उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

And I don't think I am exaggerating. Everything is terribly wrong in this picture: from the absolute lack of story (from minute 20 there is nothing to understand) to the amateur performances or cinematography. A complete failure.

What a mess. I bought the laserdisc of this years ago, an impulse purchase, because of Hugh Grant. Up to that point I had enjoyed everything I'd seen him in. After suffering through watching the film, all I could think was that the writer(s) and director must have been doing vastly different types of drugs resulting in an incomprehensible train wreck (pun intended) of a film. Neither Grant's charm nor McDowell's depth and style can save this one. The re-titling of the film to "Train to Hell" is probably the best thing the distributors have done. At least they're being honest that this is a train ride to hell in a handbasket. I haven't bothered to watch the film since (just can't bring myself to torture myself that way again).

I think my life can be divided in two parts, before watching "A Night Train To Venice" and after. I used to be an indecisive and hesitant man, a weak-willed and irresolute person. Then came the two hours that changed it all. I was pushed to my limit, tested the boundaries of my spiritual and even physical powers, the very capacity of human strength! And I made it, I actually managed to see THE WHOLE freaking thing, from start to finish, from first to last carriage. And surprisingly I lived. Now I am the most confident, positive tenacious and tough man... in the local madhouse. The things movies can do for you...!

P.S. Anyway, if you're preparing your dissertation on the refraction of artificial light through the windows of a night train, you may actually find the movie quite useful.

for some reason this film keeps being put on TV opposite late night infomercials. however, it's not any more entertaining than they are. u can sleep to it though and even listen to CDs while its on and u won't miss a thing. not sure if this could have been safely released theatrically without bomb threats against the projectionist. someone should probably confiscate all copies of this baloney and do atomic testing near them. its possible this film causes cancer.It also begs the question: why there isn't a "zero" rating on this site? I'm wondering if the director really knows how bad this is and whether he was able to be paid for it. Maybe the director's name really is alan smithee.. or maybe it should be.

This is in my top five worst movies of all time. This film caused me to ask myself many questions, the main one being, why would anyone invest time and money in producing such a stupid film. Bizarrely, it featured some fairly reputable actors. I can only guess they were on crack at the time.

I could discern no coherent plot and have no idea why a girl jumps out of the window at the end. Even more bizarrely, after she jumps out of the window and Hugh manages to catch her (quite miraculously) everybody smiles and the triumphant music begins. Wasn't anyone worried about why a young girl should want to jump out of a window??? In case you watched the beginning and switched it off, as I regret not having done, and you are wondering, who was the Malcolm Macdowell character? No explanation is ever given. He pops up every now and then with an intriguing expression on his face.

The only redeeming feature of this film is that you can have a laugh at the clever techniques used to prolong the film making it up to an astonishing 1 hour and twenty minutes. For example: - lots of pointless slow motion shots with gay music -Hugh and the woman make love at least four times and he kisses her breasts on every occasion. (what kind of mother has sex with a stranger in a train while her daughter is asleep presumably in the same carriage)? - Shots of Macdowell's face every few minutes This film is so bad you should probably watch it

Movies that parallel reality with a surreal, dream-like existence run the risk of alienating any audience not completely in tune with the director's vision; in this case, that alienation turns to unintended comedy when journalist Hugh Grant boards the Orient Express from Munich to Venice, where neo-Nazis have sneaked aboard and threaten to cause chaos. Also on-board this train trip to Hell is Tahnee Welch as a recently-widowed stage actress, her little girl and caretaker, plus an internationally known dancer, some drag queens, and Malcolm McDowell as a tough-talking "Stranger". From what I could decipher, it appears Grant blames the presence of the Nazis on himself (he apparently wrote an unflattering piece about Skinheads), but once the train pulls into Venice (in time for Carnival!) all that business aboard the Express seems to have been forgotten. It would be impossible to credit director Carlo U. Quinterio for his 'unique' vision; the filmmaker blatantly copies the criss-crossing style of Nicolas Roeg's thriller "Don't Look Now" (also set in Venice), creating an indecipherable scenario wherein the editor was allowed to go berserk with the flash-forwards and flashbacks. The movie is so cluttered up with murky minutiae that it allows the straight-faced proceedings some camp value (how else to describe the cobbling together of Nazi atrocities and S&M imagery with sex scenes involving Grant nibbling on Welch's breasts--shown again under the closing credits!). Low-budget mess resembles those Golan-Globus pictures from the 1980s, and poor Grant seems at a complete loss for words. NO STARS from ****

If you like experimental films then you might get a modicum of enjoyment out of the non-linear story line, interleaved editing, and Kenneth Anger-style fantasy imagery, but to the rest of us it is a jumbled mess. As the film progresses, many cards are laid on the table, but not a one of them is played. The dialog is embarrassingly bad, and the meager plot meanders in a few different directions, but doesn't develop any of them. It wasn't even bad enough to laugh at. The ending came close to being laughable, but when I realized that this was in fact the end I was furious at having wasted so much time. The ONLY redeeming quality of the film was the images of Venice during Carnival. That was quite haunting and beautiful, but not nearly worth the boredom and frustration one must endure in the vain attempt to make sense out of this cluttered mishmash.

