This movie was a mess. It had the absolute worst editing I have ever seen. It was almost like at the end of a scene the writer wanted to go to commercial, and the filmmaker added a second of black screen to fulfill the writers dream.

Under the messy direction and editing, there was a glimmer of something good. A good idea, a compelling spark. But somewhere it went wrong.

The story is about a quasi-psychic priest who is trying to solve a string of murders. The first thing that is hard to bite into is Richard Grieco as a priest. Well the part doesn't call for him to be a good priest and he succeeds rather well. The second problem is Dennis Hopper as the crazy bad guy. He always plays the crazy bad guy. Very ho hum.

Oh, a thought occured to me that maybe all the jumpy, horrible editing and disconnected plot was trying to add a sense of the confusion the character (Grieco) was experiencing. And just to prove that it was contrived they rolled the credits backwords. Not a good sign for any movie.



Did this review think positively or negatively of the movie?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
negative
Den här filmen var en enda röra. Den hade den absolut sämsta redigering jag någonsin sett. Det var nästan som i slutet av en scen författaren ville gå till reklam, och filmaren lade till en andra svart skärm för att uppfylla författarens dröm. Under den stökiga regin och redigeringen glimmade det på något gott. En bra idé, en övertygande gnista. Men någonstans gick det snett. Berättelsen handlar om en kvasipsykisk präst som försöker lösa en rad mord. Det första som är svårt att bita i är Richard Grieco som präst. Delen kräver inte att han ska vara en bra präst och han lyckas ganska bra. Det andra problemet är Dennis Hopper som galningen. Han spelar alltid den galna skurken. Väldigt ho hum. Åh, en tanke slog mig att kanske alla de nervösa, hemska redigering och bortkopplade handlingen försökte lägga till en känsla av förvirring tecken (Grieco) upplevde. Och bara för att bevisa att det var påhittat så rullade de bakorden. Inget bra tecken på någon film. Tyckte den här recensionen positivt eller negativt om filmen? ALTERNATIV: - negativ - positiv
This movie was a mess. It had the absolutely worst editing I've ever seen. It was almost like at the end of a stage the author wanted to go to advertising, and the filmmaker added a second black screen to fulfill the author's dream. During the messy directing and editing, it glimmed at something good. A good idea, a convincing spark. But somewhere it went wrong. The story is about a quasi-Sykian priest trying to solve a series of murders. The first thing hard to bite at is Richard Grieco as a priest. The part does not require him to be a good priest and he succeeds quite well. The second problem is Dennis Hopper as the lunatic. He always plays the crazy bad guy. Very ho hum. Oh, one thought occurred to me that perhaps all the nervous, horrible editing and disconnected action tried to add a feeling of confusion signs (Grieco) experienced. And just to prove it was made up, they rolled the back words. Not a good sign of any movie. Did this review like the film positively or negatively? ALTERNATIVE: - negative - positive
negativ
negative