The Gardener

The miscasting is almost fatal (Richard Grieco as a police commissioner??? Whose bright idea was that?), and the storyline is painfully obvious (we are forever waiting for the thickheaded heroine to figure out what is in clear view). Those two factors alone make the movie a waste of time (and a warning to Angie Everhart fanatics: don't come here looking for nudity). Even if you happen to catch this on TV, viewing it will offer you nothing; renting is simply out of the question. (*1/2)

The two couldn't be more different, yet they seem to share a similar fate: appearing in bad movies again and again. While McDowell has the best of his films tucked away fairly deep in his filmography, Everhart still is looking for the one feature that will allow her to really shine. Both get offered the wrong kind of parts - for the wrong reasons. "The Gardener" is a classic example of this: there's the mad scientist (McDowell plays that stuff without thinking about it - and it shows) and the abused beauty that brings the villain down in the end is played by - yes, a beauty. How could that be interesting? I know that many would disagree with me but I do believe that Everhart has talent, all she really needs is a solid script and a decent director to bring it out. And would please someone offer McDowell a part in which he's not some freak that makes the Mad Hatter look like Al Gore?

I got this flick at big lots for two dollars. and after watching it, i fell as if they owe me twenty. This movie is like a study in bad acting, scriptwriting, acting and sets. First off the casting was atrocious. Grieco looks as if he doesn't belong within 500 feet of this movie, playing the lieutenant, a role that seems to have been written for a much older actor. Everheart has no range, no emotion and is as stiff as richard simmons staring at stone phillips. malcolm mcdowall, well he looks as if he has to keep repeating in his head, "i'm being paid for this, i'm being paid for this." Poor malcolm, he has so much talent and spends all of is time in awful movie after awful movie. the dialoge seems as if it was written by a group of spider monkeys on payotee, lines seem to be thrown in grabastically without rhyme or reason. the worst thing though, has to be the directing, actually the complete lack of direction, Greico's character stays angry through the entire flick because he's not sure about the point of the character. Everheart is pointless, and francis ford coppala couldn't drag a decent performance out of her. there is a complete lack of connected storyline, and because of that, the bad acting is all the more evident. there is really nothing i can say that can relate the awfullness of this movie. i'm afraid that to understand you will actually have to watch this poor excuse for a film. i almost forgot about the cheaply done and completely out of the blue cgi effects. i apoligize, the movie has fried my brains.

Although I'm sorry to have seen this film in the first place, my wife came home with it, she loves Richard Grieco. Yeah, he's good looking. So am I.

Anyway, we've seen this almost funny piece of experiment that could have been a film if it was better written and especially filmed! It was too dark! I hate dark films. I've spend more then 500$ on my Philips television, it's a very good one so it had to be the film. That was my first and worst frustration.

But it was also too obvious. And at the end, ... leave that stupid plastic on Kelly's naked body: come on! When you're running for your life, you don't care if you're bare naked!!! (I wouldn't)

Stupid film, and I'm kind of ashamed to have watched it.

Great movie with wonderful role played by Malcolm MacDowell. Everhart's good, Grieco - OK. There are some unexpected twists,CGI special effects and unusual camera's angles . It's a little bit like Stephen King's works only...better !