TonyDood
I have seen "Crimes Of Passion" many times over the years but I think I only just came to understand this movie more fully after watching it again recently. It is, as the poster states, a Ken Russell film, and has to be judged that way, as part of the oeuvre of a brilliant, mad genius who seems to have been one of only a few true, classic auteurs in cinema history. "Crimes Of Passion," for all its (many) flaws, for all its trash and sleaze, for good or ill, is, in its final form anyway, a cinematic work of art that defies convention. I think it also invites serious study. Trying to describe the plot of "C of P" is the first clue to the deceptively complex nature of this film. If you viewed the movie circa 1984-1986 you saw the story of a vivacious woman played by Kathleen Turner who works in design by day and goes into drag to turns tricks downtown by night. She's pursued by a deranged priest who seems intent on "saving" her, possibly by using perverted sex to kill her, and an "average Joe" family man who, like Jimmy Stewart before him and Craig Wasson the same year "Crimes" came out, just can't stay away from what turns him on. The Average Joe character, "Bobby," played by relative unknown John Laughlin, is involved in a marriage and family that's fizzling and may possibly be the perfect antidote to what ails our confused working girl...if she can survive mentally and physically, that is. What one took away from the original version of the film was, chiefly, Ms. Turner's brave, fantastic performance (and how uninhibited she was mentally as well as physically), the berserk scenes with Anthony Perkins, the pinks and blues in the set design, the strange surprise ending and the sardonic tone--the plot almost seemed like an afterthought.Like all of Russel's films "C of P" is impossible to understand or completely enjoy after only one viewing (for a more obvious example, try his "Gothic"). When I first saw the film on cable many years ago, like many a teen in the mid-to-late 80s, I was transfixed by the sex, violence, lurid color palette and over-the-top synth score; I was intrigued by the themes of obsession, religion and duality, mystified by the range of acting choices and choice of performers and utterly confused trying to figure out what it was all about.Now here's the thing--that's how it played when the movie first came out. I don't remember the hoopla that surrounded "C of P" but I remember a similar outcry over "Body Double" which was in theaters around the same time. DePalma's film seems like a Disney movie next to Russell's now. Probably "Crimes" played, as it did on cable, so campy and over-wrought it became dark comedy...certainly you couldn't take the scenes with Ms. Turner and Perkins too seriously; as one reviewer suggested, those moments play out like bizarre numbers in an MGM musical film or something. But apparently it was too much for the censors and the film was rumored to have been "heavily cut," something mid-80s film-goers weren't very savvy about. In fact, along with Spielberg's "Close Encounters" this may have been one of the first films to cause a buzz for being re-edited and re-released later. At any rate, "C of P" did pretty well on cable and video so the men with the money decided to release an unrated VHS version of the film promising the enticement of things that were too "hot" for the original release. Again, this was back before this was a common practice; what, we wondered, could be more "naughty" than the extended and very sensual sex scene in the original cut, the montages of a naked woman and a bloody blow up sex doll, the blasphemy and explicit language and the lingering presence of a lethal vibrating sex toy? The "unrated version" ploy worked like a charm; the movie sold like hotcakes and the practice of releasing a re-edited version of a film with footage you "haven't seen" is still common today (is anyone really that interested in a Director's Cut of "Girls Trip?"). Most of us were probably a bit surprised to find the extended cut scenes of "Crimes" consisted mainly of a raw, nasty bit of over-kill business involving Kathleen Turner in a leather S+M outfit abusing a corrupt cop with his own night stick, but to bear witness to the scene was to admit that, yeah, it was a bit further than R-rated movies went at the time...and also probably wasn't all that necessary to the plot. The inclusion of this scene and some inserts of classic, erotic (and explicit) artwork changed the tone of the movie somehow, at least for me--the inclusion of this new material made it more a film about a woman who goes through a kind of sexual hell but is saved by a dopey guy as she runs from a crazy priest. The film seemed trashier (if possible) and less redemptive somehow after watching how far "Joanna Crane" (and Ken Russell, in fact) could descend into violent, sexual excess with such seeming nonchalance. Flash forward to the 90s and we got "C of P" on