Reviews (35)

Stunning and shocking!
A wealthy Victorian family is teeming with sexual restraint. Enter, a poor naturalist who falls in love with the beautiful daughter of the head of the household. She appears to be afraid of sex, yet she has secrets that her new husband cannot even begin to imagine. The governess, exquisitely and masterfully portrayed by Kristen Scott Thomas, barely conceals her powerful attraction to the naturalist. He attempts to ignore her, despite his wife's lack of sexual interest in her husband. However, Thomas's character has a keen intelligence and gift for studying nature, which was at its zenith during the Victorian period. The two naturalists are drawn together by their interests. As the story evolves, Thomas attempts to reveal the reality of the family that supports the naturalist. In doing so, she is at once subversive and mysterious. Yet there is no doubt that the naturalist must know the world in which he resides. Like the Age of Innocense, the tension is almost unbearable, but unlike that film, Angels and Insects unveils the bizarre nature of human beings when desires are forced "underground." In "Insects," the insects appear to be the only living things that are normal. This beautifully atmospheric and Victorian drenched film will shock some viewers. But it will also enlighten those who think that the good old days were "good." There is a butterfly scene that is magnificient.

Bugged Out in the English Countryside
The title of Philip Haas' latest movie underscores the contradictions of late Victorian English society as seen through the eyes of British novelist A. S. Byatt. The film adaptation of Byatt's novella (MORPHO EUGENIA )is a mysterious and engaging tale, full of visual elaboration and color. Mark Rylance plays William Adamson, a low-born British scientist who has returned from collecting specimens in the Amazon to the ostensible comfort of the English countryside. Staying at the home of Sir Harald Alabaster (Jeremy Kemp), a patron, clergyman, and part-time entomologist, he falls in love with Sir Harald's daughter, Eugenia Alabaster (Patsy Kensit). Eugenia's female presence is both sexy and intense, while her behavior is both enigmatic and often perplexing to our scientific hero. The early drama in this film is augmented by tension between Adamson and Eugenia's brother Edgar (Douglas Henshall). Edgar can be a nasty drunk. He's snotty, contemptuous and otherwise out of control as he does his best to badger and humiliate his soon to be brother-in-law, the humble and reserved specimen scientist. Edgar doesn't want this interloper to become part of his family and we're led to believe that his contempt stems from the contempt that one class bears for another. The real reason for Edgar's foaming-at-the mouth antics is the big surprise of the movie and you'll have to see the movie to find out why some critics have used the word "decadent" to describe the film. But it won't spoil anyone's enjoyment to say that the marriage of Adamson to Eugenia doesn't work out. When it doesn't, the focus shifts to another love interest in this drama of a decaying aristocracy. Kristin Scott Thomas plays Matty Compton, a poor relative of the wealthy Alabasters. She provides the cushion for Adamson's fall when he discovers that Eugenia's got a serious problem. Matty Compton's a woman with all the answers, practical, intelligent, ahead of her time. This film is laden with symbolism but you don't have to have your doctorate in English Lit to appreciate it. The work of Charles Darwin has shattered the prevalent world-view (angels and God determining our fate) and science has left mankind feeling like an unimportant creature on the long ladder of evolution. Thus, ants and butterflies are the prevailing metaphors for existence in this film, and who hasn't at one time or another thought of their friends or acquaintances in this way? The costuming also contributes a great deal to the symbolism. Even if you're not a dressmaker or fashion maven, you're bound to get a kick out of the bold and ingenious costume schemes. The natural world photography is mesmerizing and the sexual scenes are sensuous and explicit, though not plentiful. There's much to like in this movie: great cinematography, good script, terrific acting.

High caliber drama!
Mature drama set in Victorian England . An impoverished naturalist called Ryanlance is taken by Kemp's family . This fascinating story runs when Ryanlance falls in love with the Patsy Kensit and eventually marries her . Morpho Eugenia is the key ; while the investigator is studying the social order of the insects , the people who surrounds him become gradually eccentric.
The film is built following a clear metaphor . The presence of inner demons and hidden emotions will involve the high tension drama . Kristin Scott Thomas plays an interesting and challenging role ; she represents the alter ego of Raylance ; besides she shows us once more why she is one of the top actress in the world.
Superbly acting ; top notch art direction ; fascinating enlightment and a perfect script.
And remember the key word: insect.
Do you need any other advise to acquire this cinema jewel?

