Dance with a Stranger (1985)

a destructive love story. the right cast. the wise way to explore the consequences of a dependence who reminds more a Greek tragedy than a "50 real case. Miranda Richardson does more than a great job . Ian Holm is the perfect choice for the role of a protector, full of good intentions and incapable to stop the fall of his mistress. and Rupert Everett, yes, he is the real surprise . young, immature , rich, his character is the right image of the cynical butcher . a film about obsessive love. about the impact between different worlds. about the lost of sense of a mother who believes in the seduction of a dangerous illusion.

I know I've come a little late to this party and even what follows is unconnected to the brilliant film which is the subject of this site but I thought I should make a few corrections to the paragraph in theowinthrop's excellent review, (unlike Andy's, which is more intent on making supposedly witty comments than on trying to understand DWAS) which deals with the Craig and Bentley case of 1952/3.Craig was 16, not about 15, which I suppose is more or less the same thing. More seriously, theo falls into the usual trap of stating that Craig killed the policeman on hearing Bentley's alleged cry of "Let him have it, Chris!" It was a plain clothes Detective Constable, not a constable, who approached Craig who then shot and slightly wounded him supposedly on hearing those words. It was much later that a constable, Sidney Miles, was shot and killed, presumably by Craig although police marksmen had arrived by then.That alleged cry of "Let him have it, Chris!" is still a bone of contention. Many, including me, feel that it was invented after the event by the police who, understandably furious that one of their number had been killed and knowing that Craig was too young to be executed, tried by doing so to ensure that there would be a life for a life. Many years later Craig, by now a late middle aged man, took a lie detector test when he insisted that the words had never been uttered. The result of the test supported that.

This drama recounts the true events of a love triangle in early 1950s London. Richardson, inexplicably made up to look like Marilyn Monroe, plays an unstable prostitute who is obsessed with a rich, abusive race car driver played by Everett. Holm is a kindly fellow who wants to take care of her but she is not attracted to him. This is basically a dull soap opera with uninteresting characters. Richardson gives a terrible, mannered performance in her screen debut. She delivers her lines in such a weird accent and so rapidly that 90 percent of what she says is incomprehensible. Unfortunately, English subtitles are not available for this film.

Billing this as the tale of "the last woman who was executed in Britain" sorta lets you know up front that Miranda Richardson's widescreen debut is going to end badly.Director Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral) pulls gut~wrenching performances from his leads, Miranda Richardson, Rupert Everett & the always~underrated Ian Holm, in this fascinating fact~based story about utter sexual obsession.Set in the dark '50s.Ruth Ellis (Richardson) runs and lives above a nightclub/brothel frequented by several of London's wealthy gadflies. She's platinum blonde, all brass and ummm... well~liked by the local gentry.She also has a young son named Andy, about to enter school, who turns the blindest of innocent eyes to Mom's lifestyle.Enter David (Everett), a sullen alcoholic rich boy and LeMans auto racer wannabe who's taken in by Ruth's wiles within moments of seeing her for the first time ~ after being introduced to Ruth and her "club" by his equally well~heeled close friend Desmond (Holm).What unfolds is the single most riveting ~ and more importantly, believable ~ love/hate relationship film I've seen. There have been tons of movies about obsessive lust (and I'm not talking about the flix they rent behind that door at the back of your video store whose "A" section takes up three aisles) but this one is a real treat.David, you see, is seriously involved with another woman when he meets Ruth... yet beds the latter in quick fashion. The other woman (eventually his fiancee) is the rub. As is David's penchant for getting drunk and simultaneously developing still a third wandering eye.Still, it's Ruth he wants. To the point of showing up at the oddest of times to woo (or just rant drunkenly, incoherently at ~ or just to hit) her. All the while winnowing his way deeply into Ruth and her son's hearts and lives.Meanwhile Desmond stands stoically by until nearly the bitter end, supporting Ruth during LeMans~boy's long absences and sustaining her each time David fails to live up to his promises, which is pretty much always.The "fights betwixt the leads" scenes are the best, the most creatively acted and directed.After a while, Newell yanks you into the almost~triangle between the three and one begins to attempt to choose sides. This proves to be impossible, as none of the characters are particularly sympathetic.IE: this ain't a Hollywood movie. Each character has flaws which are well~defined, there's no happy ending and (are you listening, Jim Cameron?)... no sequel.Richardson is simply astonishing in her premiere. Each note she plays, screaming or smoldering, is just right (hence Miranda's Rights).Everett's superb as the sociopathically obsessed lover.And Holm is, well, brilliant. Color him unrequited with a vengeance.9 of 10 Niro~Stars