Watching Sidney Lumet's oddly erratic Q & A, I discovered two interesting aspects of cinema that were once forgotten. One, Armand Assante was deliciously evil in his chosen roles - like Mickey Rourke, he is a forgotten gem of the late 80s - early 90s that truly defined the idea of a character actor. His mannerisms, his choice words, and his power to control each scene proved that he could battle with some of the greats - but alas, some of his film decisions left him only now empowering the great Direct-to-DVD market. The second element - forgotten today but used (probably for the final time) in excess in this film - was the overly feminine, not-so-action-packed choice of songs within the film. A gritty, powerfully acted, intensely dark crime drama about corrupt cops shouldn't necessarily be bookended by the lyrics of Ruben Blades. The opening and subsequent ending just failed on so many levels with this music bursting from my speakers. It just didn't connect to the film nor did it add to the dramatic element of what Lumet was trying to portray.
Q & A had quite a bit going for it before it even started. An angry, and overweight Nick Nolte, a bearded Armande Assante, Lumet's visionary work, Luis Guzman and Charles S. Dutton pairing, Junior Soprano, oh - and let's not forget the ever unsung and sometimes forgotten Fyvush Finkel in a supporting, yet hilarious role. Alas, it just didn't work. Q & A was part crime drama, part Bad Lieutenant, part Crying Game, all Lumet - and 100% confusing. The ultimate downfall to this film was that Lumet (and I do blame him because he did adapt this film from Edwin Torres book) tried to handle way too much. There was the gay element, the Puerto Rican element, the Italian mafia element - not to mention the bad cop element, the new DA element, and the entire police force rooting for the Captain - who is rooted in the most evil, yet primed to become the next Governor. Seem like a lot here - well it was even worse in this film. Q & A began strong, felt powerful with the work of Notle and Assante, but failed due to Lumet's ability behind the camera and Hutton's paper-thin character. He should have been the glue to this story, but instead he just felt annoying and cheap. This was a movie that could have won awards. Nolte was fantastic with his crazy eyes and ability to start boat fires with the greatest of ease - Assante is, and always will be the power of evil - he can portray a corrupted man better than anyone (and his beard should have won some award). Lumet set up some scenes with beautiful grace, but some (most of them) seem recycled and cheap. This is your standard knock-off cop drama that has been done time and time again with nothing new. Hutton's side story about racism was just another weightless element that Lumet tried to tackle yet failed. I think as a book we can get within the minds of our characters, but on a one-dimensional level - it just didn't work. I could not watch this two hour twelve minute epic again - while it took me from one destination to another - it just failed as an early 90s film. The synthesizer, the over-burdening of plot twists, and the convoluted story just didn't work for this film. I could not watch it again - nor could I suggest it to friends unless they were just in for a bit Nolte/Assante fix. Thinking back now, I think this is the best on-screen match-up that I have seen this year. The two were such heavy (literally) hitters for their time, but now - well - now - they have gone the way of the dodo. Thankfully, films like this have ended - thankfully - we still have VHS and DVD for our moments where the 90s seem like the only route out of a situation. Rented from Netflix - my final verdict on this is a yellow highlight with a black mark. It will not be added to the collection nor will it be watched again. It was found in the "Q" section of my TIME OUT FILM BOOK #10. Only four more to go - wish me luck. Hopefully, Q & A will be the final blow. Gulp, I hope...
This is exactly the type of film that I was speaking about in my last post concerning Lady in White. I wanted subtle humor, a strong, yet not overwhelming story, and a dedication from both the director and the actors to the world centered around the story. This film, Lair of the White Worm, is the direct opposite of what Lady in White was. Perhaps I shouldn't be comparing the two - perhaps I am only thinking of this film because of how recently I watched it - but for the entire hour and a half of Lair of the White Worm I was enthralled. From the unknown, to poisonous seductions, to phallic dreams, all the way to Hugh Grant never being around - Lair of the White Worm had it all ... and then some.
