Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

MartinHafer The technology in "Murder By Phone" (also called "Bells") is impossible. You just have to set that aside and watch the film without questioning...and if you do, you will very likely enjoy this Canadian film.You see the girl die at the beginning of the film. She receives a phone call and when she answers it, her eyes begin to bleed, she shakes and then the phone explodes! Nat Bridger (Richard Chamberlain) investigates the case and almost immediately he comes upon very nasty and awful phone company reps...who do everything they can to frustrate his investigation. Not to be deterred, he presses on...and ultimately learn that a weird machine has been created that can be used to kill by phone! The biggest shortcoming of this film is that so many folks want to stop Bridger...and since he's only one guy, why didn't they just kill him?! Too easy to laugh off...but still kinda fun in a mindless sort of way.

PeterMitchell-506-564364 Alternatively known as Bells, here's an entertaining chiller with two gooder actors for a film that's still a good solid drama/thriller. Certainly something different here, we have a disgruntled nut who used to work for the phone company, taking people out at random, some he personally knows, by upping the voltage so high, their body melts, their ears explode, and are sent flying backwards whether on subways, or from high rise buildings. Richard Chamberlain, of all people, is a professor, who investigates the killings, when one of his best students, is a victim (the first one on the subway). While bedding architect (Sara Botsford- Rats) he teams up with a cop who he first bangs heads with, on the account of his no caring attitude, they try to flush out the killer, who's doing his business from a small electricity house, which is also his abode. John Houseman, an old lecturer and close friend of Chamberlain, has something to hide here, too, which I thought was a good shock point (pardon the expression). I did like the cop in this film, a Frederick Forest type guy, I found a hoot, if the whole film. The death scenes are classics, and we do question if we could really kill someone by upping the amps so high. How they set the killer up, is classic, as is the last call Richard Chamberlain takes, that he shouldn't of. On the whole, Bells is fun viewing for the horror/thriller viewer, though I don't think it will turn you off answering your next call.

lost-in-limbo Around this period slashers seemed to be in-craze, but coming out where some fairly oddball horror mysteries and the 1982 feature "Bells" just happened to be one of those gritty change of pace experiments. Also known as "Murder by Phone" under a re-edited version. The curiosity is waiting around for the killer's method of weapon. Ingenious, but laughable. Electrocution by phone. And boy do the victims get some air! While it might have that body count formula, instead of something rather primitive, it laced the plot with industrial conspiracies and scientific jargon as an environmentalist professor goes about investigating the deaths, despite no one really believing him when he thinks it's a phone killing people. It did come off being low-key and clever in spots (a cynical script), but this didn't stop it from being rather stilted (romance sub-plot) and at times silly. The problem lied in between the murders, as it wasn't as interesting or captivating like it should have been. Therefore the idea isn't really realised and uneven in its suspenseful build-ups. It was something you might read from a Michael Crichton novel, especially with his interest in technology getting out of control. Richard Chamberlain putting his game face on was sturdy in the lead role and was good support by a classy John Houseman. Sara Botsford feels secondary, but the cast also bestows Alan Scarfe, Barry Morse and a small part for Lenore Zann. Director Michael Anderson's durable handling is slow-grinding, letting the story unfold and atmosphere bubble with sweeping camera-work and John Barry's ominously edgy music score. Sterile, but resourcefully unique 80s horror mystery."If man is going to control his future. His got to learn to control his machinery."

trashgang Wow, great start, the body count in the first 15 minutes rises. Not that gory after all but the idea was good. Big majors having us in their powers, well, do they? The teacher searching everything that concerns the killing of one of his students. The stupid copper who becomes a believer and finds together with the teacher the 'who's done it question'. It was also the time of Scanners and other flicks were technology made it all happen. Is it a horror, no not bloody enough (for the time it was released), is it a thriller, yes I think so but for a televisionrelease it's too bloody, get it? And that's the reason why it never got published. Only available on rental VHS, and if you catch this OOP be sure to not touch the US release which has been cut up to 20 minutes!! there is enough suspense in this movie, it take a while before it get's going but after all, a must have in your collection. Start phoning your local video before they phone you...bliep bliep