GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

James Hitchcock Harry Sterndale, a professional photographer, has not led a charmed life. As a schoolboy he was mercilessly bullied by his classmates. He began his career as an advertising executive, only to be unfairly sacked from his job. His career as a photographer has not prospered, and he lost most of his savings when he was foolishly persuaded to invest in a Madoff-style Ponzi scheme. His wife, a former model named Lisa, has left him for a younger and more successful rival. To cap it all he is informed by his doctor that he is suffering from cancer and only has a few weeks to live.Harry decides to use the short time remaining to him on this earth to kill all those who have wronged him, beginning with Lisa and the man behind the Ponzi scheme. He also arranges for a hit-man to kill him in the hope that his new girlfriend Jill will benefit from a massive insurance pay-out. Of course, as is normal in black comedies like this, it turns out that the diagnosis was mistaken, leaving him with two problems; how does he prevent the hit-man from carrying out his side of the bargain, and how does he avoid being convicted for five murders.The film was not well received by critics, and Empire magazine named it the 42nd worst movie of all time. I would agree that the basic concept may well seem tasteless or offensive to many. Black comedy, however, is a genre which has always enjoyed a licence to find humour in matters not normally regarded as humorous. Nuclear war, for example, might not strike people as a natural subject for laughter, yet Kubrick's "Dr Strangelove" is essentially an extended joke about a nuclear holocaust. Those who consider it in bad taste to make jokes about murder should remember that Robert Hamer's "Kind Hearts and Coronets", in which the hero cheerfully bumps off several members of his own family, is frequently cited as one of the greatest British comedies of all time.That is not to say that "Parting Shots" is a film in the same league as Kubrick's or Hamer's. It suffers from a number of faults, mostly to do with the casting. The singer Chris Rea, cast as Harry, demonstrated amply why this turned out to be not only his first acting role but also his last. Diana Rigg may be one of Britain's leading actresses, but was far too old for the role of Lisa. Rigg is actually thirteen years older than Rea, so her character, who is supposed to be a hard, brassy, gold-digging bimbo ended up seeming more like a desperate, pathetic cradle-snatcher. Joanna Lumley seemed miscast as a Cockney barmaid, especially as she seemed to be struggling with the accent, occasionally slipping back into her normal plummy tones.And yet the film did not strike me as being as bad as some of the critics made out. There are some better acting contributions from Felicity Kendall as Jill, the late Oliver Reed in his penultimate film as the hit-man and Bob Hoskins as the greasy fraudster Gerard Layton. There were also some very amusing scenes- I particularly liked the one where Harry and Jill are patronised and insulted by the staff in that pretentious and snobbish restaurant, a scene doubtless inspired by director Michael Winner's other job as a restaurant critic. The chef whose arrogant tantrums earn him a place on Harry's death-list is named Renzo Locatelli- a remarkable choice of name given that there actually is a well-known London chef named Giorgio Locatelli. Either Giorgio was in on the joke or Winner was sailing perilously close to the wind as regards the law of libel.Possibly some of the criticism was inspired by dislike of Winner, a high-profile television personality and a controversial figure in Britain. The reviewer for "Total Film" magazine slated "Parting Shots" for its alleged "painfully transparent pro-capital punishment agenda", which struck me as an over-literal reading. There is a big difference between a black comedy and something like Winner's "Death Wish" series, which we are intended to take seriously (difficult though that may be at times) and which certainly does have such an agenda. Apart from the swindler Layton, none of Harry's victims is actually guilty of a criminal offence, and Winner is certainly not suggesting that, in the real world, adultery, bullying or bad manners should be punishable by death.What Winner is doing is holding a satirical mirror up to the Britain of the late nineties, with all its greed, materialism and vulgarity, with its crass ethos that nothing matters in life except money and success. "Parting Shots" does for Britain what John Waters' "Serial Mom", another nineties black comedy, did for American suburbia; both films have a central character who takes to killing people of whom he or she disapproves, often for trivial reasons. Of the two films, "Serial Mom" is the better, if only because Winner needed someone as accomplished as Kathleen Turner rather than the wooden Rea in the leading role. "Parting Shots" may be in defiantly bad taste, but its satire is often effective and on target. Literally speaking, the real-life equivalents of Lisa, Layton and Renzo do not deserve the death penalty. Metaphorically speaking, the vices which they represent should be hanged by the neck until dead. 6/10

