IMDb user comments for
Superstition (2001)

advertisement

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Index

10 comments in total

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Great first effort from Kenneth Hope, 27 November 2003

Author: perilla from UK

Had quite high hopes for this film after I'd read the synopsis. I think I was pleased with the end product though it did have it's occasional flaws. I wasn't sure about the lead female at first (Julie) as I wasn't warming to her character in those opening scenes with the baby. Still, to her credit, I grew to believe in her character more and liked the way her story developed through the film. The 'parents' I found a bit shallow and despite their tragedy I didn't really care much about what had happened to them. Charlotte Rampling was a joy to

watch (as ever) and I loved the warmth she brought and the credibility she gave to the defence case! Mark Strong was perfect as Gabreli. The relationship built between him Julie and even Mother Frances kept you watching; while his screen presence was enjoyable and strong (no pun intended! lol).

I gave it 8/10........for being a film that kept my intrigue from seeing the trailer, and didn't end up being a typical "let's get the witch, oh no, she a cute kid really" type film.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Surreal fantasy thriller about supernatural power, 27 September 2002

Author: Mikew3001 (mikew4001@yahoo.de) from Hamburg, Germany

This movie is based on a true story: In 1979 a British au-pair girl was working for an Italian family on the island of Elba and accused of firestarting and witchcraft after a few fatal incidents and a burnt-down house - the family told the judge she has caused the fires by "supernatural powers". She was accused guilty in 1982 but returned to England.

The film shows basically the same plot with stunning Sienna Guillory as the au-pair girl Julie with supernatural powers. Mark Strong plays her lawyer Antonio who has to fight mainly against prejudices and the fundamental superstition of the people and the media. Director Kenneth Hope hasn't produced a copy of the doomy "Exorcist" and "Omen" horror movies, but rather a silent psycho drama with great actings by Guillory, Strong, Charlotte Rampling, Alice Kringe and David Warner. There is no happy end, a thrilling court room drama sequence and there are also some very surreal and disturbing dream sequences.

If you relate "Superstition" to the horror movie genre, it's one of the best contemporary European genre productions apart from the boring popcorn horror movie remakes and teenie slasher trash of the current Hollywood productions.

---

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Patchy, inconsistent and inconclusive, 27 October 2004
Author: bitterstranger from Italy

The only good thing about this film is the presence of well known acting legends like Charlotte Rampling and less famous actors whose average to good talents cannot rescue a rather poor script. The whole thing feels more like an afternoon TV series than a proper film. The plot is messy and inconclusive. Fires happen around the girl - we are given different suggestions on how to interpret that, but none of those are actually explored at all. Is it deliberate arson, was she acting out of jealousy, was it paranormal activity, or was she in denial? We don't know. The contradictory conclusion of the trial doesn't explain a thing either.

Another thing that doesn't get any sort of proper development is the relationship between the girl and her lawyer. It seems clear a mutual attraction is developing, and the flashbacks (definitely far too many!) he is having of his deceased wife suggest he is struggling to let go of his grief and start a new life, possibly with the girl he is defending, but that's only hinted at very weakly. While Mark Strong manages to add some personality to the lawyer character, the lukewarm performance by the actress playing the girl doesn't give any real clues about her feelings for him. The hints of romance could have turned out all the better for being underplayed, but the acting is not convincing enough even for that.

Finally, the inconsistencies in the plot. I don't expect a lot of realism from a story that exploits some undefined "paranormal" occurrences, but the film can't make up its mind between a pragmatic and a supernatural interpretation. Again, that ambiguity could have been a winning factor, if it had been real, purposeful ambiguity rather than flaws in the plot and character development. During the trial, a dubious expert on the paranormal is brought in to try and support a "fires start around her because she's upset" line of defense that incidentally leads nowhere. How likely is it that any court would accept that as a valid testimony? Charlotte Rampling's character, the nun who was introduced as psychiatrist (why? it's never explained), seems to have no precise role in the story either, except as improvised grief counselor for the defending lawyer.

Even more glaringly inconsistent bits: in Italy a case for murder would never have a trial by jury. The most hilarious logic-defying bit has to be the shot of a double-decker red bus in the English countryside.

