When I saw this film nearly 15 years ago, I immediately became a fan of Miranda Richardson. Her unforgettable performance reminded me of a young Bette Davis in 'Of Human Bondage' (another story of a tragic, doomed woman). Few actresses could have matched the intensity of her Ruth.
36 Reviews
Compelling
paul2001sw-124 October 2010
A grim slice of 1950s Britain is expertly recreated in Mike Newell's film 'Dance with a Stranger'. Miranda Richardson gives an expertly judged performance as Ruth Ellis, an ageing nightclub hostess whose desire to keep a little glamour in her life, coupled with a powerful mutual sexual attraction, led her into a relationship with a man who, while not exactly evil, was utterly self-absorbed and prone to intermittent violence. The story ends in murder, and Ellis is now famous as the last woman to be executed in Great Britain. Obviously, the film is sympathetic to her, and while her victim scarcely deserves death, the tale is compelling; and it makes one wonder how many of those killed by the state may have done a terrible thing, but may also have had a tale of their own. Some will argue that in cases such as these, there is no alternative in judgement but to assign absolute individual responsibility; personally, I think it's a more civilised country that retains the capacity to forgive.
Dance with a Stranger
Prismark105 September 2021
Miranda Richardson made her film debut as Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be executed in Britain in 1955.
Ellis was a platinum blonde nightclub hostess and part time prostitute in a drab class ridden Britain still going through post war austerity.
Ellis ended up having a mutually destructive relationship with playboy racing driver and drunk David Blakely (Rupert Everett.)
Both Ellis and Blakely could not keep away from each other despite the physical and mental cruelty they displayed.
Desmond Cussen (Ian Holm) was an older wealthier man who was also obsessed with Ellis and she would have probably been better off with him. He showered her with gifts, paid for her son's boarding school fees and he even housed her when she lost her job and flat. Cussen could not giver ther the excitement that Blakely offered.
Blakey may had been from a well to do family but he was a loser. Both in the racing world and in his personal life. Money problems, a raging libido meant that he constantly let Ellis down and she became increasingly jealous.
Director Mike Newell showed a lot of skill in making this low budget film made for Channel 4 Film but giving it bigger budget aplomb.
Newell decides to concentrate on the relationship between Ellis, Blakey and Cussen. Not on the legal aftermath.
All three actors, Richardson, Everett and Holm are in top form. The first two were rising stars and had a lot to prove.
Miranda Richardson won several awards for her portrayal of Ruth Ellis. Like other young actresses she could had easily disappeared mainly due to a lack of a British film industry. However she played a trump card. Her next role was as Queen Elizabeth in Blackadder II. One of the funniest comedies of all time.
Ellis was a platinum blonde nightclub hostess and part time prostitute in a drab class ridden Britain still going through post war austerity.
Ellis ended up having a mutually destructive relationship with playboy racing driver and drunk David Blakely (Rupert Everett.)
Both Ellis and Blakely could not keep away from each other despite the physical and mental cruelty they displayed.
Desmond Cussen (Ian Holm) was an older wealthier man who was also obsessed with Ellis and she would have probably been better off with him. He showered her with gifts, paid for her son's boarding school fees and he even housed her when she lost her job and flat. Cussen could not giver ther the excitement that Blakely offered.
Blakey may had been from a well to do family but he was a loser. Both in the racing world and in his personal life. Money problems, a raging libido meant that he constantly let Ellis down and she became increasingly jealous.
Director Mike Newell showed a lot of skill in making this low budget film made for Channel 4 Film but giving it bigger budget aplomb.
Newell decides to concentrate on the relationship between Ellis, Blakey and Cussen. Not on the legal aftermath.
All three actors, Richardson, Everett and Holm are in top form. The first two were rising stars and had a lot to prove.
Miranda Richardson won several awards for her portrayal of Ruth Ellis. Like other young actresses she could had easily disappeared mainly due to a lack of a British film industry. However she played a trump card. Her next role was as Queen Elizabeth in Blackadder II. One of the funniest comedies of all time.
Worth the wait
Canino-413 December 2000
I first heard of this movie at work in 1984 when I saw an engineer who had the movie ad pinned up in his cubicle. I'd had this movie in the back of my head and always meant to check it out, but I've never seen it for rental and didn't want to risk plunking down $20 to order it. It was worth the wait.
Miranda Richardson, probably best known for The Crying Game and Sleepy Hollow (Now there's a combo!) stars as Ruth Ellis, a deluded romantic from 1950's England who managed to ride a sexual obsession to her own execution, the last on the books in the country's history. All this comes at the expense of a man who truly loves her, and a son who is not a priority in her life, to say the least. Ellis was adored, worshipped even, by clumsy businessman Ian Holm, but she only has eyes for Ruppert Everett. Everett's a hot shot car driver working on some new car design that's he convinced is going to revolutionize the auto industry. He exudes the confidence that Holm couldn't hope to possess. All three performances are outstanding.
As the story unfolds, director Mike Newell seems to pull no punches. I don't know the how's or the who's of this case, but Newell gives this film an authenticity many strive for, but few attain. In essence, it's Holm's character that is hung out to dry. He has to stand by as Everett continually denigrates Richardson both physically (A few punches, a glass of booze in the face,etc.), and emotionally (Too many episodes to count). Holm could have been molded into a flawed hero, and perhaps he would have been in the hands of a director with eyes on receipts instead of craft. Everett's character could have slipped into melodrama, as well. He has a roguish charm, I suppose, but he's basically just a spoiled rich boy, the type to bring a low class Richardson too his parents estate, and be suprised when she is intimidated.
At the center is Richardson, bringing Ruth Ellis back to life. It's disturbing how she can see what she's doing to her young son, truly care for him, but not let it effect her. Even more reprehensible is watching her use Holm to watch her child while she crawls back to Everett after another beating, to sneak a quickie in a fog-filled back alley.
Mike Newell directed Donnie Brasco, an excellent film which took a similar, bleak look at the life of a policeman who set aside his family in the name of his job. Newell didn't flinch in painting Joseph Pistone (The real life cop), as an obsessed man who started to lose his own identity. Pistone's family pays a heavy price for his dedication (misplaced?), but Ruth Ellis' paid even more. She left a son alone, and it's not a stretch to infer that he led a desperate life, based on what we learn in the closing comments.
Don't wait 16 years to see this film, like I did. Hunt it down on cable, or check out your local video store. This is a small story that gets big treatment.
Miranda Richardson, probably best known for The Crying Game and Sleepy Hollow (Now there's a combo!) stars as Ruth Ellis, a deluded romantic from 1950's England who managed to ride a sexual obsession to her own execution, the last on the books in the country's history. All this comes at the expense of a man who truly loves her, and a son who is not a priority in her life, to say the least. Ellis was adored, worshipped even, by clumsy businessman Ian Holm, but she only has eyes for Ruppert Everett. Everett's a hot shot car driver working on some new car design that's he convinced is going to revolutionize the auto industry. He exudes the confidence that Holm couldn't hope to possess. All three performances are outstanding.
