Cadavres à la pelle

Expectations from other reviewers must have been too high. This movie is thoroughly enjoyable, despite the subject matter, which I suppose is the whole point. I found it to be comically dark as expected. Although in a lighter tone than "I sell the dead" which is another good film in the same vein. The casting was well composed and at times gave me the feel of a Terry Pratchett production. The sets and cinematography were spot on and very believable. I simply wouldn't try to compare this film to any of John Landis' previous works ,it stand on its own and demonstrates the dynamic abilities of both cast and crew. All in all worth a go if you are in the mood for a few good laughs.

(44%) A well made, yet oddly completely unfunny watch centred around the crimes of the notorious murderous duo in 19th century Edinburgh. So what exactly went wrong here? Because with the cast including the talented Simon Pegg and Andy Serkis, with support from the likes of Tim Curry, Tom Wilkinson, British TV favourite Ronny Corbett, even Christopher Lee in a small cameo, and with John Landis directing meaning this should have been a hell of a lot better than it actually is. The first problem is the fact that this starts claiming to be an Earling studio production, and not once in the entire film did it ever remotely capture the feel of that once great name. It may have the darker edge you'll find in something like The ladykillers, but what is really lacking is any sort of soul or heart. It doesn't also help that the true tale of Burke and Hare isn't actually that comedic as there's no real punchline anywhere, just a couple of guys making a bit of money grave robbing and killing people, and that's about it. This isn't a bad watch by any means, but I defy anyone truly enjoying its half baked attempts.

This is a black comedy about two men who makes a fortune by selling bodies to the medical profession for anatomy classes.

The story of "Burke and Hare" is dark and disturbing if you think about it, but it does not feel this way when you watch it. Instead, it appears lighthearted and likable, even though the main characters commit the most heinous crimes. The plot is engaging, and I feel a little sorry for Dr Knox and William Burke for their fate to end like that.

The film has loads of dark humour. It is funny in its own unique way, not the laugh out loud nonsense type of funny. It is worth a watch if you come across this film.

Burke and Hare is a story of two men in Scotland in the late XIX century barely making a dime when an opportunity comes along to earn hard cash by killing people and selling their bodies to the benefit of science.

This movie may seem morally rotten at its core making a comedy out of murder, but it succeeds at it while quite a lot of comedies with far less harmful plots don't, not to mention that some of the most popular TV shows of today make it fit right in. John Landis comedies much in common with ZAZ productions and sometimes are almost live action cartoons. The title characters are shown as flawed people in a desperate situation which they think justifies their actions - we don't laugh with them, only at them. And that's intentional.

John Landis came back with a surprisingly decent feature. It's as if the MTV-style cinema revolution has passed him by (the one that hit the new Sherlock Holmes square in the face). No camera gymnastics, no forced sensual assault, all the action and physical comedy happens in frame. Burke and Hare is his first 2.35:1 feature and it shows - the frame at first appears a little too wide, like if the characters were taken from a 16:9 movie and arranged accordingly. By the way, "highly entertaining", "very funny" and "packed with the cream of British talent" - those bits on the poster aren't far from the truth.

Burke and Hare is not a masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, but it is not a bad film either or completely deserving of all the panning it got. It is far from talented director John Landis's best film not like Blues Brothers or An American Werewolf in London, but it is not his worst either as is the case with Blues Brothers 2000 and Beverly Hills Cop III.

Does Burke and Hare completely work? No it doesn't. Is it entertaining? On the most part yes, even with the hits and misses. The film to me was never laugh-out-loud hilarious excepting two or three scenes(Jessica Hynes's eureka moment inventing funeral parlours being one), most of the time it was still amusing. In my view, the sight gags were better than the script. The sight gags range from nicely understated such as the pot shots at Wordsworth, Lister and Greyfriars Bobby to crass slapstick such as chamber pot contents being dropped on heads. There is even a sex scene that raised a laugh, decide for yourself whether it is intentional or not, whether it was or not I personally did find it amusing. The script(the smart black humour kind) varies as well from having a good chuckle, raising a smile to where I found myself rather blank faced.

John Landis does do a credible job directing. He mixes contemporary innovation and social issue with ease, and although he doesn't quite make Burke and Hare the dark, smart, hilarious homage to Ealing comedy it strived to be or the throwback to American Werewolf(the comedy and horror elements are decent on their own but have mixed results together), there is evidence of the effort which is what mattered. The character development is very straight forward, that I do agree with, but the cast do make an effort to make us empathise with them, and I think they succeeded there. The Georgian setting is also convincing, the sets are beautifully evoked and I quite liked the costumes and cinematography too.

I do think all the cast have done better before, but I cannot deny this is a great cast. Simon Pegg and Andy Serkis are a well-matched double act. They work very well together, and both give entertaining performances in the process. I also liked seeing Christopher Lee, Ronnie Corbett, Paul Whitehouse(the scene where he is pushed down the stairs is hilarious) and Bill Bailey even if their appearances are rather brief. Isla Fisher(the love story between her and Pegg though is pretty weak and underdeveloped) and Jessica Hynes are alluring and do show at least some flair for comedy, Hynes actually is very funny, and while they should have had more screen time Tom Wilkinson and Tim Curry are suitably antagonistic and compelling. I do agree about the accents being variable, I had little problem with Pegg and Serkis and Wilkinson's was convincing, Curry just about passes, while Fisher's comes and goes and some of the cameos don't quite make it.

In conclusion, entertaining enough if somewhat hit-and-miss. With a longer length, perhaps more tighter pacing and some more care on the accents it could have been more. But the direction, setting and cast convinced me, so I enjoyed it. 7/10 Bethany Cox