Gothic

Gothic sounds like it might actually be a good movie. Take the real life event of the night Mary Shelley came up with the story of Frankenstein and spin it into its own tale of horror. As the official recounting goes Mary and others, including her husband, were visiting the poet Lord Byron when a storm confined them to the indoors. They began telling ghost stories to keep themselves entertained, and Frankenstein was Mary's result.

Gothic is a mess of a movie, though. Almost none of it makes any sense. Right from the beginning Percy Shelley, two girls, and some dogs are running (while Mary is evidently left to tend to the boat they just arrived in, let a man do that to a modern woman and there will be trouble). In one shot it looks like this is supposed to be a tense moment, in another shot it looks lighthearted and fun. The mood is conflicting, and there's no point to it.

From there the members of the story-telling group go running off through the house at random for no apparent reason. Percy, running about wildly, happens upon a rather obscene... something (it looks like an animatronic statue but behaves like it's a person in some kind of weird costume though the purpose of it and how he/she/it knew Percy would be coming through that hall at that particular time is a left to the imagination), then without rhyme or reason he is outside climbing on the roof in the rain while butt naked.

Later we go from a séance to a sex orgy for no given reason. One scene we're watching the séance, next scene we're watching a porno (it's not really an X rated scene, of course, but it is highly suggestive).

Supposedly these famous writers are facing up to their worst fears, a ritual that is so powerful it creates or calls forth some kind of entity that begins terrorizing them. One girl goes completely insane, Percy very nearly does, and Mary furiously hates Byron all of a sudden. However, I felt like it barely got its plot elements across without anything other than shock-value shots to try to keep it interesting.

The whole story seems like something that maybe made sense to a writer high on pot. When presented as a narrative it becomes a disjointed hodgepodge of scenes showing people reacting in terror or disgust to things of which the viewing audience is ignorant. There’s little if any of the storytelling or conversations that birthed Frankenstein so much so that I doubted much in the way of links to the real event at all. I have since read some about the free-love and homo/bi-sexual practices of the real people (elements not discussed in my high school lit classes) which leads me to believe this romp may be closer to the truth than my far more innocent imaginings of it (partially influenced by the Bride of Frankenstein scenes featuring Elsa Lanchester as Mary).

Acting wise we've got the likes of Julian Sands, Gabriel Byrne, and Natasha Richardson. Despite their talents as displayed in other roles none of the characters come across as real people; they're more like caricatures. Some additional info about the people being portrayed (such as the deaths of all but one of the Shelleys' children) might have helped explain some of the scenes, but the movie itself provides only a snapshot with very little context. Some people seem to enjoy the snapshot. I prefer having context.

MORALITY:

This is a very sexual, even perverted, movie. There are numerous sexual acts, obscene statues and drawings, and talk of the like. One scene (which I mentioned earlier) almost feels like a porno except that everyone is clothed and we don't actually see anything explicit – just a lot of heavy implications. Based on seeing some of this early on I rather expected to see a lot of nudity in the movie. There are a few scenes with both male and female showing off their assets, but it turns out to be relatively mild and infrequent especially when compared to all the suggestive sexual acts.

There is little violence but some gruesome scenes. This isn't a horror movie of a serial killer; it's more like a guy beating his hand on a nail and people shoving each other around. A few of the creepy scenes may be frightening.

There's plenty of strong language along with everything else.

Ultimately this isn't something I would recommend to young audiences. Actually, I wouldn't recommend it to any audience...

SPIRITUALITY:

There is something supernatural going on here, assuming, that is, that this is not all some drug-induced hallucination. However, the dark elements are so poorly realized that I can't think of anything coherent to say about it.

At the very least this is an illustration of people so caught up in their depraved lifestyles that they create a world of horror for themselves. That is certainly something that people do in real life even if the results aren't horror movie material. God invites the weary and burdened to come to him to be given rest. (Matthew 11:28)

FINAL THOUGHTS:

There are viewers that apparently see some poetic merit in this work, and you should definitely get a second opinion from such a person before making a decision. On the other hand, this is one of those movies with an elitist fanbase claiming it is for “intelligent” viewers while giving away subtle hints that they are really just trying to appear magnanimous or garner a reputation for “understanding” things the rest of us lack the cognitive facilities to grasp. Maybe I just lack enough (and by “enough” I mean “any”) experience with drug trips to sort through the haze not to mention the tolerance to put up with the sexual perversion. Either way I have no desire to sit through this convoluted mess again for the purpose of further enlightenment nor recommend you use it as a tool to try to appear “intelligent.”

#Gothic