Honest

Foreign critics have received this movie much better than British ones. Possibly because, although Dave Stewart has done a reasonable recreation of sixties swinging Hippiedom in London, it really isn't that interesting to home-grown audiences any more. The addition of three-quarters of a well-known girl band (All Saints) gives it even less charm (although one of the ladies concerned turns in quite a reasonable performance, as well as letting the camera linger longingly on her bosom. Nice to see ex-pop star Dave Stewart make a go of directing now his music career isn't what it used to be - he's done a reasonable job but he will hardly be hailed as a great director for this effort.

Despite the pathetic protestations of the Director and production company, this film was nothing more than a 'Spice World II'. Nothing wrong with that as Spice World had an ardent audience of pre-teens/ teens and made money. But no, Honest Productions seemed to think that 'Honest' was serious art for adults. Very misguided, but apparently they persuaded their distributors of same. Had the Director curbed his ego (and obvious desperation to be seen as a serious director), cut the violence and sex so that the REAL audience for this film: teen and pre-teen fans of the All Saints had access, this film might actually have found its true audience and made some money. Yet it seems only adults went to see movie, in hopes of getting a good look at the Appleton sisters' breasts. In casting three non-actors who obviously couldn't muster up the ironic edge to give a silly story any real comic value; attaching an aging pop star who clearly can't direct; and trying to sell this as 'serious art', the team behind this pic cut their own throats. Why didn't the distributors, who ought to know better, insist that this be edited to get a 15 certificate? That's even more idiotic than the film itself.

To give you an idea of how utterly dull and lifeless this movie is, I will tell you now that the last word of this review is going to be the film title used in a humorous and non too obvious fashion. OK?

So, to the film. Some films do exist that make Brian De Palma's Mission to Mars look like a masterpiece....... I have yet to see one yet and this doesn't even come close. Even though it is awful. And by awful I mean dull, lifeless, cricket, dire, boring. Dave Stewart, as the guitarist and co songwriter has had to put up with Annie Lennox for a good 2 decades so lets not be too hard on him, the film does have its moments. They cost 90p each on a £3.60 ticket. (Or about $1.25 in America on a $5 ticket.) Yes, two of the girls appear topless in the film and while this is no bad thing, I can't see them being given another movie anytime soon.

Mel Blatt is good in the film. She appears natural to this business we call SHOW. Nicole also has her moments (90p remember). Natalie however, the eldest of the two sisters isn't that great in the film. In fact, I'm being kind. A blind monkey with a badger strapped round it's head could have pulled a better performance. Reminiscent of an early Turtletaub or a late Howard.

Unfortunately, the casting is where the movie fails. While 66% of the All Saints are good in this film, 33% aren't. A better idea would have been to cast 3 of the S Club 7 girls in it (Tina obviously getting the boot). Because S Club 7 exist in farce, their cheeky smiles and mischievous ways would have blended perfectly with the Honest backdrop of Cockney England.

Anyway, in conclusion, I can't really recommend this film enough. 90p a nip is a bargain in today's climate. I just feel that S Club 7 would have made a far superior film to the one that we were given. Honest.

Now I'd be the first to admit that I haven't seen this pop star vanity project for a while, but as they say: Bad memories cut deep and I find it virtually impossible to come up with answers to these questions a) Who would want to pay money for a production with a script as patently rubbish as this and b) If this is the first film where the starting point was.. Nicole Appleton's breasts. When is someone going to pluck up the courage to tell these singing prima-donnas that to star in a movie you need ACTING LESSONS. Britney and Mariah, I hope you're listening too(And who can forget From Justin to Kelly....Urgh). These poor deluded creatures should keep their Hollywood dreams at bay and concentrate on their singing careers (Though admittedly, some of them aren't even too hot at that). Anyway back to the film: Well it's rubbish if you haven't got the message by now, squeezing every British crime movie cliche out into the open and still making a pigs ear of it. Oh Lock Stock, what have you brought upon us?! Plus the movie is full of time-line mistakes considering it's meant to be set in the 60's (check out the goofs section) and it also wastes a fantastic British supporting cast. It all adds up to a huge waste of celluloid, an experience that the All-Saints ( Now embarking on their career as solo artists) would no doubt rather forget and (hopefully) a message that rings loud and clear to all singers thinking of venturing outside their area of expertise.. Don't do it guys!!

This was I film I saw by accident, the film I meant to watch being sold out. As a result I had no preconceptions about it, no prejudice about the leading actresses, which in this case was probably a good thing. The acting of the three pop stars playing the three criminal sisters, Robin Hoods except that they themselves are the poor they give to, is not all that bad, and probably is scrutinized harder than usual because you know they are not really trained actors. The character of Gerry in particular is well played, despite the occasional false note in the cockney accent. They get themselves into trouble with drug dealers and local gangland bosses and drag in an innocent American who falls for Gerry after she assaults him with a life size roughly female and half nude work of art. There are comic moments to keep the film going when the action is thin on the ground, note the rich aristocratic heir who fills his time putting out a 60s subversive magazine. The portrayal of 1960s London and the contrast between those caught in their hippie revolution and those in the East End whose lives seem little changed since the 1940s feels reasonably authentic and is one of the pleasures of the film. One scene of a drug effected festival can give an edge of vertigo. The film touches on a lot of issues through its characters, rich versus poor, traditional versus modern, female equality, but does not explore any of them in any depth. While this may annoy some, I believe many would argue that this is not the point of the film. Overall, do not expect a classic or a memorable impression on your life, but if you are open minded and let yourself simply be entertained then you could well have an enjoyable time watching this.