Time of Her Life

"A REAL GHOST CAPTURED ON FILM" trumpets the front cover. "WAS IT ONE OF THE STARS AFTER SEEING THE FINISHED PRODUCT, HAUNTING THE SET OF WHAT DROVE HIM TO THE EDGE OUT OF SHAME". I ask. But I kid... Suicide is no laughing matter... so don't do it. There are people who love you, the Samaritans are only a phone call away, it'll take ages for your mum to clean the bathtub... etc. But IF there was a good reason for taking the ultimate step, being part of this... THING must rank somewhere between your family discovering you're a poultry molestor, or that you have all of Shaking' Stevens back catalogue in your collection.

I have to ask... Is this a joke? When they picked these actors, who must rank among some of the WORST I've ever seen (they can't even smile convincingly) was it because they paid into the project, or the casting director had a LOT of extended family members? And as for the dialogue... Jeez. It starts off like a bad episode of Eastenders, then we get the historical flashbacks... And it starts to resemble a REALLY bad Jane Austen adaptation. (Apologies for linking the great lady's name with this tripe). Seriously, if you set up a cringe-o-meter for the lines here, it would be off the scale every 10 seconds.

AHA you might add, it may be a boil on the bum of Satan, a complete disgrace to the film industry and anyone with a brain, but at least it's good for a few unintentional laffs, right? Well... Yes, and no. Yes, in that there are some choice moments here which'll have you rolling in the aisles, but having to tolerate the rest of the crap that is bundled along with it... I don't think so.

I'm thinking back to that supposed spectre "CAPTURED ON FILM", and I have another theory. Could it be... Jeremy Beadle playing a gag on us all from the afterlife? Did the spook have a big bushy beard, and was he carrying a microphone? If it was indeed the prankster himself, than THAT WOULD EXPLAIN EVERYTHING!! Making a fake movie... that must rank as one of his most audacious set-ups yet. Of course... anyone who's watched it would figure it out immediately... NO-ONE would spend money on making something as shoddy as this. Right? RIGHT?! 0/10

Happened upon a copy of this. Not mine and if I had spent my own money on this I'd be finding those responsible and demanding it back! All I can say is this would be a terrible student film. Any understanding of the medium of film is absent. Acting is god awful, the story would have been rejected from the original Twilight Zone series as unoriginal and lame, and the change in tone of the lead character's reaction to the 'ghost' is laughable.

I can only agree that the 'glowing' reviews of this film are from friends and family. I'm afraid it's not even entertainingly bad.

Amateur in the extreme!

Avoid! Avoid! Avoid!

A very good first effort from this director. Surprisingly good in fact given the extremely limited budget. Amazing that they managed to make a film at all, not least of all one this good. Good solid acting as well. Decent camera-work, and the soundtrack is really good as well. The story is also fairly good. This sort of project should be an inspiration to all young budding actors and directors. And it makes you wonder what these multi million pound sets spend all their money on. All in all this is a surprisingly good film given how much was spent on it. I expect future projects, with more money, will be extremely successful. I eagerly await the next film. Apparently it's another thriller.

Steven M.Smith. A name to remember, a future light of UK independent film making. Time of her life, is a very impressive first effort from this writer/director, as indeed too was his directorial debut of notable admiration. But the real triumph was his almost single handed quest, dogged determination, and a shear single-minded focus, to achieve the ultimate goal of making that first movie. Steven's first effort should be noted, as a beacon to all would be filmmakers. why? Because he's done it, he's made that journey of ups and downs. He held the whole production together with string and gaffer tape, whilst juggling cast/crew and finances with both hands tied behind his back. When he ran out of money and the usual doors slammed in his face, he somehow found enough to keep going. At the end of it all, I guess this films entire journey will probably have taken over two years of his life, maybe even more, and in all that time I know his dedication would not have dropped below 110%. All young would be filmmakers, or old, need to learn from people like Steven, as this guy has completed the journey on which many of them wish to travel. And for all of Steven's endeavours he now has to his credit a truly wonderful first time independent feature. Well Done!

Frankly I'm rather incensed that on the basis of the dazzling reviews attributed to Steven Smith I wasted nearly two hours on his debut offering. Have they all been written by his pals? The action clunks along, the music is irritating and over used, the script is simply dire and the actors (with the exception of the gardener) mediocre at best. I do think we should support the efforts of a young filmmaker but saying it's brilliant when it's not will surely only encourage him to make the same mistakes again i.e. continuing to write his own scripts and using the same actors for another venture. Yes, it's his first film, low budget etc. - I get it, but it's also out there for members of the public to purchase and it's just not up to scratch.