This film was in one of those boxed sets, together with two other films I had never heard of (and Kickboxer staring Van Damme).

When I watch a movie, I don't have any expectations, so am rarely disappointed. When I was watching this one, I was disappointed.

Hugh Grant plays a writer living in Munich, who travels on the Orient Express to take his book manuscript (on the subject of Neo-Nazis) to a publisher in Venice. Unknown to him, a bunch of German skinheads (with authentic American accents) sneak onto the train.

While the above excitement is going on, a parallel story of a beautiful woman with a young daughter, and a white haired stranger hovering around in the background (played by Malcolm McDowell, doing his best to look extremely intense).

I didn't know what to make of this film. From the cinematography I had assumed that this film was shot in the late 80s (actually 1993 - one year prior to Hugh Grants success in Four Weddings and a Funeral). The plot was non-sensical, the direction was non-existent, and at the end of it I had no idea where the time had gone, or what I had just seen.

I was in my mums flat waiting for cable guy to turn up and I thought I would watch one of her DVDs. Well everything seemed fine when I read the cover and read the plot of film but as soon as it started I began to wonder.... has my mum gone mad!? Why did she buy this? From the acting to the direction I was appalled! This has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen! So Bad I still watched it to the end , hoping that there would be an explanation as to why this film was ever made in the first place or what it all meant and to think this was made with Malcolm McDowell (shame on you Malcolm!). the best thing to do with the DVD if you unfortunately have it in your collection is to use it as a nice coaster! Truly Awful!!

Well, there are many things that have gone terribly wrong in this film from plot to sound, from acting to ending, from camera works to cuts and editing; bad/unpolished screenplay, bad post-production; poor directing... perhaps even an immitation of "Don't Look Now!".. etc etc etc.... BUT... I don't know, I still get the feeling that there is something to this movie. Somehow it keeps you engaged and a nervous through repetitious contrasts. There is a certain surreal feeling/atmosphere to it, especially with some (perhaps intended) "clumsiness" of actors costumes, movements, replies .. some rediculously amature camera moves, bad quality film used, and strangely horrible audio dubs. Then on the contrast to all of that you get occasional truely interesting and fascinating shots and scenes (which are then badly edidted). Maybe the movie was working toward braking some barriers of conventionality and maybe it required a better director and a better screenplay for that.

What I really didn't like however is the ending, and the excessive, and times - daft, use of metaphors.

Not being a fan of Hugh myself, I didn't expect too much from the film. And that is exactly what I got - not very much! The story, as the title would suggest, involves a train but this bears no relevance to the plot whatsoever. After reading the blurb and expecting something along the lines of Under Siege meets Poirot, I was met with a seemingly endless onslaught of slow-motion stares, painfully wooden acting, and a plot that made absolutely no sense to me. The ending simply made me laugh as there was no wrapping up of any kind, in an already tattered and thread-bare story. For each scene in the film a dozen question marks flooded my brain and I was unable to fathom any meaning. What the director was trying to convey in this film, I really am not sure. The genre of film is still ambiguous to me... action? Thriller? Horror? :S Please stay away from this film, in fact, I recommend you go back in time and stop yourself from ever looking at this review... just go back to wherever you were before you decided to come to this page.

everybody likes to watch bad movies from time to time, simply because they're so bad it's funny. well, this is not one of those movies. no matter how well developed your sense of irony might be, this movie is so insultingly bad that I doubt anybody could derive any pleasure from watching it.

one of the biggest complaints my friends and I had was that it feels like it was written by 3 separate people on 3 different continents, without any knowledge of what the others were doing. for some reason, hugh grant takes a train to venice (imagine that!) and on the trip he meets this woman and has gibberish conversations with her. malcolm mcdowell comes around and says some needlessly cryptic things and a guy gets tossed off the train. then there's the nazis who aren't so much characters as really bad caricatures played by people with no talent.

oh yeah...there's a naked man in a cage at one point, as well as some american nazis holding a rally and beating guys up in the street, though they're in Europe...

once hugh gets to venice, all hell breaks loose...well, not really. the movie just doesn't make any sense from this point on. it's like a bad fever dream. i won't even try to explain because there's no point.

granted, a movie doesn't have to be linear or have a coherent plot to be a good movie...look at david lynch. however, this is not a david lynch film. it's just bad. there is no story, plot, coherence, there are no real characters, and really no point. i'm angry that i watched this and now hate everybody associated with its production.

