Reviews

Basically everything what might be is wrong with this picture. Any in-depth analysis would be an undeserved flatter.

1. The premise is hard to define if there is any.

2. The plot stumbles, stutters and staggers with no rhyme nor reason.

3. The acting is horrendously incompetent.

4. Music there is none - just noises.

5. The resolution does not resolve anything and tends to the incomprehensible.

One may get to like however, the scene where a gangrenous leg is impromptu amputated by means of an electric non-surgical knife. But this belongs rather to WRONG TURN series than to sci-fi genre.

THE SCENT OF MYSTERY was brought in 1960 by Mike Todd. It was a 70 mm Technicolor thriller made in the new process of "Smell-O-Vision". The scents used - which ranged from ozone, pipe tobacco, garlic and oil, to paint, pine, wood shavings and boot polish - were piped to each individual cinema seat on cue from the "smell-track" of the film.

However, the first film officially made as "smelly" was a wide-screen travelogue about India called BEHIND THE GREAT WALL (1929). It premiered at the DeMille Theater in New York and was accompanied by 72 smells that included incense, smoke, burning pitch, oranges, spices and a barnyard of geese. The scents were circulated thought the ventilating system.

Hardly ever does one come across such a spectacular example of what cinema should not be. Talking too much about this misconceived film would be wasting oxygen. Thus, I just enumerate shortly its principal flaws.

1. The script, story, plot make no sense whatsoever.

2. The acting almost unanimously is horrendously bad - probably the "actor" who portrays agent Smith is even worse than the rest.

3. The dialog is nefariously abysmal - never heard such brainless vocal emanations.

4. The camera-work is shaky, amateurish, wrongly framed.

5. This attempts to be simultaneously a horror and a science fiction film failing in both departments.

6. The English subtitles are paraphrases of what is actually spoken.

The only reason I give it TWO stars and not one is the end credits song, which is agreeable.

With so many reviews before I will contribute mine in a very brief fashion. I consider this Terry Gilliam's motion picture highly overrated. I cannot imagine anyone in their right mind would want to watch it more than once - and even single viewing is an ordeal in this case.

Jeff Bridges looking for redemption and Robin Williams as a "bum" who helps him find it. This is a film that is calculated to appeal to trendy "Thirty- Fourtysomethings." I find it one big bore, but then again, perhaps I just like to think young !

This movie is dedicated to NYC policemen who are killed as they try to get the goods on the gunrunners and crack dealers who, like cockroaches, seem to multiply faster than they can be stamped out.

The story tells of two officers who hold an arrest record: Raymond (Mario van Peebles) and Robert (Michael Boatman). When one of them is brutally murdered the other embarks on a personal quest for justice - in best Charles Bronson fashion.

Realism is not a keynote here, but if you enjoy an undemanding old fashioned cops and crims film then you may find this right up your dark alley.

In the beginning two things attracted my attention and caused me to examine this movie: the poster, which is graphically original, and the title which is incomprehensible, unless you are familiar with Greek. After looking it up I learned TELEOIS stands for "perfection". So, my artistic sense was pleased, my linguistic knowledge increased - so far, so good.

Then the time came to watch the film. Knowing its budget was limited I did not expect fireworks of production values, but it not necessarily makes a good sci-fi picture an impossibility. One spacecraft with a crew of 5 is sent to investigate the demise of the crew of another space vessel. A premise more than satisfactory. A certain parallel with EVENT HORIZON (1997) may by seen here, though the Paul W.S. Anderson's work itself is hardly original, as it borrows heavily from NIGHTLYERS (1987).

The rest, with very few exceptions, is sorrowfully miscarried. The direction seems to be almost absent, or present at its incompetent worst. Majority of the actors are so lame it seems their acting lessons had the form of a correspondence course. Especially Lance Broadway, T.J. Hoban and Christian Pitre deliver performances of abysmally bad quality.

However, Ursula Mills makes Lulu AH 320 an interesting robotic character. And then there's is ravishing Sunny Mabrey who can act and can bring some conviction to her lines, her final speech sounds quite poignant and dramatic, but it is not enough to save the misbegotten movie. More than a decade passed since she appeared in SPECIES 3 where she had little to say and served mostly as a nude window dressing. Now she is an accomplished actress and deserves much better roles.

The costumes represent an utter lack of visual taste. And it would have sufficed to remove those hideous frontal brown areas, otherwise they are nicely female figure hugging.

In summarum, this motion picture is worth viewing only for Ms Mabrey, other reasons are extremely difficult to be found. On second thoughts, some might be tempted to see Michael Nouri in his brief video transmissions to notice how he has aged since the time of FLASHDANCE (1983).

As it happens to be a TV movie, one should not be too stern when assessing. Surely, there is plenty of illogical "logic" in the rather improbable story. The motivation of the antagonists successfully eludes my capability of detection.

What makes WOTR worthwhile for me after all, is the presence of Sarah Butler. An accomplished actress, imbued with stamina and character - let alone her stunning beauty - who is ignored by major producers and filmmakers. Why? I truly do not know.

Therefore it is pity the only significant motion picture she appeared in is the remake of I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE. Here she proved how refined her thespian skills are - her intonation and enunciation especially. But, the thing is, ISOYG is a film per se unwatchable for many.

To sum up, I hope things will change and Sarah Butler will be better spotted and garner more attention. Looking forward to A movies starring this promising talented actress.

I have just finished watching this motion picture. And I have to say that the number of scathingly negative reviews tends to surprise me.

I start with a comparison and contrast, which I would have not thought before I would be willing to make now. There is this DUNKIRK across cinemas presently: a film critically acclaimed, lauded, appreciated, etc., and so on and so forth. And there is this TRAPPED CHILD.

The latter attracted my interest from start to finish never being boring - despite obvious flaws and imperfections. The former I found so unwatchably tedious - despite big budget production values - I turned it off after about 20 minutes. By the by, if I wish to learn history, I see a documentary, not a feature.

All in all, TRAPPED CHILD is an entertaining, optically attractive thriller (if only I knew where the scrapped 747 comes from - but that is a minor quibble).