Look at this picture alone. Look at the detail of the costumes, look at the fierceness of the "new" vampire/snake horror look. This is originality. This is what Ken Russell brings to the table if allowed total control. This is also from the mind of one Bram Stoker, so why shouldn't it be a bit creative. This is my second film this month from Russell, the first being the made-for-TV adaption of Lady Chatterley which kept my attention through amazing cinematography and powerful symbolism, and now for Lair of the White Worm Russell has done it again, but instead - crafted a stronger cult film that remains a staple in 80s horror. I am speaking very highly of this film - here it is - nearly 24 hours since I last saw it, and I am still remembering moments that made me laugh, or made me squirm in my seat, or just visually treated me to something original. This horror film may have been light on the jump-out-and-scare-you moments, but it still conveyed a dark world. Yep, this film has Hugh Grant - still floppy and witty as always, but it is Amanda Donohoe that steals this film right under your feet. Her portrayal of Lady Marsh is part snake part seductress kept my eyes glued to the screen. She was her character, when she sneered, my heart flew a twitter wondering what she was going to do next. I hate to say that the British do it better, but taking a slice from Lady in White and a slice from Lair of the White Worm, I am definitely going back for seconds with Worm. Adding to the already top-notch cast is Stratford Johns as the butler Peter (amazingly dry and British) and Paul Brooke as the police officer Erny. The cast makes this a-typical horror film into something worth viewing again and again. The direction by Ken Russell is outstanding - the entire dream sequence is still running rampant through my mind - and that the British knew that they weren't making an Oscar-worthy film - so they just had fun. This film was fun. It was fun to watch and it felt like it was fun to make. That makes watching these types of films so much better. Coupled with the small nuances that Russell creates in the background - keeping us always one step ahead of our characters (which you can do if you listen and use your eyes with this film). Lair of the White Worm was smart, funny, and the perfect horror film to enjoy on a Sunday afternoon.Watched on DVD - I found this film via the last entry in my "DVD Delirium" book. I am about to jump to "Q" next - so wish me luck. No doubt about it - this film is getting a green mark with blue stars. I loved it. It will be added to the collection for others to enjoy. Thank you Ken Russell for making us proud of horror films again and again and again.
Three times. Let me tell you guys - three times it took me to fully watch this film. My hopes were so high for this little gem of an 80s creature feature (if you call ghosts creatures), but with its cliche elements - slow plots - and diminished characters - it just fell short on most levels. Lady in White came highly recommended from both the film book in which I discovered this film (speaking of how an independent release could tell such a detailed story) to friends mentioning that they remembered and loved this film from the 80s. Alas, I can't stand behind it. I began it with an opened mind, actually finding myself rather scared in several scenes at first (the man in the coat room is still classic), but falling deep asleep with the middle, and then trying to catch up by the end. It just fell flat - it was not the exciting cannon that I was hoping for.
Lucas Haas, there is where my struggle begins. Look at this imagery, it is breathtaking, but you cannot build a story with weak characters and a light dose of shock value. Sure, that is what modern horror films are all about - but I expect better from the 80s. I expect better from the 80s. So, back to Lucas Haas - with his large ears - trying to solve a crime that took place too long ago for us to care. The murders seem irrelevant now - yet the race card gets played - almost to the point of chaos. Let me explain. Why would there suddenly be hatred towards a man that everyone seemed to reason with prior? It seemed luke warm at best, and add to the detailed story - this reviewer was asleep faster than a NyQuil Miller time. Why was this film so sleepy to me? It seems like the question for the ages. It had jumps, it had some beautiful cinematography, but I couldn't keep my eyes open for the likes of me throughout any of this Lady in White debacle. I wanted to like it, as stated before, but with the cliche Italian-American stereotypes and the race issue - I just couldn't understand what made this film important. I even viewed the intro by the director, and it seems this was his one claim to fame. Perhaps you can dissect this film and see modern horror's roots, but outside of the scare with the actual "Lady in White", it was nothing more than just a spiritual commercial. No motive needed - no reason for the murders - just plot, overlapping plot - without giving us what we wanted. I wanted to see Lucas Haas frightened, I wanted to see him uncover the truth, but instead it just wrapped up neatly an idea that was never developed. "The type of movie that you can recommend to friends, while knowing that the special effects are not the greatest" - was quoted within one of my books, but I can handle cheap effects - that even makes for a better film sometimes (see Evil Dead), but when there is no passion behind the story, when there is nothing pulling our characters closer to our hearts - it just falls flat. Lady in White fell flat. It had that option to be great - the potential was there, but I think Frank LaLoggia just couldn't figure out if he wanted a horror film or a murder/mystery. Found in "DVD Delirium" this is my second to last film in the "L" category. Hoping that Lair of the White Worm will be stronger - at least cultish-ly stronger. Watched on DVD via Netflix. Alas, as much as I am not wanting to do this (due to the random acts of intelligence) I am giving Lady in White a yellow highlight with a black mark - never to be watched again. Sorry, LaLoggia, it just wasn't as 80s as I wanted.
