Let me first say, that I had a fine afternoon watching this movie: it's entertaining, fast-paced, romantic and visually beautiful, with some great settings and costumes. I agree with some of the critics that the DVD technically was rather poor: grainy and with some of the coloring a bit weird, but this wasn't that bad that it spoiled the fun.
Then there was the rare joy of seeing so many great actors together: Hugh Grant, Michael York, Claire Bloom and Oliver Reed, to name a few of the most famous ones. But here I have to come up with my first reservations. While Oliver Reed delivers a fine (but rather small) performance as the odious Sir Philip Gage and Claire Bloom gives a spicy rendering of Lady Darlington, the part of Michael York as Charles II (convincing as it is) is extremely small. And Hugh Grant (at age 29 still many movies and some 5 years away from breaking through with "Four Weddings"), hadn't matured yet to such a great actor back then. Besides that, he also fell victim to a curious whim of the writer, who gave him, the undeniable hero of this tale, hardly three whole sentences to say. While the director made him act as a silly 17th century English version of Zorro (including a preposterous black mask that couldn't fool a blind bat) and let him have a hairdo that may have been meant to look like a romantic highway-mannish ruffle, but turns out as something the cat dragged in.
The story is a romantic fiction within a historical context (the court of Charles II right after the Restoration) and is based on one of the zillion novels by Barbara Cartland. That's not necessarily bad, the popularity of her work at least proves that her novels are compelling enough to please countless readers and I guess one could turn this particular story into a reasonably adequate screenplay. The result however is a bit uneven, as if more than one person worked on it. Many of the dialogues are awkward and stiff (and unfortunately these involve all of Hugh Grant's). At other points however they're actually very crisp and intelligent (for example the dialogues between the king's arrogant and machiavellistic mistress Barbara Castlemain and her slimy partner-in-crime Rudolph Vyne, as well as the snide comments of auntie Darlington or the flirtatious innuendo's of the king).
It's the same with the action: at times plain silly and hardly living-up to the standards of an average episode of old TV-series like Robin Hood or Ivanhoe (like the clumsy "raids" of highwayman Hugh Grant and his comrades), at other times however very thrilling and involving (like all the scenes with Lady Castlemain, Lord Rudolph or Sir Gage). While the supposed love-scenes between Hugh Grant and Lysette Anthony are rather up-tight and square (what on earth they are supposed to see in each other is beyond me, it's like little Miss Goody Two-shoes meets Simon the Stiff), every scene with Emma Samms is steaming with passion and barely restrained rage. And the grand finale, where our hero (Grant) escapes his confinement in the dead-cell to jump on the scaffold and save his beloved from the executioner, must be the most breathtakingly last-minute rescue in the history of historical movies, the axe literally fails her head and neck by an ear's length.
Alas for Hugh Grant-fans: he is definitely not the star of this movie (and he actually looks as if he couldn't have cared less!). Neither is Lysette Anthony (way too virtuous and boring!). To me the biggest surprise is Emma Samms, she looks beautiful (hurray for 17th century corsets, and miss Samms DOES fit in her's stunningly!!) and her acting is top-notch! And Christopher Cazenove is equally great with his pretentious slimy fake-charms and his ruthless conniving.
All in all: no Oscar-winning material here, but with all it's flaws still very entertaining. I rank it 7 out of 10 (and a 10+ for Emma Samms!)
Then there was the rare joy of seeing so many great actors together: Hugh Grant, Michael York, Claire Bloom and Oliver Reed, to name a few of the most famous ones. But here I have to come up with my first reservations. While Oliver Reed delivers a fine (but rather small) performance as the odious Sir Philip Gage and Claire Bloom gives a spicy rendering of Lady Darlington, the part of Michael York as Charles II (convincing as it is) is extremely small. And Hugh Grant (at age 29 still many movies and some 5 years away from breaking through with "Four Weddings"), hadn't matured yet to such a great actor back then. Besides that, he also fell victim to a curious whim of the writer, who gave him, the undeniable hero of this tale, hardly three whole sentences to say. While the director made him act as a silly 17th century English version of Zorro (including a preposterous black mask that couldn't fool a blind bat) and let him have a hairdo that may have been meant to look like a romantic highway-mannish ruffle, but turns out as something the cat dragged in.
The story is a romantic fiction within a historical context (the court of Charles II right after the Restoration) and is based on one of the zillion novels by Barbara Cartland. That's not necessarily bad, the popularity of her work at least proves that her novels are compelling enough to please countless readers and I guess one could turn this particular story into a reasonably adequate screenplay. The result however is a bit uneven, as if more than one person worked on it. Many of the dialogues are awkward and stiff (and unfortunately these involve all of Hugh Grant's). At other points however they're actually very crisp and intelligent (for example the dialogues between the king's arrogant and machiavellistic mistress Barbara Castlemain and her slimy partner-in-crime Rudolph Vyne, as well as the snide comments of auntie Darlington or the flirtatious innuendo's of the king).
It's the same with the action: at times plain silly and hardly living-up to the standards of an average episode of old TV-series like Robin Hood or Ivanhoe (like the clumsy "raids" of highwayman Hugh Grant and his comrades), at other times however very thrilling and involving (like all the scenes with Lady Castlemain, Lord Rudolph or Sir Gage). While the supposed love-scenes between Hugh Grant and Lysette Anthony are rather up-tight and square (what on earth they are supposed to see in each other is beyond me, it's like little Miss Goody Two-shoes meets Simon the Stiff), every scene with Emma Samms is steaming with passion and barely restrained rage. And the grand finale, where our hero (Grant) escapes his confinement in the dead-cell to jump on the scaffold and save his beloved from the executioner, must be the most breathtakingly last-minute rescue in the history of historical movies, the axe literally fails her head and neck by an ear's length.
Alas for Hugh Grant-fans: he is definitely not the star of this movie (and he actually looks as if he couldn't have cared less!). Neither is Lysette Anthony (way too virtuous and boring!). To me the biggest surprise is Emma Samms, she looks beautiful (hurray for 17th century corsets, and miss Samms DOES fit in her's stunningly!!) and her acting is top-notch! And Christopher Cazenove is equally great with his pretentious slimy fake-charms and his ruthless conniving.
All in all: no Oscar-winning material here, but with all it's flaws still very entertaining. I rank it 7 out of 10 (and a 10+ for Emma Samms!)