Gothic (1986) Reviews

Gothic (1986)
Member Rating:  
Director Ken Russell applies his trademark excess to this surreal, experimental examination of the creative dementia which shaped Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley's Frankenstein. The story is embellished from events which allegedly took place at the Swiss villa of Lord Byron (Gabriel Byrne) on the night of June 16, 1816. Byron's guests include poet Percy Shelley (Julian Sands) and his future wife Mary (Natasha Richardson); Mary's half-sister Claire (Myriam Cyr) and Byron's leech-happy personal physician Dr. John Polidori (Timothy Spall). Byron promises them a night of horror like only a mad poet can deliver -- after partaking of laudanum and other hallucinogens, the guests tell ghost stories while exploring the dark corridors of his home. From here, Russell dives headlong into madness, discarding plot structure in favor of fever-dream setpieces in which the guests confront living manifestations of their own fears and insecurities -- creative, mortal and sexual, among others. The raging Romantics are also given to lengthy discourse on the nature of fear and the fine line between creative genius and insanity; by the film's end, viewers may find themselves wondering the same thing about the director. Those who may prefer a more subdued speculation on the same theme should seek out Ivan Passer's Haunted Summer. ~ Cavett Binion, Rovi

 Read More


Starring:
Gabriel Byrne, Julian Sands, (more)
Director(s):
Ken Russell
Theatrical MPAA Rating:
R
Format(s):
DVD
View All Versions to rent and buy
 
 
 
 
 
 

Average Ratings

(11 member reviews)  

Member Reviews

Terri H.

Basically the Synopsis explains the whole thing but I loved this movie for it was actually "Gothic" I first saw this movie when I was 12 and I liked it but I thought o since I was younger I liked basicaly anything so a couple later rented it again and still loved it. There is a lot of experimentation through out the movie you'll be able to tell when they are happening

Yes   |   No


James J.

If you like homoerotica and opium. Check this movie out. Otherwise, don't waste your time.

Yes   |   No


Steven G.

Ken Russell always goes over the top in his productions. "Gothic" is no exception. The story is interesting -- detailing when Lord Byron, Dr. Polidori, Percy Shelley and Mary Wollstonecraft stayed at Lake Geneva entertaining one another with ghost stories, out of which Mary (who later married Shelley) created the "Frankenstein" novel. The actors do their best (though Julians Sands made me cringe with his over-acting) but Russell goes too far and is too bizare. Designed to frighten and scare, this tale grosses you out and almost makes you laugh at its sad attempt. Made in 1986 before CGI effects so Russell uses camera effects. They don't hold up in 2010. The setting was good (Villa Deodati). The soundtrack was obnoxious. The references to homosexulaity were off-putting. What was the puddle of sticky stuff supposed to be? The film -- though blessed with great cover art -- fails to entertain or amuse. Nudity, foul language, some violence. Don't bother.

Yes   |   No


Katie P.

Love this movie dearly! I recommend it to ANY and ALL Ken Russell fans. If you are not familiar with this director your most likely NOT going to understand the film in it's entirety. 5 STARS!!!

Yes   |   No


Jason F.

Bizzaro. If you aren't familiar with this director, at the end of this film you will the internal conflict of wondering if it was a total waste of your time, or if it was the exact opposite of a waste of your time. IF you like Kubrick, youll find this interesting. It's like Kubrick with less budget (but even that doesn't make sense because the sets look pretty expensive).

Yes   |   No


Gloria S.

I thought since there were so many "stars" in this, it would be a good movie. And since I like "gothic" books/movies, I thought it'd be great. It stinks. I only watched the first 30 minutes. I feel life is too short to waste it on a movie that is so moronic.

Yes   |   No


Rachael S.

I didn't like it at first, but if you step back and look at the movie it's quite good. They're not afraid of an actual monster or ghost, it's all about your own personal fears driving into possible madness.

Yes   |   No


Bradley A.

This movie reminded me of the cut version of Caligula. Where the movie made no sense because it was cut or jumped around too much, and the acting was WAY OVER THE TOP.

Yes   |   No


Monique H.

DON'T waste your time. I don't care if you don't have a job and have nothing better to do. DON'T DO IT!!!

Yes   |   No


Larisa H.

This movie jumped all over the place! Couldn’t follow the story; was it based on truth or Fic.? It went know where! The story line was bizarre! I like unusual movies but this one was off! I did do think that if they had any other actors I would have stopped after 30mins for watching it.

Yes   |   No


 
 
 

BY MAIL

Monthly Subscription
NEW! 7 - Day Rental
No subscription required. Usually ships in 24 hours.
 

IN-STORE

 

What's Your Take?

Add to FavoritesIn Favorites  |  Share:     Email to a friendShare on FacebookShare on Twitter
    YOUR REVIEW
    WRITE A REVIEW
     
    1000 
     
    Member Reviews
    Read all (11)
     
    Terri H.

    Basically the Synopsis explains the whole thing but I loved this movie for it was actually "Gothic" I first saw this movie when I was 12 and I liked it but I thought o since I was younger I liked basicaly anything so a couple later rented it again and still loved it. There is a lot of experimentation through out the movie you'll be able to tell when they are happening

    Yes   |   No

     
    James J.

    If you like homoerotica and opium. Check this movie out. Otherwise, don't waste your time.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Steven G.

    Ken Russell always goes over the top in his productions. "Gothic" is no exception. The story is interesting -- detailing when Lord Byron, Dr. Polidori, Percy Shelley and Mary Wollstonecraft stayed at Lake Geneva entertaining one another with ghost stories, out of which Mary (who later married Shelley) created the "Frankenstein" novel. The actors do their best (though Julians Sands made me cringe with his over-acting) but Russell goes too far and is too bizare. Designed to frighten and scare, this tale grosses you out and almost makes you laugh at its sad attempt. Made in 1986 before CGI effects so Russell uses camera effects. They don't hold up in 2010. The setting was good (Villa Deodati). The soundtrack was obnoxious. The references to homosexulaity were off-putting. What was the puddle of sticky stuff supposed to be? The film -- though blessed with great cover art -- fails to entertain or amuse. Nudity, foul language, some violence. Don't bother.

    Yes   |   No

     
    Read All 11 Reviews
       

      Quick Links

      Email Exclusives

      Find Us Online: BLOCKBUSTER Blog - BLOCKBUSTER Widgets - BLOCKBUSTER RSS FEED - BLOCKBUSTER Facebook Page - BLOCKBUSTER Twitter Page - BLOCKBUSTER Wiki

      FIND MOVIES

      ALL MOVIES

      Popular | # | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

      ALL ACTORS AND DIRECTORS

      Popular | # | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

      BLOCKBUSTER CORPORATE

       

      BLOCKBUSTER name, design and related marks are trademarks of Blockbuster L.L.C. © 2012 Blockbuster L.L.C. All rights reserved.

      Portions of Content Provided by Rovi Corporation. © 2012 Rovi Corporation.