laser disc. Two things happened with this release that changed the film's tone further: deleted scenes and audio commentary of Ken Russell being interviewed by Barry Sandler, the screenwriter of the film. Of the commentary I remember little other than Mr. Russell going on about the loveliness of Ms. Turner in her China Blue drag and leaving before the film was over, which was cute, and Mr. Sandler coming off as an articulate, intelligent and kind person. I had met Mr. Russell in person around the same time and found him to be lively, personable and sweet. We also learned that Anthony Perkins' character was not originally a fallen priest, which would have made a profound difference in how the character was perceived.All this would have changed my opinion about about the tone and nature of the film, but the deleted scenes added another level of explanation to the project somehow. The film already has a number of melodramatic, wooden-acted moments, some that seem straight out of a sad, low-budget TV movie; the deleted scenes presented on the laser disc, including a couples' backyard BBQ and a confrontation between a wife and the woman her husband is seeing behind her back seemed like something you'd find on theLifetime channel. In fact, these scenes just don't fit at all, at least if you see the film as the Ken Russell phantasmagoria it appeared to be in the original edit. So what gives?Finally, a DVD of the film was released that included not only more deleted scenes but footage that had never been in the film before in any earlier cuts, now included in the film. None of the new scenes extended the outrageousness of the movie (with the exception of an exceptionally ugly and graphic bit of actual porn footage on a TV monitor), quite the opposite. Taken as a body, if you include all the deleted scenes available (which were surely in the green-lit script?) it would seem that originally the story of the film might have been meant to be played straight, and that the plot was about an average Joe in a crumbling marriage who gets involved with a woman who tricks at night and is pursued by a crazy person. The "China Blue" scenes that once seemed the raison d'etre of the project comprise a much smaller part of the big picture when viewed in this light...it's unlikely (but I have no confirmation) that Mr. Sandler envisioned the garishly-colored, over-sexed diatribe on American sexual mores that Mr. Russell crafted out of the script he had to work with (and Russell had done something similar with Chayefsky's "Altered States" just years before). Certainly it's hard to believe anyone but Ms. Turner, directed by Mr. Russell, could have gotten away with the (deliciously) ridiculous action in the "China Blue" scenes. Imagine, for example, someone like "Basic Instinct"-era Sharon Stone playing the part--it just wouldn't work, or be as fun.And the movie IS fun, or should be, at least the original version we saw was, despite some unfortunate and, in my opinion, unnecessary misogyny (no film, EVER, should have the line, "strip...b!tch!" in it). The film as it plays now, which may be closer to the intent of the work I suspect Mr. Sandler originally concocted, which exists only when you look at all the deleted scenes and the most recent edit, is still good stuff. It's more realistic, there's a lot more compassion; John Laughlin's trajectory makes more sense, we find that Annie Potts' best work, and many keys to the "point" of the movie, were left on the cutting room floor to make room for more sex-with-nuns-and-dildos Russell-stuff (but that's not really a complaint). But the original conception of the film may have been a different, less outrageous movie. It seems possible that by editing the film into the shorter cut we saw in the mid-80s we were gifted with another berserk Russellian moving painting whereas if someone else had directed the movie we might have instead gotten an interesting but less-than-noteworthy melodrama.Again, the film is flawed in any form--even in the first edit it seemed that (much like this review) it was a bit too long, it's unfocused and varies greatly in tone from scene to scene in any form, much like "Rocky Horror" it suffers from not having a clear protagonist (though again, the most recent edit makes Laughin the winner there with Turner relegated to supporting character), it hasn't aged well visually or thematically and the music, fun as it is, never actually worked (whether the use of Dvorak makes a "statement" or not I'll leave to others to discuss). But the power of the film can't be ignored--the visuals, the editing, the music, Ms. Turner and Mr. Perkins' performances, the themes and the unflinching discussion of sexual topics many people even today would run screaming from--all of these things combine to create a piece of film art that shouldn't be left out when discussing the works of Ken Russell specifically and the place of art films in film history in general.
