MovieChat Forums > Deep End (1971) Discussion > Dreadful - No wonder the leads left it 4...

Dreadful - No wonder the leads left it 40 yrs before facing it again


A Clumsy attempt at British social-realism.

"A Classic!" many of the herd may moo (afraid of course, of being seen not to 'get it') - no, it isn't.
What it is, is a badly plotted, rambling, half-witted coming-of-age film.
The actors are so wooden they really are a fire hazard.

Helped on by the fact that the director could barely speak/understand a word of English, the cast are left to stumble around trying to say something appropriate.
Rather than any deliberate, clever ad-libbing, they all seem like they're trying to read off a broken autocue.
It looks awkward, not because it's so authentic, but because it IS awkward.

It seems like Skolimowski had an idea and some money to spend, so cooked up this turkey, because he could.

The entire focus of this film is naturally around Jane Asher (Susan), simply because she is very pretty, fair enough, but even for hardened (pun intended) fans, it's got to have more than that, surely.

reply

If you really mistook this for social realism, or believe that its value lay in the plot, then it's hardly surprising that it went over your head. Get back in the herd where you belong!

reply

Ok, don't worry, I've already called the cops to investigate who stole your brain and replaced it with an ostrich turd !

Let me pick through your guff for a moment - there was no mistaking this for proper social realism, I said it was a clumsy/inept attempt at it... this film was made at a time when the British had already very effectively established a kitchen sink / documentary approach during the 50's and 60's, and the style of this was pretty clearly mimicking it.

I stated that it was badly plotted, not that I believed it's value lay in it. Actually, where it's value lay still remains a complete mystery.

Evidently you felt accused of being amongst the cattle yourself - since you then go about proving that you are, by repeating back the same thing to me - this being the classic hallmark of a moron.
If you choose to blindly insult me then at least do it imaginatively.

It went over my head did it ? Well conversely, I'd suggest that you simply read into it whatever you chose to, which can be done with Hannah Montana if you so wish
.... unless of course, you know that much better, then please enlighten me with your superior understanding.

reply

Deep End clearly isn't even an attempt at 'proper' social realism (as opposed to improper?). At best it merely incorporates a naturalistic acting style and location filming that had developed alongside that genre. By that measure most films of the past 40 years would qualify as social realist. I don't even know why you'd jump to label it so, presumably you wanted a term to couch your opinion in and happened upon one you didn't quite understand the meaning of. More than anything, Deep End is a magical realist coming of age comedy.

As for the 'in/out of the herd' bullocks, apologies if I gave the impression that I gave a toss.

reply

[deleted]

Rather than actually try to explain the quality of this film, you instead choose to lazily pull apart my description of a British social realism /kitchen sink 'style' (which was based on contemporary films ie. Poor Cow, Taste Of Honey, Room at the Top, Spring and Port Wine etc.), and then describe it instead as 'a magical realist coming of age comedy' - which simply renders you beneath ridicule.

Please don't bother wasting everyone’s time by posting here again - you're just embarrassing yourself.

reply

I never made any claims for the film's quality, I was just pointing out the fallacy in your criticism.

reply

"there was no mistaking this for proper social realism, I said it was a clumsy/inept attempt at it..."

ROFL. And YOU talk about ostrich turds ... beyond parody.

reply

Bollocks it's a cult film

reply

I personally loved it, how it could be regarded as realist I don't know, at points it was actually pretty surreal! Both leads were fantastic as well.

Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail-R.W Emerson

reply

I watched this film last night as it was billed as a 'superior British coming of age comedy drama'.
If that was the case my old age must be seeping in. A collage of clumsy sketches - some would not look out of place on the Benny Hill Show (no disrespect Benny).
What the hell was Diana Dors doing? Aargh.

reply

Spot on Jon !
it's a usual afterthought when a mess-up of a film like this is made that they later tag on 'comedy' or 'black comedy' as a sort of damage limitation label, and thus attempting to put the ball in your court, so that if you didn't like it, well it's your own fault for not getting it - either the alleged comedy or indeed it's artistry.
Well, at least some of us aren't buying it - so there's hope yet !

reply

Dear Ionizing.
I did try my utmost to enjoy it.
That said - I ended up fast forwarding through the film. I only reverted to normal speed at the somewhat very pleasurable spectacle of Jane Asher's bottom in the swimming pool. Shallow I know - if you pardon the pun.

