Customer Reviews
Halliwell's - only some of The Movies That Matter - By: L. E. May, 20 Dec 2008 
Halliwell's certainly was the only film guide that mattered, covering some 24,000 films & offering a star system that listed (in the 2008 edition) 298 four-star & 863 three-star films; the combined list of films became, over the years, the core of my target list of films to see & it has served me very well.
I don't want to repeat the comments of other reviewers, many of which I share. This new book is more manageable & easier to read, for sure, but it is a shadow of its forbears & not, as it stands, "The Movies That Matter". It does list many great films and, of course, each editor will have his own style, so readers will always find reason to disagree.
I would like to see the next edition carry the full reviews of all the films that were listedin past editions as three-star & four-star films: it was wrong to delete so many of them. It was these lists that alerted me to many gems of cinema I might otherwise have missed. Then this book might be "The Movies That Matter (including some dross)". In fact, I'd rather see the dross (the one & no-star films) removed - one might then use this guide as a quality threshold: if a film is not listed, it's probably not a "movie that matters".
The removal of foreign-language titles is a big mistake & is the sort of dumbing down to be deplored. Some readers may be surprised to find that "The Four Hundred Blows" isin French, with sub-titles! Other alternative titles are also not listed & this will present problems when searching further for the movie, e.g. one needs to know that the film "Ivansxtc" is sometimes known as "Ivans XTC".
The order of listing films needs better editing. Some films that start with the definite article are listed under T; most, happily, are listed as if the definite article was not present. Other mistakes I've found, & I have fed back by Email to the editorial director.
For someone new to film, this guide still provides a good starting point for films worth seeing. Those interestedin knowing more about films from the 1920s, 30s, 40s & 50s, should try to obtain a copy of a past edition of Halliwell's, listing some 23,000 or 24,000 films. I guess my saying this is a sad report on the new volume; rather than passing on the old copy to others, the last 'proper' edition must sit on my bookshelf for ever!
Halli-unwell? - By: Kenneth F. Mcara, 10 Nov 2008 
Potential buyers of the new edition of this landmark film guide - often bought as a Christmas present - should be aware that Harper Collins have removed all of John Walker's contributions so that they do not have to pay him a royalty fee. They also cancelled publication of Who's Who In The Movies, with the same net effect. Since Halliwell himself diedin 1989, & John Walker was single-handedly responsible for editing & keeping the Guide up to date since then, everything since 1989 will have to have been rewritten or cut-and-pasted from elsewhere. "Caveat emptor"!
The jury is out - By: Charles, 03 Nov 2008 Well, Halliwell's is backin a much different form. This is a film guide that was once upon a time the only one & for a time the best, if a bit Blimpy. Then creator Leslie Halliwell died & John Walker took over, misunderstood the star system & gave all sorts of arty drivel stupidly high marks. This is the first proper guide under Telegraph film critic David Gritten & it's a mixed bag.
Positive things first: it looks good, is well written (Gritten has cleared up a few of the inconsistencies from previous editions), easy to handle and, on balance, better than its immediate predecessors.
In comparison to previous editions there are very few reviews here - probably ensuring good charity shop sales for old editions. The criteria for choosing what what'sin here is a trifle curious though, & might dissuade people from buying what is only `a bit' of a film guide. So we get two Lord of the Rings films, not three. The Spider-Man films? Number one & three, & strangely not number two. Star Wars? Four of the six. Curiouser & curiouser.
The four-star rated films have been revised, & it's two cheers for Gritten. Out go all sorts of barely watchable rubbish like Fassbinder's movies, Wings of Desire, Ivan's Childhood & others. But he bringsin several eccentric new four starrers - The Long Day Closes, The Assassination of Jesse James, Gun Crazy, Michael Clayton, anyone? Grease?!
Talking of star ratings, there's still the chance to pick out your favourite silly ratings. For me: DePalma's horrible Scarface, a film that makes the planet a slightly worse place by its very presence, three stars; the dreadful Adam Sandler comedy Click, two stars; Allen's minor Broadway Danny Rose, three stars. But there aren't quite as many bad calls as before.
He also seems to be determined to slate recent Oscar winners like Crash, Chicago & Million Dollar Baby, & defiantly cuts his predecessor's ratings down. It reminds you that this book is merely the views of ONE man, one newspaper critic - & hardly an all-wise oracle on which to rely.
Maybe this new guide is a brave try, maybe it's another chapterin the decline of Halliwell's. Will it please those who buy it? We shall see.
Sadly this is no longer the important film guide for film enthusiasts! - By: Paul Bradley, 27 Oct 2008 
'Halliwell's Film Guide' had been regarded as the bible of all film guides. It's author, Leslie Halliwell, was a very conservative film critic but he was often consistent with his criticism but his rather savage reviews of many modern films exposed his viewpoint as rather myopic. Leslie Halliwell would not have given any time to pretentious arthouse film makers like David Gretten has donein this shortened & slickly presented version. Gone are many of the films from yesteryear from what was the Golden Age of Cinema & a welcome has been given to the works of contemporary indie film makers such as Michael Haneke & Paul Thomas Anderson. The book has become less of a valuable guide & more of a collection of anecdotes from a Daily Telegraph arts critic whose entries can be a tad confusing, for example,'Ben-Hur' is referred to as a film classic but the movie ratings are rather low. 'From Russia With Love', possibly the best of the Bond films, receives only two stars now while the overrated arthouse flick 'The Piano Teacher' receives three stars (it originally had received none). For customers who argue that we should move on from the Halliwell style of reviewing should ask themselves then why his name is usedin the title of the book? One point is certain that this edition is no longer the important film guide for genuine film enthusiasts.
Halliwell's, but not as we know it. - By: D. J. Stewart, 16 Oct 2008 Regular Halliwell's readers beware, the famous film guide has been pared to the bone. As the introduction states, the ever increasing size & weight of previous editions & the rise of the internet as an alternative for film reviews has led to radical changes, with the number of reviewsin this edition only numbering approx 2,800 compared to over 24,000in last year's.
So what has been kept? 350 of the past year's new releases, 2,000 from the last 20 years, & 500 notable films from pre-1988. Several films have been given new reviews, & although the format remains relatively unchanged, the drastic reduction has allowed for much bigger print size, making the book (with only half as many pages as last year & much lighter) easier on the eyes.
There have been a couple of editions, a top 10 films by genre list at the back & 10 well written essays on various film topics are scattered throughout the book, but whether this will make up for the deletion of almost 90% of film reviews is doubtful.
Halliwell's is still an essential purchase for any film buff, but it can no longer claim to be "the only film guide that matters." The drastic cuts made leave the Time Out Film Guide as probably the most comprehensive film guide currently on the market. Alternatively, movie connoisseurs may wish to purchase (or hang on to) last year's Halliwell's, it seems it may be the last of its kind.