As the story unfolds, director Mike Newell seems to pull no punches. I don't know the how's or the who's of this case, but Newell gives this film an authenticity many strive for, but few attain. In essence, it's Holm's character that is hung out to dry. He has to stand by as Everett continually denigrates Richardson both physically (A few punches, a glass of booze in the face,etc.), and emotionally (Too many episodes to count). Holm could have been molded into a flawed hero, and perhaps he would have been in the hands of a director with eyes on receipts instead of craft. Everett's character could have slipped into melodrama, as well. He has a roguish charm, I suppose, but he's basically just a spoiled rich boy, the type to bring a low class Richardson too his parents estate, and be suprised when she is intimidated.
At the center is Richardson, bringing Ruth Ellis back to life. It's disturbing how she can see what she's doing to her young son, truly care for him, but not let it effect her. Even more reprehensible is watching her use Holm to watch her child while she crawls back to Everett after another beating, to sneak a quickie in a fog-filled back alley.
Mike Newell directed Donnie Brasco, an excellent film which took a similar, bleak look at the life of a policeman who set aside his family in the name of his job. Newell didn't flinch in painting Joseph Pistone (The real life cop), as an obsessed man who started to lose his own identity. Pistone's family pays a heavy price for his dedication (misplaced?), but Ruth Ellis' paid even more. She left a son alone, and it's not a stretch to infer that he led a desperate life, based on what we learn in the closing comments.
Don't wait 16 years to see this film, like I did. Hunt it down on cable, or check out your local video store. This is a small story that gets big treatment.
powerful and depressing true story
blanche-223 November 2009
Miranda Richardson is her usual brilliant self in "Dance with a Stranger," a 1985 film telling the true story of Ruth Ellis and David Blakeley. Blakeley was a rich young race car driver who becomes involved in a obsessive, passionate, and often violent relationship with night club hostess Ellis. It leads to tragedy.
The scandal took place in the '50s, and the atmosphere of the time is captured beautifully here, and the film is well directed by Mike Newell. The acting is beyond flawless, with perfect performances by Ian Holm as the passive man who supported Ruth, Desmond Cussen, Rupert Everett as the self-centered Blakeley, and Richardson, one of the truly great actresses of our time, as Ruth. I'm not certain why Richardson's name isn't uttered along with that of Helen Mirren's or Meryl Streep's. She's a true chameleon. No one can ever equal her supporting performance in "Damage" - I don't really care that someone else won the Oscar! Here she gives a fully fleshed-out portrait of the unapologetic, tough, sexy Ellis.
The script has some disappointments - one of which is, we don't get to the real story until the last minutes of the film - it's not really told, in fact - so obviously, that wasn't considered the real story by screenwriter Shelagh Delaney. The problem is that Ellis' situation was very controversial, and if you know it, you sit through the movie waiting for that part to begin. If you don't, well, then I guess you won't miss it.
The purpose of "Dance with a Stranger" is to show what led up to the tragedy, which includes the class-consciousness of British society. In doing so, it leaves out the possible involvement of the Ian Holm character, Cussen, in what actually happened. Still, thanks to the strong acting, the story is fascinating, and these real characters come to life.
The scandal took place in the '50s, and the atmosphere of the time is captured beautifully here, and the film is well directed by Mike Newell. The acting is beyond flawless, with perfect performances by Ian Holm as the passive man who supported Ruth, Desmond Cussen, Rupert Everett as the self-centered Blakeley, and Richardson, one of the truly great actresses of our time, as Ruth. I'm not certain why Richardson's name isn't uttered along with that of Helen Mirren's or Meryl Streep's. She's a true chameleon. No one can ever equal her supporting performance in "Damage" - I don't really care that someone else won the Oscar! Here she gives a fully fleshed-out portrait of the unapologetic, tough, sexy Ellis.
The script has some disappointments - one of which is, we don't get to the real story until the last minutes of the film - it's not really told, in fact - so obviously, that wasn't considered the real story by screenwriter Shelagh Delaney. The problem is that Ellis' situation was very controversial, and if you know it, you sit through the movie waiting for that part to begin. If you don't, well, then I guess you won't miss it.
The purpose of "Dance with a Stranger" is to show what led up to the tragedy, which includes the class-consciousness of British society. In doing so, it leaves out the possible involvement of the Ian Holm character, Cussen, in what actually happened. Still, thanks to the strong acting, the story is fascinating, and these real characters come to life.
Newell's film is a harsh documenting of what that initial Dancing with that initial Stranger can lead onto, if one fails to keep one's feelings under strict wraps.
johnnyboyz28 March 2011
Dance With a Stranger is the thoroughly accomplished, agonisingly methodical Mike Newell film depicting the sordid but complicated relationship two people have with one another, further-still within a world of sleaze and immorality. It is a stark but mature observation of a handful of characters eventually consumed by their own misguided and somewhat disgraceful lifestyle, made all the more distressing by precisely what it is most of them already have that they go on to just casually toss away because of these complications. Newell's film is an apt and trimmed study of a destructive but very distinct way of life doubling up as a realm in which one may revel in one's sins; specifically, how remorseless items such as obsession and unrequited love can spawn as a result of that before going on to categorically destroy one's life.
The film covers the lives of two true-to-life people living in 1950s Britain, the two whom come to forge the film's core nucleus in its character study being Miranda Richardson's Ruth Ellis and Rupert Everett's David Blakeley; a mother of one, nightclub owner and a rich, upper class race driver. It begins with a rather clear process of distinguishing one's potentially sordid lifestyle with that of those whom look on from the outside. Ian Holm's Desmond Cussen, once a bomber pilot during The War, drives to Ellis' nightclub at a time when the sun has long since set and street lamps provide the only rays of light enabling one to see; an elderly man, the tomfoolery and distinct sense of happiness he observes in other cars as he nears his destination has him scorn. Additionally, his arrival at the club permitting the film to construct his composition through a spyhole from inside as he looks even crosser at those he stands beside in a queue acting all raucous. The man is there to see Ellis, but on a far more professional level than any one else; he is there to attend the nightly functions she hosts much to many male admirer's delight, but Cussen appears an acquaintance in comparison - merely a man with a more genuine relationship with the woman away from one night live-it-large stands in which sharing her company must be the predominant feature. In capturing Cussen's reaction in such a way that is through a spyhole, we sense a reaction to what it is he sees around him and must come to associate himself with, ie; one of a contemptuous nature or of immense distaste, one that he perhaps hides.