Mark Turner
I remember when this film was originally released. At the time I was becoming interested in director Ken Russell and his works. But seeing this one the first time I felt like it wasn't comparable to the films he'd made I enjoyed. Watching it this time around I appreciated and enjoyed it far more than that first viewing.Kathleen Turner, fresh from her success with ROMANCING THE STONE, stars as China Blue aka Joanna Crane. Crane is a well-established fashion designer by day but when night rolls around she takes to the seedier part of town and becomes China Blue, a prostitute with a kinky clientele and a peeping tom neighbor named Peter (Anthony Hopkins), a self-proclaimed preacher who finds himself drawn to her while condemning her at the same time.Into both worlds is thrown Bobby Grady (John Laughlin). The owner of the design studio Crane works at thinks she might be selling designs to a competitor and he brings Bobby in to investigate and prove if she is doing so or not. Bobby follows her and discovers her duel identity, watching as she handles her clients. Involved in a marriage with a frigid wife, Bobby finds himself aroused by Crane's night time persona.Eventually Bobby confronts her and the two fall in love. Or is it lust? They sleep together with the question of who is selling the designs still out there. Obsessed with her, Bobby puts his career and his marriage on the line as he frequents the room of China Blue more often. At the same time the preacher is also becoming more obsessed as well, with the intent of doing something drastic to cleanse the soul of this woman he sees as the ultimate sinner. The odds of both story lines clashing are pretty good.There were several things that made this move stand out at the time of its release. First and foremost was the sexuality on display here with a then high profile actress like Turner in the lead role performing somewhat explicit sexual acts (for that time) on screen. In today's world they wouldn't seem so but in 1984 they were controversial. But Russell was used to that and sometimes it seems he courted that controversy in his films on purpose.The second was that Russell used Perkins to play the role of the preacher. Having spent most of his career trying to peel himself away from his association with killer Norman Bates, Perkins is once more playing a killer, although a different sort. Along with Turner his performance here is intense and frightening. In his case due to his maniacal feelings leading to a release of rage. In her case it is a role of a woman longing for love and settling for lust instead yet still hopeful.The film has a seedy feel to it but that is on purpose. The story draws you in once the initial shock wears off (the film opens with Turner receiving oral sex while pretending to be a beauty queen making her acceptance speech). You begin to feel for all of the characters involved. It's an odd combination of repulsion and compassion that mix together to make it an interesting tale.I'm sure if you read what I write you're tiring of hearing my praises for Arrow Video. Sorry but they are becoming the best at what they do, presenting pristine copies of the movies they handle with some of the most interesting extras. The film is presented in a crisp 2k restoration from original film materials. Extras include an audio commentary with director Ken Russell and producer/screenwriter Barry Sandler, seven deleted scenes with commentary, a new interview with Sandler made for this release, home movie footage of Russell visiting in Florida for a retrospective screening of the film, the theatrical trailer, a reversible sleeve with new commissioned artwork by Twins of Evil and an illustrated booklet.If you are a fan of director Ken Russell you'll want to have this in your collection. The same goes for fans of Kathleen Turner. It is worth seeing at least once but come prepared. This is not for the faint of heart nor the easily offended.
Son_of_Mansfield
Or, you won't. This exploration of gender and sexuality has a similar problem to some people, it's not sure which way it wants to go. It's got genre confusion. Is it a drama? Is it a satire? Certainly, images of a man as hp or "human penis", slowly rising as his friend hums "Thus Spoke Zoroaster" and then spitting milk out of his mouth as his wife sits in horror surrounded by harsh scenes of family strife seems to scream satire, but the performances are all over the map. Annie Potts is deadly serious and Anthony Perkins is psycho. Kathleen Turner is the bright spot. She sells such odd scenes as her prostitute dressed in a nun's habit jumping on her bed while singing "Onward Christian Soldier!" Strangely, even with these three off the wall things mentioned, it's the straightness of the movie as a whole that makes it too dramatic. But the ending is priceless, John Laughlin does another one of his weepy monologues about how he needed his woman to tell him that everything would be alright, it's OK to be scared, then, he looks at the camera with a smile and says that they f**ked like animals. Classic.P.S. One of my favorite scenes ended up on the cutting room floor. Bruce Davidson analyzes this girl in a bar, makes an animal noise, and asks her if she likes the Bee Gees all while laughing. It's hilarious and it hits on an interesting point. Isn't it all just a game? If you say the right thing, you get a prize.
