Women in <3. Not set in the 1960s. Honest.
'Women in Love' has Alan Bates trying to literally shag nature, then naked wrestle with Oliver Reed, Glenda Jackson doing hip bohemian dancing with bulls, dramatic and slightly frightening music at every sex scene, a hilarious ballet sequence, the 1960s trying to do the 1920s (according to my dad, this is because everyone in the 60s thought it was the ONLY time worth living in) and is a D. H. Lawrence novel.
Tchaikovsky.
Not the 1970s either. This is 19th century Russia.
I also watched 'The Music Lovers' for the first time t'other night, which is basically "let's make a film about how terrifying it would be to consumate marriage with your wife if you were a gay Russian composer, and shoot it like it were a classical music video". It's a bit like 'Marie Antoinette' in that it's so tinged with the era it was made, but all the better for it.
A Marylin Monroe statue on wheels? What did you expect.
Then there's 'Tommy', which gets better every time I see it and has a scene with Ann-Margret rolling around in bubbles, liquid chocolate and baked beans (all together), Tina Turner going scary nuts, Keith Moon as a huge pervert and is a musical by THE WHO. Enough reasons really.
I dunno, Ken Russell just has this bold, fearless style that hugely appeals to me. Sort of an ugly kitchen sink realism, but with all the colour/brightness settings turned up. Wikipedia calls him "flamboyant". Just so many surreal and wonderful images that you're left scratching your head wondering what you've been watching. I've only ever seen these three films, but would love to see more.
Especially this, this looks bloody great.
Especially this, this looks bloody great.
Lair of the White Worm. Snake cults, yes please.
(images for Women and Worm pinched from the very good film blogs Snuffboxfilm and Filmconnoisseur on Blogspot, check 'em ooout, they like him too)
No comments:
Post a Comment