Rating: 
Summary: Villa Delirium
Review: Ken Russell is one of the few directors who really brings a love of literature to his movies. His 1970 film of D.H. Lawrence's Women In Love remains one of the best filmed novels. But Ken Russell's tastes got wilder as he moved from film to film in the seventies and many of his seventies movies are a strange mix of high brow and low brow which pleases neither group really(Lisztomania, Mahler). Then in 1979 he did a great horror film called Altered States which had him (ironically as it was a horror film) returning to the more controlled and coherent directorial style he exhibited before the period of excess. In the eighties he kept making horror films but they are very literate horror films, with a tongue in cheek kind of subversiveness which has fun with the material while not taking it too seriously. Gothic was made in 87. I think its his best work of the horror genre and perhaps his best work since the D.H. Lawrence picture. Gothic has horror elements, in fact it is about the night that genre as we know it today was born. It is also very literate and its literary history is for the most part accurate. Julian Sands as Shelley and Gabriel Byrne as Byron make it seem like it was a lot of fun being a poet. They really act more like rock stars.... sex, drugs, and imagination is their daily regimen however. But the movie has a serious side too and a frightening side. Mary Shelley(Natasha Richardson) had a stillborn child and that is the impetus for her to write her famous Frankenstien. Everyone has deliriums but her deliriums which Ken Russell captures most poignantly keep the film from being just a romantic poet exploitation film. Her nightmares are based in real life horrors. She is really the center of this movie even though the male poets get to have all the fun and they do have a lot of bawdy and gaudy fun in that castle on the Swiss lake in view of Mont Blanc. This movie is visually stunning and at the end leaves you with an emotional resonance of having been through an unforgettable experience. Some people say Lair of the White Worm(Russells next film) is better than this but I don't see how. Gothic is a great looking film that takes a great story and adds to it all the visual delights the cinema has to offer but it is the story that remains with you. Lair of the White Worm is visually fun but there is no story to give those images a power or life beyond their momentary appeal. Gothic will appeal to those who know a bit about the romantic poets and painters and like their movies to have at least some redeeming value but can also have a purely visual and sensual appetite as well.
Rating: 
Summary: NAUGHTY! naughty!
Review: NATASHA RICHARDSON survived this one - barely! Ditto Gabriel Byrne. Not one of Mr. Russell's stellar trips, but it does peak the interest here and there complete with 'pounding soundtrack'. Yes, it's that odd little tale of pre-Victorian flower-children romping around Europe, circa early 19th century. And it just so happens that one of the kids wrote "Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus" [must have been in draft form, the novel does plod.......] during one of these wild week-ends.WHO they exactly? Well, we have Alfred, Lord Byron, physically handicapped, he was likened to old Nic [Satan], due to a foot deformity, then there was that reputation and whispers of incest [Medora], bisexuality ['friend' Dr. Polidori with err .. opium in tow]. Mary Godwin [not quite married to Percy Shelley, the 'sensitive' budding poet], mildly pregnant, then Claire - a sister - also possibly pregnant [Byron? Shelley?] As I said - wild! It's more or less a very bad hallucinogenic experience, be sure to take a bromo or two afterwards, BUT there are a few choice visual moments! One almost expects the Rocky Horror crowd to drop by for a nightcap or two... [Quite a departure from the very proper BYRON/MARY SHELLEY prologue to "Bride Of Frankenstein" - except for the excessive eye-shadow on Byron, and those dweadful accents .....]
Rating:
Summary: Ecxellent movie
Review: Not a gore fest movie. It is supensefull and thoughtfull. It's a wild drug trip with the characters all strung out on laudanum. Surreal imagery mixed with drugged out viewing from the character's perspective.
Rating:
Summary: What movie would Lord Byron have done if he were still alive
Review: Or if he were really a vampyre, as suggested in Tom Holland's THE VAMPYRE. During this terrible night in geneva, the most inspired gothic spirits of Europe will challenge themselves to the writing of an horror story. The winner will be the one who would create a story so frightening that it will become true in the others' minds. In essence, it will give birth to two major works of English litterature, Mary sheley's Frankenstein an Polidori's VAMPYRE (which seemed to be very much taken from Lord Byron's life). The atmosphere is heavy and the prestation of each of the actors remarkable. You would believe to be back in the old days, in the presence of Lord Byron and the Shelleys. I would like to make a point escpecially on Gabriel Byrne's play as a dandy and, perhaps, vampyre. There are lots of hints at Frankenstein (with shelley naked under the rain shouting "Lightning is the force of the universe"), at the vampyre myth, and at shelley's obsession about worms, and so on... All in all, for an experience in fear, but not horror, we are held in good compagny, not to say the best
Rating: 
Summary: "Truth is often stranger than fiction."
