Frog-Legs Unfortunately our time on earth is limited and the amount of it that you might spend watching this pointless drivel will never be returned to you. I gave it a half hour of my life-span and decided it was quite enough.Take it from me, I've seen my share of art-house films or grade-Z exploitation flicks. This was just complete garbage

michaelstreet-75872 OK, so it's not polished Hollywood, but nor was late 1970's Britain for the youth of the time. It will help viewers hugely if they are old enough to appreciate this film in context. This was never intended to be light family viewing, and it makes not even the slightest effort to follow standard movie rules. Instead, this represents the disconnection youth felt from authority, be it the power holding class or big business which just seeks to exploit (ooh, nothing changed there). In this movie, the Punks have taken over the streets and the corporations still pull the strings from their protected mansions. Religious groups are not going to like the raw attention to sex and violence which society does its best to bottle-up and deny exists (funnily enough we have retrograded these days into political correctness).Media and institutions are more sophisticated at managing us these these days, and the youth of today has different issues - but the message of the film is a relevant today (maybe even more so) at it was in 1978.Watch with an open mind !

kiwisago Not a commercial film, much more interesting than that. Raw, eccentric. It doesn't look like a lot of money was spent on it, but that a lot of genuinely creative collaboration was. Some moments are visually striking or disturbing - characters occupying a decaying urban world, with sex, rage and an emphasis on female-generated violence.As a record of a particular time and place (underground Britain, mid seventies), it's fascinating. As a picture of the British punk scene at the time, I understand it's problematic (some of the leads had no connection to the punk scene at all), but I'm not British, so my understanding of that part of it is thin at best.I came away with an impression of Derek Jarman's sensibility. It seemed deeply pessimistic and surprisingly traditional-minded, despite all the way-out, on-the-edge characters. I was impressed by The Last of England some years ago, and he seemed to be circling the same ground from the start, if this older film is anything to go by.

JasonLeeSmith This movie had a shoestring budget, the acting wasn't very good, and the plot didn't make much sense; nevertheless, I liked it.The plot: At the request of Queen Elizabeth I, John Dee, her magician, summons an angel to show the Queen what life if like in the future. Flash-forward to a punk-rock future version of England. The world economy has completely collapsed, roving street gangs (and the police) randomly kill or terrorize people, and Top of the Pops is played constantly on Television.The story centers around a gang of female punks (an Historian, a Pyromaniac, a Nymphomaniac, their leader, and their au pair), who more or less aimlessly travel through London killing people.Like I've said, the plot is not very substantial, but the characters are very vivid and seem very real. Likewise, the writing is well done, and does a good job of highlighting the frustration and alienation of the era.There are some funny bits, there are some scary bits, and there are some boring bits. I thought I was going to be completely bored with the movie, but I wound up finding it very interesting.