The conundrum at the heart of "The Dead One in the Thames River" is not whodunit, or why they dunit. It's the movie's two warring attributes of incomprehensibility and tediousness, and which came first. Is the movie so boring because it doesn't make sense, or does it not make sense because it is so boring? Part of the problem is, aside from the female lead (Uschi Glas), not a one of the other characters makes any impression whatsoever. By the end of the movie I still didn't know who any of them were. It should be pretty simple: some are cops and some are gangsters. Either the actors used were so colourless they were impossible to tell apart, or the script was so trite it didn't give the actors anything to do that might distinguish themselves. It's a bit like the fight between confusion and tedium outlined above. The story is something about a ballet student who helps gangsters sell heroin. Apparently she tips off the police (or something) and seems to get killed. Her sister, also played by Uschi Glas in a duel role, comes from Australia (she doesn't exactly seem Australian) to find out what happened to her. While this is going on, a sniper is taking people out with perhaps the least violent headshots I've ever seen in a movie. There's no bullet hole or even much of a wound from his fatal gunblasts, just the tiniest dab of red paint. You could do a better job with a paintbrush. Late in the movie it is revealed that the sister we saw killed in the beginning isn't actually dead? She comes back, only to be killed again? Didn't they pull her body out of the water earlier? Sorry, but that just went completely over my head. This is the first krimi I've seen. If they're all like this one, I won't watch many more.
Angels of Terror
Angels of Terror
An Australian woman arrives in London to search for her sister who she finds is involved with a heroin smuggling gang. The gang itself is under attack from an unknown rival, who is methodically assassinating them with a shot to the head.
December 13, 2020