Enter Ellis, a frizzy haired; popular and highly extroverted hostess whose bright red lipstick, large blonde locks, pendulating earrings and loud, exuberant voice means she is nary too far away from the centre of everybody's attention, nor indeed the audience's - both of whom have a hard time in shifting focus away from the array of her distinguishable features. Her house of fun is a plethora of deviltry and lawlessness, a nightclub-come-public-house-come-brothel in which cacophonous behaviour and fun times within this realm is wholeheartedly encouraged and indulged in with great frequency. Things are made complicated with the arrival of young racer Blakeley, a handsome and seemingly decent enough man whom is already engaged to another woman and revels in his own joyous lifestyle of travel; fast cars and socialism, to his great satisfaction. His interaction with this proverbial behemoth of a woman in Ellis comes to tragically dictate how it is either of these person's lives will depressingly twist and bend in the all-too near future, an initial interaction and a passionate coming together eventually spelling disaster for all involved.
The film is a shrill demonisation of such things, Ellis' initial bond with Blakeley barely much more to her than another young punter in her ever-growing kingdom of smut whom she happens to bed; for Blakeley, the night turns into a very gradual and very dangerous obsession which puts everybody at risk and comes to see Ellis return such sentiments under a different guise. At the core appears something somewhat resembling a class war which is effortlessly embedded within all this sordid romance, evident in Blakeley's taking of Ellis to his large manor house and surroundings grounds plus village out in the middle of the countryside to which Ellis appears flustered and demands to be taken back to her London abode. On another occasion, a sensitive and rather private exchange between Ellis and her ten year old son Andy in their dingy little house, as she sits at her dressing table, has her reflect to him precisely where it is she stands on a certain Swiss private school to which girls go to be "good". This symptomatic rejection of what might be perceived as a 'proper', more informed upbringing is addressed while Ellis quite literally dresses herself or gets ready for another night of whatnot thus instilling a specific sense of persona construction as she verbally rejects another strand a young woman can seemingly venture down.
This ill-at-odds attitude, with the antithesis to what it is Ellis physically represents, is a pained but fascinating undercurrent hinting toward a result which was never going to be anything else than total failure; all to what is a routine surface relationship between her and Blakeley. The film remains morbidly fascinating throughout, Newell shooting Ellis and Blakeley's coming together at the early stages as unspectacular and deliberately colourless – it is transparent and a little blank; later on, their sex scenes carry more precise airs of passion and fondness as hues of red and darkened out cinematography encapsulated where it is they now are with one another and how far they've progressed in this regard. On a number of levels, all of which engaging without ever feeling particularly exploitative, Dance With a Stranger works rather well.
The film covers the lives of two true-to-life people living in 1950s Britain, the two whom come to forge the film's core nucleus in its character study being Miranda Richardson's Ruth Ellis and Rupert Everett's David Blakeley; a mother of one, nightclub owner and a rich, upper class race driver. It begins with a rather clear process of distinguishing one's potentially sordid lifestyle with that of those whom look on from the outside. Ian Holm's Desmond Cussen, once a bomber pilot during The War, drives to Ellis' nightclub at a time when the sun has long since set and street lamps provide the only rays of light enabling one to see; an elderly man, the tomfoolery and distinct sense of happiness he observes in other cars as he nears his destination has him scorn. Additionally, his arrival at the club permitting the film to construct his composition through a spyhole from inside as he looks even crosser at those he stands beside in a queue acting all raucous. The man is there to see Ellis, but on a far more professional level than any one else; he is there to attend the nightly functions she hosts much to many male admirer's delight, but Cussen appears an acquaintance in comparison - merely a man with a more genuine relationship with the woman away from one night live-it-large stands in which sharing her company must be the predominant feature. In capturing Cussen's reaction in such a way that is through a spyhole, we sense a reaction to what it is he sees around him and must come to associate himself with, ie; one of a contemptuous nature or of immense distaste, one that he perhaps hides.
Enter Ellis, a frizzy haired; popular and highly extroverted hostess whose bright red lipstick, large blonde locks, pendulating earrings and loud, exuberant voice means she is nary too far away from the centre of everybody's attention, nor indeed the audience's - both of whom have a hard time in shifting focus away from the array of her distinguishable features. Her house of fun is a plethora of deviltry and lawlessness, a nightclub-come-public-house-come-brothel in which cacophonous behaviour and fun times within this realm is wholeheartedly encouraged and indulged in with great frequency. Things are made complicated with the arrival of young racer Blakeley, a handsome and seemingly decent enough man whom is already engaged to another woman and revels in his own joyous lifestyle of travel; fast cars and socialism, to his great satisfaction. His interaction with this proverbial behemoth of a woman in Ellis comes to tragically dictate how it is either of these person's lives will depressingly twist and bend in the all-too near future, an initial interaction and a passionate coming together eventually spelling disaster for all involved.
The film is a shrill demonisation of such things, Ellis' initial bond with Blakeley barely much more to her than another young punter in her ever-growing kingdom of smut whom she happens to bed; for Blakeley, the night turns into a very gradual and very dangerous obsession which puts everybody at risk and comes to see Ellis return such sentiments under a different guise. At the core appears something somewhat resembling a class war which is effortlessly embedded within all this sordid romance, evident in Blakeley's taking of Ellis to his large manor house and surroundings grounds plus village out in the middle of the countryside to which Ellis appears flustered and demands to be taken back to her London abode. On another occasion, a sensitive and rather private exchange between Ellis and her ten year old son Andy in their dingy little house, as she sits at her dressing table, has her reflect to him precisely where it is she stands on a certain Swiss private school to which girls go to be "good". This symptomatic rejection of what might be perceived as a 'proper', more informed upbringing is addressed while Ellis quite literally dresses herself or gets ready for another night of whatnot thus instilling a specific sense of persona construction as she verbally rejects another strand a young woman can seemingly venture down.
This ill-at-odds attitude, with the antithesis to what it is Ellis physically represents, is a pained but fascinating undercurrent hinting toward a result which was never going to be anything else than total failure; all to what is a routine surface relationship between her and Blakeley. The film remains morbidly fascinating throughout, Newell shooting Ellis and Blakeley's coming together at the early stages as unspectacular and deliberately colourless – it is transparent and a little blank; later on, their sex scenes carry more precise airs of passion and fondness as hues of red and darkened out cinematography encapsulated where it is they now are with one another and how far they've progressed in this regard. On a number of levels, all of which engaging without ever feeling particularly exploitative, Dance With a Stranger works rather well.
Boring
njboden31 December 2021
A well-acted depiction of the true story of Ruth Ellis but simply boring as none of the characters, though probably true-to-life, were at all sympathetic. This is a biopic in the same vein as the equally dull Raging Bull, if not slightly duller (though at least not as overrated).
Miranda's Rights
Niro5 December 2000
Billing this as the tale of "the last woman who was executed in Britain" sorta lets you know up front that Miranda Richardson's widescreen debut is going to end badly.
Director Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral) pulls gut~wrenching performances from his leads, Miranda Richardson, Rupert Everett & the always~underrated Ian Holm, in this fascinating fact~based story about utter sexual obsession.
