Red_Identity What an exhilarating, entrancing, searing piece of work. Oh, it did cost me a bit to go along with the dialogue so easily, but the whole thing was just fantastic. The ensemble cast seems to be having the time of their lives speaking all of these juicy dramatic lines. Tilda Swinton, especially, manages to go beyond my expectations to deliver an all-time worthy performance. This is what she's best at, this sort of icy, hypnotizing, ethereal role, and she more than delivers. In a film full of wonderful performances, she stands at the very top. The whole thing is just completely and utterly mesmerizing, impossible to look away.

ianlouisiana Most Brits could tell you that Edward 2nd came to an unfortunate and painful end but that would be the extent of their knowledge of the country's first acknowledged homosexual monarch.Their disinterest not being rooted in deep-seated homophobia,merely the lack of relevance to life in 21st century England of the sexual orientation of some obscure long-dead king. Quite what point Mr D.Jarman is trying to make in "Edward 2nd"is not clear to me.Homosexual men had a tough time back then?Hold the front page. Is he inferring that treatment of gays in 1991 is in any way comparable?Surely that is a gross insult to the efforts of equal rights campaigners and the abuse and injury they have sustained over the years to ensure that no sensible person cares who his neighbour sleeps with as long as it doesn't have fur,feathers or scales. Whatever,the movie's two main characters are deeply unsympathetic self - obsessed boors with no saving graces whatsoever. Mr Jarman's "brilliant" spin on Marlowe's play is to put it on in modern dress - there's daring for you.Presumably to make the patently absurd point that attitudes towards homosexuality have not changed with the passage of time. Too gimmicky by half,"Edward 2nd" might appeal to the small number of gay men who still regard themselves as victims of a heterosexual conspiracy and want to see their beliefs made flesh,as it were,up om the screen. I suspect that most people,however,might consider that Mr Jarman was over - egging the pudding just a little bit.

CDC0805 A history / political science major, I usually enjoy seeing "period" films of historical significance. This film would not qualify as a "period" film. However, it definitely drew my interest.Both Steven Waddington and Tilda Swinton performed beautifully as Edward and Isabelle.Although Derek Jarman is sadly no longer with us, I LQQK forward in viewing other films made by those directors who approximate his vision.

Bologna King The story of Edward II is a story of obsession, of a man whose one-track mind causes him to lose his kingdom, his lover and his life. Marlowe's play (probably his most dramatic and certainly his least poetic) gives lots of scope for developing the problems raised by Edward's infatuation for the unscrupulous and self-seeking Gaveston: his inattention to affairs of state, his irresponsible spending, his granting of important positions to Gaveston who has no interest in actually fulfilling his duties and Gaveston's general contempt for church, nobility and everyone else.Unfortunately director Jarman has arranged this production in such a way as to make us see Edward's story through Edward's eyes rather than those of an outside observer. The sets are mostly pueblo-style interiors, giving the impression that this is a middle-class household not the palace of a king. There are no extras, and the scenes are bare of people, again reinforcing the idea that this is a private rather than a public story. The nobles are treated as tourists who are out of place in the life of the king. Our attention is focussed constantly on the intimate relations between individuals: Edward and Gaveston, Edward and Isobel, Isobel and Mortimer.Edward, whose whole life was dominated by his obsessive love for Gaveston (just count how many times he says "my Gaveston" in the play) saw his world in just this way: everything anyone did was measured against how it affected his romance, and everything he did was to further it. When Isobel abandons him, she loses her humanity and becomes in his eyes a grotesque vampire. Indeed one wonders how much of what we see as reality in the film is Edward's fantasies and imaginings as he becomes increasingly deranged.An intriguing approach, perhaps, but the problem is that Edward's one-track mind makes for a one-track monochromatic presentation, and quite frankly it becomes so superficial as to be tedious after a bit. Without the depth provided by an objective viewpoint we lose interest.Scenes of unnamed naked men making love or playing rugby without a ball must have been put in for the titillation of gay viewers. They added nothing to the story. On the other hand the love between Edward and Gaveston was sincerely and persuasively played, and a good thing too, because that's about all you get here.Waddington's performance is splendid and gives a lot of life to what might otherwise have been a total yawn; it's worth the trouble of watching this just to see him. Tilda Swinton's performance is overrated; she delivers her best monologue as slowly and tonelessly as possible and it doesn't take long to start wondering when she's going to show some emotion.