WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Brainsbell The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

Izzy Adkins The movie is surprisingly subdued in its pacing, its characterizations, and its go-for-broke sensibilities.

Matthew Stechel Peter Boyle stars as a cop dressed in a very bright blue suit who is convinced that this murder he is assigned to investigate is the work of this elaborate conspiracy. The murder is of an older Torah scholar rabbinical student who is convinced he found the 9th name of God (or was it the 10th?) and while Boyle's partner (dressed in a very Dick Tracey like bright yellow suit) whom while also serving as the film's narrator is quite happy to write off the murder as a random break-in/wrong time-wrong place type of case.Boyle becomes more and more determined to prove that this murder is the work of this cabal of murderers desperate to keep the name secret and hidden. Boyle basically goes off the deep end here becoming increasingly stubborn in his urgent cries of conspiracy here. (At one point looking at a map of three seemingly unrelated murders--he draws a triangle connecting all three points, and then proceeds to draw another point and declares it a rhomboid, which the sheer force of him declaring that statement made me laugh quite a bit--"Its Not A Traingle, Its A Rhomboid!")He's aided by an article writer played by Christopher Eccleson (for the Hebrew press no less! some kind of newsletter specifically for the Orthodox) who is very interested in seeing where Boyle goes with his investigation, but also doesn't seem to think that there's anything here realistically, but he's not gonna let his own skepticism stand in the way of a potentially good story. If anything, he can at least write a news article about Boyle's determination to see this investigation thru despite the thinnest of leads beyond his own gut. This movie is not good by a long shot. (The case really never does actually amount to anything more than Peter Boyle being very fervent in his belief that it will lead to something, and even then its kind of hard to decipher his thought process so that it makes logical sense.) The movie to the director's credit is also never boring, and it never lags. To me the film sustained its interest level throughout, but its also the kind of movie you watch late at night on TV and the next day wonder if you had possibly fallen asleep watching it because some of the details of it are so bizarre, they couldn't have possibly been in the movie itself right? Surely, you must have fallen asleep at some point and are remembering bits of a dream you had while this was on in the back round. I having seen this in a theater can assure you that it was in fact the movie and not you.That said, for everything that was interesting about the movie (including a very unusual set design) the ending of it is fairly lousy, and I have no idea if that's a fault of the short story its based on, or if that's because writer/director Alex Cox didn't do enough to set it up beforehand. Oh well. Everything up to then was still engaging enough that i'd say if you like purposefully oddball detective movies, you could do worse than this. (It might make an interesting double bill with 1992's "The Plague" which based on an Albert Camus novel was similarly interesting an adaptation set in a third world nation but also somewhat disappointing as a whole)

qv1879 In a post world war world, people eek out what living they can. A string of strange murders begin to occur and the local Detective Chief Inspector Lonrot(Peter Boyle) is on the job. He believes the murders are being committed by a gangster called Red Scarlach(Christopher Eccleston). Lonrot uses everything to hand to capture the killer and eventually comes face to face with him.I love Peter Boyle. I've seen him in the X-Files to "While You Were Sleeping", but if anyone was miscast in this role, it was him. "Death and the Compass" is a low budget film that uses spontaneity as it's guide. Director Alex Cox is a "fly by the seats of his pants" director. Thirty to forty years ago, Mr.Boyle may have been cast properly, but watching it I couldn't help but wonder if he was treading water because he wasn't sure where his footing was.Though Mr.Boyle seemed to be treading water, I didn't feel that about the other members of the cast. Maybe it was because the others of the cast were familiar with Cox's type of direction. What ever it was, it gave the movie a "driving on ice" feel. It'll be fine, then the brakes will lock and the car will slide to the side.Don't get me wrong. It wasn't a bad movie. It just needs to be done over.

e-kopstain I had read a review of this film probably five or six years ago, but had never been able to find it anywhere and wondered if I ever would. I happened to catch it on cable last night by accident. I'm a huge fan of Borges and think this particular story is a masterpiece that equals Poe's greatest work in terms of pure intellectual force, profundity, and use of language and references. This movie version is fairly surreal and self-consciously stylized and does add a lot of details not in the story. But after about 10 minutes or so I started getting into this interpretation and thought that overall it was very clever and artful. Peter Boyle was an interesting (weird?) choice as Lonrott, and I thought Christopher Eccleston was excellent as Red Scharlach (including the sound effects for his voice). Most importantly, I thought this movie did capture the obliterating sense of the infinite that staggers me every time I read the story.

cadar1729 I liked Boyle's performance, but that's about the only positive thing I can say. Everything was overdone to the point of absurdity. Most of the actors spoke like you would expect your 9-year-old nephew to speak if he were pretending to be a jaded, stone-hearted cop, or an ultra-evil villain. The raspy voice-overs seemed amateurish to me. I could go buy a cheap synthesizer and crank out better opening music. And what's with the whole 1984ish police torture stuff? It was totally superfluous and had nothing to do with the actual events of the story. Cox added a lot of things, in fact, that he apparently thought would be really cool, but had nothing to do with the story. That's a big disappointment because one of the things that makes Borges' stories so good is his minimalism -- they are tightly bound, with no superfluous details. This movie is just the opposite. I stopped watching after the scene where Lonnrot is questioning the guy from the Yidische Zaitung, or thereabouts. I wasted $4 renting this, but at least I can get some satisfaction from writing this review and hopefully saving others from making the same mistake.