
"Mr. Russell... combines
electronic music, video imagery and all manner of visionary
artifacts in a fast, ear-splitting, spectacular array: people
turning to dust; multiple crucifixions; fish and serpents in the
sky. Images like these seem perfectly at home in the film's
dizzying, frenetic mode" (Janet Maaslin, New York Times, 25 Dec
1980) |
Altered States from 1980. Ken made it to America and another shift as he tackles
science fiction. Again it could have been the start of a wealthy but ultimately disappointing
career. However he remained the individualist and despite
the major success of Altered States in 1980- second only to
Tommy- his American ventures though interesting failed.


Russell claims the film was first
offered to Spielberg, Kubrick, Sidney Pollack,
Robert Wise, Welles, Scorsese, Fred Zimmerman,
Woody Allen, Ingmar Bergman, de Palma,
Bertolucci, Boorman, Tarkovsky, Irwin Kirshner,
Coppola, Polanski, Dick Lester, Michael Winner,
Sidney Lummet, Dick Donner, George Lucas, Roeg,
Schlesinger, Truffaut, Zeffirelli, Bryan Forbes
then Ken Russell.

The story concerns Dr Jessup, a
university scientist experimenting with sensory
deprivation causing hallucinations. He
complements his experiments with a visit to
Mexican Native mystics and the potion he drinks
later combined with his experiments cause Hurt to
regress to a Neanderthal creature who´s only aim
is to eat, drink, sleep and survive. A plot driven film with a weak
sub-plot of love conquering Faustian ambition
"you are a Faustian freak, selling your soul
to find the great truth".

The dialogue in the film is at times like the
worst (whining) of Woody Allen´s man-woman self-confessionals. This may
reflect Russell's emotions after his own divorce, but the fault lies
mainly with scriptwriter Paddy Chayefsky. There are too many messages (Faust and selling
one's soul, primeval origins, the essence of soul etc etc) which
conflict with the too busy imagery of psychedelic journeys and bodily
transformation.

An example of the dialogue: "I don't know how even to put
this into words, but I'm beginning to think that what happened to you last
night was not just a hallucinatory experience, I've got this gut feeling
that something phenomelogical did actually happen and that there was some
kind of genetic transformation. I don't know why I think this in
defiance of all rationality but I do and now that I do I am terrified, I
am really terrified, petrified".
I tried watching parts of the film with the sound turned
off, and playing Van Morrison's Into the Mystic instead. It does
allow you to concentrate on Ken's non hallucinatory images which are as
always beautifully crafted. However you do miss out on Corigliano's
soundtrack.

The pacing is also faulty. The psychedelic images come very early, and the
Neanderthal creature is shown the moment he
emerges, so at the end of the film there are no
surprises left, rather just repetition of
effects. There is a lot of sentimentality with
gushing violins "if you love me we can fight
it", only occasionally is there some sharp
writing- the student girl in bed still calls her
lover Dr Jessup. But despite its weaknesses it does often
succeed and demonstrated that Russell could turn out
mainstream Hollywood successes. The hallucinations are stunningly beautiful.

The influence of Dali.
He could have developed a career as a sci-fi/
horror director but turned down later sci-fi scripts to
avoid being typecast. If the film was 20 minutes shorter,
with most of the family scenes omitted, it would be a
classic. The budget was $9 million which rose to just under $15
million. After shooting there was a 10 month period of special effects
production. Some of the effects have dated badly.

The video for Aha's
Take on Me pays homage to the transformation scene.
As an example of how to put your own
prejudice into a review, here is Ian Nathan's review in Empire magazine,
01-01-2000 "Not one to let slow-building tension and mystery get in the
way of wild flourishes of extremism and shock, Ken Russell hit upon a
story that more or less handled his structural excesses and tendency
toward blasphemy....It's got Russell's trademark eccentricity (read:
slight bonkers-ness) all over it, which you may take as a warning or a
recommendation" (from
here). The film has many flaws, mostly
from the script, but this review is just shoddy writing with no analysis.
For an example of good writing here is
Tom Buckley's interview with Ken "For better or worse my
films are not known for their dialogue scenes. In fact, I've been accused
of not knowing how to direct dialogue, although, ironically, Paddy said
that one reason I was hired after Arthur Penn left the picture was because
of the way I had handled the dialogue scenes in 'Savage Messiah.' Well,
there is a great deal of dialogue in 'Altered States,' and as I saw it, my
task was to make those scenes as visually interesting as possible so they
wouldn't be swallowed up by the special effects" (New York Times, 6 Jan
1981, click
here).
|