The Worst Film Ever

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

I really enjoyed this unusual mildly black comedy/drama of the kind only the British seem to be able to do well. It is understated and unpredictable with very solid performances all around. I even liked Helena Bonham Carter, who fit her role to a tee, since she was as annoying as usual, which was exactly what was called for. Although I expect that many people may find this film a bit slow and maybe even too cerebral compared with more modern fare (which doesn't really say much for our society, I think), I personally loved it and consider it another hidden gem.

I like this movie, and when I was in the habit of watching films, or sections of them, over and again, this was a favourite of mine to dip into. It has some very good moments, for the reason of being both funny and very well acted. I'd heard the play in a lengthier form on the radio some years before, so I was familiar with the story, and I was pleased to see Steve Coogan in an early film role (he is horribly wonderful as Bruce Tick). However, something about the film has always bothered me, and it actually only occurred to me very recently just what it is. It is that all of the young male leads are in the wrong roles. I just can't believe that Sam Neil would even consider the option of suicide (not a giveaway - this is the beginning of the film). Martin Clunes would have been better as Henry Bell - but it was the central role, and Sam Neil was the bigger name. Helena Bonham-Carter has lots of fun playing the psychotic woman. Utterly convincing, and it's easy to see why poor old Henry gets mixed up with her. The Revengers Comedies (Sweet Revenge is a better title for this movie)is not a classic, but it's better than a lot of recent British comedy films, and is a faint echo of a craft in which we once excelled, a long time ago.

If I hadn't seen Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train so recently, I might not have felt the deja vu so strongly. Instead of the murder-swapping of the Hitchcock, Karen Knightly (Helena Bonham-Carter) suggests revenge-swapping. But it is most definitely a comedy as Henry Bell (Sam Neill) discovers more and more about Knightly and becomes more and more involved with the object of her revenge. The scene where Bell and Knightly's neighbor Anthony Saxton-Billing (Martin Clunes) argue about Saxton-Billing's wife Imogen (Kristen Scott Thomas) in front of a group of girls during a dressage competition is hilarious. But it still smacked of having seen it done better once before.

This is a waste of 90 minutes, starring some excellent actors. What happened?I think this was intended to be another quirky English comedy. Unfortunately, the supposed humor generally feels mean-spirited. I kept expecting the plot was all about a scam or practical joke, and that the dead folks would pop up and start laughing. No such luck. The ending seems arbitrary and abrupt. The narration is pointless (was it intended to "fix" a major re-editing?).The other comments talk about this being a wonderful example of droll English humor. Yes, I realize the English tend to have a different sense of humor, but I wouldn't have considered this an example.