IMDb > Blue Flame (1993) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Blue Flame More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 3 reviews in total 

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

The Accent Is Upon Obscurity.

2/10
Author: rsoonsa (rsoonsa@bandbbooks.com) from Mountain Mesa, California
3 August 2004

The only directoral attempt by Cassian Elwes, this is a numbingly incoherent story that Elwes states he wrote during four days in hospital while sedated with opiates following surgery, and it must be noted that a drug-induced fog, indeed, seems to permeate the proceedings. As much as can be determined, the story is set in a future wherein a pair of anthropomorphic felons is imprisoned in a condition of suspended animation from which they escape, attracting energetic pursuit from a former policeman who knows that they kidnapped his young daughter, therewith causing his marital failure, all of which is included within a screenplay bare of intelligibility, dealing principally with the capability of the villains, named Fire and Rain, to enter human psyches at will. An essential consideration for success of a film that involves alteration of reality relative to temporal and spatial matters is that either a scientific framework for such surrealism as is evident here must be established, or the subject should be verbally let entirely alone, and a decision by Elwes to have his characters attempt to analyse the outrageous events of the tale only increases the unintelligible quality of this picture that, in all probability, possesses scant interest even for enthusiasts of science fiction and fantasy. Queer as they may be, Elwes presents ideas, but finds that directing a cast to expand upon them is entirely another matter, with the players here walking through thinly written roles, only Melissa Behr leaving a defined impression with a portrayal as some type of android; in sum then, this is a low-budget, chaotic item, cumbered by subpar production values in spite of inventive work by cinematographer Daniele Massaccesi.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

This film is a piece of you-know-what

1/10
Author: GleamingMemory
23 September 2009

This film was a struggle to sit through. It was a trying hour and a half and I couldn't believe that a film like this didn't put the actors out of work permanently simply for their participation in it. Forget that it is impossible to follow, the acting is so atrocious it has nearly replaced the nadir of all films in my book - "Beyond the 7th Door". Apparently, the movie revolves around a former cop who is searching for his long-lost daughter that (I guess) was kidnapped by these two psychic criminals. Along the way he meets an android, a cross-dresser, a horribly disfigured monk and a bunch of other losers. If it sounds intriguing at all, it isn't. According to a review floating around on the web (and referenced by the other reviewer here) this film was written by the director in the stupor of a drug haze after a surgery in the hospital. It shows. The film is noted for some nice camera-work, but honestly, nothing that would really past muster in the Sacha Vierny school of cinematography. Bottom line: A film that never was and never should have been.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Er.. what?

2/10
Author: anxietyresister from United Kingdom
23 October 2009

If you like to be confused, this is the film for you. A guy's daughter gets abducted by an alien, ages a decade and a half in 4 years, and tries to seduce dear old dad on a bed in his dreams. He will later have a computer disc inserted in his head by an blonde android with big tits, all the while being menaced by said alien who is a Russell Brand lookalike with a vaguely Irish accent. This extra-terrestial wants to marry the dude's now grown up little girl, but this would entail killing her so that he can absorb her memories in his head. This is his idea of blessed nuptials. Ain't love grand?!

As a lot of the film takes place in the main character's brain there are scene changes a-plenty and more costumes than you'd find in Elton John's wardrobe. Not forgetting the very dubious futuristic sets.. which consist of sparse streets with a few bits of rubbish blowing about. We get reams of dialogue about the plot that makes less sense the more they try and explain it, and lots of long, thin guns which are only used surreptitiously but are on display in nearly every scene. Is it just me who sees a metaphor here? I think the director has issues here, apart from a penchant for making lousy sci-fi movies. Seek help, mate.

Got to give some kudos to the guy though (but not much), he sure has a labyrinthine film here made with what is no doubt a very um, interesting imagination. Only problem is it is virtually impossible to watch, and it isn't worth the effort to decipher the story either. In short, it's just total hogwash and has FAIL written all over it. He should have bought himself a pack of Hubba Bubba with the budget instead (if it could have covered it). It would have lasted longer, and left more of a lasting flavour. And probably wouldn't have sucked as hard. 2/10

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history