Good start, but then it gets ruined

an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

When Daniel's father passes away, the whole family reunites at the mansion but the whole event is going to be disturbed by a small character who doesn't have the best intentions. Add up the fact that almost everyone has a secret or a problem of his own and you get a huge mess to enjoy. Will they be able to finish the ceremony or will there be another tragedy waiting to happen?It's the exact same plot as the movie with the same name from 2010 (yes, I've seen that one first) the only difference being the location. It's slow paced as the other one in the beginning until it introduces all its characters but when the action comes in (a bit later than I hoped) you simply cannot stop laughing. They managed to create a laughable atmosphere at a grim and sad event such as a funeral, fact which makes you appreciate their talent even more. The entire plot runs in the same location, all the characters trying to figure out multiple problems at once and failing miserably, thus provoking amusement. It's a comedy so don't expect miracles in terms of story but the actors do a very good job in keeping you entertained while the events, although some expected and stereotypical, create a good overall blend. It's a very good comedy, no doubt about it, but also nothing to blow your mind.

I was a bit anxious about this little shocker as it seems to have most reviewers here polarised. I understand that a lot of the actors used in this abomination are 'top notch' British actors, if this is the case, why would they have agreed to be in it? The humour is loud, obvious and not funny. The dialogue is laboured and predictable, it's full of clichés. The main characters seem to be a pack of wealthy stupid Hooray Henry types. The father, whose funeral it is, had a midget lover who turns up with the intention of extorting them, please. Then he passes out and is placed in the coffin with his dead lover? I just can't see how people could possibly find this entertaining? I guess it could have been worse, it could have had Hugh Grant in it...

A amateur drug maker "hides" his latest batch in an empty valium bottle then leaves the room. Two people enter the room and one person gives the other a pill from the valium bottle. They go to a funeral where the taker has hallucinations and very predictable stuff happens. Then at the end there is the compulsory morality speech. It is tripe and I would really like to see the notes that must have been made at the production meeting where someone agreed to stump up the money for this unfunny, drivel. It might be worth noting that Jane Asher has a range of own-brand cooking products that can be bought only at Poundland, for £1 each. And, because of the vapid nature of the writing quality used to make this production, Rupert Graves could easily be tempted to bring out an exclusive range of bin liners for sale in 99p Store or Matthew Macfadyen wouldn't say no if he was asked to be the front man for a range of one-use plastic food boxes.

While I would never say that "Death at a Funeral" is a brilliant comedy, it certainly takes a simple idea and makes the most of it. It's the story of a funeral that ends up having just about every awful possible thing occur throughout its course. And, I love that just when you can't imagine it getting any worse, it does! It's the sort of thing that is great fun to watch but thank goodness it's not happening to people you know and love! Now not everyone likes a comedy like this--my wife surely would have cringed repeatedly through the course of this movie. But I loved that it only got worse and worse and worse! So what exactly occurs? I'd really rather not say--it would spoil all the fun. But it really does pay off in this clever but sick comedy.