Michael-Douglas Movie Reviews

Best thriller since i know what you did last summer. watched it the other day. at first i thought they were making fun of joy ride with the character played meatloaf.in the end awesome thriller with a cool ending

the movie at first i thought was making fun of a hooror story because of the character played by meatloaf. in the end great awesome thrilling action movie that any person on the face of the earth should see.

I remember first seeing Blacktop on Thriller Max on the 7th of this month. It was on at about three in the morning. I tell you, it was the best I've seen in the longest time. I had never thought of Meat Loaf as anything but a musician until I saw this movie. Jack was one of the meanest and scariest bad guys to date, and Meat really brought the character to life.

I saw it again late late last night (about 11:15) and it hasn't changed, thank God. A "must-see".

-Joshua Underwood, 15
July 19, 2002

Gene Wilder's "The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother" has a unique snap & sparkle, with a thread of insanity, that makes it one of my favorite film comedies. While very funny and often irreverant, the film pays affectionate tribute to the wonderful Conan Doyle franchise of Holmes' stories. It is also well-produced, with brooding photography and honest depictions of period London settings. But perhaps the best thing about "Holmes' Smarter Brother" is its zany cast, from Marty Feldman, Madelaine Kahn and Wilder himself, to wonderfully crazed performances by Leo McKern as the infamous Dr. Moriarty and Dom DeLuis as a bizarrely-affected opera impressario. This film is first rate FUN and should become a classic in the comedic vein of Mel Brooks'"Young Frankenstein", "Blazing Saddles" and "High Anxiety". I highly recommend "Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother" and hope we can all soon add it to our DVD collections.

If you love Gene Wilder, this movie is a must see. I saw it when it first came out and then again last year. This is one of the funniest movies ever made. I looked for it everywhere last year, and finally saw it on some movie channel. This has to be on DVD! I hope the studio who has the rights comes to their senses!

Excellent cast, musical numbers, and ending. My wife was mad for this movie and went on about "very sexy wine" regularly. We finally got our mitts on a VHS copy and loved it. Without a doubt a very very funny movie.

The book Ivanhoe is one of my favorites, and so I was looking forward to seeing the 1952 movie, the only movie pairing of Elizabeth and Robert Taylor. And I'm a big swashbuckler fan, so I was expecting to enjoy this movie. Well, I didn't! First of all, it wasn't very faithful to the book. The screenwriter and director altered a lot, and not to my liking! Robert Taylor was stiff as a board, without any of the verve that characterized his swashbuckling predecessors such as Errol Flynn. Liz Taylor never smiles, Finlay Currie's a poor substitute for C. Aubrey Smith, George Sanders isn't much of a villain and Joan Fontaine just doesn't have that much to do! In some ways, the 1938 version of Robin Hood sticks closer to the original than this does. Putting that aside, even by Hollywood swashbuckler standards, overall this is kind of a tired movie. I'd recommend the 1982 Ivanhoe with Anthony Andrews as more faithful to the book and generally more interesting.

I saw this movie in 1952 when I was 7 years old. Years later I bought the Laser disc and am dismayed there is no DVD.There have been many swashbuckling movies but this is the best. It is a ripping good story, poignant as well. Beautifully filmed! Robert Taylor Joan Fontaine and Elizabeth Taylor are superb-as is George Sanders. I have shown this film over and over again to my children and they love it. It is romantic without being vulgar. It has plenty of action" without being gruesome. It has character. And lest I forget a wonderful musical score.

