Posted by: Iain Fisher
« on: May 06, 2008, 01:07:31 AM »
It seems that in reviewing Ken Russell's films, critics are apt to use to overworked word 'excess.'
But one must ask the question; what are they specifically responding to that would make them criticize his films as excessive? Excessive visuals, music, sound design, taste, dramatic license? All of the above?
There is a tendency to use 'excess' as an all encompassing word. It neatly avoids having to intelligently defend a critical stance. If everything comes down to a simple matter of taste, it somewhat nullifies the authoritive voice of the critic.
...
I think that the subject matter versus Ken's style is what gets poor critics. Few people call Tommy or Altered States excessive, but when the same style is used with classical composers, they react hostilely, almost always reverting to cliches or personal attacks on Ken. The poor critic prefers a reverential style for documentaries on composers, regarding Tchaikovsky as a tortured genius, but not looking at what made him tortured and a genius- for example the homosexuality is skipped quickly over.
Whereas The Music Lovers celebrates the music with imagery that reflects many aspects of Tchaikovsky's life. The viewpoint is Ken's, and you may disagree with some interpretations, but they are no more or less valid than other interpretations and I wouldn't disagree with Ken's vision of how powerful and exciting the music is.
Iain