII, a concentration camp survivor, meets her former captor/lover working as a porter at a hotel in Vienna. They then resume their odd, sadomasochistic relationship.

The film had much less [adult content] in it than I would expect from a film with relationships described that way. It also has several flashback scenes. The film still has nudity and [adult content] but less than many R rated films that are around today. There are several former SS officers living in Vienna who are hiding from the international community trying to jail them for their crimes.

The DVD has no special features which is not common for Criterion Collection releases, but as always had the liner noted and the film is presented in it's original theactrical aspect ratio.

Ehhhhhh. It was Alright...Nothing great.
I keep reading all these reviews (the ones that made me buy the flick in the first place) talk about how great this movie is.....It's ok. I wouldn't tell anyone to go out and rent it, alone buy it. I love Criterion dvds and collect them, this one is definitely on my watch a couple times list. It's not that I'm offended or anything, it's just kind of average. I watched it twice and I don't hate it but I wouldn't buy it for over $15. Criterion has no extras and the transfer is grainy. There is a hair in the lens for awhile too. ... Read more

Description

Three old friends approach their 30th birthdays amid much turmoil in their various relationships. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

A pre-cursor to the "Crying Game" - sort-of!
A strange movie, centered around a gay/ transvestite nightclub (which ought to have alerted me - for what was to come!). Hamilton-ish in the cinematography, hazy edges and soft lighting dull the senses before the big moment - the rather beautiful lead singer - who is not quite what she seems. Nor the gender that you expect! The full frontal making you doubt your sanity and your ability to judge male/female appearances. You can miss this one...... ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Did I watch the same film as the critics?
I got a chance to watch the much maligned Norman Jewison film The Statement on DVD this weekend.

It's a damn fine film!!!

Without giving too much of the story away, the film is about an old Frenchman (played by Michael Caine) who is on the run throughout the south of France for war crimes he committed back in WWII. He has to excape both investigators and assassins (possibly from a radical Jewish organization) by taking refuge in primarily catholic churches.

It was actually filmed in France in real churches and government buildings. Excellent Hitchcockian cinematography and music. Well paced editing and outstanding acting from Tilda Swinton, Jeremy Northam, Ciaran Hinds, Frank Finlay, Alan Bates...and especially Caine. The screenplay was expertly adapted by Ron Harwood. And, for a film with a pretty low budget, the DVD transfer (anamorphic) is excellent and the 5.1 surround sound is decent.

What's up with the critics? OK, I'm a big Michael Caine fan, but that doesn't mean I like ALL the films he's in (Secondhand Lions was kinda corny, his role in Goldmember was far too small, etc.). This role is a true showcase for him. And anyone who respects Caine as an actor should watch this movie.

In truth, the storyline may be hard to follow...I'm sure that's the primary problem for the critics. I had the advantage of reading the original novel first, so there was virtually no confusion for me...and the film is remarkably faithful to the novel!

The novel was a bit complicated at times and I found myself having to re-read the occasional passage to keep up with the story...so maybe the film is similar in that respect.

Also, a lot of critics had a problem with the fact that the English actors aren't speaking with French accents...but this has been the case with many films before (Quills, The Last Emperor, Three Musketeers), I don't know why this film should be any different...besides, I can't think of anything more distracting than listening to a bunch of actors speaking with phony French accents for 2 hours!

I say take a chance on the film. It's definitely a thinking-person's thriller. I'd hate to see one of Michael Caine's best late-career performances go completely unnoticed.

A Very Powerful Film Full of Intrigue, History, and Mystery
THE STATEMENT has all the ingredients of a keenly written espionage film with all the added assets of superb acting, breakneck speed direction by Norman Jewison, and magnificent photography of France. Based on a true story, Pierre Brossard (Michael Caine in a finely nuanced tragic performance) worked with the Vichy regime during the Nazi occupation of France and was responsible for the murders of seven Jews in 1944. It is now 1992 and Brossard has been in hiding under the cover and support of the Chevaliers, a band of men connected with the Catholic Church. Politically he has been pardoned, but there are those who wish him dead. A new French Judge (Tilda Swinton in another fine performance) and military Colonel Roux (Jeremy Northam) join forces (somewhat unwillingly) and commit themselves to ferreting out Brossard. Their efforts are parallel to the forces who plot to assassinate Brossard and it is this bipolar cat-and-mouse intrigue that chases Brossard from Abbey to Abbey throughout France. The ending comes as somewhat of a surprise, but the chase makes it all worth the wait. Adding immensely to this film are the cameos by Charlotte Rampling, Alan Bates, Ciaran Hinds, Noam Jenkins, and Marr Cravens among a host of others. This is an underrated movie that is full of intrigue and deserves a wider audience, if for nothing else than to alert the world of yet another WW II atrocity.

