Alicia I love this movie so much

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Brenda The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Stephanie Lilitu Blackthorne I remember being in high school my senior year and "The Guardian" was released to home video in 1990 but the year I saw it was 1992. I think also around that time "The Hand That Rocks The Cradle" was also released after it's run in theaters. It was the usual weekend ritual, two movies and a Nintendo/Super Nintendo game from Movie Warehouse and nothing else to do but veg out.So I rented both "Guardian" and "Hand" as my movies for that "Evil Nanny" themed weekend and watched "The Guardian" first. I must say that the movie is one of the most underrated horror films ever made. Friedkin's first horror film since "Exorcist" 17 years after. At first the eerie score let's the viewer know it is a scary film with a brief story about druids worshiping trees and offering sacrifices to them, an obvious mutilation of the druid's customs of nature worship as the antagonists is rather a forest demon or possible succubus.Now, some what of a spoiler warning: We see what transpires at the beginning while a boy reads "Hansel & Gretel", giving the viewer an idea of the nanny's intentions after his parents leave him and his sister with her, as "Hansel & Gretel" is a classic Brothers Grimm story about children abandoned and taken in by a stranger with intentions of sacrifice.Jenny Seagrove's portrayal of Camilla shows that she keeps her maternal instincts to herself while caring for the child but hides her true intent and anyone who discovers her true form will not live long or be heard from again, let alone anyone who crosses her path like the witch in "Hansel & Gretel" (Of course, this is the classic horror concept of a witch and not modern day pagans or wiccans... or druids).This film is hated by the critics but loved by many a film nut. I like it but not enough for a full score because it moves kind of quickly. It wasn't a slasher or a big sfx filled film but it holds up because it is scary and at one point you are routing for Camilla and then routing for the parents.I can see one reason why the critics hated it, the story is easy to follow. And another reason they hate it is because Friedkin knew he couldn't give us another "Exorcist" and horror was not really his specialty when it came to previous works like "The French Connection", "Sorcerer" and "Crusing". It is still a movie I enjoy watching every now and then and I think you would like it too, but don't take my word for it as other users have their opinions.And I thought the Kite Eating tree in the peanuts comics gave me nightmares.

videorama-759-859391 William Friedkin has made a string of good movies. The Guardian, sorrily doesn't join that list. This is one of a couple of films, I couldn't understand why he made. But when saying that, I don't mean that the others in that short list were all badM like this one. Friedkin just demeans himself with this one, and it isn't the actor's fault. They can only do so much with what they got. Jenny Seagrove who has a powerful if mesmerizing presence, plays a nanny to a new couple, where she becomes quite close with their baby. But Seagrove isn't all she seems, killing off one of her competition in the Nanny department, a surprise of a rising black actress, to pop up in this. She's a supernatural evil spirit, who sacrifices infants to the trees, where they're nothing more than in bred shapes. And guess whose her latest victim? (some instances of familiarity here too, to that 87' grizzly and religious horror flick, The Believers) Other movies, that have familiar or very familiar themes to The Guardian, have been done much better. The story here, isn't really well plotted, and that's an understatement. On first viewing, if ignoring that little line of prologue, you will really find it hard to figure it's story. It takes a while for the very low quota of scares to happen, and the over use of blood splillage, all that blood gushing from the trees, had me thinking, that this had to make up for the lack of shocks and thrills, especially right near the end, where the film goes crazy, where I felt I was watching a Texas Chainsaw Massacre flick. But I did like the gore, though. The scary part of the film, was when that neighbor was entrapped by those wolves clawing at the windows of his pad, and a juicy revenge moment involving three robber/rapists, getting their just desserts, out there in the woods. Seagrove is a sight to behold, an interesting choice of casting, in a quite good and menacing (I didn't say scary) performance, wasted in this misfire. The only other movie I ever saw her in, was Savage Islands from the 80's. The actor who boasted about being in the movie, I guessed right, before going to the contribute page: He had a bit part: Chunky robber 2. Honestly with this one, I wouldn't brag. Not without interest to Friedkin fans, to give their verdict on this.

kclipper Jenny Seagrove is an attractive nanny who is actually a wicked druid tree priestess who needs the life-forces of newborn infants in order to preserve her powers (or something like that) in William Friedkin's failed but decent horror/thriller. Proud new parents, Jill and Kate think that their new nanny is the perfect woman until their friends start getting murdered and conspiracies about missing babies start to unfold. Due to plot contrivances and muddled intentions that make the action seem at times preposterous, this is considered by many as Friedkin's most worthless effort. Although, if folk/horror combined with some good, moody suspenseful kills and plenty of blood and eroticism, you won't go wrong. The film's best scene has an inquiring neighbor surrounded and circled by ravenous coyotes through his lavish, decor house just before he's ripped to pieces. Seagrove heads a pretty good cast if not always believable, but what do you expect from a story about a tree-witch that steals babies anyway? Enjoy it for what it is.

Aaron1375 Somewhat creepy horror movie with a supernatural edge to it, kind of a more horror oriented "Hand that Rocks the Cradle". Basically, a couple with their first child hires a nanny with a very dark and disturbing secret. She has chosen this baby for a reason and it is not to simply make it hers. As far as horror movies it is somewhat good, it has some gore, a couple of tense scenes and some nudity. However, if you watch the cut version of this movie the whole thing changes to the point almost all the scares and creepy stuff is taken out. They seem to completely edit over the first scene involving the baby taken to the tree, a scene later with the mother makes it out that the child survived and is safe and sound. The regular version is not so chipper. The ending is screwed up to as it ends earlier and they basically cut out the final scene. I realize that you want to cut out some stuff so you can show your movie on the happy time family network, but in the end you should not edit a movie to the point its plot and meaning change. So for an okay horror movie with some creepy scenes and such give this movie a shot, for a pedestrian movie with basically no scares and all creepiness removed try and find the cut version of the film.