top of page
Benjamin May

The Local Stigmatic (1990) Review

In the world of movies, the term “passion project” generally comes with negative connotations. More disparagingly known as “vanity projects”, they refer to films someone gets involved with out of love or obsession, rather than financial gain. While some, such as Clint Eastwood’s masterful ‘Unforgiven,’ or Robert Duvall’s ‘The Apostle’- both of which took years to get made- are brilliant, more often than not the end result is underwhelming, if not downright awful.


Films like Michael Flatley’s deluded attempt to be James Bond ‘Blackbird,’ or Francis Ford Coppola’s recent misguided melodrama ‘Megalopolis’ exemplify how personal passion can sometimes cloud creative judgment. These projects can suffer from a lack of critical oversight, leading to indulgent storytelling, uneven pacing and a disconnect with audiences. The passion that drives these films can become their Achilles’ heel, resulting in works that are often comically self-indulgent rather than impactful.

For Al Pacino, ‘The Local Stigmatic’ falls somewhere between both camps. While it doesn’t mark the nadir of the great actor’s career (there’ll always be ‘Jack And Jill’ for that) it has serious issues. It is based on Heathcote Williams play of the same name, which Pacino first performed as a workshop during his time with The Actors’ Studio in 1968. A year later, he performed it off-Broadway and, unsatisfied with the results, did it again in 1976 alongside friend and frequent co-star John Cazale.


Eight years after that, while in London, Pacino got the idea of filming Williams’ play, to “learn a bit more about it from that angle.” The result, directed by David F. Wheeler, makes for an interesting short film, that, in some regards, is a successful adaptation. The film follows two English friends, Graham and Ray, who spend their time indulging in violent, nihilistic behaviour, while reflecting on society’s decay and their own disillusionment.

As with the source material, the film examines the nature of fame, as well as the personalities of two sociopathic sadists. Graham and Ray's interactions reflect their deep-seated resentment towards society, and their violent tendencies serve as a manifestation of their inner turmoil. The characters’ philosophical conversations about fame and its impact on human behavior paints a grim picture of individuals who feel marginalized and disconnected from the world around them.


It is an odd, ambiguous story, following a most toxic duo. At the time Williams wrote the play, disillusionment and nihilism were prevailing themes in many plays and films. The influence of playwrights like Harold Pinter is evident in the film’s dialogue and atmosphere, with its cryptic conversations and undercurrents of menace. This tradition of exploring existential angst and societal disintegration situates ‘The Local Stigmatic’ within a broader cultural context, reflecting the zeitgeist of its era.

However, while interesting, the film is not without its flaws. Ed Lachman’s cinematography is uninspiring, lacking interesting stylizations or techniques that would make the venture feel suited for the cinema. Apparently, this was intentional, aiming to retain the stark, minimalistic feel of a stage play. While this approach may enhance the film’s unsettling atmosphere, it also makes the visual experience somewhat monotonous.


Additionally, the pacing is laborious. The slow, dialogue-heavy scenes demand a great deal of patience, which might not appeal to those expecting a more traditional narrative flow. This deliberate pacing, while thought-provoking, risks losing audience engagement as the tension ebbs and flows inconsistently. Conversely, Howard Shore’s muted score adds a sinister undercurrent of dread, drifting through the film like a cruel wind.

The main issue with the film, however, is the casting. Although Pacino is menacing and malevolent as Graham, he looks like a bad Liam Gallagher impersonator and his accent is patently ridiculous. His best attempts at a Cockney accent fall completely flat, leaving him sounding like a stroke-victim with marbles in his mouth. His co-star Paul Guilfoyle is no better, sounding like a Swede feebly attempting an impression of Paul Hogan. Their truly godawful accents actually detract from the narrative, making Sean Connery in ‘The Hunt for Red October’ sound like a native Russian.


It is a shame, as the story is intriguing and the dialogue strong. Pacino’s love for the material is evident, though because he didn’t cast someone else in the lead roles, or move the action to Brooklyn, the film suffers as a result. Conversely, Joseph Maher, who starred opposite Pacino in the 68’ and 76’ productions, does fine work; his impeccable accent coming as a relief to the ears from Pacino and Guilfoyle’s embarrassing attempts at same.

In conclusion, Pacino’s problematic passion project ‘The Local Stigmatic’ is a mixed-bag. It has some serious issues, namely its uninspiring cinematography, laborious pacing and central casting. Although Pacino and Guilfoyle aren’t terrible, their accents are, detracting from Heathcote Williams’ intriguing, sinister story and brilliant dialogue. Despite its shortcomings, however, ‘The Local Stigmatic’ is a testament to Pacino’s passion for his craft and his willingness to take risks- even if his Cockney accent makes Dick Van Dyke in ‘Mary Poppins’ sound like Bob Hoskins.

bottom of page