a truly bland thriller
**1/2 In Norman Jewison's tepid thriller, "The Statement," English-accented Michael Caine plays Pierre Brossard, an aging French war criminal whose past has begun to catch up with him. In 1944, Brossard, a member of the infamous Vichy regime, not only collaborated with the Nazis, but was personally responsible for the cold-blooded execution of 14 unarmed Jewish Frenchmen as well. Immediately after the war, Brossard was tried and convicted for these offenses, but somehow managed to escape before he could face his deserved punishment. In the years since, Brossard has lived his life underground, finding protection and sanctuary from a branch of the Roman Catholic Church sympathetic to his cause. And although the French authorities have been unsuccessful in their attempts to locate him, Brossard has recently found himself the target of a mysterious group of assassins, possibly members of a secret Jewish organization seeking justice for his yet unavenged crimes against humanity.

The idea of a Nazi war criminal still living in hiding all these years after the end of World War II has the makings of an interesting movie, no doubt, but "The Statement" is not that movie. To the filmmakers' credit, they do at least attempt to present Brossard as a three-dimensional character, a man who, decades after his horrendous crimes, is still seeking redemption through his pious devotion to the Church. Caine, in a deftly balanced performance, manages to make Brossard almost sympathetic while still allowing us to see the "monster" hidden beneath the ravaged soul. Unfortunately, the actor is let down by a screenplay that seems more concerned with tired cloak-and-dagger espionage routines than with a serious study of a fascinating and conflicted character. Even more annoying is the attempt on the part of the film to paint the entire Catholic Church hierarchy as a bunch of diabolical, self-serving individuals who are busy either protecting one of their own at any or all costs or acting out of political expediency rather than true moral conviction. Fans of "The Da Vinci Code" may swallow this anti-Catholic paranoia without question, but the rest of us can merely wonder why the Church hasn't been able to cop a break from the movies since Father Damien kicked the be-Jesus out of the devil in "The Exorcist," thirty long years ago. I'm certainly no apologist for the Catholic Church (see my review of "The Magdalene Sisters"), but even we non-believers can wonder when we will be seeing a little more evenhandedness and balance in the movies' portrayal of the Church. Certainly there must be SOME well-meaning priest, nun or bishop out there that some filmmaker might consider as worthwhile movie material.

There are other problems with the film as well. Tilda Swinton, as an impassioned judge searching for Brossard, and Jeremy Northam, as a more pragmatic policeman who reluctantly joins her in her pursuit, make an annoying, constantly bickering couple who look, for all the world, like a minor-league Mulder and Scully, minus the attraction and charm. Alan Bates and Charlotte Rampling (reunited from "Georgy Girl," though the two actors never appear in the same scene together) are wasted in minor roles. And Jewison, who was once so fine a young director, fails to bring any of the scenes in this film to life. One also questions the propriety of taking a serious subject like Nazi atrocities and using it as little more than cheap window dressing for an undistinguished, run-of-the-mill thriller.

"The Statement," despite another fine performance from the ever-reliable Michael Caine, is a tired, lackluster and cynical exercise, strangely devoid of meaning, conviction and purpose.

Justice Done
I rented this DVD solely because of Michael Caine and wasn't disappointed in his performance. I agree with other reviewers that the plot is unreeled slowly and certain key points (the motaives of the conspirators, and the motives of the Roman Catholic Church) are undeveloped and remain cloudy.