Robert Taylor and Director Richard Thorpe team up for their first of two (Knights of the Round Table in 1953) epic tales of noble knights and beautiful damsels in this well made adaptation of the 1819 Sir Walter Scott classic, nominated in 1952 for three Academy Awards, including Best Picture. It is, of course, the classic retelling of one man's, Wilfred of Ivanhoe, quest to restore Richard The Lion-Hearted (Norman Wooland) to the throne stolen by his evil brother, Prince John (Guy Rolfe). But with all its feats of derring-do, this version is also a tender tale of love. Robert Taylor stars as the intrepid Saxon knight-errant Wilfred of Ivanhoe, who is charmed by not one fair lady, but two; the stunningly beautiful Rebecca (Elizabeth Taylor) and the stately Saxon princess Rowena (Joan Fontaine). In striking contrast to this romantic feast, there is the malevolent Sir Brian De Bois-Guilbert (George Sanders), Ivanhoe's deadly enemy and constant threat. This film features some very authentic looking and spectacular fighting sequences and is sure to become a favorite film of students of 12th-century English history. Filmed entirely on location in Great Britain, this movie is very rich in detail, including costumes and weaponry. Very representative of the Metro Goldwyn Mayer classics, this is a very good film somewhat typical of the film making of this decade, but still good enough to be enjoyed in modern day. If you somehow missed this one, give it a look; An excellent movie !!!

In this mini-series adaptation of Daphne Du Maurier's novel "Jamaica Inn", Jane Seymour stars as the confused yet ethical Mary Yellan, a young woman who finds herself confronting some unknown evil on the Cornish moors.

I will not critique Du Maurier's story--it is a great Gothic masterpiece which employs tone, description, plot and characterization to near perfection---read the book to enjoy Du Maurier's talent and imagination at its best.

This adaptation follows the novel much more closely than Hitchcock's earlier film. However, some twists were added to further dramatize an already tumultuous story. I must wonder why this was necessary and can only think, sadly, that the original story was thought too tame in the light of our 20th/21st century viewpoints of violence. In this version, Mary's parents are victims to the sinister plot that wraps Jamaica Inn in secret, making Mary's involvement all the more desperate and poignant. If one has read the book before viewing the film, this addition seems overdone, detracting from the original and eliminating the self-righteously ethical factor so important to Mary's character. In order to emphasize the romance in the plot, Mary's relationship with the landlord's brother tallys up more screen time when compared percentage-wise with the novel's presentation of the same interplay---there are actually more scenes in the book where the characters are together, yet the book allows you to speculate as it plays the romance off the tale of suspense and the film does not. Patrick McGoohan plays Joss with a little too much gruffness--we never really see the vulnerability and helplessness which lie beneath the surface and appear after he has soaked himself in rum. There are never any scenes with both Jem and Joss together---the necessary comparison made between the brothers is not allowed and hence, we do not quite see Mary's dilemma in her attraction to Jem or what might have attracted her Aunt in the past. Aunt Patience, played by Billy Whitelaw, would have been perfect as the once beautiful woman worn down by the knowledge of her husband's misdeeds. However,through her stern cautionary conversations with Mary, she appears too logically complacent, more a fully functioning partner to Joss rather than the frightened remains of the silly woman whose head was turned by him in the first place. Jane Seymour's portrayal of Mary includes the bit of pep that DuMaurier states but never fully demonstrates, yet she tends to be too saucy at times, playing the active willing foil to Jem's criminal antics rather than the shocked observer from the pages of the novel.

The film is most definitely capitalizing on Du Maurier's so-called reputation for escapist romance; yet the book is not a romance at all, but rather Du Maurier's grim testament to the status of women as dependent creatures, shoved here and there by their stronger male counterparts. Mary doesn't necessarily find love nor does love conquer adversity as we are meant to conclude from this presentation. There is no moral lesson scorching Du Maurier's pages. Du Maurier's vision was much more dismal---Mary, finally beaten,accepts her fate and plays second fiddle to Jem's maleness; she learns to acquiesce to her dependency. Despite these fundemental differences, the film as a romantic interlude, is still good; it fully depicts Du Maurier's Cornwall seeped in its weather and crowned by monoliths. The film's music tends to be a little melodramatic--it is of the Camille Claudel genre--I think an insiduous pan pipe along the Braveheart vein would have been a better contrast with the rain, gloom and terror than 'Transfigured Night' which doles out more of the same.