STUNNING SCREENPLAY AND AMBIENCE CARRY AN INVISIBLE PLOT
A glossy period piece supposedly about Victorian era values and society that achieves its stunning beauty through sumptuous costumes, jungle dances that carry the primal oomph of beasts, and the strict house rules of an 'old money' British house.

The film starts very promisingly with its relaxed but vivid cinematography, but about 30 minutes into the film, very little has happened. The beat picks up a bit at the end when emotions get caught up in crosshairs of a triangular romance, but by then it's probably too late.

So there is precious little to expect from the script department, although anglophiles may find some linguistic cookies to savour.

Yet, the direction is so immaculate that the film could be coursework in film schools. The screenplay epitomizes passionate symbolism and draws the viewer with the precision of a bee hive, gradually but surely, as the film progresses. The women are doted on by servants like a queen bee. A bunch of moths overpower our female protagonist in a private moment, much like the flares of her passion. A scene in which two scholars are studying a colony of red ants that invade a colony of black is followed by a fox hunt -- the well-to-do in their red jackets, the servants in black.

If you're not expecting any fireworks from a riveting plot, but want to enjoy a fascinatingly put together work of very classy cinema, I highly recommend this visual feast. But it's not for everyone.

Tender performance by Mark Rylance. James Bond in 2008?
Nice, tender performance by Mark Rylance, whom I have already seen in Intimacy (2001). While watching this film Angels & Insects, I wondered if Mark Rylance could possibly be in the running to be the next James Bond. He might have to wait until 2008 when Pierce Brosnan passes the torch. If Mark Rylance is a contender, he would be 48 in 2008. Remember Roger Moore started playing James Bond at 46 and until 58. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Strangely reminiscent of Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut, Philip Haas's Up at the Villa is a similarly insulated psychosexual drama detached from the larger world yet with consequences well beyond itself. As with Kubrick's final masterpiece, Up at the Villa is constructed around a self-centered character whose insecurities about marriage set a disastrous chain of events into motion. Kristin Scott Thomas plays Mary Panton, a comely Englishwoman staying at a villa in Florence, Italy, in the late 1930s. Sheltered by the goodwill of the British and American community there, Mary--with little money and few prospects for survival outside marriage--dithers over her uncertain destiny and dreams of independence.

Based on a novella by W. Somerset Maugham, Up At the Villa finds Mary forced to take charge of her life after a one-night stand with an Austrian immigrant (Jeremy Davies) leads to tragedy. Sean Penn plays a cavalier American playboy who helps her out in the nightmarish aftermath. Both he and Thomas approach Haas's artful film noir with intentionally mannered performances that blur the line between internal and external experience. The result is a kind of midnight journey through minefields of the subconscious.

Still, the film is not without weaknesses: getting a fix on Penn's roughly sketched character, for instance, proves unsatisfying given his clichéd roguishness. And Haas seems to be plucking derivative ideas from everywhere: there's a strange stretch in the second act in which he goes out of his way to make a Hitchcockian film that really does look and sound like a Hitchcock film. While the result is eerie, you have to wonder why Haas would be so blunt about it. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Amazon.com

