gnosticboy

To many, this film is the stunning-proof that Ken Russell never

had it, that idiocy and egoism were mistaken for genius. This

belief is unfounded. Is this film over-indulgent? Yes it is, dear

readers, very-much-so, because it is art, not entertainment. That- said, if you chuck any-expectations, this is a funny film and allegory

about the rise of pop-culture in the 19th Century, and the parallels

with the other generally-hollow spectacle known as "rock." This is

great film-making, and it should be noted that it has similarities

between itself and "Rocky Horror," and even "Hedwig," as they all

examine and explore the relationships between sexuality and pop- culture in similar-areas. It is also an odd bridge-between "classic"

rock and the emergent punk-movement of the time. It can also be

seen as a statement that "rock" is not really subversive, or

rebellious at-all, but ultimately "arch-conservative," and repressive.

Ironically (or maybe-not!), Mr. Russell had contracted Malcolm

McCalren and Vivienne Westwood to design S&M-costumes for

his film, "Mahler." It should also-be-noted that "Listz-o-Mania" was

released exactly the same year that McClaren's shop "SEX"

opened on King's Row, the rest is as they say... Basically-put, this

is about the the ins-and-outs of "why" we want and need pop- culture, and WHAT we generally-want from our "pop-idols" (sex, of- course). One could easily-say this film criticizes the absurd- spectacle that rock had-become by 1975, and we get this quite- often in the film, but it goes much-deeper, into the relationship- between artist and patron. The sexuality is about mass- psychology, too, so we get-a-nod towards Wilhelm Reich, and lots

of Freud. It is certainly a very-personal film for Russell, and

probably amuses him as much as it does myself that it enrages

so-many people who simply do-not get it... SO WHERE IS THE DVD, WARNER BROTHERS? WHERE IS THE UNCUT-VERSION OF "THE DEVILS?" WE REALLY WANT-IT, WE"RE OUT-HERE.

After reading a number of reviews at imdb--and elsewhere--I have to come-down-on-the-side of the director, Abel Ferrera's

vision. This is a GREAT science-fiction film, and for those who are

generally-disappointed with it, I have to ask whether they

understand what sci-fi IS. If science-fiction isn't about the present

(as-filtered through an imagined-future), it generally isn't good, but

New Rose Hotel fits this criteria. This is a pretty-old story from the

80s that Gibson had published in "Omni Magazine," it might-have

been his first-acceptance. While it is a minor-story, it has

dramatic-elements to it that are very-pleasing within-the-structure

of the "Ferrera" universe: a metropolitan-dystopia, urban and

moral-decay, the eternal quest by many for "power," official- corruption, the consequences of murder, sexuality, drugs, how

memory works, they all mesh-well with Ferrera's thematic-styles.

There are no great moral-lessons here, this is about the aftermath

of that paradigm. The only-complaint I have is that the future has

caught-up a bit, due to the age of the original-story. With our

human-society growing more-restrictive, with the rise of corporate- statism, and the subsequent-decline of the Nation State, New

Rose Hotel seems almost "quaint." That should give-us-pause.

While it's true that only the prologue of this film follows the short-story--one that H.P. Lovecraft did not like much--this is yet- another great-contribution by Gordon to the film-canon of Lovecraft. A number of criticisms seem to center-around ignorance about the production-itself-- it was made for around $1 million in Rome at the DeLaurentis studios, in 1986-currency. Keep-this-in-mind while watching this film, and you will understand what a true- accomplishment, and labor-of-love it must have been for her makers. The fact that it is as-engaging as it is, is a testament to Mr. Gordon's skill as a director, as well as the crew of the film. Also generally-forgotten, is Richard Band's PERFECT score for this film, it is incredibly-atmospheric and draws the viewer in...and then you're hooked. Indeed, this is a "b-film," and in the highest-regard, it easily-destroys present-day competition by other directors and production-companies. The only exception in horror I can make right-now would be Guillermo del Toro, who is ALSO a great-fan of Mr. Gordon's work! :0) And so, what more can I write-about this film which hasn't been said better, elsewhere? Upon it's release, I noted that the distributor made a BIG botch: after seeing it in a video-store, I happened-by the local-kino and saw it on the marquee! I STILL regret not going-into that theater and seeing it the way it was meant to be seen. Welcome to indie-film, catch-it if- you-can! All-said, this film delves-deeper into a story that was neglected by her author, Lovecraft didn't explore the possibilities much with it-- Stuart Gordon and Dennis Paoli did, and we are better-off for it.