User Reviews

I had high hopes for "The Oxford Murders", a new Straight-to-DVD film starring Elijah Wood and John Hurt, and most of those hopes were slowly let down as I watched the movie.

The film follows Martin (Wood), an American who travels to Oxford to write his thesis under the legendary mathematician Arthur Seldom (Hurt), and finds an angry, pompous old man instead of the wise and caring fellow he had imagined. Disillusioned, Martin is about to return home when he and Seldom find a dead body. The rest of the film covers Martin and Seldom's race against time to find the killer, using the mathematical theories that both are knowledgeable about.

The film is pretty bland. It's characters, save the amazing John Hurt, are one-dimensional. Martin is boring and unengaging and Elijah Wood does nothing to improve his script. The same can be said of Julie Cox and especially Leonar Watling. John Hurt is the only reason I finished, really. His acting skill is not at home in the world of blandness.

You could do better than "The Oxford Murders", but if you're not looking for too much it will suffice.

So what we have here is an British-ish kind of detective story that has an American exchange student in it. That partially, perhaps, causes a strange blend of both American and British features in the movie.

What I really love in British detective stories is that usually they are quite calm, slow and sophisticated. It creates a certain mood to the movies. However, 'The Oxford Murders' basically does its everything to destroy that mood by cinematography that just makes me want to look away. The takes are very much too rapid and hectic. I don't think it suits here at all. This American guy, played by Elijah Wood, also has some sex in the film, which I personally find too intensive for a British detective story. It just doesn't fit there. It felt awkward in this particular film. The movie was directed by a Spanish guy but I believe he knows much stuff about British detective stories if he makes one. The new stuff he tries to pull here doesn't work, though.

Of course there is some good here, too. I love John Hurt's performance. Also the strange mathematics are intriguing, everything I do understand about it whatsoever.

All in all, I'm not sure what kind of game the film makers are playing here. Everything happening on screen is happening too fast and oddly for this genre. I'd love to like this movie more but many details are too out of place and the whole movie is like a terribly played discord with an otherwise beautiful instrument.

5/10

The Oxford Murders is one of a very rare type of movie, I'm not even sure what you would call it. Intellectual Thriller, or maybe Nerd Mystery. Whatever the category, it's one of those thrillers where the leads are so intelligent and inquisitive that they often fly into uncontrollable excitement because of some new bit of mathematical code that just popped into their minds.

It starts out with a great hook – a professor is telling a story to his class about a man who, in the midst of a heated battle, sat down amidst all of the gunfire around him and wrote feverishly in his notebook, because he absolutely had to write down what was in his mind at that very moment. What was so important that he would risk his life?

Much of the first part of the movie is a philosophical discourse which asks us generic existential clichés like Can we know the truth? And how do we really know anything? Elijah Wood stars as Martin, a young American so eager to achieve the answers to these questions that he travels to England with the sole purpose of picking the brain of a Professor Seldom (whose name sounds like it belongs in a Harry Potter story), the man who was giving the lecture at the beginning of the movie.

You see, Martin believes that if we uncover the secret meaning of numbers, we'll know the secret meaning of reality. I'm going to just come right out and say that the movie pretty much lost me at this point. I'm not sure how the meaning of numbers is connected to the meaning of reality, or if the meaning of reality means the meaning of life or just the true nature of our surroundings, and most importantly, I didn't know there was a secret meaning of numbers. In fact, until I saw this movie, I thought that mathematics was a universal language. Maybe I didn't pay enough attention in my college philosophy classes.

Regardless, questions like these soon become of the utmost importance, as a series of murders begin happening that seem to be driven by an intellectual motive. At this point you'll notice that every character's behavior and background is designed to make them a suspect, and the movie literally turns into a game of Clue. During their investigations, Seldom and Martin actually discuss the similarities to Clue and how best to solve the mystery using that format.

To muddle things even further, the movie uses philosophy to stretch reasonable doubt to the absolute extreme. Seldom explains to Martin in dramatically hushed language that no matter how certain and clear and obvious the evidence, we can never be ABSOLUTELY certain who the killer is.