This film is a half-baked production that can't even properly explore its main theme - the supersitions about witchcraft could have been brought in a lot more forcefully, whether to debunk them or reinforce them or leave a well-crafted ambiguity, but the script doesn't do any of that, it just starts down all of those paths at the same time without convincingly following any of them. It's a pity, because the original real story this is based on was definitely fascinating material.

---

4 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Is this based on a true story?, 5 May 2004

Author: Alan Price-Roberts (alienrobotz) from Torbay England

I'm sure I remember the case of the teenage fire-starter but was it necessary to sanitize the storyline with so much obvious fiction and lack of attention to the central role.

While the acting from Mark Strong and Francis Barber as the defence and prosecution lawyers in this British made thriller were adequate, I frequently felt I was watching a low budget movie stretched by obvious financial constraints that severely held back the potential this movie could have achieved.

I normally like Sienna Guillory who 'played down' several years to portray a nervously troubled teenager who has a complex association with fires., but this time around I wasn't convinced. Playing Julia McCullough a sensuous teenager with a limited education and the inept ability to grasp what appears to be happening around her, Sienna is a 19 year English Nanny who is subconciously obsessed with the fire that killed her mother four years previous and the blame she apportions herself with her mother's death. She moves to Italy and works as a Nanny for a middle aged couple with a small son. Unreasonable attention from the menopausal husband towards Julia which is never properly explored causes anxious concern with the once troubled teenager and fires mysteriously start in the family home, the second of which kills the baby and Sienna Guillory's character is accused of murder and arson. After a bumpy start with a totally token sex scene between consenting adults, namely the Italian couple, the film shifts into a courtroom drama with a series of flashbacks and weird links that pull the various characters together. At times Sienna Guillory's acting as the irritating Julia McCullough could be construed as wooden, the pregnant pauses and definitive passion loss when passion was most needed are blatantly ineffective. While Strong and Barber played the whole scenario like another well rehearsed British TV play with predictable effect the rest of the cast were strangely bewildered for the best part looking like they had turned up for two or three totally different productions. In fairness Guillory does on a few occasions attempt to rise above the mundane script by attempting to characterise her role, only to fall back again in the following scene. The sultry pout and little girl lost routine just kept coming back which stripped the potential this character was crying out to offer. Maybe it was all about the script, hard for an actor to act when there isn't a part to play. Having seen Sienna play well in other films, maybe it was all about the direction.

How the once most desirable Femme Fatale Charlotte Rampling has lasted and in her her early 60's still looks so wonderful defies logic and in a role void of make up too, but as a 'Shrink' who doubles as a 'Mother Superior' wearing designer lingerie under a frumpy cardigan was all to US TV for me. Recruited to support the defending lawyer in figuring out how 'Julia' ticked the sexy Francophile lacked her normal presence. I was itching for a burst of Ms Rampling topless in a Nazi uniform and a pair of trouser braces covering her latter day modesty, even if it meant enduring another flashback.

Window dressing with one time audience pulling actors which also included a cameo role by the normally excellent David Warner suggested the Producers needed names to prop up a film they didn't really have much faith in. Frequently confusing, the photography suffered from an overdose of soft focus, too many flashbacks and and not enough of the slow lingering close ups needed to establish the troubled mind and supernaturally vexed soul of Julia Too many times I had to ask myself was I really watching a paranormal extravaganza or a subliminal PR exercise for the Italian Lakes. as the photography and locations kept drifting away.

If a story is good and you secure a great scriptwriter, a brilliant director will follow. Unfortunately this film had none of these ingredients. Budgets would have been better spent exploring the reasons behind the complexity of the central role. Having a little more faith in Sienna Guillory's emotional potential would have made this film a lot better for everyone, actors included.

Best bits: Sienna Guillory's pout (in small doses) The first time I have seen a Red Double Decker Bus driving down an English Country Lane in 40 years.

Worst Bits: The screenplay.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
A British babysitter working in Italy is being judged for arson under very strange circumstances., 9 March 2006

Author: sniperdogruffo from San Diego, California

This is one of those foreign movies that gets my attention because the characters are mysterious and the setting is the way i like it: European.

The story is intriguing and the ending confirms all suspicions the viewer can have and ends in a deja-vu sort of way, which I guess not a lot of people like because they're used to the Hollywood crap with happy endings and guy keeping the girl after all, well this is not the case, and it is refreshing that these kind of movies are still being made. Even if people still don't understand it, it's something that's nice to the eyes and to the ears.

