User reviews

It feels like a period documentary and the story is the story of Leopold and Loeb - A terrifying portrait of two real life killers who killed without passion or reason just to prove they were above the law. The period details are beautifully drawn but where it lacks is in the actor's faces. They appear rather than participate fully. There is a detachment in their portrayal that kept me at a safe distance and I could admire it with my head but I couldn't connect with my heart. The opposite of what happened to me with 1958's Compulsion - I was riveted by Dean Stockwell. I believed and understood just by looking into his eyes.

The film "Swoon" gives an insightful view into the minds that went behind the Leoplod-Loeb murder case. The cinematography was very well done, looking as if actual 1920s film stock, yet using very progressive camera angles and point-of-view shots at times. The film was also very frank about how homosexuality (and prejudice against it)played a role in the murder and their conviction of the murder. It's interesting to think of it in light of Alfred Hitchcock's "Rope," (which is based on the same murder case) in which the homosexuality of the lead characters is only hinted at.

Another thing I found interesting was the use of anachronisms. You might notice whenever the Leopold-Loeb duo use a phone in the movie, they always use touch-tone phones, while every else has phones more fitting for the time period. Another anachronism is an homage to Hitchcock. When Leopold and Loeb meet in bed, they recite nearly verbatim the opening lines from a scene in Hitchcock's "Rear Window" in which Lisa Carol Fremont (Grace Kelly) kisses L.B. "Jeff" Jeffries (Jimmy Stewart).

My only major complaint about the film was the acting. It seemed as if the two leads were either melodramatic or stoic, most often at the wrong times. Even the bit part players seemed rather aloof in their acting. A better cast would have made this movie much better.

Anti -hollywoodian to a fault ,"swoon" is the most realistic account of the ghastly murder of a child by two brilliant students ,inspired by Nietzsche, convinced that their IQ place them beyond good and evil .It was the first time the story of those monsters had been transferred to the screen as it really was :

-In "rope" (1949) ,the victim was a young man

-in "compulsion" (1959) ,the plots was sweetened by the presence of bland lovers ( Martin Miller and Diane Varsi) and a long Christian plea by lawyer Orson Welles .

Don't get me wrong ;both Hitchcock's and Fleischer's works were great, ahead of their time ,when the Hayes Code was still applying.They are much more palatable than Tom Kalin's 'remake" , in stark black and white , with the unbearably violent murder of the little boy .

The dominant character (John Dahl in "rope" , Bradford Dillman in "compulsion" ) is less obvious ,but the gay relationship is explicit -whereas it was only suggested in the previous versions-

Indeed,so horrendous were the chances taken by Tom Kalin that ,with any lesser talent ,the result could have been disastrous , rejecting his work into the porn gay film ghetto whereas it is genuine art house cinema .

The questioning , perhaps inspired by French Nouvelle Vague cinema vérité (archival footage is shown towards the end),may disconcert the viewer .That such a harrowing screenplay succeeds artistically without falling into the trap of sentiment is due to the director's feeling for sparseness which does not allow any conventional sentimentality ( no compassionate lawyer , both parents hardly appear ) but it inspires its vital despair .

The trial turns so improper in its depiction of the sexual practises that the women are requested to leave the courtroom ; and for the first time , the movie does not end with the trial or the arrestation ,but spans ,in an admirably succint style the criminals' whole life .MM Chester and Schlachet give performances which will make your hair stand on end , both deadpan , ruthless...but a pure love at a time the society was intolerant ,and the awful massacre of the innocent.

Director Tom Kalin took the Leopold and Loeb murder case of the 1920s, which already had been the basis of such films as "Rope" and "Compulsion," and filmed the sordid episode as an exercise in style with flashes of homo-erotic imagery. In his film, "Swoon," Kalin does not flinch from either the murderers' ethnic background or their sexual orientation, although the part that either aspect of their makeup may have played in the crime was not explored. Utilizing haunting black-and-white cinematography by Ellen Kuras, documentary footage from the period, and an often-melancholy score by James Bennett, Kalin fashioned a strangely fascinating look at the aimless lives of two young men with too much money and too much time.

Although the two youths are lovers in the physical sense, their partnership seems to have been born more of boredom than passion. Their lovemaking has eroticism, but it lacks fire. The pair performs more like two bored schoolboys passing a rainy afternoon pleasuring each other than like two men with deep emotional ties. Tragically, this passionless attraction spawns what appears to be an equally passionless crime. The plot to kidnap and murder a young boy seems to have been born of the same boredom that gave rise to Leopold's and Loeb's erotic desires. The two young men have no emotion either before or after the murder, although there is a flash of zeal on the killer's face during and shortly after the murder. The men's demeanor throughout the interrogation and trial suggests a complete lack of, not only remorse, but also comprehension that they have taken a human life. The duo bicker about the details of the crime as though they were trying to recall what they ate for breakfast. The men are distanced not only from the crime, but also from any semblance of humanity.

