Lovespell (1981) Poster

(1981)

User Reviews

Review this title
6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
They may have cast it, but the spell didn't stick.
mark.waltz6 February 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Not familiar at all with the Cornish Legend of King Mark, princess Is old and Prince Tristian, I went into this middle ages tragedy not knowing a thing about it, and coming out pretty uninterested. The cast is top-notch, but the filming of it looks cheap and faded, like it should have been done for PBS rather than the big screen or even as a network TV movie. It's one of the last screen appearances of Richard Burton, and he tries to instill some energy into his performance of King Mark of Cornwall, but his lackluster co-stars, Kate Mulgrew and Nicholas Clay, really lack any kind of chemistry.

Mulgrew is too strong to really be believable as this character, and Clay lacks in screen charisma. They are not Guinevere and Lancelot (a role Clay played in "Excalibur" after this), and Burton seems as exhausted as he did as King Arthur which he had toured in a revival of "Camelot" then took to Broadway for a brief time around the same time. Positive notes for production design which shows the shabbiness of even a king's existence in the Middle Ages. A nice cameo by veteran actress Geraldine Fitzgerald is another highlight. The film's screenwriter was Claire Labine, the veteran creator and headwriter of several soap operas including "Ryan's Hope" which during its first few years starred Mulgrew and featured Diana Van Der Vlis, who has a small role in this. But the lack of passion for such a passionate story left me cold.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Disappointing waste of time and talent
wuxmup8 June 2006
As somebody who grew up with Arthurian legends, I was really looking forward to this movie. Though made in 1981, it stayed unreleased for several years, and as you watch it you'll soon know the reason why. Richard Burton, once a fine actor, is in his final role at the end of a career punctuated with frequent bouts of alcohol. He sleepwalks through his role. Kate Mulgrew, fine as a starship skipper, is thoroughly miscast as a love-struck damsel. The whole movie has an ultra-low budget look - including a minuscule cast - which the plodding script can never overcome. The only plus is the score performed by the Chieftains - if you can stay wake to enjoy it.
16 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Authentic and sad legend of Tristan and Isolt
HotToastyRag21 July 2017
I guess I'm too much of a Camelot fan to be able to enjoy this movie. Richard Burton played King Arthur on Broadway from 1960-1963 in Lerner & Loewe's musical, and twenty years later in Lovespell, he rejoins the medieval time period. He plays King Mark of Cornwall, and he falls in love with young Isolt, played by a pre-Star Trek Kate Mulgrew. Maybe because of protocol, or maybe because he had a business meeting, or maybe because he was an idiot, but when he decided to propose marriage to her, he sent his faithful knight Tristan to do the deed. If you're aware of the Tristan and Isolt legend, you're one-up on me. I didn't know what I was getting into, even though it was pretty obvious Tristan and Isolt were going to get together, and Richard Burton was going to get his heartbroken.

Anyway, if you don't know the legend, I won't spoil it for you, but legends become legends because they are very sad. Lovespell is no exception. Just be prepared. If you like Romeo and Juliet or Camelot, you'll like this one. It's very well done; the way it's filmed takes the audience to the time period effortlessly. Still, I struggled to understand Isolt's heart. Why wouldn't she want Richard Burton? I would.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An unique 1979 Irish classic
merlbear19 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This movie is one of the better love-tragedy stories I have seen in a while. The movie recently came out on DVD and my mom told me she remembered when it came out and did not get a chance to go see it. She enjoyed it also.

A brief synopsis (spoiler)of Lovespell. Set it 9th century Ireland and based on an old legend, King Mark of Cornwall, Richard Burton, falls in love with Isolt, a very young Kate Mulgrew, while visiting her home in the Irish countryside. Mark sends his trusted nephew, Tristan, Nickolas Clay, to Isolt for her to heal Tristan and marry Mark. However, Isolt falls in love with Tristan. The movie ends in tragedy.

