Reviews

This could genuinely be one of the worst movies I've ever, ever seen. Jaw-droppingly, horrifying right-wing, with not one single redeeming feature. Compulsive viewing because... I just couldn't believe what I was seeing, and whether or not there was some kind of tongue-in-cheek satirical payoff... but there wasn't. Just a non-stop humourless onslaught against anything, or anyone, who opposes the extremist right- wing agenda of the likes of Palin, Limbaugh, Fox News, Ex-Pres Bush, Beck and the countless other neo-con idiots that are making American into a global laughing stock.

David Zucker is one of those bizarre Americans who transformed themselves, mutant-like, from a comedy satirist into a neo-con right- wing mouth-foaming bigot after the WTC attack.

Every single second of this movie is spent ripping anyone even remotely humanist or left-wing. It extols the virtues of "shoot first, ask questions later", in the name of its blind, moronic worship of the grand turgid, bloated monster that is right-wing America.

Freedom comes in one flavour, and with only one set of rules; do as we say, believe what we believe, or we'll shoot you.

I would have switched it off had I not been so frozen by it's stunning offensiveness.

This is a movie that makes the USA dumber just by existing.

Seriously, David Zucker, you've turned into one disgusting human being.

Having looked for this for ages, I was delighted to be able to see it through the magic of the Internet recently.

Like most people, I saw it when I was a child and it made a big impression.

On viewing it now, being much older, the experience was a little disappointing, as was to be expected.

The episodes had very little pace, and the programme makers took incredible liberties with the cliffhangers, often showing something at the start of the episode that wasn't there at the end of the previous one! Sky himself was still as eerie as I remembered, and the use of CSO on his eyes and hands was still effective.

It was a true Friends of the Earth parable, however, and, given that I'm not exactly a supporter of greenie, eco-friendly, anti-science bull, this grated on me.

Only one moment in the series sent a shiver up my spine... when Goodchild was going up the stairs, with the camera focused on his feet, and you saw his creepy cloak just kind of drop into shot, where it hadn't been before!... ooh! All in all, could have done with being 6 episode long instead of 7.

DVD release seems unlikely due to the fact that episodes 3 and 7 only exist in ropey off-air recordings from a domestic Philips 1500 VCR.

There's a definite reluctance to release material in low quality.

Catch it if you can, though, through other methods :)

A truly dreadful film, seen during the night on BBC2, but glad I saw it! A fairly comprehensive anti-religion film... anyone who comes into contact with it becomes maniacs! Superb! Notable for yet another Patrick Magee scenery-chewing exercise, a host of unknown actors who remained unknown, and a truly jaw dropping series of appalling songs, sung by the "Shirley Bassey" Stars in their Eyes winner, Maxine Barrie (in her younger days!). Poor dear had to wait over 20 years for public recognition. If I were her, I'd buy all the prints and burn them! Definitely a B-movie for showing in a double bill with some cheapo Hammer concoction, but unintentionally funny in places.

Yes, I can see what they were doing, and no, it didn't work.

It only able to achieve "smile-humour", and not once did I laugh out loud as I usually do in South Parks. Usually there's a strong satirical streak in the show, but it seemed to me that Matt and Trey just wanted to dump on "pee wee hockey" whatevertheheck that is, and the Mighty Ducks movie.

Now call me parochial if you like, but, being British, watching anything to do with US sports bores me rigid, and, to be honest, British sports bore me rigid. But when you have no idea what they are referring to or talking about, then it detracts from the story. Most of South Park is fairly universal, but obviously taking the wee wee out of American small town life, but I had not seen the ducks film,and know nothing about ice hockey, so this made a bad episode even worse...for me.

The last 10 minutes were dreadful... not the least funny, just plain WRONG, and left me with a really disappointed aftertaste.

I adore South Park, and hoped for so much more in a season-closing episode.

Back in the 60's and 70's, studio-based sci-fi dramas were made and devoured by a mainstream audience. At some point that audience became a "cult" audience. (Probably as a result of the ever-so-hip 80's changing societal attitudes) Those dramas represent the very best that television sci-fi had to offer, even on low budgets, shot on video with 16mm film inserts. They were flawed, and still we loved it... because we knew how to suspend our disbelief.

Today's breed of programme makers, although largely familiar with the era to which I am referring, have rejected this format, and now have an addiction to making everything look like it was shot on film.

How ironic that a 90 minute LIVE programme was processed to look like it was shot on film..... BADLY.

Coupled with the appalling location work at some disused MOD base ( think), this represented the biggest disappointment of the year so far.

Those of you who liked "Eldorado" would have felt right at home here. Due to the nature of the placing all the locations in a single, huge, concrete building (with the odd exterior from out the same building), there was no sound treatment and everywhere echoed all to hell.

