Maidgethma Wonderfully offbeat film!

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Stephen Abell When Phil (Brown) and Kate (Lowell) fall pregnant after buying a new house they decide to hire a nanny for when the baby is born. Unfortunately, their first choice is killed by a hit and run driver while she's on a bike ride. Though, luckily for them, the agency send round a replacement. Camilla (Seagrove) is a stunning English nanny who is only too happy to look after baby Jake... any time... all the time... As time goes by Phil starts to feel as though there's something out of place with Camilla, who isn't above using her sexuality to get her way... This, in turn, turns Kate's investigation mode on, only to learn some dark and chilling, hard to believe, truths about their son's guardian...I've never been a great fan of Friedkin's work, though I have to admit he has a magnificent eye for composition and iconic shots (the only thing which kept me awake through the yawn-fest that was The Exorcist - oh controversial). In this film, he has extended his eye for composition into entire scene's and employed some effective lighting techniques, especially in the night time forest sequences. This actually brings it out of the horror genre and into dark fantasy, which seems to fit the story and direction much better. There is a lack of tension, suspense, and fear which are required to make a good horror film. Even the gruesome effects are shot in such a way that they aren't exactly horrific or fear-inducing. They are good and well done. though Friedkin opts to quickly snap between the gore shots. He even adds strange angles to them, which adds more to the fantasy genre and detracts from the horror.This is a tale of old mythologies and tells of evil tree spirits who like nothing better than to eat the souls of newborns. This could easily have been another run of the mill horror flick of the time but it is something more. I just wish that Camilla's drive and reasoning behind her actions had been explained more. This could only have made her character stronger and darker. However, Seagrove adds a nice sensuality and slyness to her... if this woman were an animal she would be the snake that tempted Adam and Eve. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast is pretty average, especially the two lead characters, who are verging on two-dimensional stereotypicalness. Even Miguel Ferrer, who I've always rated as a "one-to-watch" actor, appears underused and a tad flat. Only Brad Hall as Ned Runcie comes across as a more rounded character. This may be because his character has lots to do in the story; he's built the house they live in; he becomes their friend; he has a romantic interest in Camilla; he's the first to realise there's something not-quite-right with Camilla. This gives him more depth and scope than the rest of the characters in the story.The special effects are still viable today, the killings of the gang members, though filmed in a strange manner, is well done and looks realistic - given the circumstances. Even the tree bark images and figures are chilling to see and reasonably lifelike, adding to the strength of the fantasy elements.This doesn't work as a horror, though, if you're a fantasy fan and you prefer them with a darker edge then this will probably be up your street. It's at least worth one viewing... but I'd wait until you've not got anything interesting to watch.

GL84 Following the birth of their son, a yuppie couple hires a mysterious nanny to care for him only for a series of strange incidents around them eventually causes them to believe that she's sacrificing babies to a spirit being and must race to stop her before she finishes.This was an overall decent effort without too much to really like here. One of the film's few positives here is the way this manages to really make the cult she's a part of seem like a creepy, mysterious entity. The first half here mainly comes off like a series of strange incidents around the house that don't really amount to much, yet all come together to build up a rather chilling concept here of the sacrificial cult. From the constant needling of the breastfeeding onto others, the way she always manages to wind up in the baby's care whenever something happens around them that could endanger them and the slow-burn way it leads into the revelation of her actual identity, so although there's not a whole lot of action here these scenes build up his feeling rather nicely. As well, there are some solid action scenes here featuring the group of thugs encountering her out in the woods and being drawn back to the killer trees which pick them off in rapid succession, the wolves stalking the one witness back to his house and forcing him back through all the different rooms before trapping him in a thrilling sequence and the finale in the woods is a lot of fun with the wolves ambushing them leading into the battle at the tree that gives this one a really frantic and exciting finish. Alongside the great and somewhat gorier kills than expected here, these here are what make this one enjoyable over the film's few flaws. It's two main problems are quite easy to spot and go hand-in-hand with each other, the cheesiness and its sheer ridiculousness. The ridiculousness of it might be its worst offense. There's no way that any of this could happened and the ability to keep it straight-faced and serious is a bit of a stretch to believe. Once it gets to the tree attack late in the film, then it gets too far out there to really become plausible. It just seems so out-of-place in a film about a psychotic nanny. The fact that the mystery surrounding her backstory is quite hard to get into all around and lacks just about any sense of cohesion also doesn't help since the entire concept of the cult is never given here and the only thing we get is their inherent creepiness to sustain us which doesn't last all that long. Though there are some that could be put off by the slow pace as well, as this doesn't move at the fastest point possible as well, these here are the whole of the film's problems.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Nudity, Language, a mild sex scene and children-in-jeopardy.

