The face - 1984 article by dave Hill


continued from 1 and 2.


-----

You'll have noticed that this film is hard to seperate from rumour. It'll probably help at the box office. But once comfortable in our seats, what we have is a piece of rock cinema (yes, 'rock' is the appropriate term) that works pretty well as a showcase for Prince's talents and a vehicle for the enhancement of his heavily air-brushed legend.

the film is said to have cost six or seven million dollars. Thats not huge by current standards, but its still a handsome sum for a music movie debutante. The live footage (performed on a large sounstage before representatives of Rentacrowd, while the club-based dialogues were shot on the authentic First Avenue premises) is stunning. Prince's startling presence more than compensates for what, like much of his work, is a rather dense, bombastic LP.

Magnoli, whose first feature film this is, did a substantial clean-up on Blinn's original script enabling it to pick up a '15' rating in this country. But the particular brand of soft, wet eroticism that is Prince's trademark is far from abandoned. Salivation is not in short supply and the five foot two inch sleazo's seduction of the heroine will have many of you twitching in your seats.

Another scene between the two also sticks in the mind because it says so much about Prince's significance and style. Mischief is central to his courtship of Apollonia. First he tricks her into undressing and leaping into a lake (this is business, remember). Then, as she tries to climb onto the back of his fab purple motor bike he teasingly eases it out of reach Twice.



final part below in thread!
[Edited 9/11/08 1:01am]
[Edited 9/11/08 1:03am]

Ill continue with the article tomorrow- sorry gotta go!

What was the rating in the States?

dont know the article is from The Face magazine an english publication, BGTZ should know.



The face article extract 3 continued:

-----

All this adolescent nonsense just increases the urge to describe Prince as Lucifer's answer to Michael Jackson. Both are short-assed men-children in their middle twenties (Prince has claimed lately that he's 23, say Rock & Soul, but was actually born on June 7, 1958). Both have put funk, rock, pop and soul together and 'crossed over'. Both are shockingly paranoid creatures with an indomitable lust for perfection and fame.

The difference of course is that Michael's sexuality is all-American freeze-dried, while Prince s a very dirty boy indeed. Michael's politics are peace and love platitudes. Prince's are aggressive and promiscuous.

In the movie's opening sequence Prince does things with a guitar which we cannot pretend imply anything other than the obvious. Sorry, Frankie, but if we are living in a land (an era) where sex and horror are the new Gods, then Prince spotted it and expressed it five years before you did. He glimpsed the connection on "Dirty Mind", seized it with "Controversy" and clinched it with "1999". All this, coupled with the exquisitely stage-managed mystique, confirms Prince as a consumate Eighties artiste.

Inevitably though, as Prince spreads out, he looses some thing of the element of risk.

On "Lets GO Crazy" he scoffs at Beverley Hills, but he's aiming himself more squarely at the Hollywood Dream now than ever before. He knows it's insane but he wants it just the same. The axes of the Purple Rain saga are the heart, the libido and the quest for acclaim. Theres no room for Bomb Culture - so evident on "1999" - this time.

As the new improved Kid swaggers across the stage at the film's finale he might still be stroking his groin but his victory is a regular showbiz number. "Baby I'm a Star", he yells and he's right. Perhaps he deserves it. Make way for the Prince - or get mown down.


end of article -----



hope you all enjoyed it!
[Edited 9/11/08 1:04am]

Yes, thanks again Syble

happy reading folks.

Jeffiner said:

Ok, apparently is was an 'R' which was age 17, so I suppose that would be the similar to our 18? or maybe 15?! Not sure!

Very cool. I never seen this article. Many were written about P during 84, as u can imagine. And about the film. At the time, being in my early teens, I didn't read many of the articles written about the film at that time because I didn't need to perse. I know what I myself saw and just left it at that. Only in later years, like the early 90's maybe, did I start to check out what was being written about the film and how it was looked upon. Good thread, syble.

Thanks BGTZ!

I know what you mean, I didnt really read any articles back then either and its great to read them retrospectively, i find many things still being said now that are pure myth from way back then, i guess due to Princes elusiveness and the spin, the myths continue like they are gospel. I also liked the radio intervews posted in here which gave an insight into that time!