Lawrence: After Arabia

Having watched it twice (with growing dismay) I have to say this film will probably be used by film schools to demonstrate how NOT to make a movie. The acting is, with few exceptions, terrible. Barber-Duffy as Lawrence puts in a wooden and unconvincing performance which is amply demonstrated by his first scene.

May of the scenes are framed so badly they highlight both the inadequacy of both sets and direction. (See for example the scenes where the Head of Intelligence briefs his agents, and the hospital scene later in the film).

Access to Clouds Hill was infamously limited: but why does the Director use the exact same bit of film (Lawrence arriving on his Brough to find the cottage door open), multiple times? It's just so obvious.

The blue-screen scenes which are meant to represent Arabia are simply atrocious. It would have been better not to use them at all.

I find it hard to believe the film has gathered so many awards.

On the positive side, (yes there is one) the Dorset countryside is beautiful and does evoke the landscape around Clouds Hill.

I applaud the director for giving it a go but the film was very poor and terribly shot. The acting, with a couple of exceptions, was a amateurish and the shots were over egged and tedious. A couple of beacons in the mist were the inquest scene (although terribly framed) I totally believed the actor presiding over the scene, I've seen him in lots and he's very believable, and the Cameo from Michael Maloney was enjoyable.. the rest were over acting I'm afraid.

I had high expectations for this film but unfortunately I found it disappointing. The story itself was interesting and held my attention, but the sound, continuity and photography were all inadequate, not to mention the tedious, incessant and inappropriate music score. The acting, with a few exceptions, was weak, and to bill Brian Cox as the star in the opening credits showed some nerve - what a con! He never even appeared on screen, just providing brief narration. I sat through the whole film wondering how on earth it could have won any kinds of awards or indeed how it was even selected for various film festivals. Clearly this film was made on too small a budget, making it look like an over-stretched amateur production.

The worst film I can remember seeing. Memorable only for the screenwriter, actors, sound recording, cinematographer, editor and director duelling it out for who could deliver the worst performance.

That said I would recommend it if only for comedy value. Films as terribly made as this don't come along often. Enjoy.

I know much of this story from Rodney Legg's 1988 book, so was interested to see it turned into a narrative. And I knew it would be low budget - but low budgets can often be a spur to imaginative and exciting solutions. Not in this case, sadly. Almost every department of moviemaking was shoddy. Direction was leaden. Editing was stodgy. Sound recording was mushy, and sound mixing woeful. Grading? Forget it. Continuity. Ditto. And, as for the acting... From the opening sequence, with a child actor who would have made a primary school nativity audience wince, to our hero, who was presumably trying to convey a tortured soul but only succeeded in looking mildly dyspeptic, even while squeezing out a tear. To be honest, I didn't get far enough into the movie to reach the actors we've heard of. After the second sequence of 'Arabs' running single file right to left I decided to either stay and laugh or go and do something more life-enhancing. I went. If you're interested in the story, track down the book. If you want to see a good movie, go elsewhere.