This is the kind of nihilism that leads to the logical conclusion that we should just open all of the prisons and let everyone run free, and maybe even dismantle the entire legal system because, following that logic, it clearly serves no purpose.

But one thing I did love about the movie is how Martin shows up from America, this gigantic math geek if ever there was one, and immediately makes friends with two beautiful girls who immediately fall in love with him. I hate it when that happens! One of them, who he met while playing racquetball, is so stunningly beautiful that it makes no sense when she falls for this guy. She makes Elijah Wood look like a little kid!

I think there's a good sex scene in the movie where you can see her naked, but I missed almost the entire thing because I fainted when she took her shirt off.

There is a complicated and unnecessary back story late in the film about a past student of Seldom's who drove himself insane with his strenuous efforts to answer some of the some of the questions of the universe until he ended up helpless on a hospital bed because his body couldn't keep up with his mind. He loses his legs and his mobility and his sanity and then can't even do better than a hospital that has so little respect for its patients that they would leave a legless man lying naked on his stomach for all to see. Nice.

But in the movie's defense, despite all of the mumbo jumbo throughout the film, the climax is actually pretty good. You may feel completely lost for a good part of the running time unless you have a little background in mathematics and philosophy yourself (I don't).

But unfortunately, they still can't resist handing us a nicely packaged philosophical sound bite to wrap everything up at the end, which creates a little problem. The mystery in the movie has been allowed to solve itself, and to do so in a pretty impressive way, but then they give us an entirely different solution through dialogue – a crazy solution.

I'm willing to bet that this story looked great on paper, but on the screen there is a little too much nonsense to deal with and FAR too much high-brow intellectualism. It's safe to assume that a large portion of the audience will feel pretty alienated. I personally have a tough time relating to characters that get uncontrollably excited about things like historical philosophy and math theory, and an entire movie based on things like this is even more of a challenge.

On the other hand, in a time when our movies are overflowing with stupidity, we should cherish the ones that really try to give us something to think about. But personally I prefer the ones that are just a little more accessible

Initially i thought its a good mathematical murder mystery movie like davinci code... A murders happening in college by leave behind mathematical code.. There is no impressive twists and turns in this movie.. Just satisfied movie...

This murders series story full of turns and twists concerns about an US student named Martin (Elijah Wood) who goes to Oxford University for a doctoral thesis . There contacts a veteran professor named Seldom (John Hurt) and join forces to investigate a murders series . Professor and pupil differ the points of view about numbers and on the influence of the treatise logical-philosophical by Wiggenstein , the greatest book of 20th century . The grisly killings are apparently linked to mysterious code , semiotics, and rare symbols.

This mystery murder picture blends thriller , suspense, tension , plot-twists as well as an intriguing script delving on mathematics-philosophical theories . The film works on various levels and is constantly reconfigured , however contains some embarrassing and contriving moments and also certain confusion . Poorly developing love story between Elijah Wood and Leonor Watling . Strong performance by John Hurt (role was firstly approached by Michael Caine and Jeremy Irons) and excellent plethora of secondaries as Julie Cox (Dune) , the veteran actress Anna Massey , the nice French player Dominique Pinon (City of lost children) and Jim Carter as the Police Inspector . Interesting screenplay by Javier Guerricoacheverria , Alex de La Iglesia's usual writer . Atmospheric cinematography by Kiko De La Rica with a good camera work . Suspenseful musical score by Roque Baños who appears as an orchestra conductor . The motion picture is well directed by Alex De La Iglesia . He's a cool director who had got much success such as ¨Accion Mutante¨ , ¨Day of beast¨ and ¨Perlita Durango¨, and winner of several Goyas (Spanish Oscars) , however his movies have not yet reached box office in USA , but he has strong followers . This is without a doubt a mysterious and thought-provoking movie to be enjoyed for suspense and thrillers fans .

An ambitious mathematics grad student in number theory, Martin (Elijah Wood), arrives in Oxford eager to work with famed Professor Seldom (John Hurt). The film refreshingly starts with a brief history of math and the philosophical stances of both characters on the subject. Then the first murder occurs, with of course the use of a symbol that begs the assistance of Professor Seldom and Martin in the police case.