My chief disappointment was with the ending. Brossard, the French traitor, is finally gunned down by the government assassins who suceed in placing their STATEMENT on the body. The statement says that Brossard was executed for his war crimes, but then further condemns the Catholic Church for protecting Brossard for nearly 50 years. Is this condemnation the true meaning of the story?

Directly after this scene, in which Tilda Swinton's character of a French judge arrives too late to take Brossard into custody, the film cuts to a ball-room scene. The judge goes up to several highly-placed French officials and subtly informs them that their time is up, and that justice is coming for them. The implication is that the actual assassin (a member of the French police) has been arrested and is naming names. However, we do not see that scene, only the vague reference (just one line) made by the lady judge. (That polieman, in my opinion, would never have named names because he is dedicated to what he believes is a just cause.) Thus the film reminded me of one of those crime dramas of the '30s, where the outcome must always be the same, even if it defies reason: G-Men always get their man and that "crime doesn't pay."

Since the screenplay does not go deeply into the nature of the conspiracy of the French ministers, and we never learn their names, their titles or positions, but instead focuses on Brossard's quest to "die in a state of grace and forgiveness" the film suffers from a split personaility. In the end, the audience is left in the middle. The filmmakers do not finish either story but instead make a statement of their own: that we should not forget the memories of those slaughtered by a reprehensible regime.

It struck me that Brossard actually paid for his crimes when he was shot dead. Did it really matter who did the shooting? If the judge had caught him, he would have been put on trial and sent to prison for the rest of his life (probably a very short time as he was already quite old and suffering from heart disease). Since the entent and purpose of the "official" conspiracy wasn't dealt with in detail, I would have preferred the more ambiguous ending of seeing Brossard gunned down and his assassin successfully escaping into the night. This is a more perfect ending since Brossard kisses a religious icon just before dying, thus believing that he really did die "in a state of grace and forgiveness." I like ambiguity, and in this case, it works perfectly.

I am not familiar with the novel. Should I be? When I see a film, it's story should be enough. I realize that liberties are taken in translating books to screenplays, but either version should stay true to it's theme. But you have to have a theme in the first place. If the theme in this film was to make a statement that we remember the Jews who were betrayed and killed, (but at the same time provide some sense that "justice was done") then the final scene should have been supported by a previous scene in which the policeman responsible made some sort of statement of his own. That, of course, would have meant that the conspiracy story should have been further developed. Otherwise the ending is self-serving and the dramatic structure is betrayed.

Please nobody complains...
,,, about the English cast. Since my karma was bad enough to have me born in France, and aside from the (good) reasons given by N. Jewison (see special features), I can tell that shooting this movie in french would have been very difficult. Although there are a few hints about in the film, nobody is really aware (part of the few who are dont want to be reminded, and worse, the other part don't want to be exposed) that the main change in 1945 was to add communists (one of the worst indignities being that Maurice Thorez, upon Staline's earnest recommendation, got his death sentence commuted in a position as a minister in the governement by de Gaulle himself...) to the Vichy dignitaries who escaped the fate they deserved. And, although it is briefly mentionned, the communists only entered Resistance after Hitler and Staline parted; their only aim was to be his position to deliver France into Staline hands, and maybe their greatest achievement was to perform terrorist attacks when and where they were certain that reprisals victims would be those who didn't share their communist vision: so they could be seen as patriots while getting rid of their opponents.
One other reason for the leniency towards french police (a good one in the short term, but a most poisonous one in the long term), was that nobody wanted to alienate in any way the only organisation thought able (?) to take care of riots and miscellaneous disorders following the 'Liberation'; and, since they were in charge of preventing witch-hunts, it would have been very difficult to make them understand they should have been investigated as well.
One should not forget, for a better understanding of the story background, that after Pie XI (pro-fascit to the core, altough opposed to racism) died in 1939, Pie XII (who was convinced that Hitler represented the last defence against communism) never condemned nazism, and even gave (through his bishops) his blessing to german armies. But, since the Roman Catholic Church was the first one to practice large-scale genocides (remember South America and the Conquistadores' mudering and pillaging in the name of God, which is the proof that the so-called "no prescription for crimes against humanity" should be better understood), maybe he felt some sort of kindred sympathy... ... Read more

