Chicago Joe et la showgirl

I agree with Jack Sommersby's comment that the film was boring, although he probably knows more about directing than I. However, the film somewhat chronicles what happened in this case and I think that Keifer did an OK job of portraying Hulten. In my opinion, the film would have been much better if it had shown Hulten's and Jone's trial at the Old Bailey, his subsequent hanging at the Pentonville prison, and her being sent to Holloway prison for life.

Richard Clark has an excellent Web site that is just loaded with facts about the prison system and capital punishment in the U.K. going back to the early 18th century.

This film is nowhere near the calibre of "10 Rillington Place" and "Let Him Have It."

I admit I only watched this movie to see Alexandra Pigg as Violet. Normally, I can suffer through the boring parts to get to the actor I'm looking for, but this was the slowest, dullest, most annoying movie I've ever seen. I had to fast forward after 10 minutes of the irritating lead actress smoking her brains out while she and Kiefer chewed the scenery and looked as bored as I was. They had no chemistry and every word they said fell flat. At 50 minutes in, Alexandra came on for a few minutes and it was the highlight of the film. She at least had some magnetism and was interesting to watch as a character. I may be biased, but since she was the director's wife, he should have been smart enough to give her the lead role instead --maybe this film wouldn't have flopped so hard (like their marriage)!

I've been watching quite a few ho-hum films lately and this one doesn't quite reach even that status.

We are first assured that this movie is 100% factual, and I guess it came close. I see how the story of a criminal couple on a short crime spree sold tabloid newspapers, but it just didn't make an interesting movie. It aspires to a forties look, but is too ninetiesh for me.

The acting is okay, but no outstanding performances. Directing...well, not very good. Scrept's sorta blah.

There's maybe one good though lurid scene in this and that isn't enough to make sitting through the movie to see.

Perhaps I shouldn't be commenting on this film, as I couldn't sit through the entire showing. I rented this movie, because I am always drawn to movies of the 40's/50's era. Well, that was a mistake. Should have learned my lesson with Mulholland Falls, but this one took "bad" movie to a whole new level.

There's not much to say about this movie, except "avoid at all costs".

I am a big fan of Kefer Sutherland and i have seen most of his movies but its hard to get some because Australia has not got his old ones on DVD or video but i found this gem of a movie on video at an op shop for $1 so i bought it and went home and watched it.This movies about a true story about a man (Sutherland) who is in the army and he meets a woman (Emily Lloyd) in war torn London in 1944 and together they become a deadly twosome.The first half an hour of this movie was a bit boring but the other hour was good and this movie is way under rated its not a 4.4 its at least a 6.Over all this this movie was good and Kefer Sutherland Does a great job at acting in this movie and my rating is 6 out of 10.