"The Oxford Murders" is good because it uses actual math and consistent logic. One of their only deviations is the use of Bormat's Last Theorem instead of Fermat's Last Theorem but that is just to keep in line with its fictional characters. There were perhaps a few too many twists but it was well enough written that most of them probably could have been predicted.

It plays out exactly like an old-fashioned murder mystery and set in compelling Oxford University. Like old-fashioned murder mysteries, there is no violence or gore but has a liberal use of profanity and sexual nudity (but Wood and Leonor Watling are very attractive so that's not an issue). I enjoyed the use of math and logic in "The Oxford Murders" and will likely search out future films from the writers and director.

This film is about a mathematics professor and a graduate student trying to solve murders that are connected by a mysterious code series.

"The Oxford Murders" spends too much time elaborating and dragging on the relationships between Martin, Arthur Seldom, Beth and Lorna. It gives me the impression that the filmmakers ran out of ideas on riddles and puzzles, hence made up a series of love and jealousy scenes to fill up the screen time. As a result, the first 70 minutes of the film mistakenly focuses on the poorly built love entanglements, which is rather plain and boring.

The next 20 minutes starts to be interesting as the riddle is full on, but it is too hard to follow. Only the ending twist captivated me, but that lasts for 5 minutes only.

If the riddles can be more evenly spaced and better presented, "The Oxford Murders" could have been a great mystery film. It could have been captivating as a simplified version of "Da Vinci Code", but unfortunately it failed.

Since previous reviews are visible it is impossible to write one as if casting a virgin glance to the movie reviewed. It is obvious that the majority of the reviews was negative although the overall ratings were not that bad.I have to say that the movie was tolerable and and even enjoyable and I think that negative criticism stemmed from the fact that the cast and the locale as well as the intellectual pretensions of the movie raised expectations that could not be met. It is very common from my experience that when films deal with weighty matters such as mathematics, philosophy or religion they do so in a schematic and simplified manner and that applies also to movies that were successes such as The Name of the Rose or The Da Vinci Code. I can not find a way that such matters could be worked out and presented in a movie that has to last for about two hours approximately in any other manner that would appear anything but schematic and frivolous to someone who has personal experience or knowledge of such matters-movies are entertainment an not mathematical treatises or religious tracts and therefore simplification is a structural deficiency of this artistic medium cosubstancial with it and impossible to overcome. Therefore do not blame someone for something he can not deliver because of his nature.

Criticisms have been leveled against the characters and actors. Some people found that Wood was not attractive enough to find a sexual partner-as he did in the movie. Who is to judge that. By that logic beautiful people-whatever that means- should mate only with their kind-something that everyday experience denies. The inspector appeared as silly to some- well after all as in the book he did not find the real solution! The Russian student appeared as a caricature but after all that was the choice made by the movie-maker. As for the professor, well what can I say he was professorial and coming from a more traditional country in my experience professors are expected to act in a rather uppish manner.

The central riddle of the movie became crystal clear to me when I read the book because truly filmic time is to fast for me in order to be able to comprehend mysteries and their solutions and that is a general experience I have with films probably due to my lack of visual intelligence and comprehension.

I liked the sexy appearance of Lorna and I think it added to the movie as a diversion from the platitudinous philosophizing of some of the central characters.I think the movie had some sex, a little mathematics, some academia, a bit of mystery, the allure of a historic university town and a final twist of the plot-not that bad after all.

Philosophy, mathematics & logic, Oxford University, murder, intellectuals … all the components that one could hope for in a cerebral, cozy British murder mystery. I, like several others who have written reviews, had high hopes for what would be served up, but ended up disappointed.

