Sweeney Todd: O Barbeiro Canibal

Dave Moore's TV version of the infamous tale of the bloodthirsty barber Sweeney Todd unsurprisingly bears little relation to Tim Burton's musical version released the following year. This one is much more matter-of-fact in its portrayal of Todd's descent into madness, and gives his motive for killing as revenge for being jailed in Newgate prison as a child for a crime committed by his father. Initially, there is a skewed sense of justice to Todd's reason for killing off his clients but, as his blood lust (and feelings for the neighbouring Mrs Lovett) grows stronger his reasons become less calculated.

Ray Winstone plays Todd. He is a fine actor, but loses some of his screen presence by choosing to underplay the role, his voice rarely betraying any kind of emotion. Despite this it's a choice that suits the character, even if it doesn't the actor. Cutting up his victims in the cellar of his barber shop, stripped to the waist, his bare head gleaming white and his mouth slack, Winstone makes a truly grotesque monster, one made all the more frightening because he is otherwise an extremely quiet and ordinary man.

There's a lot of violence in the film, a lot of slit throats and mutilation of corpses, but, again, it's not given any kind of sensationalistic value. Essie Davis plays Mrs Lovett, another decent character whose descent into monstrosity is sparked by the things that have happened to her rather than any inherent evil. She turns into a grotesque parody of herself as the film progresses, her beauty destroyed by pox scars, sporting fine wigs made by Todd that sit incongruously atop her ruined features. It's all very grim and dark and there is no place for humour, even of the gallows variety. Perhaps a touch of humour, especially on the part of Todd, is what is needed to both round out his character and make his monstrous actions that much more horrific

This film was made for UK TV, but its a lot better than the majority of Hollywood pap out there. Admittedly it will not be to everyones taste, but that goes without saying. It a simple tale really, but the film gives it a depth i was not expecting.

For me, it was the acting that really makes it stand out - Ray Winstone and David Warner are outstanding.

Ray shows Sweeney to be a kind compassionate person who also just happens to kill people. His character is one of great contradictions then, but his actions highlight the fact that we are all as human beings capable of feats of kindness and also great evil if circumstances dictate.

The script is excellent too, keeping the pace moving nicely, but having time to delve into aspects of religion and philosophy that give the actions of todd a profound resonance.

Overall, an excellent film, highly recommended. But how did they make a musical out of such a macabre tale?

This was a reasonable production of an excellent musical, but I recommend the George Hearn / Angela Lansbury version every time.

In a previous comment, alan_cricketman4 from Belfast UK, states: "I can understand producers using artistic licence and having to cut details and chronologically alter events etc., but to change the facts of such a well known and well documented case is just downright silly. I suggest that very little research has been applied here (by producers and reviewers alike) and a good website to browse, and learn further details on the case, is "Court TV CRIME LIBRARY"."

I fact, Sweeney Todd was universally accepted to be an 'urban myth' up to about 1993, due to the lack of other evidence. In 1993, a new book, was published. Of this book, Wikipedia says:

"In his 1993 book Sweeney Todd: The Real Story of the Demon Barber of Fleet, the horror and crime story writer Peter Haining argues that Sweeney Todd was a historical figure who committed his crimes around 1800. However, other researchers who have researched his citations find nothing in these sources to back up what Haining claims they said".

I realise that Wikipedia is not always entirely accurate, but I think it is fair to say that what Mr Haining has done is researched a theory about the origin of Sweeney Todd, which is worthy of consideration, but far from accepted historical truth.

You believe in every one of the characters in this movie, as well as this being historical London. (Which it may or may not have been- the story may well be nothing but urban legend, of course.)

Ray Winston does a great job. He has done so often enough, but this one is my favorite, so far.

It's actually pulled off portraying the 'mad barber' as a kindhearted fellow who's really only slightly disturbed (aside from being plenty homicidal) in such a way that you believe it, extreme as it sounds. Well, I certainly did, at least. All thanks to very good acting and character development.

In sum, I found this movie to be far better than the musical edition of the same tale, starring Johnny Depp. But then, I always prefer psychological credibility over costumes and singing.

Exactly how a wonderful story such as Sweeney Todd should be told. Everything about this production is head and shoulders above everything else. First up, we have the setting. This is truly a disgusting London, filled with waste and disease. Next we have Winstone, giving an astonishing performance. It shows how someone like Depp is a performer, but fails to attach himself to the emotional complexity of such a character. Winstone doesn't just decide that people are scum and start offing them. His first kill is a sudden and regrettable impulse. He even checks on the body later in the hopes that he isn't dead. Like so many real-life killers, Winstone's motivations come from a deep rooted psychological trauma. As he continues, the killing becomes the norm. It's his answer to vengeance, suspicion, and his way of attracting a woman. Davis is also brilliant as Lovett. For once this isn't some creepy madwoman, but a fragile and easily manipulated pawn. I can't speak highly enough of this film, or the way it demonstrates how stories from over a hundred years ago, can still be fresh and involving.