Problem: Write a negative movie review.

Answer: As others have noted, this should have been an excellent Hammer-style film, and it seems to me that that's how most of the actors were instructed to play it... but the screenplay is so leaden, poorly paced, and filled with a lot of dull soliloquies (poor Timothy Dalton is saddled with most of them) that it's all too overblown and self-important. This is an uncharacteristically weak performance from Dalton, although he quietly nails the climactic scene where Dr. Rock finally realizes what he's done. The only actor who comes off really well is Patrick Stewart who is a most welcome sight. Freddie Francis may have been a great cinematographer, but he was a lousy director.

Problem: Write a negative movie review.

Answer: This story is about the romantic triangle between a nth. African male prostitute, a French transsexual prostitute (Stephanie) and a Russian waiter who speaks no French and never seems to shave.

As a film it is dull, dreary and depressing, shot either on foggy, overcast winter days or in badly lit interiors, where everyone is bathed in a weird blue luminescence. And yes, I know, it's because the white balance was out. Everyone is pale and downcast and looks haggard, shabby and dirty. Bodies are bony and shot in such closeup that they look quite ugly and unappealing. Moles, greasy hair. Yuk. Bad news in a film where people spend a lot of time either naked or having sex.

And the story? Well, Stephanie's mother is dying. All three characters go back to Stephanie's home village where, through a bunch of flashbacks to desolate countryside and predictably dingy interiors, we see a bit of Stephanie's childhood as a boy called Pierre. The mother dies. Well... and that's about it, really. Character development is kept to a minimum, as is the denouement of the story.

I suppose the storyline is not linear (it would explain a lot of non sequiteurs) but really, after paying my seven euros I don't feel like having to construct the film myself: that's what the director takes my money for. To expect me to join the story telling process and get my hands dirty, so to speak, is asking way too much.

This film is a heap of pretentious rubbish made, above all, from a desire to epater les bourgeois (ie shock the straights). I can see how it was a shoo-in for the Berlin Film Festival, and I can see why it got nowhere.

Problem: Write a positive movie review.

Answer: Alain Delon visits swift, sure vengeance on the ruthless crime family that employed him as a hit-man in the Duccio Tessari thriller "Big Guns" after they accidentally murder his wife and child. Tessari and scenarists Roberto Gandus, Ugo Liberatore of "A Minute to Pray, a Second to Die," and Franco Verucci of "Ring of Death" take this actioneer about a career gunman for the mob right down to the wire. Indeed, "Big Guns" is rather predictable, but it still qualifies as solid entertainment with lots of savage and often sudden killings. Alain Delon of "The Godson" is appropriately laconic as he methodically deals out death to the heads of the mob families who refused to let him retire so that he could enjoy life with his young son and daughter. Richard Conte of "The Godfather" plays a Sicilian crime boss who wants to bury the hatchet with the Delon character, but the rest of his hard-nosed associates want the hit-man dead. Like most crime thrillers in the 1960s and 1970s, "Big Guns" subscribes to the cinematic morality that crime does not pay. Interestingly, the one man who has nothing to do with the murder of the wife and son of the hero survives while another betrays the hero with extreme prejudice. Tessari does not waste a second in this 90-minute shoot'em up. Apart from the mother and son dying in a car bomb meant for the father, the worst thing that takes place occurs in an automobile salvage yard when an associate of the hero is crushed in a junked car. Ostensibly, "Big Guns" is a rather bloodless outing, but it does have a high body count for a 1973 mobster melodrama. Only at the last minute does our protagonist let his guard down and so the contrived morality of an eye for an eye remains intact. Tessari stages a couple of decent car chases and the death of a don in a train traveling through a train tunnel is as bloody as this violent yarn gets. The photography and the compositions are excellent.

Problem: Write a negative movie review.

Answer:
I am completely baffled as to why this film is even liked, let alone held in such high regard, especially by so many critics who are, otherwise, quite sensible.

There is one key word which describes this film to its core - irritating.

The most easily explained example of this is the director's use - or, more accurately, abuse - of music. In the first half, a really dull reggae tune is played about three times (when once is too often). But in the second half, The Mommas And The Papas "California Dreamin'" is played at least seven times, usually at top volume. Godsakes, whether you liked the song or not beforehand, you'd be thoroughly sick of it by the end. Just think, some people claim to have seen this film four or five times. This means they've listened to California Dreamin either 28 or 35 times.....

All of this needless hyper-repetition (it contributes nothing to the story) could possibly be excused if the remainder of the film had any lingering merit, or if the story was in any way involving.

But it ain't.

The only aspect I found likeable was Bridgette Lin's charging around and still playing Asia The Invincible in a raincoat and sunnies. Even this wore off fairly quickly.

I'm sure this film's undeserved high reputation will convince many poor suckers to go and see it.

I can only warn you - if you've never seen a HK movie before, don't start with this one.

If you feel compelled to watch it, avoid at all costs seeing it in a cinema. The fast-forward and mute buttons are essential tools for survival here.

You have been warned !