It was OBVIOUSLY the same building no matter where you looked, and that ruined it for me utterly. That and the fact that it SEEMED to be live..... no sense of time passing was communicated at all.

No effects, no risks, no fun.

Some of the lead performances were excellent, but a good many were stagey and forced. I expect the pressure of a live broadcast rattled some of the actors.

The live episodes of Coronation Street and The Bill recently were more believable than this.

What a complete waste of time, money and effort! 1/10

It's NOT perfect, and some characters don't work, but on the whole, this show has come along at the right time.

I love Smack the Pony, and this show has elements of that, a bit of Big Train and a touch of Jaaam.

The first episode was VERY slow to get going, but is now outstandingly weird, hysterical and ENJOYABLE.

Standout characters are: The Human Resources manageress and her neurotic doctor sex partner, and the utterly bizarre Scottish staff liason woman. Not sure about Guy, the self-obsessed asshole.

RIP Fools and Horses, My Family and all "cuddly" sitcoms..... bring on more of THIS kind of stuff!!!

A real find this one. I can see why it flopped. Modern audiences simply cannot relate or understand most Restoration drama, but this is a pretty fair example of two plays translated to film, replete with 18th century language.

Such a pity the story is a bit limp and contrived, but refreshing nonethless.

I like this kind of movie.... doesn't scare you, just rolls along... Great late-night TV movie type fare.......

BUT!!!!!

DREADFUL shaky camerawork, perspective shifting and other tacky effects are used to hide the action when it does happen. Really nasty stuff....

The editor/cameraman should be forced to watch it for 24 hours solid.

HATE this kind of mess!

Pirandello's play is brilliant, but this script, and story, bears only a passing resemblance.

Lena is NOT a servant, she is the woman's aunt, who brought her up. The woman does NOT hang around in the play, she leaves them all with the mad woman, who, in my opinion, DOES turn out to be the long-lost Maria.

Why change the names? They were perfectly suitable for the screen.

This was a case of scriptwriting for its own sake, not a screen adaptation.

Performances were typical of all really, but the faithless destruction of the original material lets this down terribly.

I'm baffled as to why so many people hate this film.

This is vintage Sellers, a return to before Hollywood got it's grip on him. I saw it in the cinema, when I was 15, and laughed my ass off.

Lovely characters, funny set pieces, familiar faces and a plot-of-sorts.

Yes it can get a little slow, but I really wish you'd go and look at some of Sellers' films of the late 50's/early 60's. THAT'S where this film belongs.

It's VERY British and enters that whole territory that includes "One of our Dinosaurs is Missing", "The Magic Christian", "Peter Cook's Hound of the Baskervilles", "The Adventure of Sherlock Holmses Smarter Brother" and their ilk. Not a bad thing really, but perhaps a minority taste. These tend to play more like extended TV sketch shows, and tend not to appeal to the majority. I mean.. flying houses?!

My irritation is the addition of Sid Caeser and Steve Franken.. WHY??? Merely to make the film sellable to the US one would imagine! They serve no purpose at all. They come across as caracture Americans.. shooting at plants and the like!

And oh boy...Helen Mirren as PC Rage.. just TOO much!! The Lady of Warrington Minge!!

It's very Goon-like, in terms of plot and characterisation: David Tomlinson as Neddie, Simon Willams as Bluebottle, Sellers as Colonal Bloodnok.... but it DOES lack Milligan's edge and drive. Descendants of this film include "The Crimson Permanant Insurance"...

What about the scene with FIVE sets of the King and Queen in the theatre box?? Hysterical...

Make no mistake though....this is a vehicle for Sellers and his characters. Sellers is in top form as the bonkers, but delightfully deadpan Nayland Smith (and his .... attachment to a lawnmower!) and the evil Fu Manchu.. "Hello boys!".... He's Dr Evil before the fact! More impeccable characters. It is, in fact, quite gutting to see how much he still had to give, just before his death, and one does wonder what would follow, given his huge profile after the completion of "Being There", his pet project for nearly 10 years.

So there you have..... my attempt to balance things a bit. If you wants full-on Hollywood Sellers.. go see the Panthers. But maybe you'd like to have a closer look at Sellers the comic actor in a pearl of the British comedy. His last.

I've just read some of the comments here, and surprise, surprise, the Americans don't get it.

It's SUPERBLY tounge in cheek, and highlights the very worst of the "Yes SIR!" world.

As a monster movie, it's pretty fun too, and with a few surprises to boot.

But all the militaristic hype and nonsense is what made it for me. It's the antidote to Full Metal Jacket, Platoon and a million other "USA, USA!" films...