Set in the dark '50s.
Ruth Ellis (Richardson) runs and lives above a nightclub/brothel frequented by several of London's wealthy gadflies. She's platinum blonde, all brass and ummm... well~liked by the local gentry.
She also has a young son named Andy, about to enter school, who turns the blindest of innocent eyes to Mom's lifestyle.
Enter David (Everett), a sullen alcoholic rich boy and LeMans auto racer wannabe who's taken in by Ruth's wiles within moments of seeing her for the first time ~ after being introduced to Ruth and her "club" by his equally well~heeled close friend Desmond (Holm).
What unfolds is the single most riveting ~ and more importantly, believable ~ love/hate relationship film I've seen. There have been tons of movies about obsessive lust (and I'm not talking about the flix they rent behind that door at the back of your video store whose "A" section takes up three aisles) but this one is a real treat.
David, you see, is seriously involved with another woman when he meets Ruth... yet beds the latter in quick fashion. The other woman (eventually his fiancee) is the rub. As is David's penchant for getting drunk and simultaneously developing still a third wandering eye.
Still, it's Ruth he wants. To the point of showing up at the oddest of times to woo (or just rant drunkenly, incoherently at ~ or just to hit) her. All the while winnowing his way deeply into Ruth and her son's hearts and lives.
Meanwhile Desmond stands stoically by until nearly the bitter end, supporting Ruth during LeMans~boy's long absences and sustaining her each time David fails to live up to his promises, which is pretty much always.
The "fights betwixt the leads" scenes are the best, the most creatively acted and directed.
After a while, Newell yanks you into the almost~triangle between the three and one begins to attempt to choose sides. This proves to be impossible, as none of the characters are particularly sympathetic.
IE: this ain't a Hollywood movie. Each character has flaws which are well~defined, there's no happy ending and (are you listening, Jim Cameron?)... no sequel.
Richardson is simply astonishing in her premiere. Each note she plays, screaming or smoldering, is just right (hence Miranda's Rights).
Everett's superb as the sociopathically obsessed lover.
And Holm is, well, brilliant. Color him unrequited with a vengeance.
9 of 10 Niro~Stars
Director Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral) pulls gut~wrenching performances from his leads, Miranda Richardson, Rupert Everett & the always~underrated Ian Holm, in this fascinating fact~based story about utter sexual obsession.
Set in the dark '50s.
Ruth Ellis (Richardson) runs and lives above a nightclub/brothel frequented by several of London's wealthy gadflies. She's platinum blonde, all brass and ummm... well~liked by the local gentry.
She also has a young son named Andy, about to enter school, who turns the blindest of innocent eyes to Mom's lifestyle.
Enter David (Everett), a sullen alcoholic rich boy and LeMans auto racer wannabe who's taken in by Ruth's wiles within moments of seeing her for the first time ~ after being introduced to Ruth and her "club" by his equally well~heeled close friend Desmond (Holm).
What unfolds is the single most riveting ~ and more importantly, believable ~ love/hate relationship film I've seen. There have been tons of movies about obsessive lust (and I'm not talking about the flix they rent behind that door at the back of your video store whose "A" section takes up three aisles) but this one is a real treat.
David, you see, is seriously involved with another woman when he meets Ruth... yet beds the latter in quick fashion. The other woman (eventually his fiancee) is the rub. As is David's penchant for getting drunk and simultaneously developing still a third wandering eye.
Still, it's Ruth he wants. To the point of showing up at the oddest of times to woo (or just rant drunkenly, incoherently at ~ or just to hit) her. All the while winnowing his way deeply into Ruth and her son's hearts and lives.
Meanwhile Desmond stands stoically by until nearly the bitter end, supporting Ruth during LeMans~boy's long absences and sustaining her each time David fails to live up to his promises, which is pretty much always.
The "fights betwixt the leads" scenes are the best, the most creatively acted and directed.
After a while, Newell yanks you into the almost~triangle between the three and one begins to attempt to choose sides. This proves to be impossible, as none of the characters are particularly sympathetic.
IE: this ain't a Hollywood movie. Each character has flaws which are well~defined, there's no happy ending and (are you listening, Jim Cameron?)... no sequel.
Richardson is simply astonishing in her premiere. Each note she plays, screaming or smoldering, is just right (hence Miranda's Rights).
Everett's superb as the sociopathically obsessed lover.
And Holm is, well, brilliant. Color him unrequited with a vengeance.
9 of 10 Niro~Stars
Dance with a Stranger
jboothmillard22 August 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I found out about this film from Piers Morgan's Life Stories I think, his co-star is a good actress, I was interested in the subject matter, and it was rated well, so I looked forward to it, directed by Mike Newell (Four Weddings and a Funeral, Donnie Brasco, Mona Lisa Smile, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire). Based on the true story, set in the 1950s, Ruth Ellis (Miranda Richardson) is a former nude model and prostitute, she is manageress of a London drinking club, and a single mother living in a flat above the club with her ten-year old son Andy (Matthew Carroll). One night in the club, she meets immature young man David Blakely (Rupert Everett), who comes from a well-off family who has ambitions to become a successful motor racing driver but suffers from low income and alcoholism. Ruth falls for his looks and charm, and they start a love affair. But the relationship is doomed because of David with his upper-class background, he has no job, he cannot afford to marry her, and his family would never accept her. One night, David makes a drunken scene in the club, resulting in Ruth being discharged from her job, and she becomes homeless. She is helped by wealthy admirer Desmond Cussen (Ian Holm) who secures a flat for her and her son, but she continues to see David. When Ruth tells David she is pregnant, he does nothing about it, and she miscarries. He breaks up with her and being obsessed by him she reacts very badly to this. Distraught, she goes looking for him in Hampstead, believing he is at a party. Ruth sees David coming out of the pub and approaching his car with a girl. Before he gets in his car, Ruth steps out, firing four shots and kills David. Ruth Ellis is arrested, found guilty in court of murder, and was sentenced to death, she was the last woman to be hanged in the United Kingdom in 1955. Also starring Tom Chadbon as Anthony Findlater, Jane Bertish as Carole Findlater, David Troughton (Patrick's son) as Cliff Davis, Joanne Whalley as Christine, and Lesley Manville as Maryanne. Richardson proves herself a terrific serious actress (before becoming known as the childish Queen Elizabeth I in Blackadder II) as the infamous Soho nightclub hostess, and Everett is equally good as her aristocratic lover. By the way, the meaning of the title is because "Would You Dance with a Stranger" by Mari Wilson is performed in it. The story of Ruth Ellis leading up her hanging, ten years before capital punishment was abolished, is interesting to find out about, with social class and gender roles being most prominent, and the period detail is well done, a worthwhile biographical drama. Good!