Maybe I'm not cut out for art house. On reflection I don't really care.

reply

Just caught this on Film4, absolutely dreadful, overrated *beep* It had a few decent moments of potential - particularly the West End sequences but they were thin on the ground. I love experimental, alternative and art-house material but this was appalling.

This is a case of The Emperor's New Clothes where everyone raves around something because a bunch of elitist critics declare it to be vogue and only a minority have the bravery to come out and identify it as crap.

Its the same kind of mentality that has given us pretentiousness like Gilbert & George and Turner Prize winners who've presented an unmade bed or a shark in formaldehyde and everyone applaudes.

Please don't judge art-house on the basis of this flick, its just a bad film.

reply

It was on just after midnight. Nothing was decent on Sky so I came across this and thought, why not. Never knew this was the woman that done the cakes. :o

http://uktv.co.uk/food/stepbystep/aid/578286

The whole ending ruined the movie for me. I found it disturbing.

LoL at the amount of Hot dogs he kept buying waiting on her, then the hot dog owner gives him one for compliments. Quite a few funny moments. Especially a face palm LoL moment when he was carrying the cut out all over the place and on the train.

reply

Oh, dear. Some people should be banned from watching cinema.

Diana Dors was getting off. What are you, 11?

reply

I didn't realize that! Thanks ever so much for the info.

reply

It's my #1 of 1970 and Asher is my Best Actress win of the year.


My ratings: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur0239581/ratings

reply

I don't know what's wrong with (most of) you!

Deep End is a brilliant, beautiful film, by turns funny and disturbing, but always hauntingly atmospheric and memorable.

By the way, to the poster comparing the "pretentiousness" of Deep End to the "pretentiousness" of the art world, Gilbert & George and Tracey Emin are actually pretty populist artists (and very funny in a bawdy English way - so maybe there's a link with Deep End after all). Damien Hurst's shark is the least obscure piece of contemporary art ever - it just is what it is. But I digress...

Happily, Deep End is now finally availbale on DVD, ready to be discovered and cherished by open-minded film lovers everywhere.



reply

Hear hear! Finally somebody else who appreciates this little gem!


My ratings: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur0239581/ratings

reply

Thanks, Grady. When I saw the abuse Deep End was getting on here, I had to wade in (sorry...)

reply

I too seem to be in the minority in my enjoyment of Deep End. It showed how sexuality can be used as a form of control and manipulation, which gave Susan greater power over her male admirers. However this came back to haunt Susan as Mike's obession became deadly. Sevi_Lwa said the ending was disturbing and I would agree but not for the same reasons. The ending was meant to conveyed in this manner as it showed the extent of Mike's obessive behavior. He choose to cling on to Susan's dying body rather than call for help. It made for a shocking conclusion which was the right move.




"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".

reply

Deep End is a classic, and anyone who doesn't like has no taste. The movie work on so many surreal angles that it could not be called realism. Some of the acting seems natural (because they were great actors) and it may give a feeling of a British "kitchen sink drama" film, but Skolimowski was very much a surrealist/ political director. His earlier films build in a similar fashion to this one, and contain similar moments of naturalistic humor. Actually, his films are closer to Polanski and the new wave if anything! Believe it or not but most of this film wasn't even shot in London, but in Munich! Skolimowski's surreal recreation of a seedy London, reminds me slightly of Kubrick's New York in Eyes Wide Shut. The child may have these clumsy awkward moments, but it outlines his character and his inability to match Susan's maturity. The film acts as a sexually charged arena for the protagonists budding sexual awakening for a red hairs tease. This is an extremely darkly funny, intimate movie concerning the coming of age.

reply

Of course, "Deep End" is an unique, heartbreaking classic with not only Jane Asher, but, also a masterful performance by its young and never forgotten lead actor, John Moulder-Brown,a real cult actor!
And, the real star of this movie is fabulous director, Jerzy Skolimowski!
Obviously the person who started this post is a real troll!
What's the reason given to call this movie overrated and bad, it is only a very uneducated personal opinion, wanting to agitate the waters!
Most prominent and relative is the question: when is Paramount finally releasing a re-mastered DVD/Blue Ray version of this excellent, unforgettable romantic, cruel film in the US?