The genuinely famous "Fermat's Last Theorem" mysteriously became "Bormat's Last Theorem," which was somewhat indicative of much of the flimflam & fakery that enveloped the movie. The whole production was buried in pseudo intellectualism, name-dropping (numerous mathematicians, logicians & philosophers who would probably have preferred, like Fermat, that their names had been changed to protect their reputations) and contrived clues that depended on parsing a presumed mathematical/logical series. Beneath it all there was a plot that might have qualified for a mediocre episode of Midsomer Murders or Columbo, but would hardly engage the "little grey cells" of even Hercule Poirot.

Martin (Elijah Wood) and Arthur Seldom (John Hurt) spend a good deal of their time shouting at one another (and various other people) in ersatz academic one-upmanship, apparently on the assumption that the louder you are, the more convincing your dubious thinking must be. More alarming, Martin felt compelled to dash from pillar to post every few minutes, frequently colliding with other people carrying books or papers that went flying in the air. Rather unconvincing romantic couplings and consequent jealousies seemed totally disconnected from the rest of the story. Towards the end we were even treated to a rather tepid car chase and fiery bus crash in a vain effort to heighten the drama.

This is a case where less would have certainly been more. Too much was thrown in, in an attempt to elevate a trite and poorly concocted plot with a cloak of intellectualism and atmospherics. Too many unhinged and bipolar characters were floating about. It all seemed to be a hodgepodge of distractions aimed at concealing the absence of substance.

It just never came together.

And the Award for most drastic alteration of stylistic trademarks and choice in movies goes to … Alex de la Iglesia! Seriously, if you would watch "The Oxford Murders" without knowing he directed it, you'd never ever be able to make the link with his previous and very recognizable accomplishments, like "Day of the Beasts", "La Communidad", "800 Bullets" and "Perdita Durango". This is a very slow-brooding and atmosphere-driven thriller with an absolute lack of blackly humorous situations; whereas practically all the director's other films are a combination of shocks, thrills and especially pitch-black comedy. Hey, good for him! We ought to applaud filmmakers who're courageous enough to try something entirely new and different. And it also has to be said that "The Oxford Murders" turned out to be quite an absorbing and suspenseful whodunit-thriller with a (too?) convoluted plot, intelligent albeit far-fetched red herrings, copious references towards classic cinematic landmarks as well as historical figures and engaging acting performances from a prominent cast. The script was adapted from a novel written by Guillermo Martinez and – according to an acquaintance of mine who actually read it – the events in the film faithfully follow those in the book. The determined American math whiz kid Martin travels to Oxford University, hoping to meet and work together with his idol; professor Arthur Seldom. The professor rapidly turns out to be an obnoxious bastard who humiliates Martin during a lecture and in front of numerous fellow students. The two are united after all when they discover the body of Martin's brutally murdered landlady together. Whoever the culprit was, he/she left behind a note with mathematical symbols on it, which indicates that the murder was only the beginning of a series. Naturally intrigued by the crime, Martin and Professor Seldom team up to solve the puzzle but, considering the complexity of the mathematic puzzle, they can't prevent the deaths of more victims. Be advised this is just an extremely simplified summary of the plot, as "The Oxford Murders" actually is a non-stop one hundred and something minutes series of incomprehensible math formulas, philosophical theories, amateur-detective speculations and verbal showdowns between an elderly wise guy and a young rookie. The story is overall compelling and never really boring, but sometimes director de la Iglesia dedicates too much time to the extended depiction of small anecdotes that eventually turn out to be fairly irrelevant to the actual plot. The re-enactment of the medieval "perfect crime" killing, for example, where a barber described 14 methods to kill his wife. It's fascinating footage, but only just a dispensable anecdote more likely to raise confusion than to clarify a point. Even though the academic and illuminate mumbo-jumbo sounds impressive and makes you feel sophisticated, you definitely don't have to be a child prodigy in order keep up with the script's pacing and red herrings. The murders are incredibly tame (though for a good reason) and there are very few moments of genuinely grueling terror, with the notable exception of Prof. Seldom's limbless friend and his lobotomy experiments. As to be expected, The Oxford area forms a terrific location to shoot an old-fashioned mystery-thriller. The arty buildings and ancient libraries look grandiose and there's even time for some British history lessons, with the celebration of Guy Fawkes Day. John Hurt is once again sublime in his, by now trusted, role of arrogant elderly smart man and it's truly a joy to behold him when giving lectures. If I had a professor like Hurt when I was in college, I definitely would have attended more classes. Elijah Wood is pretty good as well, but – I'm very sorry – it's still impossible not to see him as the hairy-toed Hobbit looking for a precious ring. He could easily pass for a mathematical mastermind, I guess, but an irresistible womanizer?!? Martin's two love interests Lorna and Beth are charming and honestly affecting female characters. The actresses portraying them, respectively Leonor Watling and Julie Cox, are both heavenly beautiful and very talented women.