Beautiful setup but no story.
laceykat8 November 2017
The problem with most of the reviews on this is that they are trying to like a movie that does not exist. It is the old problem or reviewing the movie you wanted to see, not the one on the screen.
This is a beautifully shot movie with consummate actors all doing their job. The dialogue is good, the filming and direction is good, and everyone brings their A game no matter how small their part. In fact, brevity is the order of the day. Whole backstories and motivations are given in one line or throwaway comment. This is the consummate theater we all want. With all of this, the only thing the story is missing IS a story.
The other reviews will give you more of the plot, but basically, Miranda Richardson plays Ruth Ellis, the last women to be hung in England. It is post World War 2 and she is a woman who has made a lot of mistakes in her life. Rupert Everett plays the epitome of British Aristocracy in the 20th Century. He has the title and deference, but no money. Ian Holms loves Miranda also, but we never really know why. "Ruth" is drop dead gorgeous, and now a "B" girl at a local pub. Her dysfunctional relationship with "David" pushes he over the edge and she kills him (no spoiler and irrelevant to this film).
This is not a look at the social pressures and changes of post-war Britan. It is not a look at the changing role of women in the 1950s or of the problems they faced. If you would like to see a good series addressing that then I would suggest "Call the Mid-Wife." "Ruth" is no feminist icon that has been done wrong by some misogynistic society bent on holding her down. The killing is NOT the last act of a desperate, abused, woman. In the end, you are left with a "Ya, so" attitude of the events. Which is a shame because until then you had the makings of a really good movie.
My only guess is that they ran out of money and had to rush the conclusion of the story, or never had any real reason for telling it and did not realize that until they had too much invested. Even a trial scene might have given "Ruth" some empathetic moments but in this film you only think that this is a woman who made a lot of mistakes and squandered every opportunity she was ever given. You don't feel anything for her because she was never any type of sympathetic character. In fact, other than being stunning, she is no character at all.
I like actor-driven movies and this is a good example of one. Everyone came to the set ready and willing to do a good job. The faults of the film are not theirs. There just was never a real story to tell.
This is a beautifully shot movie with consummate actors all doing their job. The dialogue is good, the filming and direction is good, and everyone brings their A game no matter how small their part. In fact, brevity is the order of the day. Whole backstories and motivations are given in one line or throwaway comment. This is the consummate theater we all want. With all of this, the only thing the story is missing IS a story.
The other reviews will give you more of the plot, but basically, Miranda Richardson plays Ruth Ellis, the last women to be hung in England. It is post World War 2 and she is a woman who has made a lot of mistakes in her life. Rupert Everett plays the epitome of British Aristocracy in the 20th Century. He has the title and deference, but no money. Ian Holms loves Miranda also, but we never really know why. "Ruth" is drop dead gorgeous, and now a "B" girl at a local pub. Her dysfunctional relationship with "David" pushes he over the edge and she kills him (no spoiler and irrelevant to this film).
This is not a look at the social pressures and changes of post-war Britan. It is not a look at the changing role of women in the 1950s or of the problems they faced. If you would like to see a good series addressing that then I would suggest "Call the Mid-Wife." "Ruth" is no feminist icon that has been done wrong by some misogynistic society bent on holding her down. The killing is NOT the last act of a desperate, abused, woman. In the end, you are left with a "Ya, so" attitude of the events. Which is a shame because until then you had the makings of a really good movie.
My only guess is that they ran out of money and had to rush the conclusion of the story, or never had any real reason for telling it and did not realize that until they had too much invested. Even a trial scene might have given "Ruth" some empathetic moments but in this film you only think that this is a woman who made a lot of mistakes and squandered every opportunity she was ever given. You don't feel anything for her because she was never any type of sympathetic character. In fact, other than being stunning, she is no character at all.
I like actor-driven movies and this is a good example of one. Everyone came to the set ready and willing to do a good job. The faults of the film are not theirs. There just was never a real story to tell.
Last user review
AngelRedhead11 March 2005
I've just read the last user review on this film & I would advise anyone who has any knowledge of the Ruth Ellis story to ignore it. There were legal reasons why everything was not explained. The boy was a result of a war time romance. Ruth Ellis also had a husband (& daughter) who for legal reasons could not be named or mentioned. Ian Holm played the part of her lover who did exist & did nothing to help her once she was arrested.
If you don't understand the film read the following books first & then watch the film: Ruth Ellis: The Last Woman to Be Hanged (Robert Hancock) Ruth Ellis: My Sister's Secret Life (Muriel Jakubait, Monica Weller) Ruth Ellis, My Mother: A Daughter's Memoir of the Last Woman to Be Hanged (Georgie Ellis, Rod Taylor)
Personally I think the film is excellent but of course I did know the story before I watched it.
If you don't understand the film read the following books first & then watch the film: Ruth Ellis: The Last Woman to Be Hanged (Robert Hancock) Ruth Ellis: My Sister's Secret Life (Muriel Jakubait, Monica Weller) Ruth Ellis, My Mother: A Daughter's Memoir of the Last Woman to Be Hanged (Georgie Ellis, Rod Taylor)
Personally I think the film is excellent but of course I did know the story before I watched it.
Just read her Wikipedia page.
Sleeper-Cell1 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This film is about the last woman hung in England. I have read the other reviews and it seems there are some real fans of this movie. I think this is a problem when movie buffs review films. Odd, I know but what they do is focus on direction, lighting all these technical things which although good in some cases don't necessarily make for a good film.
And that is the problem here. The acting is top notch no complaints there, all the pegs appear to be in the right places. But the film is boring and pointless nonetheless. We see a woman who hosts parties and prostitutes herself. She isn't particularly mean but she isn't all that nice either. She has an affair with a younger man who in the end is just stringing her along as his parents do not approve when he says he wants to marry her. I would not approve either.
When he fails to take her abroad as promised, she gets upset and shoots him. There doesn't seem to be much more to it than that and then the film ends. No court room scenes, no more insight into her mind, nothing.
Are we meant to feel sympathy because she is a woman? She killed someone, she was executed.
I feel like I wasted my time watching this movie.
And that is the problem here. The acting is top notch no complaints there, all the pegs appear to be in the right places. But the film is boring and pointless nonetheless. We see a woman who hosts parties and prostitutes herself. She isn't particularly mean but she isn't all that nice either. She has an affair with a younger man who in the end is just stringing her along as his parents do not approve when he says he wants to marry her. I would not approve either.
When he fails to take her abroad as promised, she gets upset and shoots him. There doesn't seem to be much more to it than that and then the film ends. No court room scenes, no more insight into her mind, nothing.
Are we meant to feel sympathy because she is a woman? She killed someone, she was executed.
I feel like I wasted my time watching this movie.
Not for the faint of heart
joelcairo194110 December 2000
There is nothing sentimental about this story of obsession. Set in London in the 1950's--and what could be drearier--this bleak story based on the true story of Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be executed in England, is a tour-de-force for Newell, the director, the two leads, Richardson and Everett, and the incomparable Ian Holm.
