1/10
This film is not a film
17 May 2006
I have rarely seen such a feast of bad-taste tosh in my life. One or two 'jokes' about bowel movements could be funny....two could be amusing.....but this film, dedicated to that end of the alimentary canal is about as much fun to watch as it is to receive the endless enemas it delights in bringing to our close attention. Parker's characters are shallow and boring. Hopkins plays a one-dimensional puritanical sadist. He abused his adopted son, likes to humiliate his patients, is impotent and does things to his own backside with devices. Fantastic. This character could have been generated by computer. What happened to Parker's creativity? The story simply does not exist. There is no relation at all between the various threads and they have no influence on the main storyline because it is either totally lacking or so weak as to be invisible. However I fear the most important criticism I have of this sorry waste of money is that it is simply NOT AT ALL FUNNY. During the entire, dragging, boring debacle, there were perhaps two occasions when it was worth a slight smile. Does Parker really think it is necessary to show a man in a shower with filthy underpants and then give us a close-up of the brown-black waste water emanating from them? Is it funny for a man to have an erection because of electrical charges applied to his feet? (Incidently this joke was played for several minutes and several scenes in the film.) Parker directed with a total lack of taste and finesse. I would like to take a copy of this lame disaster, and just as Mr. Parker wasted a couple of precious hours of my life showing me his sad anal fixation fantasies, procure a jar of Vaseline and then introduce him to new ways of 'enjoying film'.

This film should have stayed where it belonged - on the cutting room floor. Parker - hang your head in shame, Sir!
8 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed