7/10
A long build for the payoff, but absolutely worth it
1 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I admit,the movie drags a bit in spots for my tastes (I tend to go for slapstick, Monty Python whimsy, and high powered action), but "Queen Of Spades" was a very well done tale of destiny and doom. The nature of the story lends itself to a much shorter "Tales From The Crypt/"Dead of Night" anthology feature if needed (in fact, I can see that it has been done this way), but the heft and quality of the direction, acting and set designs have filled out the potentially "sketchy" parts into something compelling.

The protagonist, especially as played by the actor, is an unsympathetic and unappealing mix of coldness, ambition, ruthlessness and envy...and yet you can't entirely blame him, as Life seems to have dealt him a pretty harsh hand. And whatever his faults and schemes, it turns out that his seeming scheme to seduce the ingénue is really a cover for the chance to beg or force a magical secret out of the girl's aunt. (So he's a scoundrel, but not a cad".) When things go wrong, it's not really his fault (although he is directly responsible for at least one death, it's more manslaughter than murder).

So watching him get his comeuppance is not a particularly comfortable process - most of us can see a little of ourselves in the character as he is depicted here, and we can easily imagine ourselves in the same predicament if Fate were to single us out to doom us with our own character flaws.

We agreed that for a film made in 1949, the movie felt much "older", and I, for one, completely forgot that I was watching a bunch of Brits portraying 19th century era Russians until the credits rolled. And that the movie managed to be really creepy when it wanted to be.

Not for every taste, but worth your time if you like Pushkin, Russians, British cinema or slow-burn tales of the supernatural.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed