Badmovies.org Forum

Information Exchange => Reader Comments => Topic started by: Andrew on April 16, 2008, 04:32:58 PM



Title: Gothic
Post by: Andrew on April 16, 2008, 04:32:58 PM
Reader review by Fausto.  Ken Russell is known for making freaky films, and this is one of them.  Did you know that the basis of "Frankenstein" was Mary Shelley's husband-to-be, yodeling naked on the roof in the middle of a thunderstorm?

Click here to go to the Review (http://www.badmovies.org/othermovies/gothic/)


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: yes on April 17, 2008, 01:55:28 PM
Thanks, This is another Russell film i still need to pick up.  I recently found Litszomania VHS for 1$.


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: SynapticBoomstick on April 19, 2008, 11:59:52 PM
I recently got one of those 50-Packs and there was a title called "Gothic" that I was unsure of watching because the summary was so bad- in those packs they tend to be. Now that I know that this is that same movie I'll have to watch it :tongueout:


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: BoyScoutKevin on May 01, 2008, 08:38:52 PM
Hard to know what to say, except I do prefer "Lair of the White Worm" (reviewed at this site) to this one, but Fausto has seemed to have hit all the highlights--and lowlights--of the film, so I'd be interested in seeing him do another review of one of Ken's films.


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: Rev. Powell on July 14, 2008, 07:31:19 PM
Good job Fausto.  I agree with your critique, especially the part about how the overacting was deliberate and added to the atmosphere (I actually thought this was very obvious).  Gabriel Byrne and Natasha Richardson were fine, and Russel harnessed Julian Sands natural talent for scenery chewing.

The first time I saw this as a pot-smoking college student I was high as kite.  It was trippy and visually fun, but I found it impossible to follow.  The characters never seemed to hold: for example, Polidori would be a simpering mess, then a prankster, then bald, then homicidal, then suicidal.   

The obvious joke to make would be that when I watched it 20 years later, sober, that I couldn't tell the difference.  Unfortunately, that's not true.  I found it fairly easy to follow as long as I remembered that while the characters were in their delirium nothing really happened, and very little carried over from one scene to the next.  The "plot" was just an excuse for Russell to do what he does best: string together a bunch of phantasmagorical sequences that aren't constrained by the demands of a linear plot.

Altogether one of Russell's better films.  I agree with the 4/5 rating.


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: Phred22 on December 29, 2009, 08:46:56 PM
This review doesn't seem to mention my favorite bit with Claire and a rat. For the sake of not spoiling anyone's pleasure, no further details.


Title: Re: Gothic
Post by: TooManyCustomers on January 14, 2011, 09:24:37 AM

 Heh.. I think my favourite scene was where people were quite upset with there being a pig's head on the hallway floor, but then once it changed into Polidori's head they were quite relieved and went back to their business...