Description

From England's celebrated horror specialists Amicus Studios (TheBeast Must Die, And Now the Screaming Starts, Tales From the Crypt) and Americanscreenwriter Robert Bloch (the novel "Psycho") come four jolting tales of terror andinsanity. Inmates in the ... Read more

Reviews (14)

Well, Doctor, which inmate used to run the asylum?
We were pretty leery of horror films back in the early Seventies in those dark, dreary days before "Halloween" ushered in the era of the slasher film ad infinitim. But the more you heard about "Asylum" the more you had to be optimistic. First, you have Robert "Psycho" Bloch as the writer. Second, it is a British film, and while Amicus Productions did not have the cinematic cachet of Hammer Studios, it is still British, which was always better than being American back then. Third, you throw in director Roy Ward Baker, who directed one of my all-time favorite horror flicks known as "Quatermass and the Pit" over there and "Five Million Years to Earth" on this side of the pond. Fourth, as a corollary to the second point, you have British actors in general and Peter Cushing, Patrick Magee, Barry Morse, Herbert Lom and Robert Powell on the eve of the role of his lifetime in "Jesus of Nazareth." Then we have Britt Eklund, Charlotte Rampling, and Barbara Perkins. Sold yet?

Oh, you want to know the story Bloch came up with.

Well, Powell plays Dr. Martin, who has arrived at the friendly neighborhood mental institution to see if he can land a job. "Asylum" offers up four bloody little stories of madness and murder told by four inmates. Yes, it is an "anthology" film, but remember all those good points up above and try to think about all the bad anthology films you have seen in your life. But this is Bloch. There is a twist. Dr. Martin gets the post if he can figure out which of the four inmates telling the story is the former head of the asylum: There is Bonnie (Perkins), who was attacked by her lover's dead wife; Bruno (Morse), who makes a magical suit that brings back the dead son of one of his customers (Cushing); Barbara (Rampling/Ekland) a schizophrenic who is being made paranoid by her brother; and Byron (Lom) who puts his consciousness in a killer little doll. "Asylum" stops short of being great, but it is certainly very good. There are moments of silliness, but the horror elements still win out in the end. Plus, you know Bloch has something up his sleeve for the ending.

THOUROUGHLY ENJOYABLE......
I've had this on DVD for some time now and enjoy watching it when I'm in the mood. It's an anthology film from the old British Amicus studios with a quartet of horror tales related by four inmates of an asylum to the new doctor on staff. It's also a beautiful print from Image. My favorite is the "Frozen Fear" piece with Barbara Parkins as the mistress of a married man who murders his occult obsessed wife, chops her up and stores her in the freezer wrapped in freezer paper. The wife's occult beliefs turn the tables and her body parts reanimate and kill the husband. When Parkins comes by (they were planning to run away together) she is attacked by all the parts shuffling and crawling around on the floor jumping on her as she tries to beat them off. This is very well done and really eerie. The other stories are good too. They include Charlotte Rampling, Britt Ekland and Patrick Mcghee in great performances. The direction by Roy Ward Baker is tight and Robert Bloch contributed the material. This may be OOP but there are still copies in stores. I recommend this for horror buffs and those who remember the horror anthologies from the 70's. Completely enjoyable.

A GOOD ONE TO OWN
Perfect to own, you will find youself wanting to watch it again. The mood is eerie enough, the stories keep you interested and it's made well. It's all about the atmosphere, get this DVD.

Decent, creepy fun only occasionally marred by cheese
This horror movie has very British sensitibilities, and you couldn't ask for a better, more entertaining introduction to the type of horror movie that was popular in the 1970s, before the era of the slasher film. It's stylish and very proper, making the gore that much more shocking.

Basically, we've got a handful of "short stories" very loosely pulled together with the framing device of a psychologist visiting the asylum being asked to "figure out" which of the patients was actually the former director of the hospital. There's very little to this part of the plot, but the various stories the patients have to tell do create varying degrees of chills.