For Ursula Le Guin's devoted following, the 2002 remake of the 1980 film based on her novel may not be the stuff dreams are made of. This new adaptation omits some of the original's most memorable developments (the racially equalized "grays" and the alien invasion). Lucas Haas stars as George Orr, a "little lost boy" haunted by his dreams, which, he claims, alter the present unbeknownst to anyone but him. James Caan (more menacing than was Kevin Conway in the original) costars as the self-promoting Dr. Haber, the therapist assigned to treat the suicidal young man. This "very productive relationship" most benefits Haber, who attempts to manufacture George's dreams "to fit some useful function." The requisite unforeseen consequences ensue. Lisa Bonet is ravishing, but less impressive as George's skeptical public defender who may be the girl of his dreams. The foreboding mood is enhanced by Angelo Badalamenti's score, which recalls his haunting work on Twin Peaks. --Donald Liebenson ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Tedious and Lacking Substance
Having seen and loved "Angels & Insects," I was looking forward to this new sexy drama when it first came out in 1997, only to discover it was an unwatchable load of you-know-what. There are, of course, worse movies than this (all of the films in the "Emmanuelle" series, for example), but this pseudo-drama was truly horrific and terrible. Sex wasn't as shocking or breathtaking as in "Angels & Insects," the story was completely unbelievable, and the actors were disagreeable, all of them. I owe the two stars to some of the finest scenes in the movie- the slow movement of the camera across the blue-walled room with scattered oranges, the sun- "an orange disc above the sea," and some of the scenes in the vineyard. Overall, however, this film was tedious and without substance (since the director produced it himself he didn't have to worry about finding an executive producer). To my knowledge, "The Blood Oranges" was never even released on tape in Great Britain. Take my advice- save your money and buy something else instead, just not the novel on which this film's based- it's even more boring and tiresome.

nnice film about love and sex
I bought this movie without seeing it because it's from the creators of Angels and Insects which I enjoyed, and my gamble turned out to pay off pretty well. Not a fancy movie or a masterpiece of any kind, but a beautifully filmed and subtle film about the relationships between two couples. The scenery is really gorgeous, and I found the dialogue to be sparce but poignant and the sex to be tasteful and almost innocent. IT's almost a coming of age story about two middle aged couples who grow up the hard way. Nothing to die for, but an enjoyable and sensual film.

Rather Insipid Drivel
This film is, rather sadly, lacking in merit. It isn't sensual, it isn't inspired and it isn't worth much time.

The storyline involves two couples in an exotic country who engage in various escapades and the (sometimes unpleasant) consequences of said liasions. However, the thin plot meanders and the characters become unsympathetic early on. This viewer became utterly disinterested within the first half hour.

There are a handful of exquisitely filmed scenes that make wonderful use of light, shadow and color. However, these snippets of brilliance cannot and do not carry the day.

Don't Bother
This was one of the worst movies I've seen recently. I found myself constantly wondering, "Who acts like this?" There was minimal character development, so whenever a major plot twist occurred, it hardly seemed believeable. Any sensuality that the director intended to convey was completely lost because none of the characters was likeable.

The Pains of Passion
An unusual film about sensuality, morality, and the consequences of free love. Two married couples swap partners for sexual pleasure. I liked this film but it will not be everyone's cup of tea. It is beautifully photographed and has wonderful music. Everything about the film conveys sensuality without being vulgar. The characters pay a price, though, for indulging their passions. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

This Movie Deserves to be on DVD
This is an outstanding film with outstanding acting. Why it's not on DVD is beyond me.

James Spader, Mandy Patinkin, and Samathan Mathis's breakthrough performances.

This movie is only for intellectuals, so not surprising that it is not popular release. Paul Auster appears briefly at the end.

This film deserves to be ranked among the best of the 90's, if not the century.

An intellectually bitter pill.
Not for all tastes, this film combines the unique film making approach of Philip Haas (Angels and Insects) with a story by one of our most profoundly intellectual novelists of the 20th century, Paul Auster.

Dramatically understated, 'The Music of Chance' chronicles one man's search (Mandy Patinkin plays Jim Nash) for himself, as he quits his job, loads his car and heads cross country. That his path crosses that of Jack Pozzi (James Spader) a drifter, card-sharp, down on his luck today, but eye's on the 'big score' ahead, is not exactly unpredictable. What they encounter as a result is indeed surprising, as well as strenuous, and all together inappropriate to be delivered in the fantasy medium of film.

When I read the book, I stumbled over the text, the words weighing heavy on my being. Reading and rereading, the labor of the learning was far more than that which had yielded the purchase price.

Every twist and turn of the plot deals more multiple metaphor. Don't look to walk away from this one with a pleasant taste in your mouth, but you may find yourself a better person having watched it. Look for a Paul Auster cameo at the end.