Jamaica Inn has the true makings of a Gothic romance/thriller. Jane Seymour turns in what I believe is one of her best performances to date in a movie. Although this film did not receive a lot of acclaim it truly is worth seeing. With a plot that is full of suspence, murder, intrigue and romance it is sure to please. Jane Seymour fans get a double treat, not only does she give a fine performance but she is positively luminous in this early role. Jane Seymour plays a young woman who after a personal tragedy goes to live with relatives at their place, Jamaica Inn. It is not until she is settled in that she meets a mysterious man, and realizes that there is much she does not understand about her "generous" relatives and their haunting home. Soon she is wrapped up in a plot that could destroy her and everyone she loves.

I have watched this video at least 10 times and am impressed each time with the intensity that is ever present in this dark and terrifying story. Yet within we have a romance between the impossibly young Jane Seymour and Trevor Eve, who are both cute as can be and still thoroughly reflect the grimness and tragedy of the tale. Twists and turns take you places wholely unexpected and keep you glued even to the rather capriciously happy ending!

In this mini-series adaptation of Daphne Du Maurier's novel "Jamaica Inn", Jane Seymour stars as the confused yet ethical Mary Yellan, a young woman who finds herself confronting some unknown evil on the Cornish moors.

I will not critique Du Maurier's story--it is a great Gothic masterpiece which employs tone, description, plot and characterization to near perfection---read the book to enjoy Du Maurier's talent and imagination at its best.

This adaptation follows the novel much more closely than Hitchcock's earlier film. However, some twists were added to further dramatize an already tumultuous story. I must wonder why this was necessary and can only think, sadly, that the original story was thought too tame in the light of our 20th/21st century viewpoints of violence. In this version, Mary's parents are victims to the sinister plot that wraps Jamaica Inn in secret, making Mary's involvement all the more desperate and poignant. If one has read the book before viewing the film, this addition seems overdone, detracting from the original and eliminating the self-righteously ethical factor so important to Mary's character. In order to emphasize the romance in the plot, Mary's relationship with the landlord's brother tallys up more screen time when compared percentage-wise with the novel's presentation of the same interplay---there are actually more scenes in the book where the characters are together, yet the book allows you to speculate as it plays the romance off the tale of suspense and the film does not. Patrick McGoohan plays Joss with a little too much gruffness--we never really see the vulnerability and helplessness which lie beneath the surface and appear after he has soaked himself in rum. There are never any scenes with both Jem and Joss together---the necessary comparison made between the brothers is not allowed and hence, we do not quite see Mary's dilemma in her attraction to Jem or what might have attracted her Aunt in the past. Aunt Patience, played by Billy Whitelaw, would have been perfect as the once beautiful woman worn down by the knowledge of her husband's misdeeds. However,through her stern cautionary conversations with Mary, she appears too logically complacent, more a fully functioning partner to Joss rather than the frightened remains of the silly woman whose head was turned by him in the first place. Jane Seymour's portrayal of Mary includes the bit of pep that DuMaurier states but never fully demonstrates, yet she tends to be too saucy at times, playing the active willing foil to Jem's criminal antics rather than the shocked observer from the pages of the novel.

The film is most definitely capitalizing on Du Maurier's so-called reputation for escapist romance; yet the book is not a romance at all, but rather Du Maurier's grim testament to the status of women as dependent creatures, shoved here and there by their stronger male counterparts. Mary doesn't necessarily find love nor does love conquer adversity as we are meant to conclude from this presentation. There is no moral lesson scorching Du Maurier's pages. Du Maurier's vision was much more dismal---Mary, finally beaten,accepts her fate and plays second fiddle to Jem's maleness; she learns to acquiesce to her dependency. Despite these fundemental differences, the film as a romantic interlude, is still good; it fully depicts Du Maurier's Cornwall seeped in its weather and crowned by monoliths. The film's music tends to be a little melodramatic--it is of the Camille Claudel genre--I think an insiduous pan pipe along the Braveheart vein would have been a better contrast with the rain, gloom and terror than 'Transfigured Night' which doles out more of the same.

