MovieChat Forums > Lord of Illusions (1995) Discussion > Wasted potential

Wasted potential

posted 9 years ago by jonathanmarklund
2 replies | jump to latest

This movie could actually have been great. There are some really good elements in it, some well researched subjects and it feels like somebody actually dedicated some time to make this movie a whole.
Most movies today feels like it's just a string of scenes edited together and entire sections could be taken out or moved around and it wouldn't change the movie to much. But this one feels like each part builds on the previous part.

But, the beginning is a rushed, all the characters in the beginning needed a stronger introduction.
We don't really know who and why kind of relationship the characters has to each other. Swann just happens to know some people with weapons who are prepared to go out on a friday night and kill some cult leader?
We kinda get that Swann and the cult leader has had some kind of relationship but what exactly would perhaps have been shown as a better motivation for the violence so soon in the movie.

The actor for Swann just feels off. He has a very weak personality and looks weird. A better actor could have done a lot for this movie. The guy playing the detective ain't exactly the best actor either, but he did fairly well.

It's obvious that this screenplay is taken from a larger body of material, and they were a little bit inconsistent with what they cut out.
Like the tattoo on the detectives backs.
They made it sound like he know almost nothing of the occult in the movie so seeing him with a large sigil doesn't make a lot of sense.

I was thinking about giving this a score of 5/10, but then I heard Diamanda Galás in the end and bumped it up to a 6/10.

This is a movie that might actually benefit from getting remade.

[–] andrewhollingsworth 9 years ago

You point about the detective not knowing much about the occult makes it sound like you didn't watch the director's cut. In this version there are a few very brief flashbacks, a newspaper article about a private eye and an exorcism and this aspect is briefly discussed when he first gets the job to go to LA.

You seem to quite like the film as you saw the potential in it, so I recommend watching the far superior director's cut. Makes what was a 5/10 or 6/10 if feeling slightly generous, a 7/10 movie in my opinion. Of the four Clive Barker directed movies, this isn't as good as Hellraiser or Nightbreed but it is far superior to his lacklustre low budget debut Rawhead Rex.

[–] TheSolarSailor 8 years ago

You point about the detective not knowing much about the occult makes it sound like you didn't watch the director's cut. In this version there are a few very brief flashbacks, a newspaper article about a private eye and an exorcism and this aspect is briefly discussed when he first gets the job to go to LA.

That whole scene was in the theatrical cut.

You seem to quite like the film as you saw the potential in it, so I recommend watching the far superior director's cut. Makes what was a 5/10 or 6/10 if feeling slightly generous, a 7/10 movie in my opinion.

I agree that the Director's Cut is better. It may not fix all of the OP's issues, but overall it is simply a more fluid film. I disliked this film back in 1995 when I saw it in theaters, but last year when I finally revisited it with Scream Factory's new release, I was amazed by how much I actually enjoyed it. Funny, no matter how much I didn't like it back in the day, it never left me and I never forgot about it. The imagery, the world of magic versus the world of illusion...it stayed with me.

Of the four Clive Barker directed movies, this isn't as good as Hellraiser or Nightbreed but it is far superior to his lacklustre low budget debut Rawhead Rex.

Clive Barker has only directed three films, Hellraiser, Nightbreed, and Lord of Illusions. George Pavlou directed Rawhead Rex. Clive really disliked Rawhead Rex. He provided a script treatment for Rawhead Rex and Underworld the year before that, but those in charge didn't really adhere to what Clive had to say. Like he says in the interview before the director's cut of Nightbreed, that was a time when he was creatively less strong when it came to getting his way. Those bad experiences are why he decided to direct Hellraiser. Hellraiser was his debut, but was also very low-budget. He had total control on Hellraiser, but bigger productions like Nightbreed and Lord of Illusions were less enjoyable and rather stressful to him because they were much larger productions. Luckily, after his experience on Nightbreed, he had the foresight to make a deal with the studio on Lord of Illusions, ensuring that he'd make the required cuts for the theatrical release if the studio agreed to allow him a director's cut on home video. He learned a huge lesson on Nightbreed, as that led to a great deal of footage disappearing to never be seen again for over twenty years. I am so thankful we finally got a director's cut of Nightbreed after all this time.

- - - - - - -
I am not a fan. I just happen to enjoy movies. Fans are embarrassing.