A mature movie deserves a mature audience, if anyone else differs with my opinion, then there's nothing I can do or even want to do.

---

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Great cast, shame about the film, 21 June 2006

Author: Mr Ben from Hampshire, England

Spending last night drafting my review of "Lord Of War" (only watched it the night before) and not really getting anywhere, I was distracted by the BBC who occasionally broadcast films that I have never heard of but still persuade me to watch. Sometimes, this can backfire as anyone who watched "The Ghost" will tell you but given that this film had several actors of note, I figured I'd forget about Nicolas Cage (momentarily) and instead focus on this strange mix of supernatural mystery and courtroom drama.

Sienna Guillory plays Julie, a young au pair working in Italy and still traumatised by the death of her mother in a fire when she was 15. Despite this, she works for a middle-aged couple (Derek de Lint and Alice Krige) looking after their infant child but before long, tragedy strikes when the baby is also killed in a fire. Accused of murder, Julie finds herself defended by Antonio Gabrieli (Mark Strong) but soon, it looks like there are far darker motives at heart than petty jealousy.

Despite being described as a "supernatural thriller" by the BBC, this was about as thrilling as watching grass grow. It never really got going and even though the impressive cast do well with a patchy script, you never really believe it because it's clearly bunkum. Take the actors - with the exception of Ms Guillory, every other character is supposed to be Italian but there is no way you'd know that watching it. The most European actor on set is Charlotte Rampling as a strange psychotherapist-slash-nun (some mistake, surely) who gets involved in the case. One other thing I really didn't like was the fact that the script obviously favoured the supernatural approach over a straight-forward murder - close-up shots of ravens, fog floating on the surface of a lake and other stereotypical images gave the game away pretty quickly. Nothing wrong with being "alternative" but at no point was the murder explained beyond some seriously dodgy nonsense about poltergeists and psychic powers. I've seen episodes of "The X Files" that were more of a "supernatural thriller" than this.

Unfortunately the film is filled with a strong cast, most of whom actually perform very well. Guillory is impressive as the tortured teenager and so is Strong, who I've only ever seen in one-off TV dramas on ITV (which is not normally a ringing endorsement of one's acting credentials). Both have adequate support from Francis Barber and a cameo from David Warner but given that everyone is supposed to be Italian, what's the point of these fine British actors being there? In fact, why set it in Italy at all - the film would work just as fine if it were set in Britain. It's symptomatic of a film that has plenty of ideas and heavyweight actors but little cohesion, imagination or enthusiasm. Personally, I'd rather watch something like "The Craft" or something with a bit of life in it. But I'm afraid "Superstition" hasn't much going for it. I knew there was a reason I'd never heard of it...

---

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
A difficult film to comment on., 7 April 2008

Author: Paul Andrews (poolandrews@hotmail.com) from UK

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Superstition starts in Italy where nineteen year old English teenager Julie McCullough (Sienna Guillory) is working for the Cenci's as an au pair looking after their young child Claudio, however one night tragedy strikes & a fire breaks out in the child's bedroom in which he dies. Julie is accused & charged with arson & murder, the public prosecutor Isabella Flores (Frances Barber) ask's her friend & defence lawyer Antonio Gabrieli (Mark Strong) to represent Julie which he agrees to. The police forensic experts have no idea how the fire started & the Italian press baying for blood dub Julie a witch, the evidence is against Julie as it seems is the whole of Italy. Things look bleak for Julie but then Antonio is contacted by a professor who may have a very unusual & very supernatural explanation for what happened...

This English, Dutch & Lexembourg co-production was directed by Kenneth Hope & if you stumble across Superstition without knowing anything about it you would be forgiven for thinking that it is a supernatural horror film which it isn't. The script by Kate Dennis & Paul Hoffman is much more of a courtroom drama than a straight horror film, in fact apart from one or two supernatural overtones I wouldn't call Superstition a horror film at all. The vast majority of the film is made up of the courtroom scenes, the personal angst surrounding Julie & the situation she finds herself in & her defence lawyer Antonio being drawn into her world. Superstition is very much a character driven piece, in fact Superstition lives or dies by it's character's since it's a very exposition heavy film with very little in the way of dramatic incident. Luckily the character's are actually excellently fleshed out to a degree where you care about them, the relationship's between people, people's motives, lies, trust & how the situation affects them is what Superstition is all about. The actual limited supernatural elements are a little hard to swallow & seem somewhat implausible in a rather forgettable twist ending. At 90 odd minutes in length if you have the patience to follow it then Superstition is a fairly engrossing & gripping drama, if your looking for supernatural horror & things that go bump in the night then forget it.