reply

Watched this movie last night, a good 1960's attempt at making a slightly surrealist arty film along with with some realism, , not in answer to creations like "Poor Cow" and " Saturday Night..." etc
( I felt ) The male lead has not much of a political platform also the young female lead had an equally powerless and subjective role. The whole possibly a little bit spoiled by the end but those 60's movies were always looking for a stylish way of killing characters off.
Ah the strong young woman, she must pay.

reply

[deleted]

Maybe I'm lucky ~ until 3 hours ago, I had never heard of this movie at all. I was randomly browsing around youtube when I happened upon the ending of this movie (unfortunately youtube only allows a limited length upload unless you pay or something, so people upload movies incrementally). I spoiled it for myself, and wasn't about to go back & find the beginning of it, but something about it poked at me. A half hour later, I went back, found the beginning & watched it through. No doubt the ending would've had more of an impact on me if I hadn't known it was coming, but that didn't detract from the fact that I thoroughly enjoyed the entire movie. This is coming from someone who had no prior knowledge of the movie or what anyone else thought of it. I had no preconceived notions or expectations about it. I just liked it.

I liked the gritty, rough & seedy look & feel of the bath house. It's stark & constantly damp, and I could almost smell the chlorine and wet tiles. It's a wonderfully weird hub for depraved clientele who are all there to get off in one way or another. The atmosphere is dark, the characters perverse, and thrown right into the center of it all is a fresh young innocent boy.

It's not "badly plotted" at all. Mike goes through a slow transformation from a shy, easily embarrassed newbie to an infatuated, then obsessed, "pervert." He's treated badly by the object of his attention but that only seems to infatuate him more. It seems like the atmosphere itself affects Mike, until he's just as creepy as all the other sexual deviants around him who we get to see in short little vignettes.

It certainly wasn't what I'd call "edge of my seat" thrilling (not that it was supposed to be), but it held my full attention, and I was interested to see where the climactic relationship would go between Mike & Sue. The character of Sue is quite interesting as well because she starts off seemingly uncaring and indifferent, but as it turns out she not only has a wild streak and a personal interest in Mike, she also seems to get a kick out of causing trouble. Their relationship develops into an immature little game of pranks; she playfully pretends he's pregnant, he grabs her boob in a movie theater, she threatens to have the cops nab him, he gets her fiancé nabbed by a cop, she runs over his bicycle, he blows out the tires on the car...it goes back & forth until the climactic ending.

I think the thing I liked about it the most was the surreality. When the bully boys push Mike into the pool & hold him under, suddenly instead he's swimming over a naked Sue. It's a bizarre moment where, as I took it, he believes himself to be defending her honor.

I don't know what other people said about the movie or if it's supposed to be "art house" or what...I just liked it. It wasn't gratuitous sex just for the sake of showing sex, it was a story about sordid characters and a place that seemed to attract them. There were humorous moments but it didn't seem like it was supposed to be funny or a comedy...it was haunting, strange, and the characters were weird & interesting. If that makes me a "sheep" then...BAA.

»«ëÕ|{¥(V)
I can't understand your crazy moon language.

reply


nothing says "I'm trying to make a social realist film" like frequent use of surrealism


Who cares about stairs? The main thing is ice cream.

reply

---"A Classic!" many of the herd may moo (afraid of course, of being seen not to 'get it')---

You criticise by ridiculing others rather than make an argument yourself.

The fact is, you don't get it.

reply

British masterpiece. Skolimowski is obviously working in a poetical realist mode that you're not used to. Check out some of the director's other films so you get your bearings. Otherwise, you just come off out of it.

reply

Was worth a watch, but can't say it's a masterpiece. There could have been so much more done with it.

Overly long, but it does transmit the awkwardness of youth and when an infatuation takes over a young mind, especially in one which has not an idea how to cope with emerging emotions.

Susan did play a few games too many with young Mike, very dangerous for anyone to trifle with teenager's feelings - I thought the greater revelation was Susan's confrontation with swimming teacher

An admirable fail from me...

reply

[deleted]