It was so close to being a great movie. What happened?
This is so peculiar. There are discrete 90s sensibilities about it, particularly in regards to the independent spirit and comparative states of undress (and outright nudity) for Su and Lou. Yet in the first half there's also an emphatic, playful, unserious ham-handedness that hearkens to pictures of the 1960s - or maybe even to the silent era. In fact the latter frame of reference may actually be most appropriate, because while 'Kill cruise' is of course a sound picture, the visuals include decidedly exaggerated body language, and to some degree even the arrangement of some shots and scenes recalls the specific stylings of that bygone era that relied entirely on the camera's eye (and intertitles) to tell a story. Moreover, much about the premise and course of events reminds of the type of story that would fill titles of adventure-laden drama in the 1920s - a voyage of two carefree and directionless young women, and one tired and haggard sailor; small inclusions that superficially seem unnecessary or tangential to the narrative. These sound like oddities, yes, but I think it works.
But, oh, we're just getting started. There are wildly different ideas that seem to dominate at one point or another throughout the length. In terms of the film's craft it's difficult to tell if the production is earnest and restrained, or flailing and lacking. One element or another varies from overdone to underwhelming, with little middle ground, and that includes the acting, characters, scene writing, editing, music, and so on. One possible takeaway is that writer-director Peter Keglevic, and his cast, just didn't have the capability to make 'Kill cruise' the best it could be. Another, especially in light of how Brynmor Llewelyn Jones' score is employed more sparingly than not, is that the disparity between the more lively moments and the more dour ones is a reflection of three characters desperate for a way out of the misery in their lives, and grasping at straws as they try to get along. If declining the utmost dark thrills and dire circumstances, there's a noir-esque vibe about the feature as bad business escalates between the three characters, all of whom are shady in their own ways, and the scenario spirals out of control. Even more than that, the movie in no small part comes across somewhat as a psychological drama as tensions boil and each character gradually and individually splinters.
The latter aspect is arguably the strongest of all, not least as it's accentuated in the second half and within the last ten minutes. However, those last ten minutes are actually, unfortunately, what completely breaks 'Kill cruise.' While the picture is generally uneven throughout its runtime, it builds a consistent narrative. That consistency isn't just disregarded but is instead utterly and actively shattered as a turn comes that in no way comports to anything in the entire preceding length. It's a senseless non sequitur made worse by the very obvious and better alternatives of how the picture could have ended - and by the true final seconds, which conclude the tale not with a last shot, but two lines of text as an epilogue. What were you thinking, Keglevic?!
It was less than perfect, but highly enjoyable and quietly bewitching. This was true even as Su and Lou were poorly written, and even as Patsy Kensit in particular struggled to serve up believable acting in a few key, regrettable instances. Then that imperfection is wholly dropped. It's almost as though Keglevic, or perhaps his producers or financial backers, suddenly decided they hated the movie they had made, so they filmed pick-ups to fashion a new and awful ending as an act of cinematic sabotage. I'm altogether flabbergasted.
I do like the performances at large. Details like hair and makeup or production design are swell. These facets just don't seem to matter when a title so thoroughly self-destructs in the way 'Kill cruise' does. I was prepared to say it's actually a really good movie, far exceeding my expectations - there was so much about this that was done well. But so much for that. I guess if you're a huge fan of Kensit, Elizabeth Hurley, or Jürgen Prochnow, then this may be worth checking out despite its glaring shortcomings. But considering the severity of those faults, I sadly can't specifically recommend it for any reason.
This is so peculiar. There are discrete 90s sensibilities about it, particularly in regards to the independent spirit and comparative states of undress (and outright nudity) for Su and Lou. Yet in the first half there's also an emphatic, playful, unserious ham-handedness that hearkens to pictures of the 1960s - or maybe even to the silent era. In fact the latter frame of reference may actually be most appropriate, because while 'Kill cruise' is of course a sound picture, the visuals include decidedly exaggerated body language, and to some degree even the arrangement of some shots and scenes recalls the specific stylings of that bygone era that relied entirely on the camera's eye (and intertitles) to tell a story. Moreover, much about the premise and course of events reminds of the type of story that would fill titles of adventure-laden drama in the 1920s - a voyage of two carefree and directionless young women, and one tired and haggard sailor; small inclusions that superficially seem unnecessary or tangential to the narrative. These sound like oddities, yes, but I think it works.
But, oh, we're just getting started. There are wildly different ideas that seem to dominate at one point or another throughout the length. In terms of the film's craft it's difficult to tell if the production is earnest and restrained, or flailing and lacking. One element or another varies from overdone to underwhelming, with little middle ground, and that includes the acting, characters, scene writing, editing, music, and so on. One possible takeaway is that writer-director Peter Keglevic, and his cast, just didn't have the capability to make 'Kill cruise' the best it could be. Another, especially in light of how Brynmor Llewelyn Jones' score is employed more sparingly than not, is that the disparity between the more lively moments and the more dour ones is a reflection of three characters desperate for a way out of the misery in their lives, and grasping at straws as they try to get along. If declining the utmost dark thrills and dire circumstances, there's a noir-esque vibe about the feature as bad business escalates between the three characters, all of whom are shady in their own ways, and the scenario spirals out of control. Even more than that, the movie in no small part comes across somewhat as a psychological drama as tensions boil and each character gradually and individually splinters.
The latter aspect is arguably the strongest of all, not least as it's accentuated in the second half and within the last ten minutes. However, those last ten minutes are actually, unfortunately, what completely breaks 'Kill cruise.' While the picture is generally uneven throughout its runtime, it builds a consistent narrative. That consistency isn't just disregarded but is instead utterly and actively shattered as a turn comes that in no way comports to anything in the entire preceding length. It's a senseless non sequitur made worse by the very obvious and better alternatives of how the picture could have ended - and by the true final seconds, which conclude the tale not with a last shot, but two lines of text as an epilogue. What were you thinking, Keglevic?!
It was less than perfect, but highly enjoyable and quietly bewitching. This was true even as Su and Lou were poorly written, and even as Patsy Kensit in particular struggled to serve up believable acting in a few key, regrettable instances. Then that imperfection is wholly dropped. It's almost as though Keglevic, or perhaps his producers or financial backers, suddenly decided they hated the movie they had made, so they filmed pick-ups to fashion a new and awful ending as an act of cinematic sabotage. I'm altogether flabbergasted.
I do like the performances at large. Details like hair and makeup or production design are swell. These facets just don't seem to matter when a title so thoroughly self-destructs in the way 'Kill cruise' does. I was prepared to say it's actually a really good movie, far exceeding my expectations - there was so much about this that was done well. But so much for that. I guess if you're a huge fan of Kensit, Elizabeth Hurley, or Jürgen Prochnow, then this may be worth checking out despite its glaring shortcomings. But considering the severity of those faults, I sadly can't specifically recommend it for any reason.