Jamaica Inn has the true makings of a Gothic romance/thriller. Jane Seymour turns in what I believe is one of her best performances to date in a movie. Although this film did not receive a lot of acclaim it truly is worth seeing. With a plot that is full of suspence, murder, intrigue and romance it is sure to please. Jane Seymour fans get a double treat, not only does she give a fine performance but she is positively luminous in this early role. Jane Seymour plays a young woman who after a personal tragedy goes to live with relatives at their place, Jamaica Inn. It is not until she is settled in that she meets a mysterious man, and realizes that there is much she does not understand about her "generous" relatives and their haunting home. Soon she is wrapped up in a plot that could destroy her and everyone she loves.

I have watched this video at least 10 times and am impressed each time with the intensity that is ever present in this dark and terrifying story. Yet within we have a romance between the impossibly young Jane Seymour and Trevor Eve, who are both cute as can be and still thoroughly reflect the grimness and tragedy of the tale. Twists and turns take you places wholely unexpected and keep you glued even to the rather capriciously happy ending!

Rather than film Oscar Wilde's play, Salome, as a stand-alone piece, Ken Russell uses the time-honored technique of a play within a play, to present a fictional British premier of the play considered so decadent, the Lord Chamberlain banned it from the stage. Wilde did not see a production of Salome in his lifetime. In Mr. Russell's film, the guests and employees of Alfred Taylor's brothel present a fully staged performance of Salome for Wilde as a birthday present.

Within this concept, Russell has each actor, except Wilde, play two parts in the film, one in the brothel, one in the play. Most remarkable of these is Imogen Millais-Scott who, the first time we see her, is a very timid, slightly stuttering maid, but who, in the play within the play, is none other than the seductive princess Salome. Besides having an intriguing face that can look thirteen one minute and sixty the next, she has a melodious, slightly odd speaking voice and intense line delivery.

Nicholas Grace is the sensuous, slightly debauched Oscar Wilde, Glenda Jackson commands the stage as a dissipated, but regal queen Herodias/Lady Alice, and Stratford Johns gives a detailed characterization as Herod/Alfred Taylor (the owner of the brothel). Russell himself appears with a fairly sizeable spoken role.

There are only two extra features on this DVD: the inevitable trailers (not particularly interesting) and a commentary by the director Ken Russell which is both fascinating and enlightening. Mr. Russell readily describes his creative process, explains some of the choices he made in the film, and relates a few interesting anecdotes about the actors, all the while dropping bits of information about the music he chose for the film and why.

This is not an appropriate film for children. It contains nudity, some crude gestures, and sexual situations.

I have been wating for close to 5 years to have this movie come ut on a medium that is affordable. For the longest of time the VHS version was close to $80.00. Now that it is on DVD we can apreciate this film for less ...

To say the least this is an excellent version of Oscar Wilde's Salome. If you want to understand Wilde and his plays, you should pick this film up. Not many people realize but Wilde and his friends would write plays and then act them out for fun. So when you see this movie you are getting a pretty good view of what a Friday night was for Wilde and his friends.
I mean to say, wouldn't it be fun to write a porn and have your friends act it out with you as the star? That was what Wilde did, that was why he was so controversial.
But like I said, if you are a theatre major or even a fan of literature and history. Watch this film and be amazed.

Much is made of risque film director's, loathe them or love them they are the ones mainstream Hollywood hacks very often "borrow" heavily from. And in doing so receive undo praise for innovention. Ken Russell is innovention personified! Like Cronenberg, Lynch and Alan Parker, he isn't afraid to takes the risks nessessary to make a highly provacative and compelling film. Salome's Last Dance is innovative, provacative, literate and well acted; brilliantly lensed on a miniscule budget (probably the budget of Spielberg's hair products durring one of his productions). Much praise to the lead actress, who's performance is nothing short of amazing! Grace as Wilde is particularly underappreciated in a subtle, yet alarmingly perverse performance that gives Stephen Fry's (in a different film) a run for his Wilde money. Odd, but sincere; bizarre, yet unique; I highly recommend t his rarely seen little gem!!!

You have to love one of the earliest parodies of 70s horror flicks.

