The Final Programme

I first saw this film when it came out in 1973, and just watched it for the second time on DVD. Excellent production values and camera work. Stars Jon Finch as androgynous (but heterosexual) dandy-dressing Jerry Cornelius, with black nail polish; looks a bit like a cross between an older Johnny Depp and Billy Zane. Also stars Sterling Hayden, Julie Ege and the evil (duh) Nazi guy from "Raiders of the Lost Ark". The film itself is a cult science fiction fantasy in the best tradition of the late '60's - early '70's, with similarities in style to The Prisoner, early James Bond (slightly), Clockwork Orange, The Abominable Dr. Phibes, and The Avengers (the director worked on the last two of those also). It is years ahead of its time in theme and science, but lapses into camp several times, especially as it progresses. It is rather disjointed, but the acting and sets are both good. Based on a story by Michael Moorcock.

A shortened version of the film first released as The Final Programme, from Michael Moorcock's novel of that name. Jerry Cornelius is the perfect universal hero/anti-hero in a disintegrating world. His search for his father's invention involves him with his mad brother Frank and the sinister programmer, Miss Brunner. The acting is over the top (one reviewer described it as "rug-chewing"), hip, and outrageous. The flip, self-mocking style owes a great deal to The Avengers, The Prisoner, and possibly even the Beatles.

This was indeed a strange one. If you read the story synopsis here and then watch the film you will likely be very confused.

I do like many movies made around this time and a few years earlier. They were rather experimental, especially in not following a classic narrative but more like throwing various scenes and images at you like a kaleidoscope. And, many of them around that time and a little earlier were intriguing snapshots of the rapidly changing social order, especially in the UK. But, in order to pull something kind of 'Trippy' like they are trying to do here, you really need to assemble the visuals, sounds, and mood in an effective way. And, sadly, this one falls a little short.

It Is rather intriguing... for a while. But, although you have a rough outline about what's going on with the 'Family', the more Science Fiction elements are extremely vague. There are indeed some nice visuals and scenes scattered throughout the film that are interesting, but it honestly isn't held together very well. I particularly liked the character he went to for the 'Napalm' I think it was. The guy was intriguingly very odd and intense and the surrounding set was kind of creative.

At first, the main guy came across like the usual spoiled, arrogant, unlikeable person of the time. But, I will admit that after his dialog with his (Handyman, Butler?) and his discussions with some of the others, he then seemed to come across as a bit more genuinely 'Cool' and likeable.

I think the main thing holding this movie back is that, again, if you are going to try to make one of these visually 'Hip' (for the time) and kind of Trippy films, you really have to invest a lot more thought into creating a truly involving mood, look, or whatever to engage the audience. And, that to me anyway is where this movie falls down.

So, for a few, scattered scenes that were kind of interesting looking, and some of the slightly Trippy mood, and what turns out to be a bit more of a likeable leading man, I gave this a '5' But, honestly, unless you're someone who is intensely interested in the time period, and even then, there really isn't much of a truly engaging story here to keep one's interest.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What I try to do in my reviews is do my best to explain whether I think it is a Good film, or if I think that it is an Entertaining movie and what I feel it's strengths and weaknesses are. I don't waste your time on just restating the plot which you can get from a lot of other places.

Hopefully, that way it will be of more benefit and be of real help to you as to whether I feel the movie is worth watching (and also perhaps what 'Type' of film it is and what type of people may enjoy it)

My Particular Way of Rating:

5 - Flawed, but perhaps with a little entertainment value here and there for some.

6. A decently passable story maybe worth a watch.

7. A solid film, well made, effective, and entertaining.

And, obviously, you can probably figure out what above and below these would mean... : )

This is one of those spectacular misfires; Fuest has taken Moorcock's splendid book and cut everything down to the bone so much that what remains is only the irrelevant sci-fi plot that was basically a throwaway excuse to hang all the elements of the book together. For this there really is no excuse; the next two books were available at the time the film was in production (the last was not publish until 1977) and if anyone had bothered to read them, they would have realized that Jerry Cornelius ain't James Bond. This a cheap Bond rip-off. The books were trans-dimensional, time hopping wonders; they had an arrogance of plot structure that really captured the complexities of multi-dimensional realities. This is a chase movie. It has a conventional three-act structure and, worst still, it ditches all the characters vital to the novel (or amalgamates three, four or five of them into one). It misses out on Moorcock's views of sexual liberation and worst of all Fuest has absolutely no idea what his source material is about. After seeing the Dr. Phibes movies I thought him to be an entertaining and imaginative director. After seeing this I realize his style has nothing to do with imagination but a talent for making do with low budgets. The Final Programme was made for around £600,000. Not inconsiderable for the time but it is wasted in every frame on trivia. For example, an early chapter of the book revolves around a massive assault on Jerry's father's Chatauex in Normandy by a team of crack armed mercenaries with hundreds of casualties; here it is reduced to a bit of mild house breaking just outside London. Jon Finch's Cornelius is the only plus point about it (he was, after all, a friend of Moorcock) and what the books really need is $400 million throwing at them (they have to be filmed back-to-back), faithful adaption, and a director like Alejandro Jodorowsky. The books have recently been reissued in a bind-up as "The Cornelius Quartet". Read them; you'll be going back to them for years to come trying to unravel all the different strands. The film has no strands.

The novel from which this movie was taken, The Final Programme, by Michael Moorcock, is structurally identical in plot and character to another Moorcock novel... Elric of Melnibone, the first of the Elric series.

This is not a coincidence; both books are part of the Champion Eternal cycle... a series of interconnected series about the Champion Eternal, who exists in every time and every universe, condemned always to fight -- and never know why he is fighting. He goes by many names -- Elric of Melnibone, Jerry Cornelius, Count Urlik, Prince Corum, each with his own series. In some incarnations he knows who he is, in others he thinks he's a normal man (occasionally, a particular incarnation is female). Sometimes two (or even three) incarnations meet each other.

The cycle, which makes up about a third of all Moorcock's ouevre (probably dozens of novels), is one of the most monumental achievements of meta-fiction ever written... but I think this is the only book of Moorcock's made into a movie, though he did contribute to the adaptation of the Edgar Rice Burroughs novel The Land That Time Forgot (dinosaurs on an island).

Now that Fritz Leiber is dead, Moorcock can lay claim to being the greatest living fantasy writer.

The movie The Final Programme (a.k.a. The Last Days of Man On Earth) does an incredible job of capturing the Jerry Cornelius character, much better than I would have expected. But the ending is changed from that of the book, and not for the better. Still definitely worth a rental.

Dafydd ab Hugh