(I am not anti-american, generally. I am anti-military, and, for the most part in movies, thats the Yanks.)

Midnight, 16th May. A theatre darkens and we all sit back to enjoy a long-awaited sequel, and praying that the disappointment of Ep.1 would be purged. Oh it was.

I cannot spoil in this section, nor would I, but I can tell you that only bits that seem to drag are the love story scenes. Far too many and too silly. C3-PO and R2-D2 are given some comedy at last, but not the wise stuff of the old films. This is rather silly stuff and you WILL groan.

The battles are incredible, the scale huge (see this on a massive screen!), and at last things are HAPPENING, rather than the political posturing of Episode One.

There are some great one-liner in-jokes and little snatches of musical themes at certain points. (The Imperial March, for example, which sent a shiver down my spine). The "old theme" return in certain segments too, which jolts you right back to 1977. There's a lot to see in this that links to Episode IV. Padme's hairdos showings a distinct leaning towards Leia's "big headphones".

I give this 9 out of 10 because it wasn't perfect. But now that Lucas is on a roll, I have HUGE anticipation for the final film, Episode II, where Darth's saga will at last be complete.

Who would have guessed that this 6-film series was a protracted biography of Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker way back when??

Oh, and finally, Yoda kicks ass. Seriously!

In 1982, the BBC, in their undertaking to produce all of Shakespeare's plays, assembled a company of actors which would take us, in one logical arc, from Henry VI part one right through to Richard III. This is notable in that through all four plays, the principal actors keep their roles (although smaller roles are also undertaken). This gives an unparalleled clarity to the events as you see the chaste Margaret descend to Machiavellian plotting to destroy challengers to her grip on power, and then her downfall as Edward and then Richard take power. It is fitting that she, in a horrific scene at the end of this play, is seen atop a mound of dead. This was, after all, her legacy.

In a simple, but effective, set, with authentic costumes and asides taken directly to camera, this brings your closer to Shakespeare's work than much of the praised films and productions in the past.

If you found Olivier's version just too hammy to bear..... try this one.

I made a silly mistake. I was out the night they showed this on TV, so I taped it. When I came back afterwards, I went to bed and ensured the right atmosphere, darkness, quiet... then played the film.

Oh boy...

It starts averagely, a good solid British ghost story in the best sense, with tension building as the blocks all slide into place. But when we cross the causeway and arrive at Eel-Marsh House, everything changes. Not for one second on that estate are we comfortable. We are damp, cold, apprehensive and in suspense. The Woman In Black is a horror creation of the greatest effect... silent and hostile.

Without giving too much away, the appearance after the tin soldier is found in his hand will haunt me to the grave. I found myself out of my bed and by the door!

It has echoes of "The Haunting" (1960), and full marks to the sound designer and the composer for creating the right mood.

On occasion, I play this film to unsuspecting jaded horror flick fans who, like me, fail to sleep comfortably after the first watching..... and I giggle, quietly..... and with the door locked.

Film, to me, is entertainment.

Sometimes it can also educate or even allow me to let my thoughts take me to other places hitherto forgotten.

But when it comes right down to it, was my 5 quid well spent? In many cases, yes, because unlike many of the complete film nuts in this world, who cannot help themselves but disassemble, analyse, and criticise all material, I go to HAVE FUN.

LOTR: Pt1 succeeds in almost every way it could, and for that alone, I cannot bring myself to nitpick.

Casting was, like Harry Potter, inspired and perfect; the scenery was incredible; the atmosphere truly other-worldly and the music superb.

It was all I hoped it could be, and simply can't wait for December 2002, when this will all happen, all over again.

10/10..... of course

It's incredible how some of these things get made. A few sad, decent comedy actors taking on some awful scripts, unrealistic 70's clothes, and making it look like 70's USA for gods sake. I'm aware of its provenance, but I really would advise against making copies of shows which were already 10th rate before they sold the rights to some unsuspecting Brit tv company.

Dubious stereotypes and sloppy sets make up 30 minutes of the incredibly dumb show. Ironically, it's ACTUALLY entertaining for completely the wrong reasons. It's a classic case of "traffic accident syndrome" - you just can't HELP watching.... you think it's going to get better... but it doesn't!

Oh, by the way, message to the previous reviewer: don't go making personal remarks about actors' looks, mate, it's just plain rude. The idea is to crit the show, not the biology.

Funny, moving and superb....... this film takes some modern-day parallels and dilemmas and turns them to Elizabethan English charm and atmosphere. Rarely in recent cinema have I laughed and cried so heartily and with such feeling.

Beautifully shot, orchestrated and cast, this film will deliver in every way.

(A working knowledge of Shakespeare's works will add an extra element in the way of the numerous in-jokes and the lovely twist at the end).

Fab.