Question:
I hadn't seen Chariots of Fire for 15 years when I picked it up for £7 in Fopp last week. In the time between I pretty much agreed with the 'general opinion' that the film received more praise than it actually deserved.
But... it has aged beautifully, and I'd rate it a classic. Vangelis' score is a masterpiece even without that theme. It's well paced (if never quite doing 100m in 10.3), with memorable performances. No extras, but I'd recommend you pick it up if you can get it as cheaply as I did. Picture is good (anamorphic), if not truly great. Although there is an annoying bit of 'wobble' in the soundtrack in the opening credits. Not quite as unforgiveable as the Straight Story DVD, but still should never have happened.
A late scene in the movie also now comes across in a different light. Eric Liddel (Ian Charleson) doesn't run the 100m due to religious beliefs (leaving the battle to his rivals Harry Abrahams and Jackson Shultz), and enters the 400m. Just before his race he receives a friendly note wishing him luck from none other than the American Shultz (Brad Davis). Liddel looks him out in the crowd, never expecting the American to be so friendly, or Christian. They smile at each other and Liddel wins his race.
A decade later both Charleson and Davis died of AIDS. Davis was already HIV+ by the time he filmed Chariots of Fire. Makes you wonder. And certainly adds a new dimension to such a small scene.
Totally agree, this film gets better on repeated viewings, and what a soundtrack!
I forgot to mention another part of Chariots that is more interesting now than it was then...
Ian Charleson's running! His 'bolt upright' style never used to look convincing at all. Is it possible a man could run like that (like he had a splint attached from the back of his neck to his ass) and be a world champion?
Well, in the years since the film's release, Michael Johnson has become the most succesful athlete to brige the gap between the sprint and the 400m, being awsome at both. And he runs 'bolt upright' in an awkward and completely unique style.
Just like Charleson. His athletic performance now looks like it could be inch-perfect historical accuracy. A fabulous touch, whether intentional or not.
One of the best films of the 80'... not seen this in a long time but I have seen it many many times.
Definitely a classic and the score is so perfect it has almost become a cliché.
A fantastic film, with a great score and really inspirational and moving.... a definite classic
When this dvd was released, most reviews I read suggested that the picture quality was very poor. Anyone care to comment on same ?
The R1 was released some time ago and was non-anamorphic - perhaps explaining the poor picture reviews.
The R2 (which McD owns) and R3 are anamorphic and were released within the last year - haven't heard anything bad about them.
In everyone's opinion - which is the better cut to go for? European or US?
Ta dudes.
In everyone's opinion - which is the better cut to go for? European or US?
Ta dudes.
Is the difference the inclusion/non-inclusion of the cricket scene? (wasn't it cut from the US cos they don't understand cricket?)
It's a good movie, and one that has aged well, but I remember seeing it when first released and it was a bit like "The Full Monty" - over-rated at the time. Certainly not the film that should have got the oscar.
David Puttnam himself went on record as saying he didn't feel too disappointed when "The Killing Fields" (a better film in my opinion, and his) didn't win the oscar because he felt they'd been given one they probably hadn't deserved the year before for "Chariots of Fire".
But... it has aged beautifully, and I'd rate it a classic. Vangelis' score is a masterpiece even without that theme. It's well paced (if never quite doing 100m in 10.3), with memorable performances. No extras, but I'd recommend you pick it up if you can get it as cheaply as I did. Picture is good (anamorphic), if not truly great. Although there is an annoying bit of 'wobble' in the soundtrack in the opening credits. Not quite as unforgiveable as the Straight Story DVD, but still should never have happened.
A late scene in the movie also now comes across in a different light. Eric Liddel (Ian Charleson) doesn't run the 100m due to religious beliefs (leaving the battle to his rivals Harry Abrahams and Jackson Shultz), and enters the 400m. Just before his race he receives a friendly note wishing him luck from none other than the American Shultz (Brad Davis). Liddel looks him out in the crowd, never expecting the American to be so friendly, or Christian. They smile at each other and Liddel wins his race.
A decade later both Charleson and Davis died of AIDS. Davis was already HIV+ by the time he filmed Chariots of Fire. Makes you wonder. And certainly adds a new dimension to such a small scene.
Answers:
Totally agree, this film gets better on repeated viewings, and what a soundtrack!
Answers:
I forgot to mention another part of Chariots that is more interesting now than it was then...
Ian Charleson's running! His 'bolt upright' style never used to look convincing at all. Is it possible a man could run like that (like he had a splint attached from the back of his neck to his ass) and be a world champion?
Well, in the years since the film's release, Michael Johnson has become the most succesful athlete to brige the gap between the sprint and the 400m, being awsome at both. And he runs 'bolt upright' in an awkward and completely unique style.
Just like Charleson. His athletic performance now looks like it could be inch-perfect historical accuracy. A fabulous touch, whether intentional or not.
Answers:
One of the best films of the 80'... not seen this in a long time but I have seen it many many times.
Definitely a classic and the score is so perfect it has almost become a cliché.
Answers:
A fantastic film, with a great score and really inspirational and moving.... a definite classic
Answers:
When this dvd was released, most reviews I read suggested that the picture quality was very poor. Anyone care to comment on same ?
Answers:
The R1 was released some time ago and was non-anamorphic - perhaps explaining the poor picture reviews.
The R2 (which McD owns) and R3 are anamorphic and were released within the last year - haven't heard anything bad about them.
Answers:
In everyone's opinion - which is the better cut to go for? European or US?
Ta dudes.
Answers:
In everyone's opinion - which is the better cut to go for? European or US?
Ta dudes.
Is the difference the inclusion/non-inclusion of the cricket scene? (wasn't it cut from the US cos they don't understand cricket?)
Answers:
It's a good movie, and one that has aged well, but I remember seeing it when first released and it was a bit like "The Full Monty" - over-rated at the time. Certainly not the film that should have got the oscar.
David Puttnam himself went on record as saying he didn't feel too disappointed when "The Killing Fields" (a better film in my opinion, and his) didn't win the oscar because he felt they'd been given one they probably hadn't deserved the year before for "Chariots of Fire".
1 2