IN: Review: I have seen a lot of bad films. Most of the time I can enjoy a crappy horror film for what it is. But this really takes badness to new extremes.

It is bland, the plot for what it is never really goes anywhere and takes its time over it. There are no shocks, no horror, no suspense, just a load of guys rubbing themselves for an hour and a half and then a quick finish.

A blight on the crappy horror genre, avoid at all costs.

What is this review like?
OUT: negative

IN: Review: The story of the film was as simple minded as its morality: Go find a girl, marry her, live with her happily ever after. Though the film had some fine moments and turns, most of it stayed at the surface of what might have been shown in a film with the same storyline.

The Baptist/Mormon struggle was only touched superficially and was mocked about, probably intentionally. A more interesting story would have been a mixed couple.

If you wanna see a film which doesn't need too much concentration, which can be watched by the whole family and which teaches your children modest and conservative values (besides the modern tolerance stuff ;-) ), you will be fine with this film. Might be shown at a family-home-evening...
What is this review like?
OUT: negative

IN: Review: I had no idea that Mr. Izzard was so damn funny, It really boggles the mind that he is not more well known! His command over the crowd and his timing is perfect.The monologue about Star Wars will kill ya too! If only all the stand up performers had his wit...
What is this review like?
OUT: positive

IN: Review: Rather foolish attempt at a Hitchcock-type mystery-thriller, improbably exchanging espionage for archaeology and based on the Robin Cook novel; incidentally, I've recently acquired another adaptation of his work COMA (1978) in honor of the late Richard Widmark. For the record, director Schaffner had just made THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL (1978) a similarly fanciful but much more engrossing suspenser and, unfortunately, SPHINX was a false step from which his so-far impressive career would not recover.

Despite its scope and reasonably decent cast, however, this one proved a critical and commercial flop mainly because the narrative just isn't very thrilling: in fact, it's quite dreary (feeble attempts at horror the archaeologist heroine having to put up with entombment, rotting corpses galore, and even an attack by a flurry of bats notwithstanding). Lesley Anne-Down is the lovely leading lady, stumbling upon a lost treasure it's actually been hidden away by a local sect to prevent it from falling into the hands of foreigners, who have appropriated much of the country's heritage (under the pretext of culture) for far too long. Sir John Gielgud turns up in a thankless bit early on as the antique dealer who puts Down on the way of the loot, and pays for this 'act of treason' with his life.

Typically, it transpires that some characters are the opposite of what they claim to be so that apparent allies (such as Maurice Ronet) are eventually exposed as villains, while an ambiguous figure (Frank Langella, whom I saw at London in early 2007 in a West End performance of "Frost/Nixon", which has now been turned into a film) goes from Down's antagonist to her lover and back again, as he determines to keep the wealth belonging to Egyptian high priest Menephta a national treasure.
What is this review like?
OUT:
negative