Opiniones de usuarios

There is no denying that this is both well made and intense but like David Lynch's Eraserhead that doesn't make it any easier to watch. Episodes of intense homoerotic masochism with 'victim' voiceover do not make for cheery viewing especially when as well done as this. Duffer's time spent with an older sadistic male is interspersed with time spent with a jolly prostitute who provides him with more traditional pleasures and trips to the riverside by Hammersmith Bridge. One bright spot is that our extremely damaged young man also takes trips to the riverside at Richmond and for those that know the area this was very early 1970 and well before tourists found the area. The grey deserted riverscape and towpath looks stunning and the side streets amazingly raw and ultimately ready for redevelopment. Almost unrecognisable to the casual viewer, the Richmond riverside of my youth is brought back as one bright spot in a very difficult film, the thematic origins of which I really would not like to know.

As a fan of cult and surreal cinema I decided to view this rarely seen film and what a choice it was.

this itself is a bizarre study of desires, want and obsession, which is demonstrated perfectly with narration awkwardly placed making you feel uncomfortable which certainly isn't a bad thing. The film disturbed atmosphere is only comparable to Lynch or Buñuel.

There is no wasted scene all of it is symbolic in a way, either if the film is a reality of a dream or a mix of both, you'll keep on asking yourself that when you're trying to decipher what fantasy/Parallel it is in.

But ultimately the film isn't perfection or a masterwork the last quarter of the film even though it is not a wasted scene (as I mentioned above) it can be quite tedious but I'm guessing that the director was trying to make it longer by including these sets of scenes? I'm not too sure.

A good piece of surreal British cinema.

7/10