IMDb > Dead Babies (2000) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Dead Babies More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 21 reviews in total 

10 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Low point of modern Brit film

2/10
Author: lb20 from England
28 January 2003

A terrible storyline (Amis at his worst), pointless and self-conscious 'decadence', obvious shock tactics and patchy acting make this film (rather like "Rancid Aluminium") embody everything that went wrong with the much-vaunted British film revival. The humour is, at best, limp, and the pretentiousness of the whole set-up (including some kind of "internet terrorist group" - ooh, how contemporary) really begins to grate.

Final summary - a half-baked attempt to be 'edgy' that does no-one any favours. Still, it's always a pleasure to see Katy Carmichael on screen...

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

A positive review for people who like dark humor and the twisted.

9/10
Author: gmalav5877 (gmalav5877@aol.com) from Burlington Vermont
15 July 2001

Dead Babies. I saw an advance promotional copy of this movie on video. The company bringing it out on video had changed the title from Dead Babies to Mood Swingers. The version I saw was the un-rated directors cut. I had to watch it twice it was so good. It was nice to see how far a director can go when given freedom. The scene where the dwarf-ish friend is tied to a tree and then shot up with dope is pure comedy magic. You definately would not find this in Blockbuster. Anyhow good for the twisted crowd but definately not for the young 'uns.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

An excellent adaptation of one of the best Amis novels.

8/10
Author: vampyre135 from United Kingdom
24 March 2006

Having been an avid Martin Amis fan for many years I was understandably excited when this film came out. Although I never caught it at the cinema, indeed, I didn't know it existed until it was on television two or so years ago.

The most important aspects of a film adaptation are present: the characters stayed true to those in the book, no vital points were missed out and the director took the same perspective on life and the book as Amis did.

If the Marquis de Sade were to crash one of P. G. Wodehouse's house parties, the chaos might resemble the nightmarishly funny goings-on in this film. The residents of Appleseed Rectory have primed themselves both for a visit from a triad of Americans and a weekend of copious drug taking and sexual gymnastics. There's even a heifer to be slugged. But none of these variously bright and dull young things has counted on the intrusion of "dead babies". Or on the uninvited presence of a mysterious prankster named Johnny, whose sinister idea of fun makes theirs look like a game of backgammon

I fear the author of the previous review assumed that this film would be a cheap horror, as I'm sure many people have owing to the somewhat dubious title. However, the term 'dead babies' was used in the book to mean 'dreary spasms of reality', the unpleasant facts of life that invariably must be dealt with sooner or later, and thus I can use this review as a platform to ward away hammer horror fans.

Instead rent or buy this movie if you want an ingenious dark comedy with a kick. I loved it!

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Pointless, excessive, valueless and tiresomely grimy

Author: bob the moo from United Kingdom
29 May 2005

A group of friends all met when they were in college. Quentin has since married a girl with money and enjoys his free life of drugs and sex; Keith has been in a mental institution and is not better now that he is out, Giles has an inheritance and a major drink problem while Andy and Diana are married but the drugs have significantly reduced their sex lives. Into their lives come two Americans and a messed up guy called Skip, bearing new powerful drugs and promoting their particular brand of bisexual group sex. As if things were going to be weird enough, someone called "Johnny" is leaving bloody threatening notes around the house.

The word on this film is that it is bad, really bad. With this knowledge I didn't have high hopes but watched it anyway and must say that I don't think it is bad as such, or at least it deserves a better description than that one word. Instead I came to think of it as more than one word and several that come to mind include pointless, dated, cheap, tiresome and excessive. If the plot seems pointless it is because it is; eventually it will get to something about a conceptualist group on the internet but by the time it does you will not care that even that is stupid and pointless. Instead the film spends most of its time trying to be shocking, whether it is sexually, violence-wise or just with the way it treats the characters. With so much pointlessness it is hard to care about or even be interested in the characters – just as well since they are cartoon wide-boys and clichés taken from other films.

The shock value is all here and what a shame it is that none of this stuff is that shocking any more – drugs are a norm for many people, sexual taboos are gradually vanishing and the idea of drunken parties full of excess will be known to many who went to university to get just that. Seeing them on screen allows things to be excessive but they are not shocking or interesting – eventually they just get tiresome and boring. The director has clearly seen Trainspotting and is trying to get as close to it as he can, but sadly he has forgotten that substance should come first – get the audience into the film, then they will care enough about the action to actually give you an emotional response of some sort. Sadly, without this it just seems stupid and the end of the film couldn't really come soon enough! The cast are a very strange mix, with some faces in there that are better than this and some I only know from sitcoms and made a strange find. Bettany is always interesting but here cannot do anything to raise the material. However he is head and shoulders above the rest of the cast who are pretty poor thanks to the material they are given, Condou gets the closest to an interesting and sympathetic character but the rest just go along with whatever nudity, shouting or excess they are required to do – none of them convince and none of them add anything.

Overall this is not a bad film if you are a teenager looking for something that is supposedly "edgy" and "different"; however the majority of us will just feel like it was a grind from start to finish with nothing of value along the way. Without a plot, script or even characters it is no wonder that it so totally failed to engage me and just ended up being tiresomely gory and excessive for no reason and providing nothing of value. A pretty terrible film but one that deserves more description than just being "bad".

