Colibel Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

Isbel A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Leofwine_draca I remember the old days, when the BBC was the most politically correct, conventional and non-risk-taking channel on TV. Times have changed, and imagine my surprise when their new adaptation of the Sweeney Todd legend began with a graphic throat-slitting, complete with blood coursing over a victim's chest! All this and at just two minutes past the watershed shows just how much times have changed. Although this is the most gruesome part of the film, overall it's quite strong on the violence front, and not for weak hearts.The good news is that SWEENEY TODD is a darned sight better than another recent Victorian BBC story – SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF THE SILK STOCKING, which not only wasted the talents of Rupert Everett but made a travesty of the whole Conan Doyle canon. Sadly, as is the case with many TV movies, budget restraints are evident here, with only a handful of locations and a few street sequences to bring Victorian London to life. Still, although cheap, it's definitely a cheerful film, with a better script than usual and some nice period details.Ray Winstone is the core of this film's success, his performance probing the depths of Todd's psychology. He's great in the role, and ably supported by the unknown Essie Davis, who is actually better as Mrs. Lovett, and deserves to go on to greater success based on her fine performance here. A stalwart cast have been assembled, one of those casts where everybody puts in a decent performance. Familiar faces pop up here and there, including Hogwarts caretaker David Bradley (whose tongue-cutting is one of the film's most graphic moments) and stalwart genre star David Warner, here playing a blind bloke. Okay, so the film is a little weak here and there, and the ending is quite unsatisfactory – which didn't Todd just do that sooner? These minor quibbles shouldn't affect the rest of the production, which is generally sound; let's hope the BBC start making more decent dramatisations like this, as they can't cost very much to produce!

JoeytheBrit Dave Moore's TV version of the infamous tale of the bloodthirsty barber Sweeney Todd unsurprisingly bears little relation to Tim Burton's musical version released the following year. This one is much more matter-of-fact in its portrayal of Todd's descent into madness, and gives his motive for killing as revenge for being jailed in Newgate prison as a child for a crime committed by his father. Initially, there is a skewed sense of justice to Todd's reason for killing off his clients but, as his blood lust (and feelings for the neighbouring Mrs Lovett) grows stronger his reasons become less calculated.Ray Winstone plays Todd. He is a fine actor, but loses some of his screen presence by choosing to underplay the role, his voice rarely betraying any kind of emotion. Despite this it's a choice that suits the character, even if it doesn't the actor. Cutting up his victims in the cellar of his barber shop, stripped to the waist, his bare head gleaming white and his mouth slack, Winstone makes a truly grotesque monster, one made all the more frightening because he is otherwise an extremely quiet and ordinary man.There's a lot of violence in the film, a lot of slit throats and mutilation of corpses, but, again, it's not given any kind of sensationalistic value. Essie Davis plays Mrs Lovett, another decent character whose descent into monstrosity is sparked by the things that have happened to her rather than any inherent evil. She turns into a grotesque parody of herself as the film progresses, her beauty destroyed by pox scars, sporting fine wigs made by Todd that sit incongruously atop her ruined features. It's all very grim and dark and there is no place for humour, even of the gallows variety. Perhaps a touch of humour, especially on the part of Todd, is what is needed to both round out his character and make his monstrous actions that much more horrific

gashamaloo Being a huge fan of the macabre (especially serial killers) I was very excited to hear this was coming on TV with one of my favourite actors portraying Sweeney. I had shortly before finished reading a biography of Sweeney Todd and enjoyed the film enormously right up until the last few scenes. I'm not going to ruin the film for others by saying exactly how it was ruined for me, except to say that the movie ending - as far as I am aware - contained certain factual differences.That said, the ending they chose - if you don't know the full story - is probably excellent, and I would heartily suggest that it gets a viewing. Performances by all cast members was great, and Ray Winstone was fantastic.

Simon Hedges This was a reasonable production of an excellent musical, but I recommend the George Hearn / Angela Lansbury version every time.In a previous comment, alan_cricketman4 from Belfast UK, states: "I can understand producers using artistic licence and having to cut details and chronologically alter events etc., but to change the facts of such a well known and well documented case is just downright silly. I suggest that very little research has been applied here (by producers and reviewers alike) and a good website to browse, and learn further details on the case, is "Court TV CRIME LIBRARY"."I fact, Sweeney Todd was universally accepted to be an 'urban myth' up to about 1993, due to the lack of other evidence. In 1993, a new book, was published. Of this book, Wikipedia says: "In his 1993 book Sweeney Todd: The Real Story of the Demon Barber of Fleet, the horror and crime story writer Peter Haining argues that Sweeney Todd was a historical figure who committed his crimes around 1800. However, other researchers who have researched his citations find nothing in these sources to back up what Haining claims they said".I realise that Wikipedia is not always entirely accurate, but I think it is fair to say that what Mr Haining has done is researched a theory about the origin of Sweeney Todd, which is worthy of consideration, but far from accepted historical truth.