Chemical Wedding

The premise was interesting though a bit convoluted.

The acting and directing were acceptable.

The one thing that ruined this film for me was the sound editing. Perhaps it was the copy I watched.

Perhaps it is really the way it was edited.

Dialog so low you cannot hear followed by a crappy musical score that blared every time it came in. If you are a fan of the music guy, and I am not, it may work for you. To me, the balance between music and dialog was totally amateur at best and ruined what could have been a very interesting movie.

"To pee or not to pee?" Aleister Crowley, infamous British occultist who liked to be called The Beast 666, was something of a boyhood hero of mine, I read numerous books and articles about his fascinating life and beliefs. This movie starts off in his final year of 1947, two young scholars drive a vintage car to the residential home where he spent his final days. Those road markings look awfully modern, oh dear! Move on 43 or 50 years into the future (different websites give different years but I can't be bothered to re-watch the film to find out. What I do know is that there are some cars shown that wouldn't have been built yet!). An experiment about virtual reality takes place at Trinity College, Cambridge, and Crowley is reincarnated, taking the place of a Prof Haddo. It's a fairly interesting and ambitious idea but it is also very confusing which in my opinion ultimately fails. Simon Callow plays both Crowley and Haddo. He is a lot of fun to watch as The Beast but his Haddo character is quietly spoken and has a bad - in more ways than one - stutter, which I found annoying. Crowley is actually played by two actors, the other one being John Shrapnel, I don't know why. Fans of Iron Maiden may be drawn to this film because it was part written by frontman Bruce Dickinson. He also plays a couple of small parts and the soundtrack features a few Maiden tracks - plus George Formby! In the DVD extras he and director Julian Doyle explain that they didn't have the budget to do a period film about Crowley, hence the idea of saving money by bringing him to the modern day. Fair enough. Crowley liked to shock and he used a lot of sex in his magick. Rated BBFC 18 the movie features a great deal of swearing and sexual language, nudity, drug taking and some violence. Those with weak stomachs may not like the bodily fluids of urine, semen and excrement on display (all fake). Callow gives good value playing Crowley but this is a million miles from being a biographic account of the man. Chemical Wedding is a curiosity of science fiction, horror and magick, if you are curious about the real Crowley then I would suggest reading something like "The Great Beast" by John Symonds. For me this film proved to be a mixed bag, Crowley himself was entertaining but the plot was silly, some of the acting was poor and after 107 minutes I'd had enough.

If you have read anything by Crowley, the Satanic Bible, or Marquis de Sade, this movie will fall along those kind of lines and not upset you too much. However, if you can't handle a weird mixture of sadism (both sexual and other), a perversion of the Christian religion (mostly in the distortion of Biblical verses to emphasize sexual things), and (just for kicks) a little Sci-Fi (kinda like "The Mangler 2"), then do not watch. But, I found it entertaining, although a bit confusing trying to mix so many genres into one movie. Basically, a professor becomes possessed by Alastair Crowley, via virtual reality, which is being tested by (basically) an American Tech Support guy. Prof. Hallow completely changes. Most of the movie is about spouting Crowley's rhetoric, with a few deaths thrown in for good measure. The movie also quotes and/or refers to many ideas regarding thoughts about space, time, philosophy, etc. I cannot expand too much because it has been a very long time since I studied any of the points that are brought up in the movie. But I will say that the ones I remember (and the ones I looked up for a refresher), were accurately presented and expressed from an educated (for one opinion or another) point of view.

I do love the acting from the character Hallow. His descent into madness and deviance is great. The other actors are good as well, but his performance steals the show. Also note: do NOT let children watch this movie. There is at least one scene that is very "Fifty Shades".

I'm sorry I do not know any of the actors names.

Aleister Crowley, one of the greatest of the magicians, is dead. But what if someone were to synthesize his essence in a computer program, and import it into the human mind... could Crowley be reborn, or at least simulated? England is about to find out, thanks to a program called Z93. As one might expect from Crowley (and Iron Maiden's Bruce Dickinson), chaos ensues.

My background on this film was mixed. I had heard largely unkind things said about it, including suggestions that it wasn't even worth viewing. As for the subject matter, my knowledge is relatively minimal. I've never been an Iron Maiden fan, and although I have read Crowley's "Diary of a Drug Fiend", that is more or less the extent of my awareness of him. I do, however, know a bit about Eliphas Levi, who is referenced in the film.

Despite the rash of bad reviews this film received, I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed it beginning to end. I found the idea very clever and original, Simon Callow's portrayal of Crowley to be flawless (especially playing two diverse characters), and the film's pushing of the limits to be a welcome surprise. I've seen the limits of violence pushed, but rarely in horror do we see sexual magick pursued with such graphic imagery. One scene involving a fax machine is particularly interesting. The images in general are vivid and alluring. Director Julian Doyle knows how to get his vision on film and does it here.

Besides Callow, the other performances are also top notch. The professors and the female lead are superb. The lead in particular was both sexy and graceful and had all the skills of a seasoned actress. I am not familiar with her work, but if we see her more often, this wouldn't be a surprise at all and may be a pleasant addition to the list of recurring actresses working in cinema today.

I had two minor concerns. First, why is getting a photo of Crowley so hard? One of the subplots involves the school's newspaper looking for a photo and they either never find one or fail to for several scenes. The film takes place in 2000, so the Internet should be available, and even without it, any occult book should have one of the more common photos (such as with Crowley wearing the pyramid on his head). Also, maybe it's me (it's probably me), but I found Mathers and Victor to be confusing. Once Victor gets scarred, there's no problem, but before that I wasn't always clear which one was on screen. Am I alone on this?

I encourage you to see "Crowley" as soon as you can. I find more and more often the few enjoyable films I view are re-issues of classic or forgotten titles, usually foreign. "Crowley" departs from that, breaking the mold... it may just be the first good horror film of 2009 (excluding re-issues). And based on what I'm seeing on the horizon, it will likely not have much competition.

I would not pay too much attention to our American friend's review.One surely cannot have an opinion when he knows nothing of the film makers main character, who's nature and role, played an influential part in the world of the occult!

I could make a few assumptions that would lean on inadequate notions but lets get back to the film.

I found it quirky and at times a little to jazzed up.If you're into magik you will adore any scene that features the beast.If you are not into the man or magik, than it's not really for you.

You will just end up writing something silly like the gentleman from America and start waffling on about politics!