Leyenda

When I first saw this movie,on DVD, I was like wow! This movie is gorgeous to look at, a famous trademark of Ridley Scott. The main flaw in this movie is Tom Cruise. He looked confused throughout the movie, but he was still likable. The other flaw, is that the storyline takes a while to get going. But all this actually managed to pick itself up, and do bear in mind it is theme driven film. I was impressed with Mia Sara. She started off a little uncomfortable, but when she turned evil, she came alive. In fact, the personifications of good and evil were one of the main reasons why I like this movie, other than Tim Curry, who is one of my favourite actors. The performance of Tim Curry is what makes this movie. He was unrecognisable, underneath all the Oscar-nominated makeup, but what a performance, it blew me away, in perhaps the most definitive portrayal of Satan ever on screen, both frightening and sexy at the same time! Even more amazing was that he is only 5'9 or so, and he had to wear stilts, also that he was in his late 30s when he took on this role, and I am glad he did. I felt as though I was in a different world when I saw this movie. The supporting actors David Bennent and Alice Playten offered solid support. I also liked the script, a little inappropriate with the goblins perhaps, but not that bad. The outstanding music score by Jerry Goldsmith is without doubt one of his finest and most underrated works. This was evident in the dress scene, Lilli's song, the final underwater scene and the very end. Magical! I liked the American version, but I much prefer the version I have on DVD, the European version, somehow I like less the score by Tangerine Dream . One definite thing that I liked about the American version was Darkness's "Mother Night" speech, in the European version he is a lot more mysterious. When this is on TV, it always shows the American version, but my personal opinion is that the European version is better (this is the one I have on DVD). If you are a fantasy fan, watch this movie, and either version. It is just beautiful, and definitely under-appreciated! 8/10. Bethany Cox

Legend (1985)

2.5/4

A lot of 80's fantasy movies focus on hero's trying to save the world, the universe, their love, their home, and so much more. 'Legend' follows that formula, with the hero (Tom Cruise) saving the world AND his love. It kind of works, to a limited degree. But it's not very good, and mostly doesn't work this time. The movie's fatal flaw is no compelling story. But what does work are the visuals. Beautiful, complex, and strangely fascinating, its own style kept me engaged. The story is lackluster; but the visuals are some of the best I've ever seen for a fantasy film. But unfortunately, the story gets in the way of a positive review, which is why I'm giving it a mixed negative review.

The movie follows a young man named Jack (Tom Cruise), who sets out to stop the evil Lord of Darkness (Tim Curry) from completely obliterating daylight and from marrying the woman he truly loves (Mia Sera).

As with a lot of director Ridley Scott's work, the style eventually overrules the substance. In 'Legend' there's little to no substance, but excellent doses in style. For years, this film tried to be made, but Scott couldn't get the proper conditions. He's finally working off an original screenplay from William Hjortsberg, who doesn't provide good groundwork for the picture. It's kind of a mash of 80's fantasy scenes, and all stringed together by a relatively basic plot. The film is also famous for having its sets burned completely to the ground during filming, and Tom Cruise's father dying during the production of the film. It's no wonder this movie is such a mess.

The visual style is exhilarating; beautifully thought and wonderfully calculated. The sets are just as fantastically produced. But the story, at its best, represents other fantasy movie plots; and at its worst, represents a lousy movie. It's a very complicated picture; but it all comes down to a very basic solution: there's more style over substance, something Scott is sometimes known for.

2 ½ STARS (OUT OF 4)

As a huge fan of Tangerine Dream and Jon Anderson, I praise the fact that their music is in the "American" cut of this film; their music has always sounded like they were trying to do soundtracks to a movie. You hear a song, you get visual images in your head and make a movie of your own.

However, ...

I do have to say that the American Version with Tangerine Dream's soundtrack only makes this movie into a "Cult" film. It could have been great, but (well, you fill in the blank).

Fortunately, I've seen the way it was SUPPOSED to have been released in the States (which you can find on the 2-disc DVD, which has both versions).

The Non-American version has a story which is much fuller, and the music (with a full symphony orchestra) is much better and adds more drama and punctuates the mood of each scene more properly.

I do find the American version's end much more climatic musically and story-wise with Jon Anderson (singer of Yes)'s angelic voice thundering with Tangerine Dream's score in the background.

So, pick an afternoon when you got about 4 hours to spare and watch BOTH. Then, take parts of each version and make YOUR OWN wonderous story.

And another thing, keep in mind that this movie came out a whole 20 years ago. The early 80's. Next year it can buy it's own beer (if it was a person). So, Tim Curry and a lot of others would have been just voices over CGI characters instead of being in actual makeup and there would have been MORE to the story and script if CGI was as available back then as it is now.

There IS such a thing as knowing limitations, you know.

American Version, good enough to make one wonder what was more.

International Version, done much better and fuller (though I like the American ending better)

As I said, watch both versions and make your OWN version to enjoy.

Aaaaannnd ... CUT!

That's a wrap.

So tell me if you've seen this one before: Two innocent lovers are corrupted by an evil villain played by Tim Curry in a dark castle where they somehow have to escape but are forever tainted by the experience.

I could be talking about the Rocky Horror Show, but I could also be talking about Legend. Both films are cult classics, and I think the reason why they manage to achieve this is through the time-tested "Garden of Eden/Original sin" plotline. The difference is that Legend lacks all the fun, silliness, and musicality of the Rocky Horror Show. It's all replaced with a dark fantasy setting and supporting actors that look the part.

I saw the US release with the Tangerine Dream soundtrack. The music is not at bad, especially the unicorn theme. Costume design is incredible as one imagines just how long it took for Tim Curry to get his demon head on before every filming session.

Ultimately the writing and pacing is fairly weak and it's not hard to see why it did poorly at the box office. I lived through the 1980s as a child and had never even heard of this film until recently. Now I know why.

Never did the phrase "a beautiful film" have more relevance than in this wonderful piece of adult fantasy. Make no mistake, this masterpiece, Ridley Scott's fourth film (it followed BLADE RUNNER) was never intended for children. Those who have written it off as a kids' movie totally betray their limitations and inability to see what is being offered here.

A youthful Tom Cruise was such a good choice as Jack, the forest dweller destined to plunge the world into darkness and then have but one opportunity to restore the light. Mia Sara is the beautiful princess, part Cinderella, part angel, all virgin! and Tim Curry? well, what a simply staggering contribution as the Lord of Darkness. Totally unrecognizable both visually and audibly but what a performance.

All the Ridley Scott trademarks are here, the back-projected blue light, the filtered scenes of wonderment, central characters in a crisis, the enigma of life itself. If anything, LEGEND is better now than when it was released. In '85 it received critical praise - just no-one went to see it! Well that's not strictly true. I attended the Sydney premiere and sat thru it entranced as others fidgeted, whispered, and generally brought attention to their limited attention spans and lowered perceptions!

Certainly it is a film that on one level children could relate to and even enjoy but it is a far deeper film with a host of reflective ideas and quite magical concepts. What really IS the Lord of Darkness? What is the significance of the Unicorns? What becomes of the innocence we leave behind in childhood? If none of this interests you, make sure you avoid this film!