OK.
This is an absorbing, but unforthcoming, film.

You all might think I'm fulla beans, but here goes....,
(
First I saw the movie, and halfway through, it literally detonated in my head. It's a Freemasonic allegory! (And not exactly complimentary to Masonry, I might add, if I'm interpreting it correctly.) The masonic references are subtle (with the exception, of course, of the stone wall. 10,000 stones ain't exactly subtle but they tip you off to start looking elsewhere for clues.) I am not a Mason, but have read quite a bit about them, and our man Nashe (Wonder what Nagy means in Magyar?) is clearly a "traveling man", a man whose obligations (career,family) have fallen by the wayside (a favorite Auster motif), leaving him careening aimlessly, like a rogue pinball, from western city to western city who, as we meet him, is going "from the West to the East". (See the exchange between Michael Caine and Christopher Plummer on the train in "The Man Who Would Be King" if you don't believe me.) He picks up Pozzi, who has been "struck on the temple", just as Hiram Abiff was struck in the Masonic story of the events surrounding the building of the Temple of Solomon, and which is reenacted in ritual in the induction of every Master Mason. There are a number of other clever details such as the brand of champagne they drink with the hooker that just happens to be my old favorite "Veuve Cliquot". (It's too small to read on the film, but no other champagne has that distinctive orange label.) "Veuve" is French for Widow, and Masons often refer to each other as Sons of the Widow. The names of the two poker players, Flower and Stone, may refer to Rosicrucians and Freemasons, but their trip to France might refer to either Hugh De Payens and his pal's trip to see Bernard de Clairvoux (which kicked off the Templars, whom the Masons claim as ancestors), or perhaps Ben Franklin's (and friend?) trip to Paris where he was inducted into the French Lodge "Neuf Soeurs". They are many more (too many to mention here) and I still haven't cracked the whole thing (not being a Mason makes it a harder job), but the book fascinates me and I'll continue to dig. I've recently read Music of Chance, Moon Palace, and City of Glass, and will read the rest soon. This fellow is a joy to read, particularly for aficionados of the mystery genre, which he well knows how to seduce with his labyrinthine structures and metaphysical quandaries. He smacks of Miguel de Unamuno ("Niebla", "Fog" in English, I believe) and Jorge Luis Borges, the father of the metaphysical detective story (but whereas Borges' stories, much as I love them, are purely cerebral exercises, cold around the heart, and liberally sprinkled with red herrings as if to mock his readers, Auster's are anguished and emotionally involving), of the Pythagorean School (and its obsession with the relationship between music and mathematics) and the Priests of Heliopolis (whom I suspect they got it from), of drunken Phaeton and his wax wings and of the Minotaur in his Maze, of the poetry of Leonard Cohen and Lenny Bruce and Tony Curtis (who had his own brand of poetry, ask his women . I don't know if it's because this cat is my own age, or because I know his New York (before moving to Seattle), but I felt an instant kinship, like we'd read all the same books at some point.

NOTE TO THE AUTHOR:

If you read this, Mr. Auster, please drop me an email to either disabuse me of these notions or to confirm that I'm on the right track. In return, regardless of the answer, you have my word that I'll buy the rest of your books anyway, and that I won't abuse any email response, or ask you to autograph the books, or any such nonsense. I'm a stable, happily married chap with two kids and a small business, not a wacko or a literary groupie. Thanks for the ride, man, and keep 'em comin'!

Exceptional film.
James Spader and his "True Colors" co-star Mandy Patinkin play a pair of newly-acquainted men who hope to out-play an eccentric pair of millionaires in a high-stakes poker game. Not only do they lose, but they must work of their debt in a rather unorthodox indentured-servitude kind of way. Both men had their own financial troubles and reasons for getting into the poker game in the first place, but neither of them realized exactly how costly their repayment would be.
In an interesting casting twist, Spader plays the oily, hustling loser of the two.
The final scene poses an interesting possibility - that the end result of their misadventure is part of the cyclic karma that put them there in the first place. Or something like that. ... Read more