Most of the comments are from those who just didn't understand. Then of course try to make themselves seem smart just because they watched it. I recommend it. Not too many movies out like this, with lots of twists in a style I can't say I've yet viewed. As far as the comment goes on how everything is old, perhaps they've never seen a movie that was made to be in older style. Clearly doesn't watch a lot of movies, nor should be posting on a site like this. They were probably baffled and tried figuring out which country had the flying cars and 2D world after seeing the Jetson's cartoon. Anyway, enough ranting about people who can't grasp the depth. The acting wasn't bad at all I found. Of course Elijah acts different, which I see not everybody likes, but you need to respect the fact he's an actor. We all got to know him as "the guy from Lord of the Rings". Well, newsflash, in his defense he won't be acting the same way in this "smart" movie as he did fighting off monsters with a smaller vocabulary. He plays an intelligent role this time around. I can't say I know of 'anybody' who could figure out what happens in the end. It 'is' indeed a very deep plot, they twist your mind so much into understanding what's presently going on, you don't have a lot of time to think of what's going to happen. Well I'm tired, bedtime. If what I said doesn't all make complete sense, that is why. Goodnight, and I hope you enjoy the film :-)

First of all, I say that watching a film like this in a dubbed version, where the story is told in Oxford, it's a sin - just like smoking in a cancer hospital...

I went in to see it mainly to enjoy watching a "good old" crime-story like I used to watch from BBC television spoken in "real" English, and though it wasn't 100% then it was enjoyable. I had no idea about who is "Álex de la Iglesia" and I was surprised by how well written and directed the film presented, not only due to the story but as well the actors he'd found, and here more the stand-ins than the main-casts. Perfect details like hopeless out of date shaded glasses, old tweed jackets and semi-long hair, it all gave the final touch to the story that some times got stocked in small unnecessary scenes specially written for selling better to the Spanish marked.

Rarely a film fails on so many levels. The film tries to say "deep things" but clearly neither the writer nor the director have a clue what they are talking about, so all the "profound" stuff is merely ridiculous (low point: Wittgenstein during WWI writing in his notebook, and that's only the introduction to the film). As a Monty Python sketch that might have been funny, but since the film is pretending to say something serious, it's just embarrassing. The acting is abysmal, the plot is silly and full of holes, for some incomprehensible reason there are two girls who suddenly fall in love with the main character, but there's no way to understand why (or how, since there's zero chemistry). For me, the worst part were the dialogues, though. At the beginning, the American student who just finds a boarding room with some woman who used to know a number of famous mathematicians, picks up a photo and then explains who the people on the photo are, why they are famous, and a short Wikipedia biography of their lives. Subtle. "Well," says the woman, "you did your homework". If only the scriptwriters, the director and the actors would have done the same.

Although I got the feeling that I was watching an overlong episode of the old Inspector Morse series from the BBC, The Oxford Murders is an intelligent and literate murder mystery as only crimes based at Oxford can be.

John Hurt steals the show as the arrogant iconoclastic mathematics genius of whom young Elijah Wood from America has come to study under and to have him guide his Ph'D thesis. It's the opportunity of a lifetime, but a series of homicides that are linked by a killer dropping Pythagorean symbols at the crimes intrigues this would be Holmes and Watson pair.

Both Hurt and Wood are inextricably drawn into the crime because victim one was Anna Massey, a terminally ill widow of a former colleague of Hurt's. Wood has taken lodging there and almost gets into an affair with her daughter Julie Cox who is also living there and taking care of Massey. He does later get involved with another Hurt's student/protégés Eleanor Watling.

