video capsule review: Chariots of Fire (10/10)

[cow]

wow! this is an amazing film. I just saw it and it put me in a super-good mood. Its about the 1924 olympics and how two men brought Britain one of its greatest sports victories.

i love the races, the music, the acting, the direction the whole thing!!!! go see it now!

[john boy]

good to hear you liked the film...it's one of my
favourite of all time and I was fortunate to use
it as a study case in my first year in college when
I did a media studies paper. Great depiction of
the different philosophies towards running by two
men of contrasting backgrounds.

[cow]

yeah, im really glad i wrote this review, sense its getting SO MANY responses! grrrrr

[R. P. McMurphy]

Sorry cow, but most video capsule posts don't get that too many replies. Its not you or anybody else fault.

Good review, maybe make it a tad bit longer next time. /ubb/smile.gif

[JoBlo]

<moderator bump>

[Fergus]

Chariots of Fire
Director: Hugh Hudson
Cast: Ben Cross, Ian Holm, Dennis Christopher, John Gielgud.
*Winner of 4 Academy Awards, including Best Picture, 1981.

Each time you see a film that comes out about sports and courage and winning; you see the cliches, the bad writing, and the boredom of it all (the most recent example being Hardball, which I don't look forward to). It is nice to sit down and watch an older, more original film that is free from cliches, unoriginality, and predictability. Even though you already know the outcome before it gets there, you realize this movie isn't trying to surprise you with its outcome.

The film begins in London 1978, then goes back to 1924 right before the start of the Olympics, then flashes even farther back to 1919. Quite an unusual setup comparing to what you would normally expect. We meet the two main characters: Eric Liddell and Harold Abrahams. They are two runners destined to be champions. Did I mention this film was based upon a true story? And the film probes their journey in getting to the Olympics. We go through personal problems, and such other events that occur in a persons life.

This is an absorbing, fascinating trip into two entirely different people who are exceptionally good at what they do. If you saw The Thin Red Line, you might've noticed how Malick used slow motion and off-screen monologues to really see into the characters, and what they go through. Hugh Hudson uses this technique throughout, even if someone isn't talking. They are beautiful moments in the film which I 'relish' anytime I see them. They really help set the mood of the film and work very well.

The actors who make up the cast are mixed with people you may have seen or heard of, and just unknown. I only listed the people I had heard of above. But I have to compliment these people and the casting director, because this easily could've been a movie full of bad actors but that is not the case here. They turn in very good performances that help make this film work.

Hudson here shows he is not bad at all behind the camera. His use of slow motion is not overdone, but sort of, subtle in a way, as is his direction throughout.

The one thing that bothered me was the music. I really liked the music, but at times I didn't, for a stupid reason really. Vangelis (Who did the Blade Runner soundtrack) scored for this movie and I couldn't help but think that their music took away the fact that it is set in the 1920's, it gave it a more contemporary, 80's feel to it. I noticed they only used the 80's kind of music in the running scenes which I liked very much; it's just a small little thing that doesn't matter that much, but it bothered me.

I can't judge this against the other nominees for Best Picture in 81', but I can see why they chose it, as it is a terrific movie. A definite crowd pleaser. I really liked this film. It had a great soundtrack, good performances, nice direction, and a compelling story make this a 9.5/10. If your in the mood for a well-made drama, I highly recommend it to those who haven't seen it.

[screamfan]

the worst most boring movie ever made

2/10

[Kavan]

Chariots of Fire is one of those movies that either works for you or it doesn't. I like for a lot of sports fans it's a real turn off. Because disguised beneath a movie obstentiably about running is the story of two different lifestyles.

It is about using sports as a means of clearing space and defining who you are and are not.

The Scotsman Liddel uses his running to give glory to God. The Jewish Abrahams uses his talent as a means of affording himself a dignity that seems denied him.

I think the decision to move the story back from the 70's is a brilliant one. Roger Ebert said it showed the distinction between the young strong young man and the old man they become. The flashbacks add a meloncholy feel to the flick. Even when you are watching the young scenes you keep remebering the old man they will or will not become.

This is a brilliant film. As Fergus said so many sports films are content to coast on being about who wins the big race. This one is about the big race but more importantly about the people who are racing and it is always making subtle yet intense points about it's characters.

And I loved the music. To this day I can be anywhere and if that music comes on I see those young men with "hopes in their hearts and wings on their heels." It's a great flick. 9/10