Large

Think "Dude, Mary ate my Pie" as directed by Tom Green - only without the good taste (and with bad teeth all round). And yet - the humor harks back more to Basil Fawlty than to Jack Tripper, the amazonian babes would do Benny Hill proud, and the dog leaves "There's something about Mary"'s pooch wallowing in the dust. As late-night video rental/cable fare - 8 out of 10.

Large is one of the funniest films I have ever seen. It is destined to become a cult classic. You either get the humour or you don't and I know some people who really hated it. Whatever your opinion, this is an extremely well-crafted film. I was a big fan of Justin Edgar's short film Dirty Phonecalls. While a lot of his off the wall energy has been diluted here, Large does not disappoint and I urge anyone with a sense of humour to see it.

It belongs to the teen movie sub-genre of the House Party Movie. The only other UK antecedent is the cult House Party Movie 'Party Party', but it's a better film that that. It cleverly melds the great UK traditions of social realism and smutty comedy, almost like a Carry On for kids.

The cast of 'Party Party' reads like a who's who of successful actors, and I believe the same thing will happen with Large. The actors might have familiar faces, but not familiar names -yet. Hats off to Edgar as well for casting most of the film with genuine Brummies. Admittedly, it's not all great performance-wise -Emma Catherwood as the evil girlfriend Rachel is truly appalling. I can only assume that the casting director was having a bad day.

Edgar and co-writer Mike Dent have created their own kitschy fantasy world, where Birmingham has it's own Home Shopping Channel and dogs have pyschiatrists. It's a little like John Waters mythologisation of Baltimore in his films. Despite this, the world has its roots in reality: Anyone who knows Solihull or Sutton Coldfield will have met someone like Lorraine Benita Mousely.

I've never seen a film that looks quite like Large, every scene has colours so vibrant that they almost make your eyes bleed. Despite this reaction against the usual grey look of UK movies, Edgar has gone for an edgy, documentary-style handheld camera throughout, which serves to keep the pace cracking along. The Dolby 5.1 mix should also be singled out for praise, and the gutsy score from David A Hughes. Large does not look like the low-budget film it is.

There seems to be a bad smell about Large just because it got a one-star review in The Guardian (from Peter Bradshaw, the man who wrote the worlds worst sitcom -Baddiel's Syndrome with public school chum David Baddiel), but I read great reviews in Sight and Sound and Variety. I can only guess that the reason it wasn't a massive hit in the UK was because it was released the same week as 'American Pie 2' on 400 screens less. Unfortunately, UK teenagers would rather see a bad Hollywood Teen movie than a good British one.

The true worth of Large cannot be determined now, but in ten, twenty or even thirty years time, when critics will look back on it as a fascinating curiosity amidst the UK cinema of this period. I have no idea what Edgar will come up with next, but I can't wait to see it.

I suppose it was my own fault, expecting something worthwhile, from a film that was funded, in part by FilmFour. I was not expecting, however to be crawling with embarrassment by the end of it. I can only assume that Justin Edgar is a big Tom Sharpe fan, since he used so many of his scenarios - the drugged dog being ever so reminiscent of "The Throwback" etc. etc. The sets were impressive enough and the filming although patchy, evoked enough atmosphere, but "Trainspotting" in Birmingham, this was not. The dragging up of B list celebrities did nothing for the standard of acting either - over the top, or in the case of the lead, Luke De Woolfson virtually non-existent, as he looked constantly surprised to be there at all. There are certainly some very funny moments, but none of them very original - like knowing the punch line to a joke while someone is telling it, the laugh is automatic. I'd like to have something clever to say, to sum it all up, but I'd rather just try and forget that I payed money to see it.

There are no large laughs at all in this one, nor are there any minor ones even. A frantic comedy which goes for all the cheap gags, none of which work. Approximately the "Great Race" and "American Virgin" school of comedy, except that this isn't so much a school as a kindergarten for the mentally-challenged. Only the manic speed and fast editing prevent this from being unwatchable - and some pretty girls. A slightly annoying thing about this movie is that we have scenes like a dog licking a girl's vagina or another girl giving a guy a hand-job - and yet no breasts!! So it's okay to have bestiality and masturbation, but when faced with having one of those girls show some skin they suddenly got very British about it, it would seem. There is no nudity at all, but in my opinion a movie as tasteless as this (not necessarily a criticism) should at least go all the way. An amazing thing about this movie is that it is based on a book - or vice versa (irrelevant); how can this nonsense exist in written form? Must be voodoo

Oh dear. An hour into this film I walked out (something I have never done before while at the cinema) because I couldn't have cared less about it. The performances were stale, the premise done before and the jokes were unoriginal. I don't think I smiled once let alone laugh. This film is an absolute waste of time. Avoid.