Director Strong does a nice job here & the film is very stylishly shot, the film is also quite cleverly edited with several flashbacks scenes which all tie together nicely. The film has a soft look about it with muted colours, wide open locations & lots of fades rather than quick sharp cuts between scenes. Again Superstition is not an out-and-out horror fest of blood & gore, far from it in fact & I don't think there's a single drop of blood in the entire thing or a single scene which is meant to be scary. There's a definite atmosphere of unease but it doesn't try to be scary at all. I am not an expert on Italian law but why was Julie freed after being convicted of arson? I know she was acquitted of murder but the fact remains that a baby died in the fire she was convicted of starting, wouldn't that be called manslaughter which is a crime in itself? Wouldn't the judge take that into account when sentencing? Also, despite being set in Italy not one person ever speaks in Italian...

Technically the film is well made with some nice stylish cinematography. The locations look nice enough although I am pretty sure it wasn't actually shot in Italy. There's some very good performances here from a good cast here including Charlotte Rampling, Alice Krige & the always watchable David Warner.

Superstition is more of a courtroom drama than a supernatural horror film & you really should know that before watching it, alas I think the marketing campaign bigs up the horror elements which are obviously easier to sell than a drama. Worth a watch if you have the patience, stick with it & don't expect a full on horror film. Not to be confused with the brilliant gory horror flick Superstition (1982) about a killer witch.

---

1 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
A good movie, Interesting and Original., 7 September 2005

Author: arronizmiguel from Mexico

I'm not a critic and I believe THEY JUST CAN'T ENJOY ANY MOVIE. If you persevere you can find errors even on the CLOUDS!

Me, a simple guy who loves to see movies, can ENJOY them without having to criticize anything, Just "Sit and Watch". Can say I liked the movie... or I didn't... And that's enough.

For everyone belonging to this group, let me tell you, SUPERSTITION is a good movie, with that European feeling... Artistic, interesting, where you actually can use your imagination and be engaged with the story.

The intervention of David Warner (one of my favorite Actors) is a blessing to the cast. The leading roles are very well done and the supporting actors too.

Perhaps the use of a more "Hollywood-Style-use-of-Songs" are something that crashed on my brain, but nothing too serious.

Movies in which a big part of them are spent on the Court room are something many will like from this one, since that's because a paranormal event, the better.

The publicity tries to involve something more "Satanic", but that's wrong... paranormal has nothing to do with it.

Don't try to find something like "The Exorcist"... This one might be considered as: "The X-Files meets Carrie"

As I always say, NEVER back up any critic unless you have seen the movie. A decent effort well done.

.

---

1 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
If in Doubt, leave it alone, 4 February 2005

Author: Matthew Williams from England

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Loosely based on a true story, Superstition is the tale of a British Au-Pair working in Italy, accused of using Witchcraft and Firestarting, after some fatal, fire related incidents. We then follow the story of her battle through the courts and her fight for innocence.

The film has some decent acting and some quite disturbing scenes, but is largely forgettable and brings nothing new to the genre.

It's OK if your desperate to see it, but if you have any doubt don't bother, it's probably not worth the effort.

5/10

For some decent Supernatural thrills, Try Sixth Sense, Stir of Echoes, What Lies Beneath or even Gothika, before you try this.

---

3 out of 22 people found the following comment useful :-
Confusing story with bad female main character, 24 June 2003

Author: lia00027 from Indonesia

I really don't like with the woman whom is the main character in this film. Usually we like the female main character, but I really think that she is stupid, and very suck. She can't do anything without his lawyer help, and she's acting like crazy people.

This movie is not really good, because: 1. The scenario is weakness. 2. There is to much flash back which make me bored and confused. 3. One part and the other part sometime doesn't have clear relationship. 4. The ending is not finished yet, which make me hate this film. 5. Fool female main character which people usually don't like because too weak. 6. Very stupid create film about fire if even the main character problem is not known well.

---

---

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history