Some nice cinematography especially at Oxford during their Guy Fawkes Day celebration aid the film which does drag in spots. Still the performances are good and the script literate. John Hurt is nothing less than outstanding. Give it a look if your taste runs to cinema that doesn't have to have a lot of violence to make it watchable for you.

The Oxford Murders will undoubtedly be likened to the unimpressively executed The Da Vinci Code except that since it's a foreign film, its additional draw is the expected gratuitous nudity.

While the delicious Leonor Watling certainly delivers on that as everyone's love interest Nurse Lorna, it's jarring to see her at it with Elijah Wood, who still can't shake off his most memorable role as a gay hobbit. Somehow, he manages to earn leading man status as Martin, an American exchange student at Oxford University, desperately seeking an acerbic but brilliant professor Arthur Seldom (John Hurt) to be his thesis mentor. Instead, they get embroiled in a homicide and end up putting their heads together to stop what may be a serial killer apparently linked by math symbols. Julie Cox is positively creepy as the cellist Beth, Martin's housemate and daughter of Mrs. Eagleton, the equally chilly Anna Massey.

A whodunit that doesn't take its plot so seriously despite Wood's overly huge eyes, The Oxford Murders certainly delivers art-house-style with its super stark imagery and crisp cinematography. Enjoy director Álex de la Iglesia's impeccable skills shown off especially in a wonderfully choreographed uber-long continuous shot in homage to Psycho/Citizen Kane following the characters outdoors, inside a shop, back outside and finally resting onto the scene of the crime.

There's no denying the talent within this piece and I also loved the word play the actors are intense when they need to be and I think you could definitely it as a "Cerebral Phylosophical Murder Mystery" Paced movie and fun.

Our mind is the wrapper of equations.

Use your mind hard, everything happening can be calculated. Look down on one equation, combining equations and things people come with another new equations.

This is my explanation about the movie. In the end, it's the professor who finds the final equation. Martin is just one of the numbers in it. It's only the professor who sees equation after equations.

We use our minds to wrap up a lot of equations. Sometimes we are absolute about things, sometimes we want to prove them. But most of the time, we can't get away from ourselves and things, look down to them, and think.

There is a science fiction that says, think of things in the universal sociology or philosophy, everything changes.

This film would appear to be a case where a well-intentioned producer, or enclave of producers, noticed a public interest in conceptually high-toned and seemingly erudite subject matter, combined with more staid pop story elements, like serial murder (Se7en) or overcoming emotional/psychological issues (Good Will Hunting/A Beautiful Mind).

The problem appears to be that they turned the screen writing job over to hacks.

I know that's a brutal thing to say, but it really does appear to be the case.

The film tries to wed serial murder and academic philosophical musing, but fails. Actually, it tries to bring quite the plethora of de rigueur elements together, and mismanages the whole affair. You have all kinds of messy stuff, and an absence of any really compelling myth to bind it together, or even to effectively humanize the characters. You have John Hurt striving valiantly to imbue each scene he works with warmth and sensitivity, but he fails against the tide of bad overall conception/development. Suddenly, Wood is dallying with his hostess' daughter. Where did that come from? Then, she's mad at him for arriving home late. Was she expecting him? Later, she apologizes, and they seem to have arrived at some kind of cozy platonic status quo. Why? And she plays the cello. Uh, are we supposed to assume that an interest in contemporary orchestral ensemble work functions as a hedge against emotional irrelevancy? This was all fast, senseless, and just one example of many, many instances where presumably emotionally resonant moments float in a mutually disconnected vacuum.

