Brilliant and touching

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Everyone on this board acts as if they were just assaulted with meat cleavers.Okay it's not Citizen Kane. I'd rather sit through this than some mindless film with car chases and explosions every five minutes.I think, right off, that this film was made for the wrong audience. It reminded me, in an odd way, of a time travel film called "From Time to Time" that starred Maggie Smith. It was an action and adventure film geared toward children - almost like a Hallmark film - but that adults would also enjoy. I think if this film had been made with that type of audience in mind, for television, it might have been better received.In this film, a woman, Sadie (Vera Day) who runs a London pub is murdered after she finds an unpublished book by Charles Dickens. One of her friends, Mike (Vinnie Jones), a former sports reporter, investigates. He wants to establish himself as an investigative reporter. A police press officer, Kate (Julie Cox), helps him. Also, he is aided by a homeless man.Following a riddle of Sadie's they find the manuscript. We then go between the time of Dickens and today. The book itself describes a murder, and Mike is interested in that, as he tries to solve what happened to Sadie.Mike has another project, looking into the death of a construction worker.This is a tad hard to follow, and the murder of Sadie is easily figured out. I still think the film had some good ideas and people in it, including Vanessa Redgrave, looking incredibly glamorous as Mike's old boss, and Derek Jacobi. Vera Day, who played Sadie, was a knockout, as you can probably tell, in the '50s, kind of a cross between Kim Novak and Janet Leigh.I found the beginning more enjoyable, and it moved a little faster. I didn't care for the ending.The acting was okay, and Vinnie Jones isn't the first sports figure to have a film career, if memory serves.

I didn't know anything about this DVD when I hired it. Had a quick look here at the comments but decided to keep an open mind. Obviously an independent film and low budget but that didn't worry me. I will watch anything with Derick Jacobi and as always he played his part well. What a pity no one else did. I had watched 'Atonement' a few weeks ago with Vanessa Redgrave and she was sublime. In this she seemed to just turn up to read the lines. In my opinion the main mistake was in casting Vinnie Jones. To be honest I saw his picture on the DVD cover but didn't notice that he got top billing. A sticker was strategically placed over his name! It was watchable and I quite liked the Dickens story alongside present day. Maybe with a more capable actor playing the lead this might have worked better. Still it was weak.

Let me admit up front: I know the guy who wrote and directed this movie. I like to think I can be objective about it nonetheless, but in an effort to counteract any bias I might feel, I'll try to base this review (and my rating above) on two fairly objective factors.First, take a look at the cast list: Vanessa Redgrave, Derek Jacobi, and Vinnie Jones. Think about how many movie offers each of them must have at any given moment. You don't get one actor like that (let alone three!) in a low-budget film made by an unknown unless they think there is something special in both the script and the director. Look, there's no reason you should care what I think about this movie--I'm just some anonymous guy on the Internet--but if Vanessa Redgrave, Derek Jacobi, and Vinnie Jones think this film is worth their while, then you should probably pay attention to them.Second, at a time when the British film industry was in something of a slump, the filmmakers behind "The Riddle" not only made their movie (with an amazing cast), they got it into the hands of 4.5 MILLION PEOPLE. This would be an impressive accomplishment for any film, but for a quirky, ambitious indie movie, it's unprecedented. And as an aspiring independent filmmaker, I find that inspirational.

The Riddle is an enjoyable, tongue-in-cheek thriller that seems to take its inspiration from old radio detectives and noir novels.It has two separate but intertwined stories, one about a sports writer try to solve the death of a friend and the other about a rediscovered book by Charles Dickens. Jacobi has different roles in both stories.I was slightly baffled by some of the vitriolic comments until I read one lady who complained that there was 'some old guy' spouting gobbdygook. That would be Sir Derek Jacobi, giving the 'so much blood' speech by Charles Dickens after the death of Nancy. Speaking personally, one of the world's greatest living actors reading words by the greatest writer of the 19th Century will do me.One other thought. While I've never been a huge fan of Vinnie Jones, I was impressed by his range in this and his determination to move outside his usual roles. He deserves credit.One for people who enjoy something quirky and intelligent.