3 Reviews
Sort by:
Back (2017– )
Pedestrian and predictable, sadly.
15 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Oh dear, the authors of some of the funniest shows of 5-10 years ago are now back, with a show, but not with a funny show.

Well, that's a slight lie, there are some funny lines in it, how could there not be, but overall the level of humour and its methodology are enormously middle-aged, like the actors and like the setting.

Set in a twee English village (pub) everyone in it is so totally daft, dotty and mad you'd wonder how their world even functions. Blissfully unaware of the things they say and do they are effective passive-aggressive torturers for our protagonist (Mitchell). He himself phones in his performance as a bog stock middle-classed English suppressed neurotic, essentially he simply plays his on screen persona, but with the smarts and clever dialled down to 1/10 (an older duller Mark Corrigan). A large part of the jokes are based on Mitchell determined to sail one course in life but being completely incapable of preventing the world forcing (with little effort) the opposite on him.

If a stranger gave you a dog you didn't like and didn't want in a pub would you a/source out the problem to a pet rescue or b/ reluctantly and bitterly let it live with you where it almost immediately wees and defecates everywhere and forces you to pay 1000 quid on vet bills? Well guess which path Mitchell takes. Not hard is it? Next we have Webbs character turn up,he is, peculiarly enough a slick glib lying narcissistic sociopath ( a bit like Peep Show's Jeremy) who we think, so far, is there to destroy Mitchells life and replace him. Its a standard sort of plot device and is naturally assisted by no-one (almost) BUT Mitchell being even vaguely suspicious. Essentially his over-eccentric family and friends will happily allow the slick antagonist his way through a combination of sheer idiocy and perversity.

It just needs some sort of kick and a far lower reliance on cringe humour.
6 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Largely worthless, dull and outdated.
10 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I mainly watched this to see Roger Lloyd-Pack, Owen from Vicar of Dibley, in a 'sexy' movie. I can see why he never made it as a main actor and has largely worked in comedies and/or as a character actor, cos his performance here is more wooden than almost anything I've seen in actual pornographic movies (not that I admit to seeing any of course). His character is charmless and dull and he seems to reciting the script in the same manner a kidnap victim recites his captors message to a video camera.

Along with a incredibly implausible story line not even worth mentioning we mainly get a dreary cavalcade of breasts and the occasional flash of bushy 1970s girly parts, as our hero, a sort of early Ron Jeremy minus any personality or wit, grudgingly ploughs through them apparently in alphabetical order or something. The climax (hah) has our bland lothario win the day by designing the most ludicrously inept and unprofessional architectural design, based on a womans breast, AND get married, a goal totally at issue with the tone of the rest of the movie but obviously the secret goal of all modern young sexually liberated post-hippy person, according to the writers.

Not worth seeing unless a/ its free b/you are particularly perverse in your viewing habits and c/ in this modern age unable to find any better 'adult material' for your own perusal. Only if all 3 conditions are met should you watch this.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Dangerous Place (2012 Video)
Enormously average film that sinks into sticky sap at the end.
24 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I thought I'd counter the suspicious number of single review users who give this a 9 or 10 and say its the bestest movie ever by giving a more neutral review. Whilst not totally appalling, the production standards are good for an independent and the acting, at the start at least, is tolerable enough, this film sinks, somewhat like the Titanic, rapidly and ferociously by the end. It has a bioterror plot combined with two sideplots, one high finance one (sorta), and the other about the emotional effects of death of a loved one during the 9/11 attacks. None of these are particularly convincing although the bioterror one starts off semi-intriguingly. However it all comes across both a bit weak and forced as well obvious, i knew that the perp was one of either two major candidates. There's also a minor storyline about the 'spirit' of the husband, killed in 9/11, who hangs around the house looking either morose or slightly disinterested.

As I mentioned, this film largely fails in the end, where it rapidly descends into predictability and cloying sentiment. Any interest in the plot elements rapidly vanishes as they complete in a long-winded and banal final 'fight' scene and then the, aforesaid, excessively simplistic emotional tie up ending. If I was stuck in a motel, late one night and had nothing much to do, Id watch this at least 1/2 way through before probably nodding off, or maybe I'd watch to the end, whereupon I'd then wish I'd nodded off. Or done something else.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this