Performance (1970)

I went in doing all my research on this movie. I read where it didn't good reviews when it first came out, it was violent and some lady vomited at the premiere. I don't know why that sticks out to me. But I knew it was gonna be either a love or hate movie, no in the middle. It started off good sure, a petty thief crosses his boss and goes on the run from the boss and ends up at Mick Jaggers house where it all falls apart. I hated the movie yes but I am still giving it a 5 star review out of 10. I like these late 60's early 70's British underworld crime movies. The Italian Job and Get Carter both come to mind. The cockney accents and just London at that time was the place to be. It was like looking in a time voretx of London in the 60's. Thats all the movies had going for it. But Mick Jagger and the other fellow dressing up like women and having gay sex. Nah just wasn't for me.

I saw this film about a dozen times at a tiny art-house theater off the Sunset Strip. It's not what you think it might be with the casting of Ms. Pallenberg and Mick. It's an onion of a movie with layers and nuances and subtexts that require repeated viewings. It explores sexuality and power in a way that was very frightening and nihilistic to audiences--so much so that preview audiences were refunded their money.The actual violence in the beginning of the movie is a misdirect, ala the initial story line in Psycho. Mr. Fox's character screws the pooch by enjoying his work to his own detriment and has to lay low while he figures out how to leave the country and evade his former employers. He stumbles into the counterculture. Turner and his entourage take him in, in every sense of the word. Turner is pan-sexual, a Ziggy Stardust who has lost his daemon and retreated deeper into a drug-induced fugue state where the only rule is misrule.Turner's guest is an accidental tourist in a land where he doesn't speak the language or respect the culture. They slip him a mushroom omelet to loosen him up, but he sees their world in his own context, which is primal and violent.In one teaser scene, M. Jagger sits in a bathtub with a pound note as a fig leaf. Sex sells?Trying to explain this movie to someone who's never seen it is like trying to describe an acid trip to someone who's never been on one. Watch it a couple of times before you make up your mind. You may be repulsed and fascinated simultaneously. You'll love it or hate it. The soundtrack is worth the price of admission. It pushes the boundaries that were being crossed by movies like If and Clockwork Orange. It's a way- back machine to a time before Rocky Horror, The Last Tango in Paris, Inserts and other Seventies movies that challenged the sexual status quo. Gender-bender, mind-bender--you've been cautioned.

Have been a huge fan of this movie since I first saw it about 30 years ago. It captures the mayhem of the time and brings together a Brit gangster movie with the psychedelic world of reclusive, faded rock star chic. I simply love everything about this film; James Fox is magnificent as a sadistic on the run gangster and Jagger does what he does best to a sizzling soundtrack of period music. So many firsts here... from the Moog synthesiser, the mixture of genres, its use of imagery, is that the first rap song? .. and more. The ending is a little confused but the whole thing is a feast for the senses, you can't guess what will happen next. They dared to try out lots of new ideas and combine many different styles.. it really works and defies categorisation to this day.. a masterpiece!

This movie is a real mixed bag for me. I was totally into its first half and was absolutely loving it for its creativity but the about half way through the movie starts to become a totally different movie, the moment Mick Jagger makes his appearance.Thing that made me love its first half, was that it was being a very British crime flick, focusing on criminals, that got shot and told beautifully. Truly in an artistic manner, with some experimental camera-work and editing, that all worked out well and captivating for the movie.I was so disappointed that not the whole movie was being like this. The second half of the movie is far more psychedelic and doesn't really seem all too concerned about telling its story. So disappointing, since everything that got buildup in the first half of the movie was being very promising and I was anxious to see what would happen next. But it's almost as of halfway through the movie comes to a stop and after that the movie hardly progresses any more story-wise. It becomes more a movie about its characters, which was just all less interesting to watch, in my opinion.In a way you could say that Jagger ruined the movie for me but I don't blame just him. It more was the story and the different approach of its second half that it all less interesting to watch and caused his character to work out as mostly an annoying one.James Fox was definitely better. He is not a big name actor but chances are you have already seen him in something. He doesn't always play leading roles, as he does in this movie but he definitely is a more than capable actor, that also has plenty of charisma to him.I still rate the movie quite highly, simply because of the reason that it's being a very original and creative movie, that also still works out for most part as well.So in short, it has a great and artistic first half and a less impressive and more messy second one. But overall the movie remains a more than good and original watch, though it's most definitely not a movie for just everyone.7/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/