Much underrated and sadly, little seen seedy gem. Low budget so lots of location shooting, always good, especially in London and if a little rough around the edges, all the better. Helen Mirren gives a gutsy and convincing performance in what is a surprisingly convincing glimpse of the sleazier side of late 70s London. She would play a rather more glossy version of the fancied girl on the edge of the underworld in the following year's Long Good Friday but even in that fine film we do not see a finer performance than here. Matthew Chapman does well with his limited funds and gets decent performances from everyone including the child and surely one of the most menacing bad guys in cinema. Paul Angelis, who worked mainly in TV but famously voiced parts for Yellow Submarine, switches deftly between friendly and fearsome as a psychotic criminal strong man and coming between the two main protagonists. Solid script, competent direction, great performances and wonderful settings make this an essential view.

well, the title is certainly "trashy" enough to mislead those looking for a quality drama away to other things. the makers definitely could've chosen a better one, but perhaps they wanted the added interest a lurid title would draw? the box the DVD i watched came in had this extra bit of salaciousness as a caption at the top: "how much sex is enough" (l.o.l.) but, being familiar with helen mirren's career, i knew that if she were starring in it there might be nudity (and there is),but it'd be a first-rate film (and it is). she's always been a knockout, in addition to being one of Britain's best actresses. hence, her honorary status there as a "dame." (she was also, at age 60, recently a marquee guest speaker at the local film festival) i'm really surprised, though, that somebody didn't go back and change the title of this film. anyway, i liked it. if you like helen mirren - particularly, early h.m. - you'll like it, too. note her entrance into the film's story after the first few minutes. that tells you everything you need to know about what the filmmakers think of her, and her own class.

I can't say that I liked this film very much, but it did have some good elements. First, and foremost, Helen Mirren. She has always been sooo beautiful, even into her sixties. Here, she was about thirty-five, and looks it, with some lines around the eyes that no modern actress would tolerate in this Botox era. I found it charming and attractive, myself. But then, I'm no spring chicken myself. Many actresses ruin their looks with toxins and surgeries. Yes, feminine beauty is ephemeral, but the effort to maintain it often goes horribly bad these days. Anyway, the plotting and casting seem better to me now, than when I was watching the film yesterday. Not sure what that means. I guess I'd say that fans of Mirren (like me) should definitely see this, and others should probably skip it.