I am a big Kate Mulgrew fan and I enjoyed her in Lovespell. This movie is a must-see for Kate Mulgrew fans.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
The Richard Burton Tristan And Isolde
FloatingOpera719 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Lovespell (1981): Starring Richard Burton, Kate Mulgrew, Nicholas Clay, Geraldine Fitzgerald, Cyril Cusack, Kathryn Dowling, Trudy Hayes, Niall O'Brian, John Jo Brooks, Frank McCarthy, Niall Toibin, Diana Van der Vlis....Director Tom Donovan..Screenplay Claire Labine.

Director Tom Donovan's "Tristan and Isolde" film adaptation "Lovespell", released in 1981, was never a big success for various reasons. First, the quality of the cinematography was not impressive in the least and the format appears to be straight out of television and not the movies. Another reason is that the Tristan and Isolde legend, part of the Arthurian saga, has never really been popular in modern, mainstream society and remains an obscure story. Tristan and Isolde was far better appreciated 100 or more years ago. Richard Wagner wrote a glorious opera on it, the tale was far better known, and the Romantics sympathized with the doomed adulterous lovers. Far from being an immoral pair, the lovers Tristan and Isolde possess a strong, spiritual, unbreakable love that transcends everything. This film stars Richard Burton as the betrayed King Mark, Nicholas Clay as his best friend and champion knight Tristan and Kate Mulgrew (better known as Captain Katherine Janeway from Star Trek Voyager) as Princess/Queen Isolde. The story takes place in the Middle Ages in Ireland where King Mark has won several battles and claimed new territory as well as a new queen, the beautiful and spirited Isolde. King Mark trust his champion knight Tristan and has him personally escort his bride across the sea to his castle. But during the voyage, the two fall in love when they both drink from a potion. Both of them remain in love there afterward. The problem is, she's King Mark's bride and love. They deceive him for a while before they are discovered. In some versions, King Mark has Tristan killed in others, both of them die as they are bonded in soul. The story is sufficiently dramatic for a movie. The recent 2006 Tristan and Isolde was a strong historical story and stripped of any mythological aspects. But this version fails to stir the soul the way the story should. Richard Burton is rather old by 1981, though he was doing several fine films, including "Clash of the Titans" where he portrayed Zeus, and the mini-series "Wagner" in which he portrayed Wagner, as well as George Orwell's "1984" where he portrayed the evil inquisitor/minister. The Isolde of Kate Mulgrew is bland and not very developed and that's a pity because Isolde is possibly the strongest of the bunch. Perhaps if Genevive Bujold had been cast, she would have brought more depth and fire to the role and she might have rekindled the chemistry with Richard Burton whom she had worked with in "Anne Of The Thousand Days" in 1969. Nicholas Clay was a busy actor at this time. He was appearing in John Boorman's "Excalibur" in the role of Lancelot, a character whose tragedy is similar to Tristan's. But Nicholas Clay was far better as Lancelot than as this Tristan, which, like Kate Mulgrew's Isolde, is weak and lackluster. He is nothing more than a handsome foil to Richard Burton's aging, sinister King Mark. Nicholas Clay, an attractive man, specialized in the role of "the other man" and so he did well in such films as "Lady Chatterley's Lover". Richard Burton was said to be drinking a lot at this time in his life and it shows. He does nothing more than rant and make grand speeches as a king. It's a pity he couldn't do anything else with the part. There is an attempt to emphasize the friendship between King Mark and Tristan but the acting wasn't strong enough to pull it off. The intimate scenes are probably the strongest. Burton and Mulgrew talking alone or Mulgrew and Clay talking alone. The color quality is lousy for 1981. Thank cinematographer Richard H. Kline for that. Production design by John Lucas is fair but not impressive. We get the sense that we are in newly Christian Ireland but which still holds on to the pagan Druidic ways. Original orchestral "Irish/Celtic" music by Paddy Moloney and the band "The Chieftains". I did love that final scene in which the lovers die reaching out for one another and King Mark staring as the sea waves crash against him. Yes, this film can easily be dismissed as terrible, but there are some good things too. First of all, I love old films and this film, while released about 25 years ago or so, looks older. It has a haunting but sweet feeling, and there seems to be no real despair or tragedy to the story, as if the three of these figures are friends who are wrapped up in a tragic situation. It did have the potential for being a more sensational film, considering they could have cast a younger good looking Tristan and Isolde, heated up the love scenes or made the film more expensive but not excessive. This film also has the feeling of being isolated like the location. The number of actors are few (12 by the cast listed on IMDb). But the film is exotic and beautiful in its own way.
10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Solid interpretation of a classic saga, if not essential
I_Ailurophile29 April 2022
Perhaps it's a reflection of film-making values of the early 80s, or of British or Irish production; then again, maybe it's a reflection of the intent behind this production specifically: There is a simple earnestness to the movie that declines the more fanciful embellishments we may expect from a title of this nature if it were made now. The cinematography and sound design is quite fine, but bears a certain graininess that drains the utmost color and vibrancy from the presentation. Even more relevantly, the production design and art direction are wonderful, with the contributions behind the scenes of hair and makeup, costume design, and set design being especially impressive. Yet compared to what viewers would anticipate of a feature made in the 2010s, there's a mild sense of austerity to these aspects that makes it feel more tightly centered and self-encapsulated, like a fairy tale, and therefore more endearing in its way. And still, all this has one other effect to observe: the relative modesty of all the technical craft and rounding details allows the acting and the writing to stand out all the more. And with that, though 'Lovespell' may not be wholly essential, it's nonetheless worthy on its own merits.