Released for general television, perhaps on Cable, this titillating (come on it had to be said at least once) release of D.H. Lawrence's masterpiece is my first cinematic experience with any of his work. Needless to say, I was impressed, not just with the idea that both Sean Bean and Joely Richardson were willing to go full monty for their characters, but how well Ken Russell handled the material. This is my first outing (not just with D.H.) with Ken Russell, and I know it won't be my last ... his Lair of the White Worm will be reviewed shortly, but if it is anything like this film - it impressed. Russell had a difficult duty ahead with nearly four hours of screen time, how do you keep audiences hooked without just showing boobs and sex. I must admit, he dutifully did it with what seemed like the greatest of ease. 
I am typically not one for period piece films. In the past, they have either bored me or just felt so dry that falling asleep provided better entertainment. Why does British aristocracy have to be so dull? I did experience a better outing with the film Handful of Dust, but since then, it has only been chaos after debacle after chaos. Where was the road going to end? It ended with Lady Chatterley, a 1993 release that probably won't be watched in college classrooms or even at the high school level, though it is said, it follows D.H.'s words almost entirely. For me, it was two days of easy coasting with this film. Surprisingly, I was absorbed into this world of class, wealth, and disgust. I loved what Russell offered, particularly in one scene where James Wilby is discussing what makes one class better than the other, and Russell merely focuses on the maid's faces. They are long, sad, and emotionless, and Russell focused the point stronger. He made Chatterley's evil stronger and his words carry a vibrant point. There were also individual scenes that just worked thanks to Russell's attention to detail. There were some great scenes where it was merely Clifford in his chair in a room, but the angles were perfect. Russell was said to have complete control over this film, and it seemed very clear his talent was not to be covered up. Although Russell was phenomenal in his direction, the major players were not used for their acting abilities, but merely for their looks. Joely was beautiful, but wasn't the strong - nearly maddened woman that I was expecting - and we knew absolutely nothing about Bean's Mellors. He seems to appear out of nowhere. While I did love the slight chemistry that they had together, it was obvious that beauty came before ability with the casting of this film. It felt as if we went from scene to scene completely lacking the soul of the characters. Then events would happen, major crisis' would be discovered, and we easily came to a conclusion. The ending wrapped up a bit too quickly for me. Perhaps just another gripe. Again, I wasn't as sleepy with this period piece film. I liked what Russell brought to the table, and if forced to watch again perhaps I would gather with friends to enjoy, but I couldn't carry the weight of this film on my back again. It is a four hour burden to take on (nothing like the 13 hour Berlin Alexanderplatz slowly waiting for me around the corner) - and it just wouldn't be as enticing. I am eager to see other of D.H.'s work, but this modern release (within the past decade) just didn't reach to full throttle. Again, I liked this, but love would never be uttered - just like in this film. Oh, enough. The third entry in my "L" section of the "DVD Delirium", I will be ending my period piece run for now and entering back into the world of horror - and leaving Lady Chatterley with a pink mark. Forced to watch if needed, but not by choice. Favorite Scene: The individual shots of the maids as Clifford talks about how inhuman the lower class was. This scene was sheer brilliance, and if Russell would have continued along this path - I would have had to own this film, but the inconsistencies were what kept me away.
