Hidden City

I am another one who can't understand the good reviews. Maybe you have to be British to like it. I'm not so, I don't. Why did Charles Dance's character keep following the girl around? Tell her to give you the money she promised for ripping your jacket then tell her to go away. Movie over.

Instead we get, I'll take you here but I'm not going in. Next scene, he's in. Okay I'll take you there but I'm not going in. Next scene, he's in. He shows no interest in what she's looking for. Why keep following her? Does he really need the money to fix his jacket? She did steal his book too. Call the cops, have her arrested, end of bad movie.

I only watched this picture because of my current obsession with Charles Dance. It's a very strange film, rather too artsy and noir for my taste, but in general a pretty good picture.

A few items: far too much is made of the "hidden city" component. Any older city has subterranean tunnels and chambers. Disused subways, dry drains, utility shafts and connectors, power cable channels, catacombs, and sewage pipes form a veritable honeycomb beneath a city's surface. Not secret so much as not relevant to the daily life of ordinary people. That these areas might be useful for file storage is sensible and efficient.

The more intriguing mystery for me was why the writers writers (who otherwise did an excellent job) failed to give us explanations to these questions:

Why would an intelligent, sophisticated, educated man disregard several days' worth of scheduled meetings in order to assist a complete stranger in an ill-defined quest for information of questionable value?

Why, having learned the mysterious government secret, do the pair do absolutely nothing with what they've learned? It's implausible that anybody would go to so much trouble merely to satisfy idle curiosity.

And finally, why do the pair decide to continue rummaging for secrets?

On the plus side, "Hidden City" does include a very excellent performance by Charles Dance. I think that one of the more difficult challenges for an actor is speaking lines that convey information the audience needs but would never be uttered in real-life conversation. The film contains an astonishingly large number of such lines, and Dance delivered them so naturally that only when I'd finished watching did I realize. In fact, I can't think of a better example of that sort of acting. Well done, Charles Dance!

This film is a such a unique gem. Anchored by two amazing main characters, with so many differences between them, and there are also so many side characters introduced, and every single one of them is likeable, interesting and believable. So many shots and scenes that give you the idea that this was a tremendous production. The opening scene through the water tunnels is mesmerizing.

The back and forth dramatic dialogue between the two protagonists is something you don't get much anymore. There are so many lines that consist of something you may have never heard of. This film rewards itself for having the magical combination of an ambitious and creative filmmaker, talented actors and a unique and thoroughly interesting script. Not only that but it takes place in some incredible locations.

This is a vibrant film, obviously the masterpiece of a painstaking and meticulous production. This film will show you parts of London many people have likely never seen. Kudos to Stephen Poliakoff. It is highly recommended to watch this with his commentary on the Blu-ray release.

The film is not without faults. I got the feeling that there was sometimes too much music. In some scenes, the music was perfect and elevated the moment to new heights. In other scenes, I wanted to plug my ears and enjoy the fantastic cinematography. Many of the best scenes are also the quietest and I think that says something. Quite possibly it could have been elevated to greater stardom if the music had just let the scenes breathe. This film will test your patience if what you're after is the mystery itself and not the journey. In this film you should be patient and enjoy the ride if you want to appreciate it more.

At times you might think the film takes itself a little too seriously. But if you keep watching you'll realize that they should indeed be taken seriously.

'Hidden City' has become another good example how British films of the eighties have disappeared without a trace. Having found a rare video copy this film I have had the chance to reassess this possible lost gem. Cassie Stuart plays Sharon, a mysterious girl who turns up in the life of lecturer, Charles Dance with a mysterious piece of film placed at the end of fifties public information film. What unfolds is a genuinely interesting look at how Governments have so many secrets they can sometimes get lost. What is also interesting is how this gives an insight in to the early work of writer Stephen Poliakoff and how he still follows many of these theme in his later work more critically acclaim work. Unfortunately 'Hidden City' has dated in it's look and the plot just fails to hit the target. However it is certainly worth looking out for because just like the two leading characters the viewer is drawn into the film's theme of intrigue and mystery hidden in the bowels of London.

Of all Poliakoff's work on film, this is probably the most underrated and often missed , and is one of his two best works from the 1980s.

This is an interesting and thoughtful look at the workings of one aspect of modern government, which was well-received at the time and premiered at the Venice festival, but has become criminally and unjustly difficult to find. A proper DVD reissue is long overdue here.Charles Dance produces a typically strong performance with direction, performances and casting all solid ; this was a part of the important Film on Four strand that helped keep British cinema alive during some of its lowest points of the 1980s.