One could possibly argue that the restraint and narrow focus of the picture makes it a little less easy to engage with, and become absorbed in, as we readily might with others. This seems like a small concession, though, as one kens that the only purpose with 'Lovespell' was to tell a beloved story in a manner that felt as true and honest as it could be. To that end, I can only offer my commendations to all involved for their sincerity, and the strength in the endeavor. The crew did fine work in all regards, and director Tom Donovan illustrates a fair guiding hand. Building from a famous narrative, screenwriter Claire Labine has penned rich, heartfelt dialogue that for its lexicon - and the actors' measured delivery - seems a swell effort to further transport the viewer to another time and place. Though obviously filling distinct archetypes, she wrote marvelous personality into the characters. And to tie all these together and make them complete, the scene writing that instructs the course of events resounds with strong, varied emotions, but also a strict attentiveness to the needs of the tale being communicated. Once more: a revelation 'Lovespell' is not, but it's more solid and engrossing than I expected as I began watching.

This brings us at length to the acting. To some extent in her very countenance but certainly in her vocal timbre, it's been well remarked upon (not least of all during the run of 'Star Trek: Voyager' on network television) that Kate Mulgrew bears a resemblance to screen legend Katharine Hepburn. I dare not make any comparison as to skill, but even only 24 years old at the time this picture was filmed, Mulgrew makes an impression with her poise, range, and nuance, to say nothing of the heart she brings to Isolt. Nicholas Clay carries less renown as a performer, but still very capably realizes lovestruck Tristan with believable unwitting fog as a man swept up in a tragic affair. And Richard Burton, a titan of cinema, wields inescapable presence and force of personality as King Mark that makes his maddened delivery all the more startling. As I said, for all the excellence of the production, it surely feels as though the fundamental writing and the performances were the real core here, and these stars prove it - but even those in supporting roles are terrific in bringing the saga to life.

The value in the movie well speaks for itself, without need for flourishes to heighten the drama. I can appreciate why that approach or appearance may not appeal to all appraisers, emphasized with quieter scenes (especially nearer the end) that rely on substantial dialogue to impart their meaning and impact. In fairness, despite the worth of the tale, the last third of the picture is so heavily defined by that softer air that it's hard not to feel as though the plot and viewing experience somewhat languishes, and suffers as a result. Yet the ending is well done, and all the same, more so than not this is well made, with great care put into many elements and steady acting that serves as a tent pole. It may not strike a chord with wide general audiences, but I for one found 'Lovespell' to be a deserving slice of cinema that, if less flashy than more recent fare, still holds up fairly well. If you happen to come across it, this is worth checking out.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed