Freaktana
A Major Disappointment
SteinMo
What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.
Fairaher
The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.
michaellisher
Hippopotamus is an adaption of a novel written by Stephen Fry, which by credit to whomever chose the cast, became obvious within ten minutes into the film when Ted Wallace, played by Roger Allam, affirmed his character so well as to have an essence of Stephen Fry's grandiloquence emanate through his role. For that reason, this film would certainly be recommended to any fans of Stephen Fry, himself. The quality of which, between the book itself and the film, must forgo to others more competent as book reviewers rather than film, as I, myself, thoroughly enjoyed the more eloquent use of language, as expected from a book, whilst a cast, of whom were capable of the eccentric roles which were required from them, were perfectly matched to the script. Bringing together a film, which by today's standards, is a phenomenal increase in the use of grammar with a visual display to aid the story onto the screen. The story revolves around a supposed miracle of which Ted Wallace (Roger Allam) is employed by Jane Swann (Emily Berrington) to witness for himself but yet opposes throughout. With such opposition, the film becomes an Agatha Christie Poirot mystery with all the clues just need piecing together to figure out if indeed this was a film, as one would watch at Christmas, with all the miracles of hope and joy, or if, by going against the grain of human emotion, reason and logic would succeed to answer the inexplicable. Much to my disappointment was that a search for more adaptations of Stephens Frys books led to zero.
Paul Creeden
We have been christened by spunk inspired by Stephen Fry. Perhaps not miraculous. Perhaps always pompous. Perhaps always hilarious. Who better than nearly omnipresent Roger Allam to be the vessel of Bard Fry's venom? I say: Absolutely none. The supporting cast did not always rise to the occasion. Some of the editing could have been better. The boiler plate mansion seemed a bit tired. All in all, it was a good time. Fry's ability to poke fun at mystical and religious tom-foolery never flags. Even an offended fairy-believer would have to howl occasionally, if she had a sense of humor. It's good to see Fry's work presented well, even though I would hardly expect him to think so.
kmerwin-81-599131
I cannot recommend this movie for many reasons. I will list three:The dialogue..."blah, blah, blah, cuss, cuss, cuss...blah, blah, blah, cuss, cuss, cuss."It's focus on destroying any hope or faith at all was disturbing. Disrespecting and ridiculing throughout.The theme of "how sexually disgusting can I be... all set in a beautiful English countryside" was a constant. And truthfully, it just got old...it's like the writer was stuck on the same merry-go-round of: disgust, rude, offense, sexual baseness, cuss....but with an Englishaccent to make it sound really brilliant. Well, don't be deceived, it was not.I wasted my time...don't waste yours.
Reid Gagle
A long time ago, our hero was a respected poet, but the muse has long ago abandoned him. Now he is a drunken theater critic whose high jinks, while amusing, are out of control and cost him his job.A young woman hires him to look into a miracle worker, who happens to be our hero's godson. While a dyed-in-the-wool skeptic, our man needs the money and take the job. It's also a trip to his past, and he has to cross bridges that were burned decades before.While the sum of the movie is much less than the sum of its parts, the parts are often quite witty. The lead is well played by the excellent Roger Allam.The movie was taken from a book by Stephen Fry, of "Blackadder" and "Jeeves and Wooster" fame.
