Wow! Such a good movie.

Did you people see the same film I saw?

Absolutely amazing

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

In the 19th Century, poets are the rock stars of their time – using drugs, living on the edge and revered by many for their creative influence. At a rally where he protests against the war with France and slavery, Samuel Coleridge meets the young William Wordsworth, who idolises him and joins him in his "revolution". When Coleridge flees the city with his wife and baby to set up a self-sustaining Utopia of their own, William and his sister join them. The two friends get down to work, although the writing process starts to destroy Coleridge from the inside – although maybe it's the opium? I taped this film because the title and cast caught my interest but, whenever I read what it was about I thought twice because it sounded like a dull historical film about characters I didn't know a great deal about. Despite this I decided to give it a go and see if it was any good. From the very start the film interested me with its strange visuals and interesting characters. The actual plot is not so easy to get into, but the relationships are well written and there is always something going on. I do not know the "real" facts behind these characters so I will not go down the road of picking at this film for what definitely contains a great deal of artistic license (the film ends on the London Eye) but in a way it is the license that makes it more interesting. With this, we are able to enter the experience rather than just the story; it also allows for plenty of interesting touches. I laughed quite a bit to read reviews ranting about errors in continuity, with some shots having modern things in the background – perhaps they didn't reach the end of the film to see that this was deliberate and became more frequent as the film went on (why review it if you haven't seen it all?). The precise meaning of this was lost on me other than it being about Coleridge being ahead of his time or timeless in his vision, but it did make the film interesting. The characters of Coleridge and Wordsworth are both interesting and it is they that make the story worth sticking with.This is not to imply it is brilliant because it isn't, but it is enjoyable, interesting and different enough to keep me watching. The direction is a bit too forced at times but it does have some nice moments that are original if not cohesive. The cast do well to help inject a certain amount of humour, wonder and drama when any or all of them are required. Roache gets all the "wonder" stuff and is pretty good but he has the film stolen from him by stealth as Hannah delivers a great performance. Wordsworth starts out idolising Coleridge and following him, but then gradually turns to destroying his work etc – this transformation is very well done by Hannah, who works the extremes well but does the transition better. Support is as strong as you would expect from Morton, Woof, Serkis and others but the film belongs to the lead pair and the director.Overall this is not a brilliant film but it is an interesting one. The narrative is difficult because the director tries hard to make it obscure and difficult to get deep into, but the general delivery features an interest character story told with humour, drama and good acting. The interesting (if a little pretentious) direction is always interesting even if it can be a little alienating at times. If it sounds boring and "not your sort of thing" then you'll be the same as me – in which case you should give it a try anyway, but I do wonder what fans of Wordsworth and/or Coleridge made of it.

I thought this movie was pretty good, actually. Sure it was kinda weird, especially at the end credits, but even then it gave it a very different touch. Sure it might of been a little melodramatic with the relationship between Coleridge and Wordsworth, but I bet there is also quite a bit of melodrama in the lives' of those who hate this movie. However, this movie does deserve very different veiws because it has a hard time knowing what it wants to be, but also, it deserves praise for trying to explain a very complicated subjects in very complicated times.And I thought the end credits were actually one of the best I've ever seen. It shows that it doesn't take itself too seriously. I think the review posted on this site is ridiculous... it just shows how the reviewer has no patience for something they don't understand right away.

I wandered lonely as a cow into the video store. . . and then I rented this film. Alas. I think the director was trying to channel the spirit of Ken Russell while he was making this film. Unfortunately, it was only during the last 15 minutes that the movie took a full bodied lurch into unintentionally comic melodramatic absurdity. With its utter disregard for the historic record, "Pandaemonium" attempts to do for England's greatest Romantic poets what "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" did for the Arthurian legends - but (sadly) without the wit or the humor.Why is it that so many films about poets fail to convey any essence of poetry? Perhaps if you don't know anything about Wordsworth or Coleridge (or you don't care) you might be satisfied with "Pandaemonium," but I find it impossible to recommend a film that slanders the former while portraying the latter as a slathering dope fiend.(I did enjoy the "Xanadu" music video shown over the ending credits - now that was truly trashy.)

First things first: if you're watching this film to get some insight into the real lives of Samuel Taylor Coleridge or Wordsworth: don't. Most especially if you're a fan of Wordsworth, he's not portrayed too kindly. This script takes a LOT of liberties with history, to the point where it should be considered entirely fictional. That said, I thought it was a completely beautiful, exquisite movie. A fan of Coleridge, I liked hearing the poetry (though to be brutally honest, didn't care much for the actual voice/intonation used for the readings). Most especially, I loved the director's way of bringing me into the supposed head of a drug-mad poet. Was STC really like this? <shrug> Does it matter? <shrug> I found the camera work stylish, the cinematography stunning, the references to the contemporary world confusing but thought-provoking. The story was perhaps only a step up from mediocre, but the visual element so greatly surpassed my expectations that it balanced out to being one of my new favourites. So good, I watched it 2 nights in a row. And if I wasn't so busy, I'd watch it again today....