Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Aedonerre I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

Ariella Broughton It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

gavin6942 A member of the House of Lords dies, leaving his estate to his son. Unfortunately, his son thinks he is Jesus Christ. The other, somewhat more respectable, members of their family plot to steal the estate from him. Murder and mayhem ensue.As of now (April 2017), I have written half-baked reviews for almost 6,000 movies and I have reached that cynical point where I feel like I've seen it all. And then this film comes across my desk. Holy smokes, it is as funny and fresh as any film before or since. This is what satire or black comedy is meant to be.Peter O'Toole was nominated for an Oscar. Sadly, he lost. But even more sadly is how this film was not nominated for other Oscars. I am not going to look up the competition at the moment, but this surely must have been one of the best films of 1972.

Andrew Huggett 'rich knobs and privileged a***holes can afford to be bonkers … 'The first 10 minutes or so of this film are quite interesting, with a good cast of British eccentrics (especially the splendid Alastair Sim and Arthur Lowe). I quite enjoyed the gathering at the start with the reading of the will and the arrival of the new Lord (and even the subsequent surreal song and dance routine with the ladies organising the local fête) – but it then descends into a complete pretentious mess. Very disappointing considering the talented actors deployed here. I nodded off just after Peter O'Toole had stopped thinking he was God and decided he was Jack the Ripper instead - this was partly because I'd had some wine with my meal, and not entirely down to the reactions this film provoked in me. The odd sequence at the end in the House of Lords reminded me of the final 2 episodes of the TV series 'the Prisoner' made 4 years prior to the release of this film.

MartinHafer "The Ruling Class" is a film that is sure to offend--after all, the leading man (Peter O'Toole) thinks he is Jesus! Right away, this sort of idea eliminates many potential viewers who would just be too offended to see such a film--especially with scenes where O'Toole climbs up on a giant cross in his house in order to meditate or take a nap. Additionally, the film nails the final nails in the coffin of the traditional English class system--and probably offended quite a few tradition-bound Brits as well. As for me, I was less offended (especially in its skewering of the upper class) but more bothered because the execution of the plot left a bit to be desired. Specifically, it was overlong and overly indulgent.The film begins with the Earl of Gurney accidentally hanging himself while having a rant--during which he was wearing a tutu! Obviously, the guy was NOT in his right mind. However, his heir (O'Toole) is 100% bonkers--and thinks he's Jesus! Considering he's got a seat in the House of Lords the family thinks this is a serious problem! But they also want to have an heir and so they trick the new Earl into a marriage and a child is soon produced. Now that the heir is here, the family will either have O'Toole committed or cure him--they don't care which--they just know they can't have a loony representing the family in the House! The film has a lot to like. I love how, for absolutely no reason, the cast members periodically break into song and dance numbers. I also like the general premise that the monarchy has long outlived its usefulness. Finally, the Butler is wonderful, as once he inherits his fortune he doesn't care one bit about propriety and tells EVERYONE exactly what he'd been hiding all those years--and delivers some very funny lines. But, I also feel irritated that such a lovely idea is, at times, squandered because the film just goes on and on and on and on. Someone really needed to look at this film and make a few judicious cuts here and there or say 'enough' when it lost momentum because scenes were just overdone or lacked comedic timing. This is especially true near the end--a portion that should have taken about ten minutes but took 40! And, frankly, the Jack the Ripper angle was handled in a very, very unfunny way--and it could have been hilarious. Overall, an interesting and compelling failure.By the way, the Rorschach cards used by the psychiatrist in the film are two of the actual cards from this test. It's rare to see real cards in films or TV.

aimless-46 Back in 2001, The Criterion Collection saw fit to add "The Ruling Class" (1972) to their catalog; which means there is now a good print available in the correct aspect ratio, one that includes the entire original release running time of 154 minutes. It also means that "The Ruling Class" is now regarded in film circles as a "significant" movie. Of course almost any film student will tell you that "significant" is not necessarily synonymous with entertaining, critically acclaimed, or well-made.So if you are considering a purchase or have just had a confused post-purchase viewing experience the following discussion may prove useful. This is a British film, one I originally watched on the BBC a few months after its release. It was neither a critical success (mixed reviews) nor a box office sensation and hitting the BBC so soon after a theatrical release back then was not much different from going direct-to-video today.It was a counter-culture film, and much of my original enjoyment came from the obvious tweaking of certain cultural and political institutions. Much of this stuff has lost its power and appeal over the years.It has a lot of expressionistic and allegorical elements; this sort of stuff was (and is) relatively rare in an English language film and probably accounts for much of the current cult status of the film. The black comedy aspect of these elements has held up very well and you will understand the film better and enjoy it more if you don't take it literally.Jack, the 14th Earl of Gurney (Peter O'Toole), has recently inherited the family title and a place in the House of Lords of the British Parliament. The story actually begins with a cheerfully provocative black comedy sequence as his father, the 13th Earl (Harry Andrews), accidentally hangs himself while performing what is apparently a long-standing self-pleasuring ritual.Jack believes himself Jesus Christ and his family believes that they can get their hands on the estate once he produces an heir. Their idea being to have him committed and then become guardians of the child. Carolyn Seymour plays his uncle's mistress who is brought in to marry Jack. Her character throws a wrench in the works by falling in love with her new husband. Other than Jack, Seymour's character is the only one that undergoes any real change during the course of the film and she sells this transformation quite nicely while also providing one of the best striptease sequences you are likely to stumble across in a mainstream movie.As already noted the running length is 154 minutes, that's about the length of two movies and if the film were being produced today I suspect that it would be done as two separate films. Indeed it is really two stories with each having an entirely different tone. About midway through the film, the Jesus version of the 14th Earl is replaced by a Jack the Ripper version. In the process a farcical and relatively light-hearted black comedy is instantly transformed into a much darker story. Black comedy gives way to dark fantasy and hallucinations as the wheels fall off the story until a visually stunning ending.The 1972 theme being essentially that being forced to conform to the ritualistic practices of upper class British society produces a monster. That not being able to "do your own thing" unleashes a monster on the world. Unfortunately the basic cause and effect of this whole process is glossed over and one is left wondering why the film you have been watching has been replaced with something entirely different and far less entertaining.O'Toole underplays his two characters, don't expect a lot of Gary Oldham type excess. Jesus is more a mild narcissist than a booming holy roller. Jack (the Ripper) is much better mannered but obviously smoldering beneath his polite exterior.The laughs mostly come from the discomfort of Jack's family and from Alastair Sim's apoplectic bishop and Authur Lowe's collectivist butler who abuses the family with a "Benson" type frankness.There are two great musical sequences, a hunt club performance of "Dem Bones" (a homage to "The Prisoner") and the climatic scene in the House of Lords (a surreal montage of decay to the music of "Pomp and Circumstances" and "Onward, Christian Soldiers").Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.