Alas, this was the only picture I could find. For the better, it wasn't one that I hope to remember in the near future, but need to preserve to ensure that this film isn't watched again. Lady of the Lake, a Fangoria release, is out of print. It is obscure. This film is lost - and probably for the better. While I think I will use it in my next horror film contest, this is one of those DTV (direct-to-video) films that should have been lost in the shuffle, but the fine people at Fangoria picked it up, dropped it, and will probably nare release it again.Filmed on handhelds over the course of six years, our actors as well as our story inconsistently age over the next 82 minutes. That is to say that there wasn't any creativity in this film, it just lacked some of the excitement needed for small independents to survive. Strong nudity coupled with random soul-selling coupled further with a premature zombie fight just seemed like it couldn't find its rhythm. It would introduce characters, like the crazy neighbor that didn't seem to be shocked by the spiritual nature of the lake, but then seemingly drop any structure to build a symmetrical world around him. It centered on David Lowry (Erik Rutherford) and his love of sex and water. Again, seeming like random ideas compiled into one film, it begins to find a niche by milking the idea that the soul needs to find peace, not just wreck havoc on anyone and everything. Taking nothing from Arthurian legend, Lady of the Lake walks its own path - and I guess we should be graceful. I am happy to own this DVD merely to have it in the film store collection for unsuspecting watchers to find - but outside of that - it will not be finding my player anytime soon.Perhaps the girl was attractive, but not worthy enough to be the infamous Lady of the Lake - no matter which story you are working from.The idea of traveling back in time to find why this woman is lost was an interesting concept, but it happened too late in the film. The final act, the last twenty minutes, just seemed forced and incoherent, creating a lackluster film experience. While I don't like to compare with big-budget Hollywood films, Lady of the Lake just didn't wet the appetite, both literally and pun-ily.FAVORITE SCENE: Honestly, anytime the swarmy Christopher Piggins was on screen - he just didn't seem to fit - which made his appearances even more enjoyable. He over-acted, but in a fantasical way.Found again in the "DVD Delirium Vol. 1" book, this movie will get a yellow mark with a black line. Erasing it from the cannon of films to be watched again. One star people, it wasn't worth the time (sans Piggins). This movie was found on eBay on DVD format.
It is difficult to say why this film remains a favorite of mine. Is it nostalgia? It is the music? It is Bowie's tight pants? All of these factor in, but I have to say it is truly because of Henson's creations - his creatures. Someone once said that with puppets instead of CGI, you can see the hard work, the dedication, the emotion that goes within each of the creations - and for me, a short-time film critic, it is utterly true. Who knows what Henson would have created if only he was still with us today. Labyrinth is only one, The Dark Crystal is another, and you can see some darkness in Farscape and Follow that Bird, but this ranks among one of my favorite. 
"You remind me of the babe", how many times have I begun this line only to have another person next to me complete it. That is the sheer power of this film. It represents the cult nature of what Henson created, the darkness, the imagination, the unknown - all coupled with Bowie and there is just something unique about this film. Shown as the final year film with our FILM CLUB, it was discussed if this is still a "good" film for children to watch. It was also asked if this film continues to entertain, nearly twenty three years later. Our group, considerably mixed. Considered to be a generational thing, the older members who possibly grew up with a fond awareness of Henson and his creature wonders loved what he was doing here. Whilst those, younger and more prone to the modern Star Wars culture, was not as impressed. Much of the disgust came from Bowie, our group could either not stand him, or find him iconic in this role. There was rarely anyone in between. We were darkly mixed, thinking that modern children, fixated on CGI and flashy gimmicks, wouldn't appreciate the value of Labyrinth, but yet it carries so many popular icons. How can you give a child a copy of Where the Wild Things Are yet find Henson's retelling (coupled with the imagination of Maurice Sendak) not as classic.It boggles my mind, yet I am continually drawn back to this film. Found in a new book - the DVD Delirium: The International Guide to the Wild and Wonderful - Volume 1. I am starting my next five reviews with the letter "L" - Henson's film is my first. I am eager to see this lost, nearly forgotten icon films that are less memorable mainly because 1) it doesn't star Tom Hanks or 2) they aren't shared enough in family atmospheres. Films need to be shared, they need to be explored - I am still angry that I am 30 years old and I just watched Seven Samurai for the first time this year. Not good. Labyrinth is getting a green mark with two blue stars in my books. I will watch this film again - I will suggest it to families - and I will ensure that Henson's darker imagination is not forgotten. He isn't just Elmo, he is a world that would frighten children. Also - I do think Ludo needs to get some ointment - he is suffering from the most painful arthritis. Dance party everyone - dance party.
