User Reviews

**SPOILERS** Not being up to take over and run his father's vast real-estate and business empire 19 year-old Jack Lyne, Jonathan Penner, is shocked to find out that his widowed mom Helen, Jacqueline Bisset,is planning to marry his hated and sleazy Uncle Carl,Jamey Sheridan.

Doing nothing but getting smashed, with booze drugs and fists, Jack drops into one of his father's bars. While getting a load off his mind in the restroom Jack hears someone, on the other side of the stall, tell him that it was his Uncle Carl who really did his father in and made it look like a heart attack.

Running out and checking everyones shoes, thats the only way he can identify the person who gave him the shocking news, Jack is beat up and thrown out by the bartender and a number of outraged customers. it seems obvious from the make of the shoes that the person who told Jack about his Uncle Carl's treachery is non-other then the family lawyer and his late dad's good friend Sol Hirsh, Philip Baker Hall.

At a party at Hirsh's place that night, after having some hot action with Hirsh's unstable and dog food eating daughter Julie (Mary-Louise Parker), Jack again sees written on a mirror, obviously by Sol, that Carl murdered his father and "what is he waiting for"! It turns out that Carl is also at the party and so is Jack's mother where their to announce their upcoming engagement and marriage.

Jack who's recovering from a sever mental breakdown want's to stop the marriage but doesn't feel that killing Carl is worth spending is entire life behind bars. On the other hand Carl,in having Jack murdered, does and is not at all planning to pay the price of his freedom for killing him and plans to make Jack's death look like an accident or robbery.

The movie is a jumble of mistakes with Carl having these two creeps Bradbury & Brautigan,Randell Batikoff & Norma Needus, plan to whack Jack but things get a little complicated when Julie joins in. Jack calling for a cab to take Julie home with Brautigan's cell phone dials Sol's home and get's Uncle Carl instead. Not waiting for Jack to say anything and thinking that it's Brautigan, his cell phone number came up on the caller I.D, who's calling Carl tells Jack to whack Julie as well as himself. This tips Jack off that the two are not at all interested in Mexican food, which they were supposed to pick up, but are hired by Uncle Carl to put a bullet in his head.

It turns out that Jack's fathers good friend and what seems to be his Guardian Angel Satch, Jonathan Banks, had these two crooked cops, Tony & Lobo, come to Jack's rescue knocking off both Bardbury & Brautigan before they could do Jack in. Later somehow, it's never explained in the movie, they seemed to have knocked off Julie even though she earlier left the car and the two would-be killers never as much as got out of their car seats?

Carl now greatly impressed with Jack ability to keep from getting killed by his hoods plans to get him in his friend's, and co-conspirator, Bruce, Maury Chaykin, "Pleasure Dome" nightclub to talk things over a few drinks. Setting Jack up with a spiked bottle of champaign and a hit-man ,Jeff Bowser, if he felt like staying off the sauce that evening. As usual like everything else in the movie things get screwed up when Helen shows up, dressed all in black, for the party.

Slow and boring movie that has to do with a number of off-the-wall characters who by the time it's over Jack is left dying and Carl and Jack's mother Helen who were supposed to be married are instead to be buried in the now very crowded Lyne family plot.

Did you ever see a movie where everything added up to nothing? Well that is how I felt after watching "Let the Devil Wear Black". A whole bunch of unlikable characters with little or no development, try killing each other. Jonathan Penner is good as the son seeking revenge on his uncle for murdering his father. The problem is, the film comes across as an almost incoherent series of events. There is lots of small talk, totally unrelated to the story, that constantly bogs things down. Unlike the plot description of violent killings, shocking suicides and a thrilling plot that will shake you to the core, I wound up merely shaking my head. - MERK

"Let the Devil..." is an orgy of sex, murder, deceit, and treachery which wastes a solid cast and excellent production talent on a weak story which is little more than wickedness heaped upon wickedness ad nauseum. The film fails as a psychodrama, action flick, and/or whodunnit and flounders toward it anticlimactic ending when it should be wrenching the gut or breaking the heart. Less evil and more good would have been better for there's no value in yin without yang.

Take "Hamlet." Strip it to it's bare bones. Throw the bones as high as you can up into the air. Assemble them in whatever order they land and you'll pretty much have the plot to "Let The Devil Wear Black."

It's been a long standing policy of mine never to criticize an actor for taking a shot at the role of Hamlet. (Even a barely recognizable Hamlet like this one.) I mean, what actor worth his salt *wouldn't* take a run at Hamlet? And truth be told, Jonathan Penner does takes his best shot at it.

Unfortunately, Penner and Title torpedo the effort with orgulous writing and plot developments so painfully aimless I kept hoping for Zombie Shakespeare to rise from his grave, shamble onto the set and start ripping those responsible for this embarrassment limb-from-limb.

