Highlander

Release Date: March 8, 1986

Time Kate wanted to see it: This wasn't so much an "I want to see" as an "I guess I should." Highlander seems to be one of those films--one of those cult films that I had to see to fully appreciate my media culture.

Reason Kate procrastinated: Is this a guy flick or what!?

Category: Film, Fantasy, Cult Classic

Kate says I'd heard a great deal about Highlander over the years, but I'd never seen the movie, and I think I'd seen exactly one half of one episode of the television series. I think my lack of interest always came down to one thing:

Isn't this a guy flick?

I don't think a female friend has ever mentioned Highlander to me. Female friends have mentioned Star Trek and Star Wars and even Lord of the Rings. But never Highlander.

However, the real reason I never got around to seeing this movie may be that it is too surreal to be believed; it starts off with Sean Connery's voice, Queen, and professional wrestling, and then . . .

It gets freakier.

This has to be one of the most random movies I've ever seen. It's Batman meets The Terminator meets Star Wars meets 80's rock video.

There are moments that stand out. The Scotland 1500s scenes are surprisingly sharp and believable, and I was impressed by MacLeod staying with Heather until the end of her life. I also loved the "duel" on Boston Commons. I agree with Mike that the shift between present and past makes the film far more engaging than if the story was told chronologically. Many times, the "we won't tell you the secret until the end" gambit back-fires (especially when the secret is pretty tame). But here, it works.

As for the characters: I thought the cops were underused (as always). I considered Brenda Wyatt rather pointless--not all that endearing, and she and MacLeod gave me zero reason to believe in their relationship long-term.

I found Kurgan seriously disturbing. One of the best scenes in the movie is between MacLeod and Kurgan--in the church. The scene delivers real meat. Back on the streets, however, Kurgan is just a Joker-like character: random badness is uncomfortable to watch and, really, who cares?

I did like MacLeod although his modern personality is lightly skimmed over. And I really liked that the swords are wielded as truly heavy weapons. It makes the final scene much more exciting.

That all said, now that I've seen it . . . I can't say whether I like the movie or not. The entire viewing experience was similar to undergoing a freak of nature. Does one hate thunderstorms? Actually, I love thunderstorms. Uh, does one hate solar flares? Well, yes, if one is stuck in one, but they are just there, ya know. What more can one say?

Though I may check out the series.

(I should mention that the excellent James Cosmo shows up for two seconds and immediately becomes the best actor in the film. I adore actors like James Cosmo who have long, steady, working careers--that is real success!)

Mike says Highlander is one of those must see movies that every Geek has to see at least once. But woe be unto the Geek who watches it twice, for he shall see something like unto an acid trip set to 80's rock ballads. To say that Highlander is bizarre is akin to saying that Richard Simmons seems a little effeminate.

What makes it even weirder is the franchise it spawned: 5 sequels (more if you count every version of Highlander II) and two TV series. Pretty impressive, if not inconsistent, for a film that pretty conclusively brings its premise to a complete end. It appears that there can be only one immortal, until you need to cash in on a sequel, then a few more will randomly crop up.

As Kate says, the movie starts weird, and just keeps going from there. When I first saw the film, I was pretty blown away by it. I don't know if it was youth, being a few years closer to the 80's, or a combination of the two. Watching it now, the film really does come across as the quintessential "Cult Favorite," that being a film the broad public avoids but a enthusiastic few adore beyond all reason. It's with some shock that I now find myself categorized with the broad public.

The film is disturbing, odd, and creative in alternating states, making it a definite mixed experiance when it comes to watching . . . the movie wavers between amazing and horrendous, almost as if sections of it were filmed by different directors.

There were many things I liked, however. Lambert is just odd enough an actor to take this role in stride, with his enigmatic accent and unexpected humor making him believable as McLeod. The sword fights and imagery of Gods fighting on Big City streets is also very cool, and I think the film really caught this sense of there being an hidden layer under everyday life, where strange and amazing things happen.

I also love the pace and structure of the movie--I think the flashbacks are well done, often outshining the modern scenes. Jumping back and forth, gradually filling us in on who and what McLeod is as he goes about his business is fascinating.

On the other hand, there was plenty I didn't like. I agree with Kate on the romance; it was obviously thrown in to meet the standards of 80's movies: Nudity, Gore, and random violent acts by psychotic punk rockers. The Kurgen just makes me plain uncomfortable (though I did like how he is savvy to the current era). And despite the abssolute awesomeness of the concept of the movie, there are holes in the story and plot wide enough to drive a truck through (can someone explain why Sean Connery is so willing to help McLeod?). I think the second movie was an attempt to fill in some of these holes . . . and ended up making them worse.

The 80's rock imagery just took it over the top, making some scenes nightmarish and painful to watch. The Kurgen's neck safety pins alone are enough to inspire nausea.

Despite this, it is easy to see why it was hard for filmmakers and fans to let the concept go, as there are some pretty cool ideas and intriguing phrases peppered throughout the movie. Terms like "The Gathering," "The Quickening," really inspire interest and give a sense of myth to the idea of the film. And with a catchphrase like "There Can Be Only One," producers are probably still salivating at the idea of cashing in on these ideas.

Now, I have had a chance to see some of the series (though not much), and it's pretty entertaining; once you get over the fact that none of it should exist. As for the sequels  . . . well, I think the filmmakers should have followed the advice given in the catchphrase.

I can't help thinking the film might have worked a little bit better like this: