A stylish, freewheeling work set against the drug counterculture of the 1960's, High offers a surprisingly hard-edged look at the nastiness behind the sunny facade of the summer of love. Tom, an amoral Montreal drifter who supports himself by peddling dope and fleecing lonely woman, hooks up with Vicky, a straight-laced librarian, and initiates her, all too well, into his criminal ways. The film is more experimental than Kent's earlier features, with shifts from monochrome into color, liberal use of color tints, overexposures, and still photos, and a psychedelic credit sequences. Replete with Kent's characteristically frank sex scenes and nudity, High became a cause celebre when, just prior to its premier at the Montreal Film Festival, it was banned by the Quebec censors, prompting the likes of Warren Beatty, Jean Renoir and Fritz Lang to speak out in praise of the film. In a gesture of solidarity, Alan King and Jean-Pierre Lefebvre, co winners of the festival's Canadian competition, ... Written by
This was a great Canadian movie again for it's time and budget. Considering when this movie was shot Kent does some remarkable work with the photography in order to paint the psychedelic theme he was going for. The constant 60s psychedelic music playing through out this movie adds to the allure and the charm of this.
This film was a great pioneer of the romantic crime genre in my opinion and helped to pave the way for some later movies. Although to some this film may have lacked the modern standards for most films of this genre, keeping in mind that this film was shot in 1967 and was banned from the Quebec Film Festival because of the provocative nature of the film.
I also appreciate the way that High portrays the great liberating spirit of both men and women in the 60s. Their was a true appreciation for liberty and freedom being expressed in the film whether wrongly placed or not. This was one of this first films that I saw accurately portraying this of the time.
The movie does show a few week points in both script and acting ability and perhaps and little too much time spent upon the sex scenes which some may view as a delving into a pornographic film. But I believe that the film was meant to raise eyebrows of the time and push the limit of film.
All in all for an 'indie' film of it's time I would say that Kent did a pretty good job of this movie and the there were some spectacular shots in the film. So I'm going to give this an 8 out of 10.
2 of 2 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?