Review: Sometimes what is real is much more disturbing than what is make - believe. This movie is a good illustration of this point. Viewing "Gothic" with no foreknowledge of the history and background of the story is like watching a blood fetish porno with a plot. What makes it a great movie though is that, although it seems too fantastical to be real, there is little make - believe. The night when the Shelleys, Byron, his physician and his mistress (a relation of M. Shelley I believe) got together was more than just a gathering of writers. It was a laudanum soaked Carnival. Although a great amount of the story is melodramatic and fictional - especially toward the end - many more elements of the plot are real or are based on actual accounts of the writers' character. Byron's aversion to blood and his fetish for the women in his wife's death mask for example are rumored to be true, so is Polidori's extreme Catholic persuasion, Shelley's hysterical laudanum fits, and Byron's skull. Watch the movie, read in detail what happened that night, study the characteristics of each writer, than watch the movie again. I guarantee a lot of the things which originally seemed ridiculous and out of place will be horrific and make for a great thriller when you realize they are not just bad screenwriting. When you realize that some of the characters are acting strange and almost inappropriately (such as Percy's ever wide eyed look) it also helps to remember too that these people were all on a handful of different drug combinations including opium, liquor, and probably hash so they are naturally not going to be acting normal, per se. As a viewer you are also meant to see the events in this film as an onlooker to the party which includes watching them hallucinate and at times be drawn into their hallucinations (it should be noted though that some thing which appear like poor acting probably are).
Rating:
Summary: "Truth is often stranger than fiction."
Review: Sometimes what is real is much more disturbing than what is make - believe. This movie is a good illustration of this point. Viewing "Gothic" with no foreknowledge of the history and background of the story is like watching a blood fetish porno with a plot. What makes it a great movie though is that, although it seems too fantastical to be real, there is little make - believe. The night when the Shelleys, Byron, his physician and his mistress (a relation of M. Shelley I believe) got together was more than just a gathering of writers. It was a laudanum soaked Carnival. Although a great amount of the story is melodramatic and fictional - especially toward the end - many more elements of the plot are real or are based on actual accounts of the writers' character. Byron's aversion to blood and his fetish for the women in his wife's death mask for example are rumored to be true, so is Polidori's extreme Catholic persuasion, Shelley's hysterical laudanum fits, and Byron's skull. Watch the movie, read in detail what happened that night, study the characteristics of each writer, than watch the movie again. I guarantee a lot of the things which originally seemed ridiculous and out of place will be horrific and make for a great thriller when you realize they are not just bad screenwriting. When you realize that some of the characters are acting strange and almost inappropriately (such as Percy's ever wide eyed look) it also helps to remember too that these people were all on a handful of different drug combinations including opium, liquor, and probably hash so they are naturally not going to be acting normal, per se. As a viewer you are also meant to see the events in this film as an onlooker to the party which includes watching them hallucinate and at times be drawn into their hallucinations (it should be noted though that some thing which appear like poor acting probably are).
Rating: 
Summary: Gothic
Review: Sorry fans. I was disappointed by the movie. It wasn't what I expected. Plus it was somewhat too sacrilegious. I like gothic movies, the Crow, Underworld... but this one just didn't do it for me.
Rating:
Summary: Strange, Hallucinogenic & Interesting
Review: The movie "Gothic" is not nearly as awful as some reviewers here have represented. Russel more or less puts the viewer in the minds of the characters as they experience drug induced hallucinations and whip themselves into a climactic frenzy. If you can accept this frame of reference, you can enjoy the disjointedness and wierdness of this film. Both Byrne and Sands are excellent as the two poets, although Richardson is fairly wooden in her role. There is some poor editing, particularly towards the end, and some unexplained shots that require knowledge about the actual characters (especially Lord Byron). However, the film does a good job of conveying the goings-on of a crazy night at Byron's swiss chalet. In short, Gothic is a fairly wild (and short) ride that has to be approached with an open mind in order to enjoy.
Rating:
Summary: Strange, Hallucinogenic & Interesting
Review: The movie "Gothic" is not nearly as awful as some reviewers here have represented. Russel more or less puts the viewer in the minds of the characters as they experience drug induced hallucinations and whip themselves into a climactic frenzy. If you can accept this frame of reference, you can enjoy the disjointedness and wierdness of this film. Both Byrne and Sands are excellent as the two poets, although Richardson is fairly wooden in her role. There is some poor editing, particularly towards the end, and some unexplained shots that require knowledge about the actual characters (especially Lord Byron). However, the film does a good job of conveying the goings-on of a crazy night at Byron's swiss chalet. In short, Gothic is a fairly wild (and short) ride that has to be approached with an open mind in order to enjoy.
Rating: 
Summary: Mis-Matched Cast
Review: The story behind the movie "Gothic" is an odd, but intriguing story. The "Haunted Summer" that Mary Shelley, Percy Shelley, and Lord Byron spent together doing drugs and engaging in whatever their hearts desired led them all to the very edge of madness. It's an incredible story. The movie however, is not the best tribute to these legends that I have ever seen. The cast is completely mis-matched Gabriel Byrne, Julian Sands, and Natasha Richardson head up the cast and they just don't work well together. Julian Sands, although a better actor now, was still quite a novice and his performance is simply unbelievable. Gabriel Byrne although physically matching for the part of Lord Byron doesn't put as much passion as he should've playing the mad poet. Natasha Richardson spends most of the movie trying to rationalize everything and doesn't reveal Mary's passion. It's a very dry movie that lacks the emotion needed to bring in the viewer. The horror was downplayed and too much time was devoted to dialogue that did nothing to give the story a much needed push.
|
