Angel Details

[Highly rated reviewer]

Jaw-droppingly awful

I think I only watched it the whole (extended version) way through because I couldn't believe what my eyes and ears were telling me (my poor tortured senses).

Redeeming features you ask: Sam Neill and Charlotte Rampling (and Lucy Russell isn't bad), though why they're in this film at all is baffling; oh, and that it (eventually) ends.

Surely it can't be that bad you say... oh but it is.

Painfully-bad acting from Romola (to be fair this is the first thing I've seen her in), a title character you couldn't empathise with if you were paid, god-awful dialogue, laughable set design, and a whole of host of other flaws that lead you to wonder whether your DVD skipped on the part with time-machines and body-snatching.

Amazingly someone felt this film warranted a 'Making of...' featurette on the DVD, and, hypnotised by the horror, I was compelled to watch that too. It seems that making it was only marginally more fun than watching it - some of the actors' comments about the script made me laugh, the director's explanation for the 'special' effects was vaguely interesting, and poor Sam Neill looked like he'd rather be anywhere else. But I digress...

All in all I think this movie could qualify for cruel and unusual punishment (I'm not sure that you'd even have to put it on a loop).

Wow, I feel so mean...

Maybe the shorter international version was better...

Who am I kidding... two hours shorter wouldn't bump this up to a turkey qualification.

Only watch if you enjoy creative disasters.

Do NOT waste your time

Occasionally a film comes along and you wonder why it was made, what I wondered was why the 'story' was ever written. It goes nowhere, you dislike all the characters and in the end you switch it off before it finshes!

DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME!

What was Sam Neil thinking?