trevorwomble I saw this film on its UK cinema release and couldn't believe just how stupendously bad it was. I'm not saying its the worst film i've ever seen but i can't believe it was ever given a theatrical release.Chris Rea gives it his best but he's a pop star, not an actor and it shows. Somehow Michael Winner squanders an otherwise very good cast (Oliver Reed, Ben Kingsley, John Cleese, Felicity Kendall, etc etc etc)in what could have been a half decent film if the script had been better. It doesn't help that the directing is dreadfully clumsy at times and the film obviously had a very tight budget. There are continuity errors galore, and an appalling scene where a major character is shot but the sound has obviously been dubbed on as there is no muzzle flash, no smoke and no 'kick' from the obviously empty prop gun (maybe the budget wouldn't run to a blank firing pistol!).To Winner's credit, he's tried to do a sort of 1990's Ealing comedy type film but he's made a dreadful hash of it. He's managed to persuade a top draw cast of famous and talented actors (look how many MBE's, OBE's, Knights and Dames are in the cast list) but has failed to give them a finished film that justifies the talent on show. At the time of writing, this was the last film that Winner directed (and that was 7 years ago!). If this does turn out to be Winner's swansong then it would be a sad footnote to what was once a promising career.Overall this film wastes the opportunity it was presented with but it might have some curiosity value for people who thought 'Bullseye' was Winner's worst film.

Paul English While it lacks the urgency and poetic beauty of "Dirty Weekend", "Parting Shots" is a competent black comedy which never fails to entertain, and in parts, titillate.Chris Rea [far superior an actor to his namesake Stephen Rea] gives a solid and effective performance as a decent guy who is told that his life is coming to end. The love scenes with Felicity Kendal aka Barbara Good are magnificent and the presence of the two expensive, beautiful and stylish call girls considerably enhances the film. A success.6/10

BStalker First things first - some people think this ISN'T the worst film ever. They are mistaken.I recall, one fine afternoon, visiting the local multiplex and witnessing the trailer for Parting Shots. Something smelt distinctly fishy and indeed my worst fears were confirmed at the end when it proudly stated, "Written, Produced and Directed by Michael Winner". I was amused.Some weeks later, reviews for the film started appearing in the press which all backed up my initial feelings. Some months later...much to my joy, the film appeared on the shelf in Blockbuster. After so long a build-up, I was desperate to see quite how bad this film could be. On these grounds, it is an incredible achievement of modern cinema. How Mr. Winner has been able to produce the ultimate "so bad it's actually kind of good" film is a testament to his skill as director and part-time restaurant critic. Details of the film's many amusements (Plot(?), characters, ethics, good actors looking worse than ever), have been discussed in the other, many (and often amusing) reviews. However, I feel duty-bound to give further highlight to the performance and acting prowess of one, Mr. Chris Rea Esq. This faded rockstar was originally supposed to do the music but 'friend' Winner suggested he play the main role, since nobody else could give such depth and realism to the part of such a born loser. Well done Michael. Every word and motion of Rea is pure (unintentional) comic genius, ranging from his heartfelt declaration of love ("I luv you. I do ya' know") to his 'interesting' bodily positions (note his stance beside the swimming pool, or his 'relaxed' look when sipping champagne). I have seen many, many films in my time, but even so, Rea is a truly original performer, nay artiste. He is the essence of Parting Shots and through him Winner proves to the world that he is, in fact, just fat, miserable, and inhuman. As if we didn't know already.To conclude, if you build up your expectations for a truly bad film and perhaps partake in a fair amount of alcohol, you won't be disappointed by Parting Shots. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if you split your sides laughing all the way up to the scooby-doo-style-everyone-laughs ending. It's ironic really that something so devoid of humour can be so hilarious.BUY IT!!!