Appropriately, the sharp light and shade contrasts in the stark photography at times make the film resemble a silent horror film, because "Swoon" is a horror show at its core. These two men are like monsters that were created without souls and that lie in wait until idle thoughts prompt them to fill their empty hours with crime. The languid air that pervades the film underscores the tedium of their existence. Kalin tracks the two men to the ends of their lives and leaves the viewer with an ambivalent feeling about whether or not justice was ever served. Like "In Cold Blood," however, "Swoon" focuses on and almost celebrates the two killers, while the innocent young victim is reduced to a nearly anonymous figure. Thus, "Swoon" is often a difficult film to watch, yet, despite lingering and disturbing thoughts afterward, Kalin has fashioned an intelligent, intriguing work that merits attention.

Two highly intelligent young Jewish men, who are also lovers, attempt to get away with "the perfect murder". This intriguing drama was also filmed as "Rope" (1948) and "Compulsion" (1959). Based on the true story of Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb, this version stars Craig Chester (as Mr. Leopold) and Daniel Schlachet (as Mr. Loeb). Of the three features currently available, this is undoubtedly the most "realistic" version of the gruesome crime. Yet, for most, "Swoon" will also be the least entertaining of the three films.

This one focuses on not only the murder, but also the sexual relationship between the principals. With unsavory flourish, "Swoon" comes across as an attempt to move responsibility for the crime from Leopold and Loeb, to an intolerant society, with the former explaining, "I wanted to murder the idea of suffering as my condition; I wanted to surpass the boundaries of intelligence for something more pure." Excuses, excuses.

Director Tom Kalin makes it an outstanding looking production, with Ellen Kuras contributing terrific black-and-white photography. Due to the availability of archival footage and Mr. Kalin's expert editing, the real Leopold and Loeb can be seen. And, due to and Leopold's relatively long life, we have one of the subjects characterized becoming an actor in the film. The real actors, Mr. Chester and Mr. Schlachet, perform superbly.

******* Swoon (2/19/92) Tom Kalin ~ Craig Chester, Daniel Schlachet, Ron Vawter

What a riveting, startling and altogether masterful achievement. The idea the we're actually seeing Leopold and Loeb in person crossed my mind more than once. The illusion is overwhelming and the idea that we're seeing and hearing something that we shouldn't is part of its fascination. I loved Richard Fleischer's 1959 film from Meyer Levin's novel. I was enthralled by Dean Stockwell's performance and that's the only missing element here. Dean Stockwell. However, Tom Kalin has masterminded a narration that makes the whole thing so close to what it really must have been that the experience, for all film lovers, should be a must.

In this modern version of the infamous Leopold and Loeb murder case of the 1920s, "Swoon" stresses the gay angle, relative to "Compulsion" (1959), a film of the same story, but burdened by the watchful eye of the censors associated with the moralistic Hays Code. Actual court records do in fact indicate that the relationship or bond between these two guys was primarily sexual.

Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb apparently had a masochistic pact. And "Swoon" asks the question: which guy was in control? The answer seems to be that they alternated control. Also, compared to "Compulsion", more attention is given to the actual murder of the teenage boy.

This film is quite stylized. Archival images and lyrical cutaways unrelated to the story are used because they are thematically relevant. Further, some scenes are intended as dreams. And non-period piece elements add textural perspective.

The real Nathan Leopold is shown in historical footage, first as a young man at about the time of the actual killing. He is shown in a sequence with a group of fellow ornithologists. And near the end of the film, he is shown as an older man, having been released from prison.

"Swoon" was shot in B&W. Images are a tad grainy, maybe deliberately so, as part of the film's visual style. Casting and acting are fine. I did not care for the background music. It's too whimsical and kooky sounding, given the subject matter. But the music does contribute to the film's overall flighty, giddy tone, reflected in the lack of emotional involvement of the characters. Further, the killing of the young boy is perfunctory and nonchalant.

The film's peculiar tone and mood I found annoying. Yet, it's probably consistent with the mindset of these two peculiar criminals, two guys, both cerebral and intelligent, completely lacking both in conscience and in a sense of moral principles.

Overall, compared to "Compulsion", "Swoon" is more direct, and perhaps a tad more thematically compelling.

