Reptileenbu
Did you people see the same film I saw?
Spoonixel
Amateur movie with Big budget
Janis
One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.
adriangr
Other reviewers are right - Michael Winner's remake of the vintage classic The Wicked Lady turns out more like "Carry On Dick" only with bigger star names.I can only assume the film was intended to be a comedy, but it's hard to tell as the film wavers all over the place. Faye Dunaway and Alan Bates act like they are in an uproarious bawdy romp, but the rest of the cast play it straight. Faye Dunaway is particularly odd, she continuously pulls the most bizarre comedy faces and bugs her eyes out in an effort to portray the scheming and greedy personality of the lead character Lady Barbara Skelton, whose exploits form the main story of the film. There's definitely a juicy tale here, with Lady Skelton robbing, seducing, lying and murdering her way through the cast to get what she wants, but the presentation here really wastes the material. The events of the story are dashed through at great speed, giving the viewer little chance to empathise with any of the characters, but as most of the emotions are portrayed in such a throwaway manner, I certainly never felt drawn in. Again Dunaway suggests no depth to the character she plays. But the presentation of the action is the real offender. There's no time for anything to sink in. As soon as the film starts, Lady Skelton is stealing a man, then next minute she's married, then stealing, then tricking, all without pausing for breathThere are some things to enjoy, including the beautiful English scenery and antique architecture, plus some nice performances from Denham Elliott and Prunella Scales in supporting roles, but the smaller parts, such as bawdy waitresses and strumpets (of which there are many), are wretchedly hammy. There are many scenes of nudity, all of which look completely incongruous for the period the film is set in, and exist only for titillation. To sum up this is a very juvenile film with little depth, and a huge waste of talent and money.
hesketh27
The original 1940s version of this film, starring Margaret Lockwood is a really enjoyable campfest. This dire remake is one of the worst films I have had the misfortune to see! Being a fan of the original, I was curious to catch this version which was broadcast on satellite last night (I had not seen it previously). Viewers are expected to believe that the grandfatherly Denholm Elliot would be the object of love/lust for a beautiful young Glynis Barber and then a (totally charmless) Faye Dunaway. At times, the poor old lad has trouble getting around the set let alone keeping two women happy. Faye Dunaway is meant to be Ms. Barber's 'friend' whilst actually looking like her mother. Ms. Dunaway (even then an old broiler with the head stuck out of an aeroplane window pulled-back face look) is lusted after by Alan Bates and Oliver Tobias. The whole premise is ludicrous. Hopelessly miscast, badly acted and directed the film is a total mess and one views it with the horrible fascination of a car crash! Whether or not it is meant to be tongue in cheek I don't know, but it certainly caused a few laughs! I'm afraid that Michael Winner's crime against cinema is far worse than Captain Jerry's highway robbery so in my view it should be MW swinging from the gibbet at Tyburn!!!
potshotk
...so the original was better.Quite a lot better. Given all the slop they throw onto DVD it's hard to believe you can't even get the original on videotape!But when the rubber meets the road, the Sirtas Vs Dunaway Pillsbury Whip-Off is the only interesting bit of directing Michael Loser will likely ever produce and you all know it.Otherwise, I'd say it has as much to do with the original 1945 version as, say, "That Forsythe Woman" has to do with the brilliant Galsworthy 1970s miniseries, "The Forsythe Saga." In any case, this movie is certain to be much better on DVD because you'll be able to scan directly to that scene.
adamjacen
Not the best period movie ever made, but it does have some good qualities: Great music by Tony Banks, great sets, and lavish costumes. The "look" of the movie is rich with detail. The acting is campy, but doesn't take itself too seriously. One thing that really annoys me about this film, however, is the abundance of gratuitous nudity.