Miranda Richardson as Ellis gives a knockout performance in every scene. She has so perfectly captured the emotional pitch of a woman in love with a heel that one cannot help identifying with her. Her all-consuming love, even to the point of neglecting her son, makes it ridiculous to entertain the common query of "why doesn't she just get away from him?" Mike Newell captures all of the emotional highs and lows of a relationship of this kind, and the rakishly handsome Everett is both charming and destructive as Ellis's amor.
The beauty of this movie is that it is not just about two ill-fated lovers, the way many Hollywood movies are. It is also about England's class system. Ellis's attraction to Blakeley is more about her desire to be acknowledged by her "betters" than just by this one man. Perhaps the most heartrending scene comes at the end where one sees Ellis's painted finger going over a letter she is about to send on the eve of her execution to Blakeley's mother, apologizing for the misery she has caused her. The language of the letter is perfect, because it reveals volumes about Ellis's class aspirations, and the hopelessness of her ever achieving them.
This movie is a must-see for movie lovers, but it is not for the Meg Ryan set.
Miranda Richardson as Ellis gives a knockout performance in every scene. She has so perfectly captured the emotional pitch of a woman in love with a heel that one cannot help identifying with her. Her all-consuming love, even to the point of neglecting her son, makes it ridiculous to entertain the common query of "why doesn't she just get away from him?" Mike Newell captures all of the emotional highs and lows of a relationship of this kind, and the rakishly handsome Everett is both charming and destructive as Ellis's amor.
The beauty of this movie is that it is not just about two ill-fated lovers, the way many Hollywood movies are. It is also about England's class system. Ellis's attraction to Blakeley is more about her desire to be acknowledged by her "betters" than just by this one man. Perhaps the most heartrending scene comes at the end where one sees Ellis's painted finger going over a letter she is about to send on the eve of her execution to Blakeley's mother, apologizing for the misery she has caused her. The language of the letter is perfect, because it reveals volumes about Ellis's class aspirations, and the hopelessness of her ever achieving them.
This movie is a must-see for movie lovers, but it is not for the Meg Ryan set.
Watch it properly next time
m0ndayschild21 May 2006
Andy of Flatlands, yes maybe it was boring to you as it was based on fact, and face it the average working class person who lived in post war Britain had a boring and hard life. It is a damn good film, and you need to be able to work out the relationships for yourself without being spoon fed. I found it quite easy. I think you have missed the whole point of the miscarriage of justice that happened. Her speaking voice was typical of a working class women trying to be something she wasn't. Does the term "fur coat no knickers" mean anything to you? I suggest you watch it again. It is factual, damn good and worth watching. Miranda Richardson played the part really well as did all the cast. Their performances really were a great portrayal of the characters. By the way she was hanged (as a past tense and a past participle of hang, is used in the sense of "to put to death by hanging)not hung
Hard going even for a true story
davyd-0223723 August 2021
Lets face reality, today Ruth Ellis would have gone to prison for several years then been released. Sadly, this woman somehow fell for a man with a privileged background who treated her like garbage. Clearly Ruth wasnt good enough for his family (who owned a good portion of land in the UK). Despite his privilege his desire for Ruth was simply lust. She could not get beyond him and seemingly, from this version, could not live without him. Based upon this - this guy wasnt worth dying for, let alone worth living for. If this version is accurate he wasnt worth anything and the fallout lasted many years later!
A Worthy Cinematic Retelling of a Tragedy
theowinthrop20 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Today, in the U.S., there is a strong desire to restore the death penalty in homicide cases on most premeditated levels. In most states that have a death penalty it is only supposed to be used in murders of police officers and public officials. Certain states use it in any homicide case which fit the minimum for making the perpetrator seem to be planning to kill his victim for some time.
There is no clear right or wrong point on this controversy. Anti-death penalty advocates ignore the damage done to the family and friends of homicide victims, while pro-death penalty supporters forget that there are cases where the perpetrator is not as hopelessly bad as one imagines but had reasons that might mitigate.
It is of interest to Americans to see the same problem has and bedeviled other nations. In particular Great Britain. From 1950 - 1960 a series of great homicide cases shook up British belief in capital punishment. Some have been the subject of movies.
The first was the Christie / Evans Tragedy that was the subject of the film 10 RILLINGTON PLACE. Christie, a strangler and necrophiliac, killed over a dozen women burying the corpses in the walls and garden of his home. Two of the victims appear to be Mrs. Evans and her baby daughter. But Christie had been the chief witness for the prosecution of Timothy Evans for these murders in 1950. His testimony sent Evans to the gallows. Christie followed three years later. It took nearly a decade for the British Government to admit an error in executing Evans, who was posthumously rehabilitated.
In 1954 came the Craig - Bentley tragedy, the subject of the film LET HIM HAVE IT. Chris Craig, a youth of about 15, went on a criminal spree, followed by his mentally challenged playmate Derek Bentley (age 19). Chris hated policeman, and he and Bentley were cornered on a roof. Bentley was in police custody, and seeing a constable confronting the armed Chris shouted, "Let him have it, Chris!" The meaning of this sentence is in dispute to this day. Most likely Bentley was telling Chris to hand the gun to the constable. Instead, Chris shot and killed the Constable. Chris was underage, and could not be put to death. Bentley (who you remember was in police hands at the time of the shooting), was of the right age for possible execution. He was tried, convicted, and executed. Craig served a long term for a juvenile, was released, and eventually became a farmer.
The following year came this story: the Ellis - Blakeney tragedy. There have been other female killers who have been executed in Britain before Ruth Ellis. Edith Thompson, in the 1920s, comes closest to her in sympathy because she was a remarkable woman, and her conviction for killing her husband seemed due to her jury trying her more for adultery with the actual killer (her lover Frederick Byswater) than proof that she tried to murder her husband Percy (whom Byswater eventually did kill). She appears to have been in a physical state of collapse when she was hanged in 1922. More sympathy had been shown to Alma Rattenbury in 1935 when she and her lover were tried for killing her husband Frances, a prominent architect. She was acquitted (her lover got the death sentence), but she committed suicide thinking about the lover - who, ironically, was given a reduced sentence.
Edith Thompson and Alma Rattenbury were both good looking, and talented. Rattenbury was a part-time song composer, and Thompson's letters to Byswater shows a remarkable intellect at work. Similarly, Ruth Ellis was a good looking blonde, who was helping to run a social club (i.e. bar). She had a boy and a girl, and was cool and collected looking on the outside, but capable of having real emotional turmoil on the inside. She met an upper class amateur racing driver named David Blakeley, and they had a romance. But he dropped her, basically at the advice of his upper-crust friends and family. Ellis could not get him out of her system (despite the attempts of her friend and boss Desmond Cusins, who wanted to marry Ellis himself). Eventually, after Blakely and she had several public scenes, Ellis shot him to death on a public street. When asked later on (at her trial) if she intended to only wound him, she admitted she wanted to kill him. She was found guilty and hanged. But there was a tremendous uproar from the public. It was a typical French-style crime passion-ale, and deserved different treatment from say a murder connected to a robbery. As a result of the large revulsion felt by the British public, Ruth Ellis turned out to be the last woman in Great Britain to be executed.