The true story of gay lovers, Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold Jr. who kidnapped and murdered a child in the early 1920s for kicks. The plot covers the months before the crime, the investigation, trial and final fate of the two men.

Of the few film versions of this story out there, they all seem to be naturally quite good. "Compulsion" is no doubt the best, and this film definitely takes some cues from it. Based on what I know of the case, the script follows reality quite closely.

This version does play up the homosexual angle a bit more, though there is some debate on that. My understanding is that one of the two was clearly gay, but the other may or may not have been. Regardless, this is an aspect that makes the case all the more interesting... even when it is more subtle such as in "Rope".

"Swoon" is an enigmatic, sometimes almost inaccessible film that I continue to find oddly emotionally satisfying, even after having seen it at least a dozen times. An intentionally chaotic jumble of images and brilliance, speckled with anachronisms, sly winks at the camera, stock footage and allegorical sound affects, the film functions more like an avante-garde stage play than a typical movie- and yet it remains very cinematic, very engaging despite being occasionally cryptic, and very emotionally powerful- even surprisingly romantic in places- even though there is clearly a satiric and dry bent to the director's vision. Like a good Hal Hartley film, there is an intelligent handling of deep, dark emotions here, and for it's direct but never sensational treatment of massochism and obsession, I am incredibley thankful and eternally enlightened- I sort of wish would-be auteurs of the psychosexual (i.e. David Lynch) would take a cue from this strange but excellent little movie.

Swoon tells the story of Leopold and Lobe with homosexuality constantly in mind, because it was important (or at least everyone at the time it actually happened believed it was important). This film points out how the trial focused on their homosexuality, using authentic court transcripts, despite the murder having nothing to do with sexual orientation. This mirrors Michael Foucault's History of Sexuality regarding the policing of sexuality. Thought-provoking.

Although a bit confusing at times, a movie worth watching once. Perhaps do a bit of research on the background of the case to supplement the film.

I had heard that this film was stylish and intriguing, but I just found it annoying. It's been a while since I've seen it (and hopefully I won't find out all my memories are wrong and I'm unjustly condemning this movie), but my memory is that the filmmakers tried to portray Leopold and Loeb as victimized by an anti-gay society, and that this somehow caused their horrible crime. I totally disagree with this point of view, and think it's unfair both to homosexuals and to Bobby Franks, the real victim of the story. I can't imagine why anyone would want to claim those two as martyrs. I also thought L&L were portrayed as a bit more sophisticated than they actually were--after all, they were teenagers who lived at home. The film places them in a kind of fantasy world that seems like it should be scored by Morrissey.

I just read an interview with one of the filmmakers that implied the film's anachronisms, such as the push-button phones that characters used, were meant "to add Brechtian distance". They certainly do that, but I happened to find it highly irksome.

Apparently a number of people found this movie interesting, but I would have preferred a less "stylish" and more realistic examination of the part homosexuality may have played in the Leopold & Loeb case.

This is the third film on the case I've seen and it certainly has merits of its own. There was no grandstand acting here, no over-acting for the Academy Awards or anything like that. I actually found the acting quite adequate unlike some others. It was downplayed, true, but sufficient. Let's remember that these people were not the norm for their time - or for any time. They were bigger than life, or at least they thought they were. The cinematography and staging were wonderful with so many scenes "unbalanced" in their composition. The cutting too was uneasy but uneasy on purpose. The characters were not portrayed as likable and, no, an intolerant society was not set up for blame. There is much going on here - certainly more meets the eye on first viewing.

Watched the director's cut last night...glad it was free rental, even a dollar would have been too much for me to pay to watch this attempt at "film noir". The anachronisms (modern telephones) were annoying to me, not clever, seeming more like budget constraints than anything else. The "non-traditional" casting I also found distracting. If I have to stop following the story to wonder "what the heck is the black chick/drag queen doing there?" then the storyteller has failed me. Again, not clever in my opinion but annoying and irritating, and very film school final project-ish. And for pete's sake if you are going to shoot in black and white at least use some of the techniques used in old films that take full advantage of not having color. There was no use of nuance in the lighting, no shades of gray, no depth, no texture...just black and just white...boring!

Another biopic of the Leopold and Loeb case - this one took an interestng angle by sensationalizing their sexual relationship, which would've been unheard of in the former "Rope" and "Compulsion". A neat idea.

The cinematography is gorgeous and it housed some very great, sombre atmosphere.

When you weren't drooling over the men's fashion photography, you were thrown head on into one of the strangest relationships ever put on film. Recommended.

