White of the Eye (1988)

A fellow "film geek" brought this over one night and insisted I drop what I was doing so we could screen it right away. Beginning with one of the most original opening scenes in my memory to the other-worldly climax, this is an incredibly well-conceived and well-crafted movie. David Keith secures his place here in the Pantheon of film weirdos that includes Eric Roberts in Star 80. Oddly, I was so wrapped up in Keith's performance that I didn't notice the flashbacks the first time I watched the film. I think I thought that there were weird inconsistencies in the clothes and the script (uhhhh..weird, dude). Keith's madman is portrayed lovingly here and I think that's why it's so chilling. He's not one-dimensional; he's good and bad more like a good Hitchcock psycho (see Bruno in Strangers on a Train). Danielle Smith is a real treat here. She reminded me a little of Linda Manz in Days of Heaven. She has an amazing face that I couldn't stop staring at and she has a (subtly strange) way with a line ("what's a juvie?"). SEE THIS MOVIE! Tell others about it!

this films is definitely an under-seen gem... David Keith will scare the crap out of you. Beautifully filmed, excellent pacing, and Cathy Moriarity is as sexy a woman as has ever graced the screen. Glad to see that a few others were lucky/smart enough to see this film... for years i thought i was one of about 4 people who had even heard of it.

What we have here is a clear case of a movie that tries to get by on sheer style, without any particular concern for the story or the characters. There are many interesting directorial touches and a unique atmosphere, but the film suffers from a weak script, and from overlength. Strictly for fans of the offbeat. (**)

*spoilers*Donald Cammell's final film White of the Eye is more similar in theme to the chameleon-esque Performance than the sci-fi adaptation Demon Seed. Both films concern identity, either the loss of (Performance where the two disparate leads merge into one) or the rigid absolution thereof (White of the Eye), resulting in madness and murder. In both films the narrative is not linear. There are both flashbacks and scenes extraneous to the plot. See also the films of Performance co-director Nicholas Roeg.The opening sequence of White of the Eye depicts an eagle soaring over the man-made landscape of city and quarry/mines, completely distanced/alien from that world. An eagle is a predator reliant on vision, it could be construed as a metaphor for Paul White.The first murder is overtly stylised, as is most of the film. Imagery such as the fish in the meat dish, red wine spilling, and red roses, replace the need to show bloodshed. Unfortunately such showiness distances the viewer from the scene. It is more like art than murder (but what else is any film?).The second murder is more sinister, particularly when the killer holds a mirror to the drowning woman's face. It reminded me of the male/female interplay with a mirror in Performance (identity theme again).There is a revealing moment into the psychology of White when his wife, Joan, confronts him about the murders. He is more relieved that this acquits him of adultery, thus consolidating his loyalty to her. Consider his stoical aspect on life/identity. He does not realise/except that now his life and relationship is irrevocably changed.Joan's previous lover, Mike, does change with time unlike White. He too has mental problems, "the TV in his head" (vision again), which supposedly explains his sudden appearance at the finale. As he knew the truth about White, he is partially responsible for the murders, and with typical film morality had to die at the end. The conclusion is quite unsatisfactory, guns and explosions are easy, a dramatic conclusion may have been more fitting.