The top three roles are Miranda Richardson as the doomed Ruth, wishing that she could get the right signals back from the self-centered Blakeney (superbly played by Rupert Everett). Between them they let Americans understand the crazy state of snobbery that exists in Britain even after two World Wars and the collapse of it's leadership position in the world. Blakeney does not really need too much convincing to dump Ruth - his friends the Findlaters (Tom Chadbon and Jane Bertish) put up the social pressure to do it (Ruth later blames the tragedy on their meddling). As for Cusins (Ian Holm) he is a man of abilities and some position who is hopelessly in love with a woman who won't look in his direction (but he's always ready to return being the doormat or helper of the same woman). It is a fascinating view of a doomed trio of losers, who could not break out of their interconnections and their incompatibilities.
There is no clear right or wrong point on this controversy. Anti-death penalty advocates ignore the damage done to the family and friends of homicide victims, while pro-death penalty supporters forget that there are cases where the perpetrator is not as hopelessly bad as one imagines but had reasons that might mitigate.
It is of interest to Americans to see the same problem has and bedeviled other nations. In particular Great Britain. From 1950 - 1960 a series of great homicide cases shook up British belief in capital punishment. Some have been the subject of movies.
The first was the Christie / Evans Tragedy that was the subject of the film 10 RILLINGTON PLACE. Christie, a strangler and necrophiliac, killed over a dozen women burying the corpses in the walls and garden of his home. Two of the victims appear to be Mrs. Evans and her baby daughter. But Christie had been the chief witness for the prosecution of Timothy Evans for these murders in 1950. His testimony sent Evans to the gallows. Christie followed three years later. It took nearly a decade for the British Government to admit an error in executing Evans, who was posthumously rehabilitated.
In 1954 came the Craig - Bentley tragedy, the subject of the film LET HIM HAVE IT. Chris Craig, a youth of about 15, went on a criminal spree, followed by his mentally challenged playmate Derek Bentley (age 19). Chris hated policeman, and he and Bentley were cornered on a roof. Bentley was in police custody, and seeing a constable confronting the armed Chris shouted, "Let him have it, Chris!" The meaning of this sentence is in dispute to this day. Most likely Bentley was telling Chris to hand the gun to the constable. Instead, Chris shot and killed the Constable. Chris was underage, and could not be put to death. Bentley (who you remember was in police hands at the time of the shooting), was of the right age for possible execution. He was tried, convicted, and executed. Craig served a long term for a juvenile, was released, and eventually became a farmer.
The following year came this story: the Ellis - Blakeney tragedy. There have been other female killers who have been executed in Britain before Ruth Ellis. Edith Thompson, in the 1920s, comes closest to her in sympathy because she was a remarkable woman, and her conviction for killing her husband seemed due to her jury trying her more for adultery with the actual killer (her lover Frederick Byswater) than proof that she tried to murder her husband Percy (whom Byswater eventually did kill). She appears to have been in a physical state of collapse when she was hanged in 1922. More sympathy had been shown to Alma Rattenbury in 1935 when she and her lover were tried for killing her husband Frances, a prominent architect. She was acquitted (her lover got the death sentence), but she committed suicide thinking about the lover - who, ironically, was given a reduced sentence.
Edith Thompson and Alma Rattenbury were both good looking, and talented. Rattenbury was a part-time song composer, and Thompson's letters to Byswater shows a remarkable intellect at work. Similarly, Ruth Ellis was a good looking blonde, who was helping to run a social club (i.e. bar). She had a boy and a girl, and was cool and collected looking on the outside, but capable of having real emotional turmoil on the inside. She met an upper class amateur racing driver named David Blakeley, and they had a romance. But he dropped her, basically at the advice of his upper-crust friends and family. Ellis could not get him out of her system (despite the attempts of her friend and boss Desmond Cusins, who wanted to marry Ellis himself). Eventually, after Blakely and she had several public scenes, Ellis shot him to death on a public street. When asked later on (at her trial) if she intended to only wound him, she admitted she wanted to kill him. She was found guilty and hanged. But there was a tremendous uproar from the public. It was a typical French-style crime passion-ale, and deserved different treatment from say a murder connected to a robbery. As a result of the large revulsion felt by the British public, Ruth Ellis turned out to be the last woman in Great Britain to be executed.
The top three roles are Miranda Richardson as the doomed Ruth, wishing that she could get the right signals back from the self-centered Blakeney (superbly played by Rupert Everett). Between them they let Americans understand the crazy state of snobbery that exists in Britain even after two World Wars and the collapse of it's leadership position in the world. Blakeney does not really need too much convincing to dump Ruth - his friends the Findlaters (Tom Chadbon and Jane Bertish) put up the social pressure to do it (Ruth later blames the tragedy on their meddling). As for Cusins (Ian Holm) he is a man of abilities and some position who is hopelessly in love with a woman who won't look in his direction (but he's always ready to return being the doormat or helper of the same woman). It is a fascinating view of a doomed trio of losers, who could not break out of their interconnections and their incompatibilities.
Sit Out This Dance
kenjha28 September 2010
This drama recounts the true events of a love triangle in early 1950s London. Richardson, inexplicably made up to look like Marilyn Monroe, plays an unstable prostitute who is obsessed with a rich, abusive race car driver played by Everett. Holm is a kindly fellow who wants to take care of her but she is not attracted to him. This is basically a dull soap opera with uninteresting characters. Richardson gives a terrible, mannered performance in her screen debut. She delivers her lines in such a weird accent and so rapidly that 90 percent of what she says is incomprehensible. Unfortunately, English subtitles are not available for this film.
Brilliant
shamefacedmylad26 March 2006
This is a haunting, finely-crafted film that transports the viewer to another time and place from the very first frames of the movie. The sets, lighting, fashions, and make-up all unify to create a special cinema experience. It is restrained, refined, mature, and civilized. In its dark way, this film captures a type of story-telling magic that only movies can create. It is an eternal, personal favorite, and one of the best films of the decade. Miranda Richardson is irreplaceable; she inhabits the role, completely. The supporting cast is equally effective. Unfortunately, the latest DVD cover lacks the powerful, simple black-and-white design of vintage promotional material. The original imagery was as classic and elegant as the film, itself. It is a fine piece of movie-making. I wish more directors aspired to this type of work.
Mike Newell's DANCE WITH A STRANGER is a drama based on the obsessive and ultimately destructive love affair between a wealthy young British man and a 30 something madame.
