An Englishman in New York

I knew Quentin Crisp. He lived on East 3rd Street in the East Village when I was living on West 4th in the West Village. One day I called him up (his number was listed in the phone book) and starting talking to him. We wound up having blintzes at a polish deli on 9th and started a "friendship" of sorts, seeing each other here and there. I found him to be a very practical thinker and interesting to talk to. This movie is a total embarrassment to him. Oh, sure I doubt he'd see it that way because any publicity is good publicity. But compared to the Naked Civil Servant, this is trash. The music is right out of 80's adult movies shown on 42nd street. It's cheaply made. And Hurt is horrible as Quentin. Not sure what happened to him in the years since The Naked Civil Servant, but he seems to just walk thru the role with no regard to the character. But then, he doesn't have much to work with either. There was zero thought putting this movie together. There is no real plot. The movie is basically a bunch of Quentin quips taken from his stage act strung together back to back. In sum, it's a boring, embarrassing movie that is only getting good reviews here for one reason. And you know what that is.

Trailer—An Englishman in New York

An Englishman in New York_720p(480P)

source: An Englishman in New York

It's ironic that this film begins right as "The Naked Civil Servant" is being broadcast to great a claim. You could have had a young actor playing John Hurt meeting Quentin Crisp played by John Hurt, but you don't. What you get is a view of crisps later life as he resettled in New York City only to find that the gay world of free gay men isn't a world that he relates to. He becomes sort of a cult icon doing sold out talks, but his controversial attitudes get him into trouble as he obviously is a person with an attitude from a different era. In fact, at times, he seems to be a gay male version of the Countess of Grantham from "Downton Abbey". 20-something young gay men look at him as a freak, and he's kicked out of a tough leather bar for being way out of place. But others look into him as a mentor, and it's those moments that are touching rather than depressing. You can't help love some of his attitudes. I especially like "Why walk on the sunny side of the street when the sun is really in the center?" At times, Crisp is truly lovable but other times he is completely insufferable as he expects to find elements of the gay life that he's known which sadly did not include love. He may have had partners, but the fact that he openly admits that he's actually never been in love truly is sad. It is nice seeing parts of Manhattan you normally don't see, especially the lower east side and glimpses of what Christopher Street would have look like in 1983. Dennis O'Hare is great as a struggling journalist who becomes his confident, and Swoozie Kurtz is delightfully feisty as his agent. Cynthia Nixon play the performance art character named Penny Arcade, but she is not fully developed outside of her cliches. Jonathan Tucker is sweet and vulnerable as the young gay artist who helps Crisp see some modern truths, while he learns old fashioned unchallenged values proving that "When you become a teacher by your pupils you'll be taught." The era of AIDS and Act Up is far different from anything that Crisp ever saw, and indeed, this does show the cold pretentious side of the scene that is rarely dealt with honestly in movies. Not a great movie, but it enlightening one with Hurt pregnant again the second time around, and a reminder that while we do not have a perfect world, it's the only world we've got so we're going to make the best of it.

behind I see the film, Quentin Crisp was only a name. eccentric, bizarre, a kind of Oscar Wilde, with the basic differences , of XX century. the film change everything. not only the perception about the lead character, because it is more than a portrait. not the manner to see a community. but the way to discover a period, in its fundamental traits. it is difficult to define the brilliant work of John Hurt. sure, it is amazing, touching, spectacular, magnificent. he becomes, scene by scene, Quentin Crisp. but his great contribution , his impressive performance, are not reduced at a good acting. but at subtle, precise explanation of an option, its consequences and the way to fight and win against the time. a film like a huge open window. maybe, to yourself.

I had only heard of Quentin Crisp, knowing only his name even though I am over 60. This film was a great way to have been formally introduced to him. It wasn't until after seeing the film that I looked for a performance of Crisp's and found that John Hurt did a superb job at imitating him. In the performance I saw, Mr. Crisp spoke slightly faster, but he didn't look as ancient as Hurt did in the film either. In a later documentary, I found that it wasn't a joke that Mr. Crisp didn't dust his apartment and when he said the dirt didn't change after four years, he wasn't joking at all. I can't tell you anything about Mr. Crisp because I knew so little myself, but I can say the film was moving and engaging. I really enjoyed it and would recommend it.

bitter, profound, fascinating. story of a guru. like modern parable. a character. and a great performance. map of small things. and a great arena. seed of dark joy because the story of Quentin Crisp is out of categories. it seems be a fairy-tale, page of a history of homosexual freedom war, testimony about values and traces of Oscar Wilde style, a manifesto about reality behind illusions, a form of silent protest against ordinaries warm lies. each of this aspects is present in this movie. a film like definition of an air. or, only, circle of a small refuge garden. nothing else. only reflection about real nature of world. an old man in a large city. and its gestures, words, trips. as pieces of a lesson about yourself. or shadows of a continuous search of truth sense.

Just believable character's, this movie made me want to be their friend, just an awesome witty movie!!

John Hurt inhabits this character completely. This is not a sequel to The Naked Civil Servant, it is a continuation of the story of Quentin Crisp. Quentin Crisp was a flamboyant and insightful 'homosexual' who, after spending the first 73 years of his life in not-so-gay, olde England, moved to New York and was embraced by the art and literary communities there. He spoke in quotable soundbites that challenged the world's assumptions, and people's perceptions of each other through the stories he told. His live performances were more of Q and A between himself and the audience, as he never failed to provide an opinion about any idea presented to him. This film fearlessly bases it's integrity on John Hurt's performance and he doesn't let anyone down. Having played Crisp previously in a film based on Crisp's own book, The Naked Civil Servant, Hurt "leaves nothing unpacked" in his rendition of Crisp. When I think of Crisp now, I see John Hurt's face. Story-wise, I found this film very informative about a less-public time in the life of a courageously defiant man who refused to let society keep him in the closet, both in England and the U.S. Finally I got some clarity on why Crisp fell out of favour during the beginning of the AIDS crisis. It's unfortunate that Crisp's analysis of AIDS as a "fad" turned out to be true in some ways. Perhaps the disease isn't a fad, but certainly people's fear and behavioural changes were temporary, as we now see in increasing infection rates of young people. If only his insights weren't treated as simplistic in the midst of panic, or if Crisp had had the fortitude (at 75) to lead a change in attitudes, the fight against this disease might have followed a different trajectory. Unfortunately that was not Crisp's role to play. If you enjoyed The Naked Civil Servant, you will likely find this film equally interesting. Hurt is remarkable, and Crisp's perspectives are still relevant.