Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

writers_reign This is almost unbelievable in its ineptitude. You get the feeling that some student, about a week into a course on programming has programmed a computer to write a thriller and detailed a few components; lots of vulnerable teenage girls wearing mini-skirts and stupid enough to walk through woods alone even after one of them is traumatised by a rapist;risible red herrings, a totally unrealistic newspaper reporter, and then, when it gets down to the actual writing the computer turns out to be both dyslexic and autistic. It's mind-boggling that actors like Freddy Jones and Frank Finlay can contrive to act like sub-Alan Lake and that the actual killer should be wheeled out in the last ten minutes with no preparation. Total RUBBISH!

lazarillo Although any number of Italian gialli ("Nude Si Muore", "What Have You Done to Solange?", etc.) were set in Britain and/or were UK co-productions, this film is somewhat unique in that it seems to be a completely British giallo. We're definitely in giallo territory here: There's a vicious rapist-murderer on the loose at a girl's school. There are two witnesses to the murder--one who can't quite remember what she saw (a familiar plot-line in the Italian films)and a previous rape victim who is too traumatized to speak. The lead is Suzy Kendall, who two years earlier had starred in Dario Argento's seminal giallo "The Bird with Crystal Plumage." It's definitely a very British film, however. The cinematography is staid and workman-like compared to the more garish and stylistic Italian films. The plot is fairly linear and logical, at least until the end when the murderer-rapist goes to laughably ridiculous lengths to stop a psychiatrist from giving sodium pentathlon to the traumatized victim to help her recover her memory.It's not surprising given the famed British aversion to violence (in movies that is)that most of the violence here takes place off-screen. Still it is pretty nasty violence, especially considering the rape angle and the age and gender of the victims. (It's interesting that these kinds of movies never take place at a MEN'S college or in an old age home). The sex and nudity is also pretty non-existent, but it doesn't exactly seem wholesome either the way they have cast sexy twenty year olds as fifteen year olds and dressed them in mini-skirts short enough to get any real schoolgirl expelled. The most lurid scene involves the headmistress's lecherous husband and a student librarian on a ladder. I don't know if it makes it more or less perverse that the "student" is played by Janet Lynn, a British sex star of the period (thus the obvious pseudonym)who had been featured the year before in Pete Walker's naked sex romp "Cool It, Carol". The only really recognizable star though, besides Suzy Kendall, is a young Leslie-Anne Down as the traumatized rape victim. (Despite what an earlier reviewer said, Jenny Agutter is NOT in this movie).Still if you can get around the leering British hypocrisy, the relative lack of sex and violence, and the fairly low-wattage of the star power, this is actually a pretty entertaining little film, and, if nothing else, an interesting one.

Theo Robertson In 1977 ITV had a " Late night adult movie season " on Monday nights . There's two things you have to consider 1 ) Late night in British TV terms in those days meant 10.30 pm . Up until the mid 1980s TV stations would close about 12.30 am 2 ) Adult movies shown on television were a world removed from the gore and exploitation seen in video nasties of the early 1980s !!!! MILD SPOILERS !!!! Seeing as these movies were on too late for me I never got to see any of the movies scheduled in this slot with the exception of ASSUALT , though I did read up on what movie was being shown via the TV Times . With the exception of NO BLADE OF GRASS every movie shown seemed to be about a serial killer and this movie is little different , which is a pity since the opening gives the impression that it's going to be a supernatural horror where schoolgirls are being murdered by a demon stalking the woods near the local school . The first third fools the audience into thinking that this indeed is a horror film featuring a demon but then it settles down into a whodunnit as to who the sexual predator is I saw the movie again in the early 1980s and was bitterly disappointed with it . It's not a movie that holds up to repeated viewing if memory serves me right , it has several red herrings like a woman thinks she's being stalked but it turns out to be a police bodyguard and contrived where the villain is caught because he stands beside a red light and justice is dispersed because he chose a bloody stupid escape route To sum up I have to agree with the person who said this is typical of British movies of the late 60s / early 70s . It's very similar to THE BEAST IN THE CELLAR . Once you know what the plot is it's a very flat movie

KDWms Too much talk and too little of the right kind of action, for me. But the talk is delivered capably; the sex is maximally restrained; and the gore is maturely, practically non-existent. The police in this story believably - albeit boringly - strive to come up with the identity of who, among a few possibilities, is the rapist? You're gonna hafta rent the movie to find out. That would be OK if it doesn't cost very much. But buy it only if that does not exceed the price of renting. My impression was: a little less than mediocre.