None of the stories are great, nor are they especially surprising, but they are told quite nicely and are better acted than such low-budget stuff has a right to be. Some outstanding actors such as Herbert Lom and Charlotte Rampling are featured, along with a brief but creepy turn by Peter Cushing (who, along with Christoper Lee, owned this genre of horror movie).

In many ways the film is a period piece, not so much about an era of history, but about an era of film history. It distills the style and sensibilities of the Hammer films (so called because they were made in England's Hammer Studio) into one neat, entertaining package. Will this be your favorite movie ever? Nope. But is it an amusing diversion and a wonderful slice of what was once the height of horror film making? You bet.

Check it out!

An absolutely brilliant horror movie
As one who has often panned for gold in the stream of little-known horror delights, I have discovered much more fool's gold than gold dust, but Asylum is a magnificent gold nugget. Produced by Amicus, the British equivalent of Hammer Studios, this classic film features a remarkable cast bringing to life a compelling, delightfully shocking tale which comes straight from the pen of none other than Robert Bloch. I think the whole idea of the movie is brilliant, especially the way everything is put together, meshing four largely unrelated tales into one overall and amazingly successful story. We begin with Dr. Martin's arrival at the asylum in pursuit of a position. He is surprised to learn that Dr. Styles, the asylum director and the man he expected to speak with about the job, is now one of the incurably insane inmates housed upstairs. Dr. Rutherford is willing to hire Dr. Martin, but only if he passes a certain test. There are four inmates upstairs, and he must determine which one is actually Dr. Styles (who has assumed a brand new identity for himself). As Dr. Martin makes the rounds, accompanied by the doctor posted upstairs, we are presented with each individual's story as to how they came to be institutionalized.

The first story, that of Bonnie, is a wholly remarkable one. Her lover, having finally agreed to kill his divorce-denying wife and run off with her, chops his wife into several pieces and stows everything in the freezer, including her voodoo-ish protective bracelet He is quite shocked shortly thereafter to see the head, wrapped in butcher's paper, roll into view upstairs, and he is even more surprised by what happens next. When Bonnie arrives, she finds herself menaced and attacked by the separate body parts of the seemingly undead murdered woman. Next we have the story of Bruno the tailor. Facing economic ruin, he is offered two hundred pounds to make a suit for a rather strange gentleman named Mr. Smith (played magnificently by Peter Cushing). The suit must be created under the unusual conditions specified by the customer and must be made from the remarkable fabric Smith has provided Bruno. This metallic, strangely glittering coat is actually an instrument of magic, Bruno finds out upon delivering it. Supposedly it has the power to give or restore life to whoever wears it. Cushing's performance helps make this the strongest of the four stories, in my opinion. Next up is Barbara, who denies having committed the murders that resulted in her institutionalization. It was her friend Lucy, she says. The story plays pretty well until the end, when whatever mystery lingered concerning the truth about Lucy is rather unnecessarily done away with. Finally, we have Dr. Baron, maker of robotic men; actually, he says, the creatures are quite human on the inside, and he claims to have the power to will his own mind into one such creation and essentially make it come alive with his own consciousness. This tale has its weaknesses, but its effect on Dr. Martin is profound and sets in motion the thrilling conclusion of the movie. This conclusion, I must say, is remarkably good, treating me to a wonderful surprise and devilishly good twist.

The plot of Asylum does have a weakness or two in it, but the film's overall effect on the viewer is so gripping that minor questions cease to matter very much. Frankly, I have never seen an anthologized movie such as this succeed so well. Few movies can combine separate tales and succeed as a unified whole, but Asylum accomplishes this feat quite easily. This is an intelligent horror movie that fans of the genre can point to with great pride. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

Wine and Whine - Interesting Perspectives
Rosanna Arquette directs this documentary (originally on Showtime) about the problem actresses over the age of forty have getting quality roles. There's a lot of truth told here, but the routine becomes exhausting after twenty minutes. In nearly every scene, groups of actresses (Diane Lane, Teri Garr, Holly Hunter, Meg Ryan Sharon Stone and more) are shown partying with wine in hand and complaining about the big male Hollywood thugs who only look at their tits. To be fair, there is truth to this, but the general atmosphere is a non-ending complaint fest. Jane Fonda and Vanessa Redgrave (both solo interviews) add some needed class with their own interpretations of what happens when an actress reaches a certain age, but they are few and far between. It was also hard to believe that Redgrave cannot afford to retire. Whoopi Goldberg is refreshing with her funny, no-nonsense, laissez-faire observation about the realities of life.