And speaking of resonant moments, it's possible that some directorial stringency might have redeemed the script somewhat, though I'm not sure. It appears to be a case where the director accepted the script as-is, directed individual scenes as best as possible, then handed the footage over to editing; maybe they could make sense where he couldn't. There really seemed to be only the faintest glimmer of an understanding of any kind of move toward a redemptive overall storyline. I guess I'm saying that the narrative buck needed to have stopped with the narrators, but instead got passed, ineffectually, along the line in the process, until we see the buck being passed right out our screens and into our laps: The narrators didn't know what they were after--or didn't have the craft to pull it off--could the director handle it? The director couldn't handle it; could the editors make up for the oversight? The editors tried as best they could; if they can't make gold out of shite footage, could the viewer kindly oblige and dig something meaningful out of this morass of disconnected emoting interlaced with disconnected pedantry? By now, I think you get the idea. Seriously: If you're an aspiring screenwriter, WATCH THIS MOVIE. I daresay it's a textbook case.

I'm just having one more thought. It is *just possible* that the script is OK, but we're actually witnessing a combination of bad direction and editing mangling it. I would guess it's unlikely, but it *is* possible.

Fresh out of the cinema I have a very good feeling about the movie. My first impression is that it is definitely worth seeing. Alex de la Iglesia (the director of for instance "El Dia de la Bestia" or "La comunidad") makes this time a mystery movie following the classical parameters. A nice plot, specially for those who like mathematics or logic in general, with intricate moves and very nice dialogs by John Hurt and Eliah Wood (who, by the way, looks like a pretty solid actor. I had only seen him playing Frodo and was a bit worried about him getting stuck on that character, not at all) who basically follow the classical thoughts about "the perfect murder" and in the philosophical search for absolute truths.

Being a fan of de la Iglesia, whose sense of humor is well known and pretty easy to recognize, I am quite happy to see that he is also able of making a genuine mystery film, with everything you expect to see on it, twisted arguments, funny characters ("Podorov", and of course, Dominique Pinon from, among others, Delicatessen) and a extremely good film-making, nice sequences, good mystery music, etc.

To me, being a bit of a geek, the mathematical references are too obvious, the series shown are too well known, they are nice nonetheless, but for instance why to talk about Fibonaci numbers (which were also in the 'Da Vinci Code' when one can talk about many other nice and funny series? On the other hand being a mystery movie's lover one always enjoys the sequences which are clear homage's to previous classics, pay attention and you'll enjoy.

Let me end up by mentioning the very nice work of Leonor Watling (you may have seen her before in, for example Almodovar's "Talk to her", her meaning she), who, apart from being a really good actress, of being extremely beautiful and attractive is also a pretty good singer! It was quite a pleasure, being Spanish myself, to see her playing an important role with such a great casting!

So, watch it by yourself, the first "serious" Alex de la Iglesia movie, and he does a pretty good job!

This is one of those films where a puzzle is presented in a particular environment and, while the different pieces of the puzzle are presented, that environment is revealed to the otherwise ignorant viewer. In the end, the puzzle is solved making the viewer feel either cheated (like "they didn't give me all the clues") or very smart ("I knew it!").

Unfortunately, the murder is placed in Oxford, amongst mathematicians, but no math is presented anywhere in the movie! I mean, there is a scene when the lead is explaining what a Fibbonacci series is. That's it! Also, Oxford is a great scientific village, with a history and a lot of interesting things can be said about it. But the stage could have been set anywhere else and no one would have seen the difference.

All that remains is the puzzle, which was interesting enough, but the pieces are revealed at such a pace that it is impossible to get it. Yeah, I felt cheated :) Anyway, this film could have been great, instead it turned into a more talkative Rivières Pourpres, with a lot less atmosphere.

Bottom line: not worth watching it unless you accidentally catch it on TV.

'nuff said well they say i have to include at least ten lines so i guess i need to spew some pretentious garbage to explain what pretentious garbage this film is. it purports to be based on a line from Wittgenstein, which the screenwriters not only totally misunderstand (or willfully misconstrue) but quote from the wrong book! so right from the get-go (since they introduce it in the first scene) the movie is painful to watch, for anyone with any knowledge of philosophy or mathematical theory. but even apart from that, it creaks and groans with tired old plot ideas. i must say that frodo guy has amazing eyes, but they're just a distraction, since there's nothing else to pay attention to in this clunker. highly unrecommended/