This film is without doubt the worst film I have ever seen, and if you think that this claim is mere hyperbole then I implore you to see it for yourself, for once you have every film you see thereafter will seem better no matter how cringe-inducing the acting or nonsensical the plot. Night Train to Venice literally has to be seen to be believed. The so-called plot sees Hugh Grant, who should be thoroughly ashamed of himself for agreeing to appear in this drivel no matter how much he needed the money, boarding the Orient Express to Venice to take a manuscript he has written exposing a neo-Nazi movement to a publishing house. However, he is being followed by a group of badly-dubbed Nazis who are as camp as Christmas and about as terrifying as tinsel.

Speaking of Christmas, Grant's laughable dialogue where he states that he hopes to receive books rather than socks next year because "I'm an intellectual", is one of the few hilarious high points, though for all the wrong reasons, and leads to the first of the film's many soft-core sex scenes, interpolated with the sight of a transvestite miming to Edith Piaf. This is just one of many examples of just how random and bizarre this film is, it's as if no one involved put any effort into making it coherent. Questions are asked but are never answered, and if you are hoping for an ending where the whole thing comes together and makes sense then think again, you'll be left scratching your head long after the sight of Hugh Grant having sex for the umpteenth time has disappeared from the screen, and not because the film is complex or in any way clever, it just seems to have been thrown together without any of the filmmakers caring about plot or substance.

What exactly is the point of having Malcolm MacDowell grimace at the screen in slow motion in every scene? Why are so many scenes interrupted by shots of the train going past, as if we hadn't worked out yet that the film is set on a train? The actual script can only have been about seven pages long and the director has cruelly padded it out with naff slow-motion and totally unnecessary establishing shots. If you watch this film, prepare yourself for some (unintended by the 'filmamkers') laughs but most of all to be baffled and bored by this unbelievably awful movie.

0.5/10

Back in the early 2000s I had saved my paper round money to purchase a DVD player with a surround sound system. When I opened the box I saw it came with a few free DVDs which certainly wasn't the norm. One of these films was Train to Hell (1996). From the title of the film and the picture of a big star actor (Grant) on the front I foolishly decided this was worth a watch.

Terrible. Just absolutely awful. Words cannot describe how disappointing this film is. I sat through the entire film, start to finish!

Even now, nearly 15 years later it still stands out vividly in my memory as the single worst film I've ever seen. The script was bizarre, the dialogue was all over the place, the camera work was often shaky and scenes with mistakes in the delivery and points where Grant mistakenly and nervously peeks into the camera lens were left in the final edit. It was clear from the look in Hugh Grant's eyes that he was uncomfortable with the direction during filming, at certain points he genuinely looks like he is going to be sick with anxiety.

I think I burned the DVD after watching it, only to crave it again years later after discussing awful films with friends at uni. I felt I had to watch it again to make sure it wasn't just a dream (nightmare). I never managed to get a hold of another copy.

I imagine if I was a lecturer on a cinema course I would make a point of showing all my students this film. It is basically a step by step guide of how to make a genuinely laugh out loud terrible film. I cannot fathom how people were paid to make this. I actually believe I could make a better film myself with a smartphone and a couple of friends; and that is saying something!

If you're a film student, this is a must see......

I'm generally not somebody who'd criticize, but this movie deserves to be exposed. It's the worst piece of cinematography I've ever seen and I have been leading the film club at our school, so I saw all the amateur crap pupils brought in. For goodness sake, home movies of babies sleeping motionless are more interesting. This movie sucks so much, that if you own it, you'll never need a vacuum cleaner again! It's so dull that in comparison even cotton candy seems like a razor sharp object! Neonazies chase the leading character, but he is able to walk away from them in an empty train cart, only to run into them later on and escape by allowing them to get killed at his convenience.

Come on, even when you see the sexual scenes between the leading actors (and the lady is hot) you'll just say to your self, why do they show this. Shouldn't they rather end it? And when they finally end the movie, you're not even glad the torture is over, you actually get angry at them for waiting until the end. Trust me, it's the time you'd better spend with the TV turned off.

I'm seriously considering contacting my lawyer and making a civil suit against the director for not committing suicide before finishing this movie.