However, the actresses interviewed forget that there really are some women with talent over forty that are working. How about Julianne Moore, Cate Blanchette, Meryl Streep, Judi Dench, Jessica Lange, Naomi Watts, Gena Rowlands, Anjelica Huston, Halle Berry, Susan Sarandon, Jodie Foster, Emily Watson, Patricia Clarkson, Ellen Burstyn, Kathy Bates, Diane Keaton, Annette Bening, Helen Mirren and Sissy Spacek? I like all of the actresses in this documentary, but they are not the best of Hollywood. When Debra Winger does appear near the end of the film, we find yet another interesting take on an 'older'actresses life. It seems to put the entire film in perspective and a surprising one at that. It would be interesting to see a follow-up documentary to hear the responses from the aforementioned actresses after hearing Winger's point of view.

Celebrities' Humanity
Rosanna Arquette heads up this exploration of the pressures, choices and sacrifices that female actors face working in the entertainment industry, particularly as they hit 40 and begin being overlooked for certain roles. Debra Winger is the example of a pioneer in this battle because of her decision to bow out of the industry while still in her prime.

Director:Rosanna Arquette
Starring:

Credited cast:
Patricia Arquette .... Herself
Rosanna Arquette .... Herself
Emmanuelle Béart .... Herself
Katrin Cartlidge .... Herself
Laura Dern .... Herself
Roger Ebert .... Himself
Jane Fonda .... Herself
Teri Garr .... Herself
Whoopi Goldberg .... Herself
Melanie Griffith .... Herself
Daryl Hannah .... Herself
Salma Hayek .... Herself
Holly Hunter .... Herself
Anjelica Huston .... Herself
Diane Lane .... Herself
Kelly Lynch .... Herself
Julianna Margulies .... Herself
Chiara Mastroianni .... Herself
Samantha Mathis .... Herself
Frances McDormand .... Herself
Catherine O'Hara .... Herself
Julia Ormond .... Herself
Gwyneth Paltrow .... Herself
Martha Plimpton .... Herself
Charlotte Rampling .... Herself
Vanessa Redgrave .... Herself
Theresa Russell .... Herself
Meg Ryan .... Herself
Ally Sheedy .... Herself
Adrienne Shelly .... Herself
Hilary Shepard .... Herself
Sharon Stone .... Herself
Tracey Ullman .... Herself
JoBeth Williams .... Herself
Debra Winger .... Herself
Alfre Woodard .... Herself
Robin Wright Penn .... Herself
(more)

Five stars for content -- whole lotta collective wisdom
I salute Ms. Arquette for doing something original: piercing the facade of the successful actress stereotype and inducing a plethora of fascinating and accomplished women to speak openly about their life experiences. The film works well at a number of levels -- personally I am not AS interested in acting per se as I am in creativity in general, and there was ample interesting material on what it means to be creative, and on the tension between pursuing one's creativity and achieving balance in one's life. Beyond the creativity issue, there is the equally interesting question of how one should approach aging and what growing older means; it was an inspiration and a pleasure seeing so many women who are past their Hollywood "primes" talking about the pressures, but also the rewards, of aging. I suspect there are not many men who would enjoy this film, which is a shame because men face these issues too. But this film is a gold mine of material for women, and particularly female artists working in any medium. I also enjoyed the soundtrack. I only gave three stars because, notwithstanding the good concept and the excellent quality of some of the interviews, the film shifted focus a lot: one second we're hearing about how Hollywood only cares about sex appeal, the next we're hearing how hard it is for an actress to raise kids, the next we're hearing about the challenges of nurturing both an intimate relationship and a career, the next we're hearing about what it means to be an aging actress. And, actually, the nominal subject of the film, Debra Winger, raises a whole separate issue, which is why we even need the outward trappings of success to be "successful" in our lives and creative pursuits. Also, the camera work was pretty basic, and the editing of the piece as a "documentary" could have been much more imaginative. Other than using the scenes from "The Red Shoes," which was inspired, the film was almost nothing but talking heads. A few family photos would have been refreshing, for instance, when Ms. Arquette talked about her mother raising five creative kids and stifling her own creativity. Or some scenes from films in which some of the interviewees had starred. Or any little detail to enrich the film's texture. Although the comparison may be unfair, Michael Moore understands how to make a documentary visually riveting; just because a film is a "documentary" doesn't mean it should ignore the pursuit of "movie magic."

