The Wicked Lady

To mark the passing of Michael Winner and to celebrate the film's 30th anniversary(2013) the time would now seem to be propitious to finally release this movie on DVD even if it's only a DVD-R as most older movies are these days. Of course it all boils down to who currently owns the rights. Originally made for the Cannon banner, most of those films wound up being purchased by MGM whose DVDs are now being distributed in conjunction with 20th Century Fox.

There could also be a problem with the soundtrack by Tony Banks (of Genesis fame). He may be due royalties which the current owner of THE WICKED LADY doesn't want to pay. That happened to a number of late 1960s and early 1970s American International titles when they first came out on video. There could be many different reasons for the delay but whatever they are, they need to be worked out! If the film looks great on VHS (which it does), think of what a proper aspect DVD would look like.

The film was roundly panned upon its original release in 1983. The Brits hated it because they saw it as an unnecessary R rated remake of the beloved 1945 film with Margaret Lockwood and James Mason and the Americans hated it because they either didn't realize that it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek or found it too over-the-top for their liking. To criticize Dunaway's performance as overblown is to totally miss the point. Alan Bates, John Gielgud, Denholm Elliot and the rest of the cast are having a fine old time and the cinematography by Jack Cardiff (THE RED SHOES) is gorgeous to behold.

There is definitely gratuitous nudity and the nearly X rated horsewhipping scene is truly outrageous but that adds to the overheated atmosphere of the film. It's either your cup of tea or it isn't but either way it deserves to be available in the digital format. Is it a fun historical romp or overdone cinematic trash? Let each viewer decide!... For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.

POSTSCRIPT: A Blu-Ray / DVD version was finally released by Kino Lorber in 2015 and although still available, it is outrageously expensive.

Back in the day of 1983, I was 22 and really did not care about quality in movies like I do now at 60. There is a place for cheesy movies or drive in movies, but Cannon chose to skip and save on each budget to hoped to fund their next idiot production of knock off movies. I caught Wicked Lady 1983 for the first and final time after doing a Faye Dunaway search. When I saw the other movies were Cannon, I did not expect much. A period movie with customs was nice, but cannot compare to Richard Lester the 3 and 4 Musketeers and see for yourself the difference in quality. In defense of Michael Winner, he was a mans man director, meaning his style worked best with men who were stage actors and needed little or no direction, they could improvise out on rugged locations. Chato's Land a release by United Artist.

This film is another example of why perspicacious cinema-goers have always needed to be very wary when major studios decide to remake a well known classic. Perhaps IMDb should create a list of such remakes and give viewers the chance to vote on them as better or worse than the original, possibly adding comments when appropriate. Hopefully these comments might make the studios concerned much more wary about following this rather dubious practice. This 1983 film is a remake in colour of the classic black and white film of the same name starring Margaret Lockwood, which was released in 1945, and it can still be readily found on videotape. Unfortunately the original 1945 film is not and is becoming very hard to find outside the U.K. where Margaret Lockwood's name still commands enormous respect in the entertainment world.

Although this remake was able to obtain an R rating in the U.S.A. (by report only with considerable difficulty) it is in my opinion straight pornography- not because it realistically portrays the cruelty and violence of an eighteenth century execution at Tyburn, shows two women fighting with horsewhips, and includes a little more nudity than was generally regarded as acceptable at the time of its release, but because all these scenes were only peripherally necessary to the story line and were clearly only featured and prolonged in the way that they were for the purpose of audience titillation. If you want to be titillated in this way then by all means watch this remake which will probably provide exactly what you expect; but if you want to view a work of art which is in fact infinitely more sexy than this remake, join the demand for a DVD of the 1945 film (which is already available in PAL format for the European market) to be released for the North American market as well. This 1945 film has never been released in its original form in the U.S.A. because the meticulously recreated seventeenth century costumes were too low cut to be acceptable to the American censors of the period, so the original version had to be re-filmed before it could find its way into North American cinemas. A North American DVD of this original release would therefore be a fitting tribute to a great work in this its diamond anniversary year.

Heavy handed adventure with Faye (who followed up Mommie Dearest with this) robbing stage coaches in full period costume. The production is pretty decent, as is the cast, but the film is so woefully over-the-top that you just want to slap director Michael Winner sometimes. What could have been. And that nudity thrown in for no apparent reason is absurd. The scene where Faye whips the clothes off the wife of her lover at his funeral is classic camp, however. Best performance is given by Denholm Elliott, who plays Faye's put-upon husband. This is in the same league as the even more preposterous Mata-Hari...which even shares co-star Oliver Tobias! This one is good for a few laughs.

Just watched this the other day and, while the film itself was a bit of a mess, Faye Dunaway's performance makes this watchable. From the first moment we see her appear on screen, she owns the screen and you just can't take your eyes off her.

Miss Dunaway was still incredibly gorgeous at this stage and willing to take risks with her performance that few other actresses would. How many legendary actresses would be willing to engage in a whip fight with a topless woman?

While she is let down by the poor dialogue and uninterested/uninteresting supporting performers, she certainly gives it her all. At times she may go a little over the top but she is the only thing that makes the film watchable.