the leading man is my tpye

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

When Phil (Brown) and Kate (Lowell) fall pregnant after buying a new house they decide to hire a nanny for when the baby is born. Unfortunately, their first choice is killed by a hit and run driver while she's on a bike ride. Though, luckily for them, the agency send round a replacement. Camilla (Seagrove) is a stunning English nanny who is only too happy to look after baby Jake... any time... all the time... As time goes by Phil starts to feel as though there's something out of place with Camilla, who isn't above using her sexuality to get her way... This, in turn, turns Kate's investigation mode on, only to learn some dark and chilling, hard to believe, truths about their son's guardian...I've never been a great fan of Friedkin's work, though I have to admit he has a magnificent eye for composition and iconic shots (the only thing which kept me awake through the yawn-fest that was The Exorcist - oh controversial). In this film, he has extended his eye for composition into entire scene's and employed some effective lighting techniques, especially in the night time forest sequences. This actually brings it out of the horror genre and into dark fantasy, which seems to fit the story and direction much better. There is a lack of tension, suspense, and fear which are required to make a good horror film. Even the gruesome effects are shot in such a way that they aren't exactly horrific or fear-inducing. They are good and well done. though Friedkin opts to quickly snap between the gore shots. He even adds strange angles to them, which adds more to the fantasy genre and detracts from the horror.This is a tale of old mythologies and tells of evil tree spirits who like nothing better than to eat the souls of newborns. This could easily have been another run of the mill horror flick of the time but it is something more. I just wish that Camilla's drive and reasoning behind her actions had been explained more. This could only have made her character stronger and darker. However, Seagrove adds a nice sensuality and slyness to her... if this woman were an animal she would be the snake that tempted Adam and Eve. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast is pretty average, especially the two lead characters, who are verging on two-dimensional stereotypicalness. Even Miguel Ferrer, who I've always rated as a "one-to-watch" actor, appears underused and a tad flat. Only Brad Hall as Ned Runcie comes across as a more rounded character. This may be because his character has lots to do in the story; he's built the house they live in; he becomes their friend; he has a romantic interest in Camilla; he's the first to realise there's something not-quite-right with Camilla. This gives him more depth and scope than the rest of the characters in the story.The special effects are still viable today, the killings of the gang members, though filmed in a strange manner, is well done and looks realistic - given the circumstances. Even the tree bark images and figures are chilling to see and reasonably lifelike, adding to the strength of the fantasy elements.This doesn't work as a horror, though, if you're a fantasy fan and you prefer them with a darker edge then this will probably be up your street. It's at least worth one viewing... but I'd wait until you've not got anything interesting to watch.

Molly and Allan Sheridan leave their baby with their nanny Diana Julian. She's a druid who sacrifices the baby to worship the tree. She and the baby disappear. Phil (Dwier Brown) and Kate Sterling (Carey Lowell) move from Chicago to Santa Monica. Phil has a new advertising job and Kate has a new baby. They hire nanny Camilla Grandier (Jenny Seagrove) after the one they wanted has a deadly accident. Camilla and the baby get chased into the woods by three thugs. The rapists cut Camilla but the tree and wolves kill the thugs. The neighbor Ned Runcie takes a liking to Camilla.William Friedkin tries his hand on another horror. The problem is that it's never scary. The characters are rarely compelling. The tree effects seem second rate. There is little to no tension since the young couple has no rooting interest. They are very bland. The most memorable thing that Jenny Seagrove does is get naked and get into the tree makeup. There are unreasonable character traits. For example, Kate is much too compassionate to Camilla when Phil starts making accusations. Kate should be much more of a mamma bear. At the hospital, they don't call in security and instead they run home where inevitably Camilla will follow. There are plenty of wrong turns and uninspired roads in this Friedkin side trip.

Phil and Kate Sterling have moved into one of the remote canyon areas of Los Angeles. Within the year, Kate gives birth to their first baby, who they name Jake. Within a few weeks of the delivery, they make the decision for Kate to return to work as a designer immediately, which means hiring a full-time, live-in nanny.The development of "The Guardian" is a story in itself. Starting off as a book called "The Nanny", it was handed off to Sam Raimi. In retrospect, this seems to make sense given his history with chainsaws and killer trees. But he dropped out to make "Darkman" (a wise choice) and the directing duties were passed to William Friedkin.In Friedkin's hands, two things happen. First, you go from a fun director (Raimi) to a much more serious, award-winning visionary. That is a good thing. And second, you start a series of rewrites, with Friedkin himself writing much of the new material, and you go from a story ostensibly about druids to some sort of adult Grimm's fairy tale that never quite comes across on screen. This is probably bad.The film was disliked in its own time, notoriously making Roger Ebert's hate list alongside everything in Rob Schneider's career. It seems to have been profitable, but poor audience reaction overall doomed it to relative obscurity. (For a director as lauded as Friedkin is, it is surprising how many of his films seem to be completely forgotten.) What really makes this film fail is the pacing. Scenes are drawn out much too long, and where this should be a time to create tension and suspense, we end up just waiting impatiently for the next kill. For what it's worth, the kills are pretty good -- plenty of blood and gore for the horror fanatics who like that sort of thing. But you will be waiting far too long for the payoff, which is disappointing. This all has to be blamed on Friedkin, not the editor, as you can only trim so much.The rest of the crew is notable. Even if the names are not familiar, their work probably is. Cinematographer John Alonzo had done "Chinatown" and "Scarface", and Denise Cronenberg provided the wardrobe. Yes, Denise is a member of that well-known Canadian horror family (she is David's sister).Although not everyone will love this film, for those who have given it a ult following, you might appreciate the Scream Factory blu-ray release. The sound is alright. The picture is less than you might expect from blu, but this is probably due to the original source material. Much of it is no better than what you would expect from VHS, unfortunately. But where Scream shines is with the extras. There are several interviews with the cast and crew, most of which are new. Friedkin himself has more than 15 minutes on camera talking about his work. If you ever wanted to know anything, certainly your question is answered.Most disappointing (and I hate to bash Scream) is the lack of an audio commentary. The earlier Anchor Bay DVD had one (with Friedkin), and you would expect it to be ported over. There must have been an issue with the rights, but regardless of the explanation it is a huge loss and knocks this down from a "must-have" or "day one" purchase to something for serious fans only. (Sorry, Scream, but not every disc can be perfect.)

THE GUARDIAN seems like one of the more average achievements of master Friedkin–an urban Gothic tale, a grim fairy tale fostering the audiences' fear of the woods.Jenny Seagrove was a fine beauty and an average but interesting actress; here she gets to play 'Camilla', name of LeFanuesque resonance, and at least she offers something to glimpse at in her few nude scenes. The action keeps linear, the treatment will appear like quite unsubtle. A young and not very likable couple has a newborn son and hires a babysitter to look after him—the babysitter is Mrs. Seagrove. Very quickly Friedkin reveals that Jenny is a freak.