Unfocused Documentary Has Still Some Inspired Interviewees
THE FILM starts with Rosanna Arquette questioning herself: "Cannot actresses balance between work and family? Especially after reaching 40?" Well, she says not exactly, but to the effect, and makes her intention very clear with a footage from Michael Powell film "The Red Shoes" (1948). The point is clear, and interesting if you watch the heroine's fate.

SO ROSANNA STARTs her journey, holding a hand-held camera, interviewing as many actresses as possible. Some of the interviewees are her good friends while some are probably encountered at the film festival in Cannes, and agreed to say a thing or two. The film comprises these footages until Rosanna goes to Debra Winger, who Rosanna says, retired from the profession. (But I am afraid that not all people share Rosanna's view that she actually 'retired.')

Now, let's face it. AS A DOCUMENTARY, "Searching for Debra Winger" is a big failure, being too disjointed and having no focus. After all, there are so many actresses out there now, and many opinions too, especially those about their professions, this case acting. It's diversity, which should be treated more carefully.

THE INTERVIEWEES include Patricia Arquette, Emmanuelle Beart, Katrin Cartlidge, Laura Dern, Jane Fonda, Teri Garr, Whoopi Goldberg, Melanie Griffith, Daryl Hannah, Salma Hayek, Holly Hunter, Dinae Lane, Kelly Lynch, Julianna Margulles, Chiara Mastroianni, Samantha Mathis, Frances McDormand, Catherine O'Hara, Julia Ormond, Gwyneth Paltrow, Martha Plimpton, Charlotte Rampling, Vanessa Redgrave, Theressa Russell, Meg Ryan, Ally Sheedy, Hilary Shephard-Turner, Sharon Stone, Tracy Ullman, JoBeth Williams, Debra Winger, Alfre Woodard, and Robin Wright Penn. I don't know why, but Roger Ebert pops up, saying very unique things about one Angelina Jolie film. (Come on, Roger, you must be kidding, right?)

SOME OF THE INTERVIEWEES are very inspired, giving us insights into the business with humor and charms. You see Frances McDormand, and you understand her good-natured personality instantly. Or look at Charlotte Rampling (who appears with Katrin Cartlidge), and how she dresses herself. She is gorgeous, as seen in "Under the Sand" and her fashion sense! And we miss late Katrin Cartlidge, who shows her amiable down-to-earth personality. What is regrettable is that the time alloted to them (or some others) are too short. Why did they decide to include Roger Ebert?

And if you say that actress's job gets harder after 40 (and I do not disagree), OK, where are those people? I mean, Streep, Weaver, Keaton, Close, Sarandon, and so on and on? On the UK side, how about Denti or Mirren? Or another Redgrave? On French side, how about Moreau or Deneuve? Rosanna must have approached to them, and if they declined interview, why did they? Because they think differently? Or just too busy? But if busy, Rossana's argument (about the profession) is no longer valid. I kept on thinking about it, and the idea certainly weakens the impact of the film's contents.

You might, moreover, still hate some of the interviewees, who give too strong opinions. SOme of them are not convincing, and some are downright irritating. At least Rosanna Arquette should be prasied for inducing them to be honest, and whether you like it or not, what they say before the camera is never boring.

The film is interesting to see regardless of the director's intentions, which gets blurred as the film goes on. Too many talks are gathered to support one coherent idea, but the interviews themselves are always fascinating.