As a European, I didn't know anything about the story of "Dickie & Babe" before watching this movie. All the praise - or at least a good part of it - goes to the original narrative techniques employed by director Tom Kalin: it truly feels like watching a movie/documentary of the 20s. The fact that we know this is a movie made in the early 90s only makes of some of these techniques out-and-out Brechtian distancing effects: among others, the reports made by the analysts, which aim at showing the homophobic mindset of science (as a reflection of that of society) of those times and the sequence about the physiognomical analyses of skull/face features which sought to find the explanation for determinate (immoral) behaviors in a person's physical appearance. But examples of the same sort abound in the movie, and we can even think of it as a clever composition of Verfremdungseffekte all facing today's viewer with the same question: Who is the actual perverse (and "deranged")? Leopold and Loeb or rather "the society in which they live(d) in"?

Puzzling revisionist return to 1920s Chicago, wherein a couple of vicarious thrill-seekers and gay lovers graduate from breaking storefront windows to masterminding the murder of a young boy (within the pretense of a kidnapping-for-ransom job). True story of convicted murderers Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold, Jr. is given a stark, visually arresting and stylish look, but the men themselves are annoyingly enigmatic. The pair are seen as lustful and reckless, yet they're also in denial over their actions, their religion (both were Jewish) and their homosexuality. The film doesn't equate their self-denial with anything substantial (not their upbringings, their behavior in public or private, nor their state of wealth), and the intrinsic aloofness keeps the picture from being a gripping document. Some of the details of the case are confusing as presented, either brushed passed without great thought or left deliberately ambiguous (as with the prosecutor's claim the young victim was sexually abused, something we don't see). There are mordantly amusing asides (such as Leopold allegedly suing the movie producer behind 1959's "Compulsion" because it portrayed him in a negative fashion!), yet the pair's prison years are hardly delved into, leaving us with less at the finish than we initially had. ** from ****

Swoon focuses on Leopold and Loeb's homosexual relationship - a facet of the case that has been mostly (and unjustly) ignored since their trial, even by Leopold himself in his autobiography. But, even in its treatment of this Swoon over does it by far. Worse, it twists, combines, and straight out alters the details of the case which will irritate anyone who knows much about it while at the same time managing to confuse those who are not familiar with it. While it is an interestingly made film, Swoon stinks.

1 out of 10 - awful.

Question: What do the following actors share as a common link to each other?

Paul Muni, Melvyn Douglas, Spencer Tracy, Jason Robards, Jack Lemmon, Orson Welles and Robert Read.

Answer: All of these actors at one time portrayed the famous lawyer Clarence Darrow either on the stage or screen, although in most instances under a fictitious name. The least recognized player of the group is Robert Read, who very briefly appeared as the real Clarence Darrow in the little known Indy film Swoon (1992). In the much more famous movie Compulsion (1959) involving the same celebrated Leopold-Loeb criminal case, Orson Welles is featured as the star of the production, although he does not appear on screen until the final court room and related scenes. George C. Scott deserves a special mention here, as he played the Darrow role on the stage in Inherit the Wind, and then switched over to the William Jennings Bryan character in the television movie version of the same play from 1999 in which Jack Lemmon assumed the Darrow part.

It is well known that Alfred Hitchcock's 1948 film Rope is based upon elements of the Loeb-Leopold case but presented as a murder mystery. Because Rope ends when the mystery is solved, the Darrow character never appears in the story.

As for the film Swoon, it is an interesting contemporary take on the famous case and its infamous leading characters. At times its documentary-style black and white photography creates an almost "fly on the wall" feeling in the observer that can be both arresting and jarring. The narrative seems to wander somewhat regarding which of the principals was actually controlling the other. And while Swoon did not attempt to be another version of Compulsion, it is at least questionable whether its almost dismissive presentation of the trial was a valid narrative device.

Swoon is a serious effort to tell this story in a new and different way, and deserves to be seen by a wider audience.

Don't waste your time. The picture was hard to make out, blurry, way too dark, & green. I didn't appreciate being put through all the sex scenes between them, and could have done without the drag queen parties too. This movie didn't tell me details about their crime. There's a scene with them in a car, they offer a boy a ride home. We see one of them in the back seat raise a hammer & blood flies. I expected more information about who the kid was, how did they come to pick him, how did they know his name, the parents' names, the home address & phone number to carry out a kidnapping? Did they get any ransom money? I would of liked information about their childhood. Were they both virgins? Had they had other boyfriends before they met? How does it happen that a child kidnapper/murderer gets released from a life sentence plus 99 years?