TrueJoshNight Truly Dreadful Film

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Anoushka Slater While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Jennifer Lynx The other day was Derek Jarman's birthday. I discovered him last year because I really like independent cinema, particularly from the fringes of society, and his name came up repeatedly. So on a whim, I bought "The Last of England". When BFI described him as a "queer pagan punk" for his birthday, I knew it was time to put that movie on and give it a whirl. It was a wholly unexpected, but mostly pleasurable, experience."The Last of England" is a highly personal bitch fest about the state of the country and even the world as it was in the mid 80s. Jarman was English and was reacting to life under the Thatcher rule, while I was an American living under Reagan rule. I think more than anytime before or since, the English and American experiences coincided culturally in the 1980s. Jarman's film was shot in 8mm, shaky cam and all, and is more or less and decoupage of raw emotions and experiences of growing up in the cold war, never knowing when the bombs will drop, and being led by leaders who seem to think such a state of constant anxiety is sane. Add to it, the newly emerging queer revolution and the punk scene, complete with drugs, and life at the time did seem quite precarious. I loved the odd stream of consciousness, the nightmare visions, the lack of dialog or plot or even characters. Well, OK, I loved about 2/3 of it. The last 15 minutes which was where Tilda Swinton came in with her wedding gown made the least sense to me and could have been cut with no loss (which pains me to say as I admire her, but here she was like an extra at the last moment to add time and a name to the film, which was already quite intriguing). I enjoyed how he merged past with home family videos with present and future. I'm glad to have the film and I will certainly look for more by Jarman, though he is clearly not going to be everyone's cup of tea.

Theo Robertson I once attended University film classes and one of the courses was in European cinema . Our tutor Rolland was a flamboyant , larger than life character , very erudite and knowledgeable in his field but his tastes weren't exactly mainstream and one night the class was doing experimental European cinema " Now we're going to be seeing some Derek Jarman " " Aw no " I cried " " Ah Theo you must hate me ? " " Well thatdepends on what we're watching . It's not the last of England is it ? "" yes it is "" Aw no " I shrieked by which time the atmosphere in the class became one of intrigue as the other students became curious as to why a film could bring out such emotions from someone " but it's totally gay " Rolland replied in camp mock anger " Of course it's gay . Jarman was gay , he died from AIDS didn't you know that " " That's no excuse to wave penises at the screen " Laughs from the other students " Ah Theo now I understand - you have a small penis problem " cue laughter from the other students that seemed to last a lifetime I'd certainly recommend a Rolland film class . They're always interesting and informative with interaction class discussion and much laughter . The downside is you have to watch a Jarman film now and again Derek Jarman in invariably described as " a challenging film maker " which is pseudo-speak for pretentious art house garbage . TLOE is Jarman at his most challenging indeed and anyone attracted to narrative cinema need not to watch this The story at its most basic features a post apocalypse landscape and images that almost defy description . A youth has sex with a painting , a woman played by Tilda Swinton tears off her wedding dress , a man forages for food in a dustbin , with the images cutting to para military soldiers patrolling the devastated streets . Add to this abstract voice overs , sequences filmed in black and white 8 mm . time lapse photography and homosexual frotting and you've got a film that will only appeal to the most pretentious art-house cinema junkie . The only reason for watching it is that you can claim you've seen one of the most ostentatious films ever made and remind yourself that rubbish like this used to appear on Channel 4 every Thursday in the late 1980s and that British cinema was taking quantum leaps in quality ten years later

LaFeeChartreuse Reading the comments on this film or others like it is a frustrating experience, because so many people don't seem to be clear on the concept. Let me put it very simply:This. Is. Not. A. Narrative. Film.If you're going to complain about lack of a plot, character development, or other features of narrative films, don't go see a non-narrative film! It's an entirely different experience, and that's the whole idea. Judging an experimental montage of images and music and voice by the standards of a conventional narrative film is ridiculous -- like complaining about a drama because it wasn't funny. It's not SUPPOSED to be. If you don't like films that don't have a conventional narrative, don't see them.So, for those who DO actually like experimental, non-narrative film, I'd highly recommend this one -- it's one of my all-time favourite films of any sort, even though know the majority of the population probably couldn't sit through it. I found it incredibly powerful, evocative and visually stunning, and even 15 years after seeing it, some images from it are still burned into my mind. I'm a big fan of Jarman's work in general, but if I had to pin down one single favourite from his work, I think this would be it.

glynyfaron This is the sort of movie which is usually defended with a phrase such as 'Oh you clearly didn't understand' or 'It's narrative is too unorthodox'. The sad fact is the film's limited distribution is due to its own wretched pretensions rather than its intelligence. A barrage of depressing images (man shoots up, man humps portrait of woman and so on) and an endless meandering dialogue is not enough to make a film involving. Jarman's intention is clear, Thatcher's Britain was every bit as horrible as it is shown to be here but surely there were better ways to articulate that. His work remains infuriating rather than involving and for that reason alone this film must be judged a failure.