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

A miss for Amis

1/10
Author: John Delucas from United States
28 April 2005

This inept adaptation of arguably one of Martin Amis's weaker novels fails to even draw comparisons with other druggy oeuvres such as Requiem For A Dream or anything penned by Irvine Walsh as it struggles to decide whether it is a slap-stick cartoon or a hyper-realistic hallucination.

Boringly directed by William Marsh in over-saturated hues, a group of public school drop-outs converge in a mansion awaiting the appearance of three American friends for a weekend of decadent drug-taking. And that's it. Except for the ludicrous sub-plot soon-to-be-the-main-plot nonsense about an extremist cult group who express themselves with the violent killings of the world's elite figures, be it political or pampered. Within the first reel you know exactly where this is going.

What is a talented actor like Paul Bettany doing in this tiresome, badly written bore? Made prior to his rise to fame and Jennifer Connelly one can be assured that had he been offered this garbage now he'd have immediately changed agents! Avoid.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

The Drugs Don't Work

Author: James.S.Davies from London, England
4 February 2001

It would be true to say that William Marsh's directorial debut pulls no punches. In fact shock tactics are deliberately played right from the word go. One of the first shots is of the alcoholic Giles' bloody teeth falling out one by one. From here on in the audience is left with little doubt that we're in for a bumpy ride. However, we end up being bombarded with so many scenes of drugs, violence, nudity and general depravity that one soon develops an immunity.

The plot centers around one hedonistic weekend where a bunch of directionless English graduates who inhabit a country mansion, are visited by three American friends (one of whom is played by Marsh himself) bent on supplying the perfect weekend of sex and drugs. It's kind of like watching a drugged-up version of Peter's Friends. The films' sub-plot involves a net based terrorist group known as The Conceptualists, who have somehow infiltrated the proceedings. It soon becomes clear that one of the revelers is not what they seem. However any intrigue, or indeed suspense, is dulled by our lack of empathy for the characters, who are either too larger-than-life to be believable or just totally un-likeable.

Dead Babies would no doubt like to be thought of in the same tradition as other drug fueled British cult classics such as Performance, Withnail and I, and Trainspotting. However, these films were far more character driven and weren't so heavily dependent on artificial means of stimulation.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

GOT LIFE?

8/10
Author: elizabeth from sweden
11 May 2002

When I sat down, I wasnt sure what to expect. I got swept up quickly in all the characters and their mental problems (a full cast of neurotics)! The conceptualists side theme, wove in rather well to become the main theme. The writing is good, and i pondered what kind of mind thought up some of the scenes. (the doll scene in particular!) The only thing that bothered me was the american accents, were they real or did i just imagine them slipping from time to time?

what better way to deal with people who dont deal with life? an interesting movie, worth a view, especially if you're of the gen x generation.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Pretentious Rubbish Misses the Point

1/10
Author: steve_cox_ from Australia
25 January 2005

I am a great fan of Martin Amis, on whose book this film is based. Unfortunately the director has been unable to translate the book to the screen. The novel is thoroughly post modern and highly artificial in its wildly overblown characters and the disintegration of traditional plot line and character development. It is an hilarious examination of human greed, excess and emptiness by one of the most moral of contemporary British writers. The director of the film has completely missed the point of the novel. In his hands, the film screams along at breakneck speed, indulging in every known trick shot and 'odd' camera angle possible. It is like Ken Russel on acid, and suffers from that older director's self indulgence cranked up to a hundred. Not even the (brief) glimpse of gorgeous actor Christian Solimeno's penis was enough to save this wretched film for me. Abysmal!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

Don't.

Author: Dave Convery (daveconvery) from Cambridge
31 August 2003

It's possible that you may see this movie on TV. Bear in mind that those two hours of your life can never be brought back. If you see it in a video store, bear in mind that you will be wasting your money AND your life.

This is a badly written, poorly paced and badly shot movie. The characters are nothing you haven't seen before, the sort of badly-characterised 'spoilt rich kid' that appear in all sorts of British movies. The plot - concerning 'internet terrorists' (has Amis been reading a lot of Lynda La Plante lately?) is nothing short of appalling.

Save for a few reasonably good performances, there is absolutely nothing to like about this film. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

hallucinogenic!

10/10
Author: sitaintro
6 June 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Guys, this movie's awesome! Think of Trainspotting, add crime and you'll got dead babies. Drugs mixed with homicide..explosive consequences. There's no much feeling, at least not human, just chemical reactions. Insanity rules. A group of friends spend a weekend together trying some American excellent drugs, that instead of making them feel better freak everybody out, facing their demons. When they realize somebody (of the group, of course) wants to kill them all it's too late. Suicide, murder, insanity. They're just young people who seek for fun. And find death. Paul Bettany has definitely the bad-guy face. He's perfect for Quentin's role. Andy Nyman (playing keith) makes up an odd character, who perfectly fits into the drug addicted setting. What can i say...don't watch this movie if you're looking for something particularly deep, this film gives a portrait of what human mind can think out when too much stimulated by violence. all taken to the limit. This is pretty much like a hallucinogenic trip. Just try it!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Ratings Awards External reviews
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history