An Englishman in New York

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.

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.

Saw this film at the Tribeca Film Festival in NYC and was deeply impressed. A loving, yet honest, look at Quentin Crisp in his later years in New York. John Hurt just IS Quentin Crisp in this role. It's amazing how accustomed we can be to bad acting as a norm until you see a performance like this and are suddenly reminded of how it's really done. Supporting cast is equally effective (how can they not be when you've got Cynthia Nixon and Swoosie Kurtz) with a massive standout being Denis O'Hare. Beautiful understated effective performance. More than simply biographical, it offers many social subjects for consideration in context - queer-on-queer prejudice, appropriate responses to AIDS in the 1980's, and much much more. It's a really good film, and well worth seeking out for just the acting alone. John Hurt is just perfect.

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.

It is not necessary to have seen John Hurt's previous portrayal of Quentin Crisp in "The Naked Civil Servant" to appreciate this new film, but it is interesting to consider the subtle but different tones of each. The first was a cotton-candy confection that delighted on its own terms in spite of being based upon Quentin's much more somber autobiography. The current film is also sweet, but it incorporates some of the more serious issues of Quentin's later life, namely his seemingly indifferent, cavalier response to AIDS and how he dealt with growing old. Quentin was misunderstood in life because people, gay and straight, viewed him as a harlequin; but, anyone who has had the pleasure of reading his books, which this film curiously barely mentions, knows that he was a sober, ferocious intellect who, while flamboyant in approach and appearance, was a product of his time and came to us as a famous person, late in life, inevitably possessing, in the 1970's, '80's, and '90's, at least some of the Edwardian notions that informed his youth in the 1920's and '30's.

This film achieves the formidable task of presenting Quentin both as he appeared publicly and as he thought privately. One can only imagine how difficult it must have been to construct the script. It was inspired to have utilized the framework of Quentin's relationships with various people upon which to construct the biography. By showcasing Quentin's friendships with a literary figure (his friend from "Christopher Street" magazine), an AIDS figure (the young, anguished painter), and a performing artist, the film reflects important facets of his personality and helps to illuminate the sometimes perplexing concept of the world according to Crisp or what he in life famously termed "Crisperanto." Quentin's dialog in the film may sound epigrammatic to some; but, that is how the gentleman actually spoke, and he had a great deal to say.

These considerations are perilously academic, however. What is important is that the film is, in and of itself, magnificent. One is tempted to observe that John Hurt does Quentin better than did Quentin himself. It is difficult to take one's eyes off of this intricately prepared, compelling actor. How astonishing are those scenes that show Hurt as Quentin: playing Queen Elizabeth I in a film, waxing ruefully upon the ravages of aging; as he really was, in his tiny apartment, hair down, balding, elderly, alone; tilting his head back, upon theater stages, in cafés, or while simply walking down the street, to achieve that rollicking laugh that so soothed and beguiled. Because portraying Quentin is by definition flashy, Hurt at first may appear mannered and theatrical; but, if one watches closely, he will realize that the actor knows precisely when less is more. His performance is, in fact, careful. It is vigorous but not exaggerated, and the effect is remarkable.

Those who approach "An Englishman in New York" armed with old political animosities from the Act Up era are missing out, really, because, as troubling as Quentin seemed in his attitude towards AIDS, he did try to atone for it, in his own way (even people with huge and gracious hearts can sometimes find it impossible to say "I'm sorry"), and because he blazed so uniquely and with such genius in innumerable other areas. As a social commentator, essayist, novelist, film critic, philosopher, public speaker, and most unlikely of fashion plates, Quentin Crisp had no peer. For better or worse, he remains a gay -- and literary -- icon. This film does justice to this totally unique man both as a legend and as he was at heart, a caring, emotional creature whose ultimate love and humility will likely outlive the hats, scarves, and tinted hair that memorably punctuated his public persona.