The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

This movie relates a surrealistic rendition of a 16th century play by Thomas Middleton (sometimes credited to Cyril Tourneur). The movie is set in a feudal European society (Liverpool) in the near future, the opening scene relating a nuclear attack on Europe.The acting is very good - Christopher Eccleston's emotions are believable and he brings the old English style of the play to life. The actors actually bring the old English to life in a way that Romeo and Juliet failed to. From the hatred of the Duke from the commoners to the expressions of Joy in the wedding sequences, the acting makes one feel as if the emotion is sincere.The scenery manages to appear a post-apocalyptic impoverished city that is dynamic and pleasing to the eye. The images of the Duke become eerier as the film progresses, representing an authority that s all - encompassing. There is very little nature shown, though the glamorous buildings chosen as sets suggest opulence at the expense of the people, and are beautiful.The writers modify the language to a degree to make the violent speech sharper and the whole script easier to relate to. The lines that appear in old English but were absent from the play blend in well and supplement the near - futuristic setting well. The whole story is in fact changed to some degree in order to make the futuristic set blend in well with the script.Politically, there are many references to peoples' struggles. A poster depicting Oscar Romero, a martyr for his support of "Liberation theology" and a quote of his appears near the end of the movie. The original play in fact was released anonymously, probably because it depicts authority as reviled by the disgruntled populace. The play makes the royal family appear corrupt from their abuse of the law to an adulterous, murderous family life. The movie takes this further; dressing the Duke to resemble a vampire and making the heirs to the throne appear childish as well as greedy. The news is symbolized by an eye over a pyramid, the duke appears regularly as if he was Big Brother and even the popular Antonio is corrupt.Not surprisingly, a leftist musical group, Chumbawamba was chosen to do the whole soundtrack. The music is more than stunning; it's atmospheric, melancholy adds graveness to the movie. In some ways the shows plays like a music video - even when the music fades the beauty of the old English is lyrical and allows the audio to flow seamlessly. Chumbawamba released a new version of "Don't Try this at Home" including bits of audio from the movie; the song appears during the credits and on the soundtrack. The lyrics of the song underline the undoubtedly political intent in the movie, and the original lyrics ironically relate very well to the plot of the movie.

This is an excellent adaptation of the play, which penguin classics claims Tourneur wrote, not Middleton, by the way.Christopher Eccleston is superb in acting Vindice as a fanatically hilarious psychopath, and the modern twists to give it present day significance also work well.However the language is quite difficult to understand, indeed I would say reading the play is important to gain some perspective into what is actually occurring, and to keep in mind as you watch it, especially th subtle changes, and a more satisfying ending than that given in the play. However it is quite advisable to never question the plausibility of the events in the play actually occurring, in essence it would make little sense, however I recommend you suspend your disbelief and be carried along on this imaginary journey into the surreal and meaningful.

Clever screen modernizations of classic drama make sense to me. I loved Ethan Hawke in HAMLET, Emma Thompson in MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING, Kevin Klein in A MIDSUMMER'S NIGHT DREAM, etc. This is a masterful adaptation/reformulation of THE REVENGER'S TRAGEDY. It's intelligent, fast-paced, witty, shocking, engaging, and faithful to the spirit of the original.I intend to use it in conjunction with teaching the original to Advanced Placement English students in a public high school.As a certain 20th-century poet said, "Don't criticize what you can't understand." This is a nearly flawless production for anyone who loves the history of theater or who loves great cinema.

Does anyone care about any of the characters in this film? - Or for that matter what happens to them? - I doubt it. That is the key problem - for a tragedy to work we have to care about at least one of the characters and none of them inspire any sympathy or appear to have any redeeming qualities at all.What may have worked in the 16th Century, certainly does not work in one can only assume 'post apocalyptic Liverpool' if that was indeed what it was meant to be. The problem is the characters in post apocalyptic Liverpool, whilst still driving around in cars, using mobile phones and watching television, have reverted to speaking in Shakespearian language - with a Liverpudlian dialect. Oh dear! Bad enough you might think - but this often lapsed into pure scouse - with comments such as 'eh lah are you a cockney? And was that a Merseyrail announcement during one of the scenes filmed in the underground? Well the good news is that in Post apocalyptic Liverpool - the trains are still running.The characters without exception are badly drawn, wooden and more like charicatures on the lines of the Joker/Penguin in Batman and Robin except there is no real storyline to speak of - or if there is - it is one that doesn't work in a modern setting where half the sets are gloomy and 'Blade runnerish' and the other half are fluorescent garish or just 21st century normal. Costumes are also mixed up with half wearing their everyday clothes (Parkers are big in post apocalyptic Liverpool - apparently) and the other half wearing costumes from the leftovers of a fancy dress party? The film explores the ideas of lust, incest and revenge in the most inane fashion imaginable - the tragedy is that this film was made at all.