Michele_Phillips22 August 2005
Although best known for his blockbuster hits FOUR WEDDINGS AND A FUNERAL and LOVE ACTUALLY, Mike Newell does a splendid job of bringing this tragic tale to the screen. The cinematography is lush and the recreation of London in the 1950's, both sets and costumes, is brilliantly realized. Obsession can be a difficult subject to tackle and yet one is compelled by the script, the visuals, and most of all the consummate acting, to see this affair through to it's conclusion. Miranda Richardson is the woman trapped by her need to make a good living and her inability to disentangle herself from the clutches of a destructive affair. An incredibly young Ruppert Everett and the redoubtable Ian Holm make up the other two sides of this twisted triangle. While all three actors shine, Richardson's portrayal is one of an individual tortured by a relationship that can never be and at a loss to explain why it endures to herself or anyone else. Not for the faint of heart but well worth the effort. Based on a true story.
Lugubrious plot coupled with unlikable characters doom true story of last woman hanged in Great Britain
Turfseer17 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
A 1985 British film, Dance with a Stranger is the true life story of Ruth Ellis, the last woman hanged for murder in Great Britain. The eminent actress Miranda Richardson made her debut in the film as Ellis who was notably made up to look like Marilyn Monroe.
One wonders why director Mike Newell was drawn to the material in the first place. While the acting and cinematography are fine the story is not only completely downbeat but lacks even a modicum of suspense.
The plot can be summed up in a couple of short paragraphs: Ruth Ellis (Richardson), a former prostitute and now nightclub hostess at a pub in London finds herself smitten by ne'er do well David Blakely (Rupert Everett), an aspiring race car driver from a well-to-do family who abuses her and sees other women. Well-off businessman Desmond Cussen (Ian Holm) becomes besotted with Ruth who has no romantic interest in him and enters into a platonic relationship with her.
After losing her job because of David, Desmond rents an apartment for Ruth and occasionally takes care of her son until Ruth murders David over his long-term pervasive emotional and physical abuse.
Ultimately there is nothing likeable about any of the three principals and all the emotional outbursts on the part of Ruth prove tiresome. One can hardly sympathize with Ruth who has ample opportunities to escape the abusive David but in classic domestic abuse victim style, always goes back to him.
It might have been a better idea to use Ruth's court trial as a framing device. That might have answered the only interesting question about this whole affair: why the woman was hanged over a crime of passion which in other venues would have easily resulted in a lesser charge of manslaughter.
One wonders why director Mike Newell was drawn to the material in the first place. While the acting and cinematography are fine the story is not only completely downbeat but lacks even a modicum of suspense.
The plot can be summed up in a couple of short paragraphs: Ruth Ellis (Richardson), a former prostitute and now nightclub hostess at a pub in London finds herself smitten by ne'er do well David Blakely (Rupert Everett), an aspiring race car driver from a well-to-do family who abuses her and sees other women. Well-off businessman Desmond Cussen (Ian Holm) becomes besotted with Ruth who has no romantic interest in him and enters into a platonic relationship with her.
After losing her job because of David, Desmond rents an apartment for Ruth and occasionally takes care of her son until Ruth murders David over his long-term pervasive emotional and physical abuse.
Ultimately there is nothing likeable about any of the three principals and all the emotional outbursts on the part of Ruth prove tiresome. One can hardly sympathize with Ruth who has ample opportunities to escape the abusive David but in classic domestic abuse victim style, always goes back to him.
It might have been a better idea to use Ruth's court trial as a framing device. That might have answered the only interesting question about this whole affair: why the woman was hanged over a crime of passion which in other venues would have easily resulted in a lesser charge of manslaughter.
Magnificent in every way
r_j_t_kelly14 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Understandably, most of the attention went to Miranda Richardson's virtuoso performance as Ruth when this film first appeared, and time has done nothing to dim what must be one of the truly great female performances. Richardson's brilliance is in never taking a quick shortcut to sympathy for Ellis: she makes her selfish, vulgar and cruel, as well as vulnerable, haunted and uncertain. It's a stunning performance. It's worth noting though, that both Ian Holm and Rupert Everett are also excellent as the two men between whom Ruth vacillates. The design is inch-perfect: no love letter to the past, but a visceral recreation of a glamorous world with an unpleasant "backstage" and the script is magnificent: suggesting that Ruth's real crime is not murder, but not knowing - and sticking to - her place in 1950s British society. A cracking film.
Obsessive relationships can de destructive but also boring
dierregi7 November 2023
Meet Ruth and David, two average people who could have lived longer and perhaps more interesting lives if their paths had not collided in a nightclub with catastrophic consequences.
Ruth was a woman with a chequered past, who at age 26 had already collected two children and two divorces and David was a lazy, wealthy drunkard from an aristocratic background.
The two developed a lusty affair, with frequent break-ups, reconciliations, stalking, and mistreatment by David. The movie follows their first encounter and their many fights and tends to get tedious, because the two did little else than obsess about each other, have sex, and split up, just to start again.
All this lasted a couple of years, witnessed by Ruth's dubious admirer and helper Desmond Cussen and Andy, the unfortunate son.
Watching the movie I just felt sorry for Andy, neglected and often forgotten by Ruth, too busy obsessing about lover-boy David. On the other hand, David was an unpleasant character, an obnoxious, degenerate, selfish drunkard. Still, one wonders why Ruth had to kill him, since at the end of their affair he seemed finally able to leave her alone.
Even the final act is disappointing, more of a whimper than a blast, and Ruth's letter to David's mother is a clear example of how people mistake lusty obsession for love. Given the subject, the movie is dreary and drags along forever, even if Miranda Richardson does a good job with her most unpleasant part.
Ruth was a woman with a chequered past, who at age 26 had already collected two children and two divorces and David was a lazy, wealthy drunkard from an aristocratic background.
The two developed a lusty affair, with frequent break-ups, reconciliations, stalking, and mistreatment by David. The movie follows their first encounter and their many fights and tends to get tedious, because the two did little else than obsess about each other, have sex, and split up, just to start again.
All this lasted a couple of years, witnessed by Ruth's dubious admirer and helper Desmond Cussen and Andy, the unfortunate son.
Watching the movie I just felt sorry for Andy, neglected and often forgotten by Ruth, too busy obsessing about lover-boy David. On the other hand, David was an unpleasant character, an obnoxious, degenerate, selfish drunkard. Still, one wonders why Ruth had to kill him, since at the end of their affair he seemed finally able to leave her alone.
Even the final act is disappointing, more of a whimper than a blast, and Ruth's letter to David's mother is a clear example of how people mistake lusty obsession for love. Given the subject, the movie is dreary and drags along forever, even if Miranda Richardson does a good job with her most unpleasant part.
Dance with Stranger
paisleyjubilee-3322218 January 2021
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