Michael_Elliott The Guardian (1990)* 1/2 (out of 4) A text at the start of the movie tells us how Druids used to scarifies humans to trees. Flash forward to couple Phil (Dwier Brown) and Kate (Carey Lowell) who find themselves to proud parents to a new baby boy. They end up hiring a nanny named Camilla (Jenny Seagrove) not realizing that she's previously stolen babies and fed them to a tree in the woods.William Friedkin finally returned to the horror genre nearly two decades after his ground-breaking film THE EXORCIST. If you're going to watch this movie then it's best that you don't go in expecting another movie at the level of that one because THE GUARDIAN is pretty bad on many different levels. I think the idea of a woman giving babies to a tree for a scarifies is actually a pretty interesting idea but sadly the screenplay here just offers up predictable scene after another and in the end there's just nothing too thrilling here.The biggest problem is the screenplay because it's all quite predictable and I can honestly say that there's not a single thing that happens here that you don't expect. Take the sex scene between the husband and the wife. Don't you just know he's going to open his eyes and see the nanny as the one he's having sex with? There's the fact that the police don't believe the couple after they find out what's going on. These are just two examples of the predictable things that happen throughout.There are a few good moments that keep this from being a complete stinker. I thought Seagrove was very good in the role of the deadly woman. She's very believable as the "good" nanny but she's also quite seductive in the evil parts. Both Brown and Lowell are also good in their parts as is Brad Hall. I'd also say that the music score was quite effective and Friedkin did manage to create one very good sequence dealing with a man trapped inside his house with evil coming to him.The gore effects are also another major plus as they actually managed to get quite a bit past the MPAA. There are a couple memorable death scenes and I would add that the living tree was a very good effect and the scenes of it eating people were effective. Still, THE GUARDIAN just has too many issues with the story and the lack of any real scares really brings it down.

Ricky Haas (saahdrahcir) Great movie; an excellent follow up to "The Exorcist." If you're into horrors that are tense and not just about blood and guts (while still including it), this is the film for you-- if you can get your hands on it. It's been over four years since I first heard of this movie, and ever since I saw the climax scene featured on "Boogeymen: The Ultimate Killer Compilation," I have wanted to see it. So, I went down to rent it. Not available. I tried renting it online. Not available. I tried purchasing it, waiting for it to appear on television or On Demand… but no. I asked people if they've heard of it and only my father said he remembered it. And it was good. A couple days ago, I purchased and downloaded the digital copy online, and saw it.It was everything I expected, yet nothing I expected. Absolute brilliance is the only way to describe this film. Believe me, it has everything: a druid, rabid coyotes, sex, and a tree that harvests the souls of babies. I know what your thinking (Isn't that a Pink Floyd CD cover?), but this was a really great flick. Sure it wasn't as scary as "The Exorcist," or as dramatic as "The French Connection," or even as cringe-making as "Bug," but gosh darn it the film was enjoyable.I'm not sure if it's because 37 minutes and 12 seconds into the movie, the shadow of Phil's (Dwier Brown) chin looked like Jay Leno's or the subtle nuances that hinted Camilla's intentions for Baby Jake (He "slept like a log"), I nonetheless found myself smiling and thinking to myself that it was worth the wait.The scene where Ned (Brad Hall) got home after seeing Camilla's druid powers is quite possible the most suspenseful scene in film history. As he's dialing a number on the phone, you see the coyotes grouping by the window and thereby creating an eerie and effective dramatic irony. What I loved about this was that it didn't just try to have the animals trying to rip apart the house, director William Friedkin decided to play it slow. And boy did it pay off. Never could a death scene be so elegant while still containing blood splatter.However, this is a strong juxtaposition as to the previous death scene of the Punks (or, as I like to call them, the Potential Picnic Rapists). Gore went as much as it could without ruining the film… but, whose going to argue killing criminals like them in the most violent way possible? Essentially, the same goes with the climax, featuring beautiful visuals of the Bark Babies crying.My only criticism would be in the scene where Phil meets Molly Sheridan (Natalia Nogulich). The acting wasn't too convincing. The best performance in that scene just so happened to be the little kid.Get this movie. You will not be disappointed. Actually, you can even play: Guess that familiar actor! I bet you'll finding a familiar face in both this film and the television show "Nikita."