"Let the Devil Wear Black" is dark, sexy and smart modern interpretation of "Hamlet". Distinctively noirish, this clever film maintains a fast and steady pace that explores the deep rooted psyches of the main characters. Although the film surely would be characterized as a thriller, the writing and directing are strong enough to justify "Devil" as a character piece as well. Stacy Title's wry sense of humor is apparent from beginning to end. Furthermore, Ms. Title's shooting style, complemented by Jim Whittaker's cinematography, is more imaginative and animated as compared to her previous film "The Last Supper". This film is funny, tragic and engaging. It is truly a gem and not to be missed.

One of the worst movies I have ever seen. It is beyond me that such a thing gets actually produced. The only remarkable moment in this pathetic effort of an Hamlet adaption is when the Ophelia (Julia) character eats dry dog food.

A bold and worthy attempt to update Shakespeare's Hamlet by stripping the play of its dialogue, and turning it into a contemporary murder story.

Of course it isn't always successful, I suspect that no such strategy would be, since Shakespeare's language is actually more important than his plotting.

Still, the sincerity of cast and crew carry the effort a great ways. The Rozencrantz and Guildenstern sup-plot was, I thought, particularly well-handled.

I have shown this to people who say they hate Shakespeare, without telling them the connection to the bard, and they have generally found it fascinating. Perhaps this is the only way some people can "get" Shakespeare.

definitely worth a viewing.

Believe it or not this is another revised version of Hamlet complete with the Ghost of his father, a murderous uncle, unfaithful mother, even Rozenkranz & Guildenstern; also a suicidal girl friend.

I wish it were more coherant, even the Keannu Reeves version was more understandable. a mild thumb down for me only **1/2

This one's a real return to film noir. An updated version of Hamlet, with a positively unique spin on the now-cliched "Alas, poor Yorick" speech. Probably could've done without the "Pepto Bismol" scene, but aside from that it was a great story (of course) well told. Performances were terrific all around, but especially Jonathan Banks as "Satch."

wow i just saw this last week and i loved it. The cast is amazing, Mary-Louise Parker as a bi-polar Ophelia, Jonathan Penner as an angst ridden hero, Jamey Sheridan as an evil Claudius, Phillip Baker Hall, Maury chaykin, it's so funny and well done. Doesn't talk down to you.

A truly excellent Hamlet adaptation.

The look of the film also deserves mention, it is lush and eerie. Very well directed.

I find it mildly amusing to read the comments of self-styled critics who derive great satisfaction from their ability to string words together in a quasi-intellectual and wannabe MEANINGFUL fashion....the art-house intelligentsia. Yeah some of us other terrestrials HAVE in fact a working knowledge of HAMLET even to the point of realising that this here little number IS in fact a modernistic, though agreed, unspectacular re-working!

Who gives a flying doughnut if "shooting at night is problematical?" and/or every option available to the aspiring director in charge? Carol Reed in technologically simplistic times came up with THE THIRD MAN, a flick for which "the dark" is synonymous with "mood" and "noir." The problem with this film is not one of inappropriate filming techniques or even the unreasonably slated "script" (let him who is without sin.........etc) it is the fact that you actually have to LISTEN! The film does not sidle up to you and nuzzle your leg saying "Pick me up - aren't I cute?" The characters regrettably are simply unendearing and with all the spontaneity of those from ANOTHER WORLD.

For all that, I have seen way worse than this and despite cranially displaced assertions that barely one scene in its ninety minute run-time might be said to momentarily hold one's attention, there is in fact a film here you just might get something out of, if you TRY! It IS after all just a film, NOT a philosophical dissertation!

this is well worth a viewing. satisfying and filmic -- a standout. a great director...is this a gal or guy? just cause the sex scenes are steamy. mary louise parker is excellent here, crazy and haunting. penner is great. jamey sheridan, maury chaykin this just has an awesome cast and it's a blast.

modern film noir, pure and simple. a few twists, some titillation, and it's a nice little thriller. clever version of hamlet to boot.

the sound track is excellent. I'm guessing it was an indy film and I'm pretty impressed. the actors put out good performances and several of them went on to become mainstream talent.

thumbs up.

geeze the length requirement here is overkill. OK what else...the film was shot almost exclusively at nite, with some touching little flashbacks done in a retro home-movie style, which were always outdoors in the sun. I loved that -- that the actual lives of the characters is dark and bleak but their memories are sweet and in color. except tho Julia makes a comment about not having sweet memories like that.

have seen this movie three times now. excellent. mary-louise parker is so sexy.

and this piece is wild. it has a wicked sensibility. funny. the writer is very in tune. there's some beautiful flashback home movie stuff. but mostly gorgeous 35mm.

i assume this was done independently... fantastic acting, and it moves. well let's just come out and say it: it's hot.

I caught this ditty by chance and was I glad I did. It is a film written and acted suited to my tastes. Jonathan Penner was captivating within his mannerisms, gorgeous to look at and a pleasure to see him act. Plot is grand. Everything else too. I am not giving much more away, solely my two opinions, aforementioned and the last: RENT IT if you find it.