The Riddle (DVD)

...dead, apparently killed. When Mike, the journalist, hears her message, he is intrigued, and eventually finds the manuscript. He teams up with Kate, a police press officer and a tramp to find out what happened to Sadie and along the way, he also becomes intrigued by a murder described in Dicken's manuscript. It soon becomes clear that if he solves Dicken's murder, then he will be a lot further forward in solving Sadie's. However, there are people ...
...he ever find the answers he is searching for?

Directed by Brendan Foley, this film is rather individual because it became the first feature film to be distributed on DVD by a national newspaper - The Daily Mail. The Daily Mail bought the rights to the film and gave it away as a freebie to people who bought the newspaper. Many will think this automatically makes the film a dud - free DVDs with newspapers are usually either very old or ... more

A pub landlady comes across an unseen manuscript by Charles Dickens. However, before she can do any more than leave a message on a journalist's phone about it, she is found dead, apparently killed. When Mike, the journalist, hears her message, he is intrigued, and eventually finds the manuscript. He teams up with Kate, a police press officer and a tramp to find out what happened to Sadie and along the way, he also becomes intrigued by a murder described in Dicken's manuscript. It soon becomes clear that if he solves Dicken's murder, then he will be a lot further forward in solving Sadie's. However, there are people who are desperate to stop him in his tracks. Will he ever find the answers he is searching for?

Directed by Brendan Foley, this film is rather individual because it became the first feature film to be distributed on DVD by a national newspaper - The Daily Mail. The Daily Mail bought the rights to the film and gave it away as a freebie to people who bought the newspaper. Many will think this automatically makes the film a dud - free DVDs with newspapers are usually either very old or very bad. And there is unfortunately no exception here. The Riddle has an original idea, but it is badly told and, much of the time, doesn't make much sense.

The greatest mystery of all is how Derek Jacobi came to be associated with this film. He is a talented and acclaimed actor and I have never seen him in a bad role. To be fair, he probably is the only saving grace of the film. He plays both the tramp and Charles Dickens and is pretty good at both. As Charles Dickens, he is perhaps a little over theatrical, particularly compared to everyone else's acting, but he's still good. As the tramp, he is a kindly old man who has somehow lost his way - his chance meeting with Mike is highly contrived, as is his involvement with the case thereafter - however that is not Jacobi's fault. Thankfully, he does look completely different, so there is no confusing the two roles.

Vinnie Jones plays Mike. I think Vinnie Jones has some talent as an actor - I thought he was great in Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, for example. Here, however, he comes across as being incredibly wooden. Perhaps I've come to associate him too much with rough and ready criminal-type roles, because he certainly didn't seem like a journalist at all. He isn't completely awful, but I really got the impression that Brendan Foley didn't make the most of him and should have edited out quite a lot of his scenes. As for his so-called relationship with Kate, played by Julie Cox - there was absolutely no chemistry between the two of them whatsoever. Frankly, Kate's role was superfluous. Julie Cox just never seemed to get into the role.

Another mystery is the appearance of Mel Smith as a Professor of literature and Vanessa Redgrave as a Devil Wears Prada-style editor. Mel Smith is convincing enough, but doesn't really have an impact on the overall story. Vanessa Redgrave really hams her role up and not, as far as I am concerned, in a good way. I was actually quite shocked at just how bad she was. On a more positive note, I really liked Vera Day as the pub landlady. She came across as being natural and likeable - it's just a shame her character died so early in the proceedings.

The way the story is told is not exactly original, but it is rather strange, for all the wrong reasons. The film starts off with Mike's story, until the landlady finds the manuscript, when it suddenly switches to Charles Dickens and his narration of the murder of his sister-in-law. So suddenly does the switch occur that I actually thought there was something wrong with the DVD and it was another film entirely. And even after I'd got used to the idea of there being two stories, I still found the switching between the two clumsy and strange. There are other examples of poor editing in the main part of the film - clumsy switching between Mike making toast and the finding of Sadie's body, for example; also some continuity errors.

The worst part of the film is undoubtedly the end. By that point, I had long given up the idea of anything likely to save the film. All that was needed was a tidying up of the ends and the credits. However, what actually happens is inexplicable and frankly, just plain daft. I think Foley's idea of linking the two stories was a bad one. Both would have made reasonable, if a little dull, films on their own, but combining them just left me with a sense of having wasted my time. I just couldn't understand the point of it all - with perhaps the exception of Derek Jacobi's acting, there really are no advantages to this film at all.

Just as a final insult, there is some quite odd music that accompanies the film. Most film music is played in the background, unless it has a real purpose to the story. Here, there is some very in your face music that doesn't fit the film all that well and is most definitely distracting. One song in particular that is played while Mike is drugged and being seduced by a young woman is very sexual and more than a little bit creepy. The overall impression is strange and uncomfortable. There's a rating of 12 on the film, for these mild sexual scenes and a bit of blood and violence at the end. Really not much that children shouldn't see - although I doubt very much that they would get past the first ten minutes anyway.

There are no extras with the DVD - I am reviewing the film only.

I was disappointed with this film. It isn't unwatchable, at least not to me, but then I have a very high threshold for rubbish. If you're a big fan of any of the actors, then it might be worth a very brief look, but I think you'll be disappointed. It certainly isn't worth the price that it is selling for on play.com. However, I'm sure there won't be any difficulty in getting hold of the Daily Mail DVD - copies seem to be readily available in charity shops at at car boots. Not recommended.

The DVD is available from play.com for £4.99.

Classification: 12

Running time: 116 minutes 

...less