Thank you Jamie Cantwell
Until I saw this movie, I never knew just how tough things are for these incredibly beautiful, internationally famous multi-millionaires. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

A Blend of Avant-Garde and Slapstick
This 1965 Cannes Film Festival Palm D'Or winner still looks innovative nearly 40 years after it was made. The John Barry soundtrack used throughout the movie is outstanding. This film is not to be missed by those who love the 1960s and the films made during that decade.

The story started out as a play by Ann Jellicoe. The film shifts between broad slapstick and avant-garde as it tells the story of an unlucky in love schoolteacher, his womanizing housemate, the artist who moves in with them, and a naive girl who has just arrived in London.

Director Richard Lester uses all kinds of editing shots that still look fresh and there's something about this film being in black and white that somehow makes it more "1960s" than if it had been shot in color.

MGM released this in widescreen with the theatrical trailer but it really could use some extras where the making of the film is discussed. (Check out the liner notes on the CD soundtrack for some behind the scenes information.) Audio commentary from Richard Lester and any of the actors would have also been much appreciated.

WE ARE ALL, MORE OR LESS, SEXUAL FALURES...
...So Tom tells us about half way through "The Knack...and how to get it". Whether he speaks for the other characters or for humanity as a whole the viewers have to decide for themselves but it is just the sort of thing that keeps you guessing in this amazing film.

When someone askes me to name my favourite film I usually say "The Knack...and how to get it" which is almost always met with a puzzled look in responce; so few people have seen this movie, even though it won the main prize at Cannes the year it was made and was a popular and commercial success across the world, that you might be forgiven for thinking that perhaps it had been surpressed or maybe overtaken by fashion that lumped all the "Swinging London" films together and forgot them. Either way I think it is a neglected clasic that deserves wider recognision.

Taken from a not very successful play by Ann Jellicoe, that ran at the Royal Court experimental theatre for six weeks about a year before it was filmed, Charles Wood's screenplay expanded the action away from the run-down house, which is at the centre of the play, to use London as the backdrop for the film; not tourist London but the back streets and slightly run down areas of Shepherd's Bush. The true masterstoke was to give the running commentary by the old people on what the four main (young) characters are up to. This babble is so typical of the British attitude to sex sensorious, but at the same time obsessed and slightly regretting that they haven't done it themselves that it is hillarious. This aspect of the film is clearly influenced by Dylan Thomas' "Under Milk Wood" but used here it takes on it's own identity. Charles Wood also has a small part in the film himself; he is one of the Guardsmen that Nancy encounters in their "Bear Skins" (pun fully intended) while trying to find the YWCA.

The performances by the main actors are all superb. Michael Crawford as the accident prone, sex starved Colin, living in his run down Victorian house, who careers from one disaster to another is clearly the reletive of Frank Spencer the character Crawford played to such great effect in the 1970's "Some Mother's Do 'ave 'em" before he went on to even greater success in West End and Broadway musical theatre.

Ray Brooks delivers a totally beliveable Tolan, the superior, promiscous man living on the top floor of Colin's house who's self confidence eventually leads to his own downfall. A year after making this Brooks was the male lead in "Cathy Come Home", one of the most famous British television plays of all time, which shocked a nation by graphically showing the full reality of the homeless in the UK. It is difficult to imagine two more contrasting rolls.

Donal Donelly as Tom the manic painter and decorator who acts as the catalyst bringing the other elements of the film together. He was in some other 1960 movies including "Waterloo" but I haven't seen him in anything for a very long time now.

Rita Tushingham always has a vulnerability about her and never more so than in this film as Nancy. She arrives in London and wanders haplesly around costantly being mis directed to the YWCA until she comes across Colin and Tom in a junk yard. As she comes to know the other characters she comes under Tolan's spell until she suddenly finds she is in love with Colin. Tushingham handles her part well as she develops from the innocent new girl in town to the more confident woman at the end of the picture via a sort of breakdown after which she accuses all and sundry of "rape". It is this aspect of the film which has drawn most criticim bringing with it accusations of misogyny. I don't think that it is justified after all nobody gets raped they just shout it a lot!

John Barry's score brings the whole film together; He uses a choir of womens voices and the jazz organist Alan Haven, who had previously enlivened the opening titles of "From Russia With Love", to a variety of moods with one basic theme in 3/4 time. It is on