Some highlights of the film that make it hilarious:

* Our killer (you never see his face, just heavy breathing, gloves, and galoshes) is looking over weapons and picks the deadliest one of them all...an unfolded paperclip!! * The ongoing "body count" that flashes on the screen everytime someone dies! * Our killer talking to the teacher: Teacher (on phone): "Why does your voice sound funny? Killer: "Because I'm disguising it, schmuck!" "How?" "I'm talking through a rubber chicken." "It sounded like you're talking through a rubber chicken." "'Click!'" "Did you just hang up?" "No, I just said 'click.'" * One of my favorite quotes as the principal "confesses": "All these years I've been naked underneath these clothes." * The killer as he chases a girl: "Why do they always run? Maybe it's the galoshes! They're a dead giveaway! Why do I wear them? It's not even raining!" *You have to love a movie that uses an eggplant for a murder weapon.

Okay, so the humor is bad and dated...but in the right mood with a lot of friends, it's downright funny.

I'm amazed that it's still in print. Enjoy.

Firstly, I thought that chick Toby was hot. And I don't think she was ever in another movie. Too bad.

This movie is a kind of horror spoof, but not nearly as trite as those that would follow in its wake. I didn't really like the whole "breather" thing; I thought that part was overdone and stupid. There is some raunchy humor involved, which is to me about as funny as Micheal Bolton, but that doesn't matter, because the subtle things are what makes the movie. Anyway, you have this high school, and someone is going around killing all of the teenagers while in the middle of fornication. One chick gets paper-clipped to death, for example. The screen promptly flashes a body count number as each victim bites the bullet. They also give you plenty of suspects, like the principal or the janitor or the shop teacher with the horsehead bookends. There's that chick, Toby; she's supposed to be mousy and unattractive, but, guys, I don't think so. (But it was funny when the breather described her as looking like Prince Valiant in a plum sweater.) Anyway, she manages to be within the area every time a murder takes place, so of course everyone assumes that she's the killer.

Gradually, the movie starts a downward spiral into chaotic, nightmarish scenes, bending reality beyond the confines of the spoof. Toby gets dressed up in a leather outfit, puts balloons into her blouse to increase her bustline, throws on a blonde wig, and decides to investigate in disguise. Two of my favorite lines:

Toby: "Principal Peters, you're naked!"
Principal: "That's right, Toby, for years I've been naked underneath my clothes."

Heh heh heh. Eventually, Toby finds herself being chased down the hall by the laughing, chalk-faced zombies of her fellow students, and by the principal, the janitor, and horsehead bookends. She crashes through a window, and then awakens in a hospital bed. The swine flu (cause by sexual repression) gave her the king crawling whopper of all nightmares. But it's not over yet. Oddly, despite the rest of the movie, it ends on a decidely horror-movie note. Kinda strange and uneven. But, it's fun to watch, and that's really all that matters, well, that and some fine chicks. And unlike many of the other movies I've reviewed, this one is funny on purpose.

I just finished watching Student Bodies again, a parody of old slasher movies, starts on Halloween night, Friday the 13th, etc... Although not by Abrams Zucker, and Zucker, it is of the same genre with many really bad sight gags, and on-screen messages, such as "not-dead, just unconscious, an important plot complication..." and so on. If you have never seen this move and like parodies of Halloween or Jason movies, go find a copy. Unfortunately it is not currently available on DVD, but you can find it on VHS or Laserdisc.

Laserdisc version reviewed.

Jerry Lewis has never seemed very funny too me, he always just seems to want to act dumb. This movie is no exception.

The Story sounds rather interesting, but in reality it isn't exactly elaborated enough. The Story is about a little girl called Donna who is a recently orphaned rich heiress, who has to decide which of her seven uncles to live with. So she is suppoesd to spend 2 weeks with each one, but actually most of the time you only get to see one scene with one uncle. There is really not much elaboration on the uncles, just one little scene. And ALL of them are played by Jerry Lewis.

What Torture, no this movie isn't funny it is just plain dumb. Don't get it! If you want something funny get an 'I love Lucy' or some other comedy. Cause this is not real comedy

Jerry is an "acquired taste," which I fortunately acquired at a young age! Clean humor is so hard to find anymore, and Jerry's versatility continues to astonish me. This movie showcases that perfectly.

