Ken Russell is -- how shall I put this? -- "not to all tastes". He is a talented and distinctive film-maker who has little interest in courting a mainstream audience. "Salome's Last Dance" is clearly targeted for viewers who fancy their entertainment on the decadent side. There are several positive aspects of this movie, but most usefully it contains a performance of Oscar Wilde's play 'Salome'. There is some bookend material at the beginning and the end of this movie, but the main action is Wilde's 'Salome'.
MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD. Basically, 'earnest' male lovers Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas visit a London brothel one evening in 1895 for the usual reasons, only for Wilde to be honoured with a surprise performance of his quasi-biblical drama. Afterward, as Wilde and 'Bosie' are leaving -- apparently without having indulged in the brothel's usual transactions -- police arrive to arrest Wilde for his sexual crimes.
The actors' performances are mostly excellent, particularly that of Stratford Johns as Herod in the play within the film. (Full disclosure: Johns was a client of mine; I did some publicity work for him in 1978 when he was Daddy Warbucks in 'Annie' at the Victoria Palace.) At the centre of this movie, though, there's a serious casting problem. Before the performance begins, Wilde is introduced to the child actress who will be portraying Salome ... and it's extremely obvious that this short-necked, narrow-hipped 'actress' is in fact a boy. At the climax of the film, when Salome drops her last veil, I was not remotely surprised by what popped out of it. Possibly Ken Russell intended this film for viewers who prefer seeing a boy dressed as a girl, rather than an actual girl ... however, his attempts to frame this as a surprise were utterly a failure. Russell himself appears briefly as a Victorian photographer, lumbered with an elaborate tripod-mounted bellows camera.
There is one deeply disgusting moment when John the Baptist spits a gobbet of saliva into Salome's face, and Salome rapturously licks it off. Ugh! However, anyone familiar with Ken Russell's body of work likely expects to be disgusted occasionally.
The art direction -- sets, costumes, lighting -- is excellent throughout, although I felt it unlikely that the brothel-keepers would have splashed out so much expense and effort on costumes for a single performance of 'Salome'. And the streets in the exterior shots are too clean.
In any story putting historical figures in fictional situations, there are always some factual errors. Unfortunately, Russell commits errors here that are unnecessary. Wilde was arrested in April 1895, but Russell sets these events (including the arrest) on Guy Fawkes Night. I can't see any good reason for this. Guy Fawkes Day is an event that appeals largely to small boys (who beg financial contributions 'for the Guy'), devotees of fireworks, bonfire pyromaniacs and Catholic-bashers. I doubt that the Fifth of November had any special significance for Oscar Wilde.
More fatally, there's a whopper of an error in the screenplay. Near the end of this movie, just before the peelers arrive, Oscar Wilde makes a sniggering comment about Sarah Bernhardt's wooden leg. In 1895, mind you. This is trebly an error: #1: Bernhardt's right leg was not amputated until nearly twenty years later (well after Wilde's death). #2: Bernhardt chose not to wear a prosthetic limb: her very few post-amputation performances were mostly done sitting down. And #3: Oscar Wilde publicly worshipped Bernhardt, so it's unlikely that he'd make a joke at her expense. (What is it with gay men and actresses?)
I find this bad joke deeply emblematic of Ken Russell: he makes movies about famous people, but he clearly isn't interested in their actual achievements ... he only cares for the celebrity gossip and scandal. To Ken Russell, Sarah Bernhardt's career dwindles into insignificance, and what's really important is the (alleged) fact that she wore a wooden leg. If Ken Russell made a movie about Vincent van Gogh, Russell would ignore van Gogh's artwork and fixate on van Gogh slicing his ear off. (Actually, van Gogh cut off only a piece of his ear.)
"Salome's Last Dance" shows that Ken Russell has mastered the technical aspects of film- making, and that he clearly isn't interested in more conventional subject matter. To call this movie repellent or decadent would be interpreted (among Russell's fans) as paying a compliment. Purely since Russell so fully achieved what he meant to do here, I'll rate this one 8 out of 10.
MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD. Basically, 'earnest' male lovers Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas visit a London brothel one evening in 1895 for the usual reasons, only for Wilde to be honoured with a surprise performance of his quasi-biblical drama. Afterward, as Wilde and 'Bosie' are leaving -- apparently without having indulged in the brothel's usual transactions -- police arrive to arrest Wilde for his sexual crimes.
The actors' performances are mostly excellent, particularly that of Stratford Johns as Herod in the play within the film. (Full disclosure: Johns was a client of mine; I did some publicity work for him in 1978 when he was Daddy Warbucks in 'Annie' at the Victoria Palace.) At the centre of this movie, though, there's a serious casting problem. Before the performance begins, Wilde is introduced to the child actress who will be portraying Salome ... and it's extremely obvious that this short-necked, narrow-hipped 'actress' is in fact a boy. At the climax of the film, when Salome drops her last veil, I was not remotely surprised by what popped out of it. Possibly Ken Russell intended this film for viewers who prefer seeing a boy dressed as a girl, rather than an actual girl ... however, his attempts to frame this as a surprise were utterly a failure. Russell himself appears briefly as a Victorian photographer, lumbered with an elaborate tripod-mounted bellows camera.
There is one deeply disgusting moment when John the Baptist spits a gobbet of saliva into Salome's face, and Salome rapturously licks it off. Ugh! However, anyone familiar with Ken Russell's body of work likely expects to be disgusted occasionally.
The art direction -- sets, costumes, lighting -- is excellent throughout, although I felt it unlikely that the brothel-keepers would have splashed out so much expense and effort on costumes for a single performance of 'Salome'. And the streets in the exterior shots are too clean.
In any story putting historical figures in fictional situations, there are always some factual errors. Unfortunately, Russell commits errors here that are unnecessary. Wilde was arrested in April 1895, but Russell sets these events (including the arrest) on Guy Fawkes Night. I can't see any good reason for this. Guy Fawkes Day is an event that appeals largely to small boys (who beg financial contributions 'for the Guy'), devotees of fireworks, bonfire pyromaniacs and Catholic-bashers. I doubt that the Fifth of November had any special significance for Oscar Wilde.
More fatally, there's a whopper of an error in the screenplay. Near the end of this movie, just before the peelers arrive, Oscar Wilde makes a sniggering comment about Sarah Bernhardt's wooden leg. In 1895, mind you. This is trebly an error: #1: Bernhardt's right leg was not amputated until nearly twenty years later (well after Wilde's death). #2: Bernhardt chose not to wear a prosthetic limb: her very few post-amputation performances were mostly done sitting down. And #3: Oscar Wilde publicly worshipped Bernhardt, so it's unlikely that he'd make a joke at her expense. (What is it with gay men and actresses?)
I find this bad joke deeply emblematic of Ken Russell: he makes movies about famous people, but he clearly isn't interested in their actual achievements ... he only cares for the celebrity gossip and scandal. To Ken Russell, Sarah Bernhardt's career dwindles into insignificance, and what's really important is the (alleged) fact that she wore a wooden leg. If Ken Russell made a movie about Vincent van Gogh, Russell would ignore van Gogh's artwork and fixate on van Gogh slicing his ear off. (Actually, van Gogh cut off only a piece of his ear.)
"Salome's Last Dance" shows that Ken Russell has mastered the technical aspects of film- making, and that he clearly isn't interested in more conventional subject matter. To call this movie repellent or decadent would be interpreted (among Russell's fans) as paying a compliment. Purely since Russell so fully achieved what he meant to do here, I'll rate this one 8 out of 10.