I sat down and watched this pile of s*** 1 evening, i was very close to shooting myself, it is possibly the worst film ever made. I think 1/10 is way, way to high for this (spit) film. I got it free with my DVD player, don't ever watch it. I'm surprised that Huhg Grant wasn't banned from acting after this film. Which has the worst ending ever, in fact, was there even a story to it?. On the front cover the villain is shown holding a gun. He never has 1. He stands there looking evil all of the time, but never throughout the whole film ever does anything to the "good guys". I think someone was trying to copy a really good film, but quite obviously failed miserably.

Incredible... yes, this film lacks any credibility whatsoever: To put you in the picture, I found a DVD copy of this for sale last year under the title 'Train to Hell', and recognised it as the same 'Night Train to Venice' I had seen in the mid-nineties. Over the last few years I have repeatedly made reference to this production whenever discussions about 'the worst movie of all time' have arisen. I will defend this movie's right to that title until my death, as I can not envisage a worse film being made in the future. Some films are so bad they're actually quite fun to watch, becoming cult hits in the fashion of 'Springtime for Hitler' from Mel Brooks', 'The Producers'. Yet N.T.T.V. opens up a whole new category below that... a category in which making it through to the end of the film is a physical challenge of the highest proportions. The complete lack of direction that permeates every facet of this film's production leaves an almost tangibly bad smell in the room in which one attempts to suffer through the experience. I think its supposed to be a surreal paranoid fantasy with a few neo-Nazis thrown in for good measure, done in what was presumably conceived as an European 'arthouse' style - 'Murder on the Orient Express' meets 'The Boys from Brazil' and is then drained of all quality and coherence. Anyway, I bought the DVD and it's sitting in its wrapping on a shelf in my house, ready to be produced if I ever have to prove in the future, that this is without doubt, the worst film ever made.

I purchased the DVD some time last year...and returned it the next day. Malcolm McDowell, as well as being a fellow northerner, is one of the finest actors of his generation and Hugh Grant, though not exactly diverse in what he does, never disappoints as the blabbering, quintessential Englishman. So why was this film so bad? In the words of Alfred Hitchcock, 'To make a successful film, you need 3 things. A good script, a good script...' you can work the rest out for yourself. I'm all for art-house films and abstraction, but we need something to feed on here, a linear thread of some kind. As the film progresses you think maybe, just maybe, it has an Ace up its sleeve. It turns out to be a Joker. The end throws up some aerial shots of beautiful Venice. Sadly, this doesn't compensate for an allegory which left the unfortunate few who've seen it forever scratching their heads.

One of those films that is so terribly awful in every way that it inadvertently has comedy moments. Worth a go if you like terrible dialogue, but be warned this film contains more filler than any other film this side of art school. The "experimental camera and bizarre costumes seem to be plucked from nowhere with no clear connection between various parts of the film. The acting in general is terribly poor with the dialogue comic when it tries to be menacing, Grant is the same as always therefore not great but at the same time not awful either. If you like David Lynch films this maybe for you as it is as confusing as films such as Mullholand Drive, but take into account that there is less meaning in this than even the most bizarre of Lynch's creations. Watch and laugh but do not expect to come away with anything to think about.

The title of the film in the local distribution is 'Train to Hell' - it probably refers to the hell of cinema, because this is one of the worst films I have ever seen. The 70 minutes are painfully filled with a mix of story-less script, bad acting, conventional and buggy cut, and repeated scenes lacking any artistic logic. Hugh Grant was by the time the movie was made (1993) at the start of his international exposure, and I hope he hides this dark episode from his CV. Malcolm McDowell is used to play bad guys, but I guess he is still wondering if his character was meant to be the bad guy or something else in this film. We will never know. The only question is why they made the effort of putting this film on a DVD. Oh, yes I know - just to get the renting fee from poor souls of myself. But you are warned! Avoid it! 2 out of 10 on my personal scale.

This is just a kind of film, which must be avoided anyway. It's idiotic and without any tangible plot. And the problem is not in the low budget, the problem is in the director and the writer. You watch and watch and watch it and what do you get in the end? BIG nothing! It all turns out to be some kind of nightmare, and even this is not clear till the end because it may not have been a dream after all! The only thing I'm sorry about is that the brilliant actor Malcolm Mcdowell has to appear in such trash movies. After "A Clockwork Orange" and "Lucky Man" this is a real pity. As for Hugh Grant well after this film he appeared in "Four Weddings and a Funeral", which made him a big star and hopefully he won't be ever compelled to participate in such rubbish anymore. Anyway my advice is to skip this movie whenever you come across it. it's a real shame to waste money on making such films when so many people die everyday of hunger.