18 years after the making of this gem, he would star with Robert DeNiro as the King of Comedy. Well, this is the King at his finest. Each character is exquisite, though I must admit that Uncle Bugsy is my favorite. The scene where he makes Donna (his adorable young niece) recite an arithmatic problem is classic old school comedy, and classic Lewis. While such classics as "The Nutty Professor", "The Disorderly Orderly" and "Cinderfella" made him a comedy icon, this charming and hilariously funny film is certain to find a place your heart. Superb family entertainment.

An above average comedy made three times as good by one of the best casts ever. Michael J Fox stars as the only nice member of a family waiting for a rich relative to die. Kurt Douglas, Nancy Travis and Ed Begley Jr are just some of the hilarious cast. My absolute favourite scene is the brawl between Michael and Phil, but the film is full of unforgetable scenes. See it for yourself.

This picture reminds me of the movie Greedy. It's a real funny movie and I laughted at all the real funny jokes. If you like really funny movies, then this one will make you laugh alot. Michael J. Fox is really great in his role and I think he is about the funniest actor. All the others actors are funny too, except it's sad that Phil Hartman got killed, that's not very good. I think if you like to laugh and have fun, then this movie is absolutely too funny for words. Go see it for yourself. I don't think some movies are quite as funny as this one though. Joshua

Kirk Douglas is surrounded by predator family- with smiles. When a young sexy nurse moves in, the family sets out on a dire leap, conning a black-sheep (Michael J. Fox) to step in and the rest you'll adore. It's fast pace, twists, fantastic acting, humorous, and I haven't a clue why joe-pro critics seemed to have missed that here. *L*

I first heard about this film on a radio call-in show in 1985, when I was 14 and *obsessed* with movies. Although I was in Illinois, the show was broadcast out of Philadelphia (WCAU-AM). The show was on from midnight to 5 am (CST), and it was hosted by a guy named Stephen Friedman. It was a call-in show where the subject was nothing but movies--and I swear this guy had seen ALL of them! Does anybody recall this show?? I just loved it!

Anyway, I was intrigued by a conversation he had with a caller on this film. They were talking about what a wild psychological drama it was, and that (at the time) there was basically no way to see the film in its original state. The film had not been released on video yet, and the TV print had been notoriously butchered to make it more "acceptable" for TV. The network (ABC?) even went so far as to shoot additional footage with psychiatrists explaining the sordid details of the story (a la "Psycho", perhaps). Well, I finally tracked it down. So after all these years, the wonder is over...

I can only imagine what I would have made of this film as a naive teenager. Even now I find myself creeped out by the horrible secrets of Mia's character, and by the painful emptiness of the soul of Liz's (this film would be considered bold even today; it's not tame by any standards). Mia's character seems a bit over the top, but I do believe there are people like that in the world. Her past traumas seemed to have led her to have a total lack of physical boundaries with people. As for Liz, she was moving at times, rather unpleasant at times (like in the all-too-real breakfast scene), and practically another character in others (like the fake British accent she adopts on occasion).

There is certainly an element of camp in this film. It doesn't dominate the film, so I wouldn't call it camp. But some of the dialog and sets are not to be believed. Liz croaks out some pretty bad lines, with my favorite being "that's too drab for a spring day--that should be worn on a day when it rains like p*ss!". Robert Mitchum, thoroughly repulsive as Mia's stepfather, gets some of the best (worst) lines, like his line to an overweight Liz, "I'm very fond of cows. Moooooo!".

I don't want to give away the plot, because the film is worth the time just to watch the story unravel and to enjoy the creepy atmosphere (full of baroque-y music, Mia's bizarre mansion, and constant dread). If you put the lapses into camp aside, you'll find it's not a bad psychological drama. You won't regret spending the time to check this unique film out.

There is something quite fascinating that continues to draw me back to repeated screenings of "Secret Ceremony". Whether it is the interesting and highly successful teaming of Elizabeth Taylor and Mia farrow, the almost surreal settings of the story or its very unusual storyline I'm not sure, perhaps it's a combination of all those things. Without a doubt it contains one of Elizabeth Taylor's finest, most underrated late 1960's performances just at the time when her Box Office standing was beginning to slip. She had only recently completed "Boom" with Richard Burton which was not successful and I feel as a result this film also suffered even though it is a far better production.

"Secret Ceremony" is set in London and tells the strange story of an wealthy but abandoned young girl Cenci (Farrow) who one day on a bus sees a woman who resembles her dead mother. Cenci in her disturbed mind feels it is her mother and "adapts" the middle aged prostitute Leonora as a replacement mother and takes her back to her strange home to play at being her daughter. Leonora has recently suffered through the lose of her own young daughter and sensing the girl's loneliness and her own unstable situation decides to play along with it and becomes actually attached to the girl in the process. Things become more complicated with the arrival first of Cenci's grasping aunts Hannah and Hilda (played by veteran actresses Peggy Ashcroft and Pamela Brown) who regularly come to the house to harrass Cenci and steal valuable items to resell in their run down antique shop, and secondly by the appearance of Cenci's unwelcome step father Albert (played by Robert Mitcham). As pyschological dramas go this is a winner and hints at many things in its story line such as lesbianism, child abuse and mother complexes. It certainly is not for all tastes which probably explains why rather sadly the film was not a success when released in 1968. What it does boast though are some excellent acting performances with great work from Elizabeth Taylor and Mia Farrow in particular. They have a wonderful screen chemistry together and indeed despite being savaged by the critics at the time I feel Robert Mitcham in his small role portraying a highly unlikeable character delivers great work and his confrontation scenes with Elizabeth have a real electricity about them.

Directed with flair by the famed Joseph losey, he enhanced the eerie atmosphere of this story with one of the great house sets that have ever been used in such a drama. Located in a leafy London suburb it is quite bizzare in its interior decoration and design and fits perfectly into the story. All Byzantine arches and coloured tiles and filled with macarbe dolls and music boxes it is both majestic and overdone which fits in perfectly with the bizzare storyline. Joseph Losey in all his productions always placed great emphasis on the settings of his stories to build the correct atmosphere and here he has excelled. It is hard to really fathom what time this story is set in so detached it seems to be from any sort of outside reality. Even the scenes shot at the beach resort in the off-season period have a strange almost funeral quality to them with misty seascapes and a general lack of people present.

Certainly like alot of Joseph Losey productions "Secret Ceremony" is an acquired taste. I can appreciate the fine acting by the leads and the strange offbeat story has alot to hold your interest. If you are interested in a compelling Elizabeth Taylor film from after her main period of Box Office stardom then "Secret Ceremony" is highly recommended.

having seen few films by either the magnificent ms taylor and/ or ms farrow, i was certainly impressed and would highly recommend this film to anyone who enjoys well-made classical psychological dramas. needless to say, the performances here are nearly flawless and i am actually surprised that neither actress was nominated for anything. i must say first of all that i am a lover of the strangest films and often campy ones too so this really was a true find for me. having read the other reviewers comments here, i can agree only so much with anything anyone has written here thus far. generally speaking, i am not fond of leonard maltin as a critic but i believe perhaps his review of this film comes the closest to carefully examining this exercise in psychological drama. secret ceremony can be disturbing at times in it's almost uncompromising depiction of tragedy and how we tend to cope with unbearable incidents. we find ms farrow here playing a young girl in her early twenties named cenci who has never truly accepted her mother's death. she meets lenora played by ms. taylor whom she almost instantaneously believes is her mother and two form a strange friendship. having lost a loved one in her life as well, lenora tends to feel sorry for the young cenci and agree to play "mummy" for her until the meddling aunts or cenci's sleazy, abusive stepfather appear. i didn't particularly find the breakfast scene between cenci and lenora to be repulsive. in fact, rather felt sorry for lenora off and on throughout the film and was glad to see her receive a nourishing meal. so what ?? ms. talor was beginning to gain a bit of weight but i still believe she looked radiantly beautiful in many scenes here. GREAT FILM AND VERY OVERLOOKED BY MANY.