With so little money and resources it is an insult to Britain's hard-pressed, underpaid workers in Britain's film industry that this pretentious garbage should be funded and produced. If there was a film that showed why Britain's film industry is always on its knees while Hollywood booms, it is this piece of pretentious garbage. Maybe as a short story, it had originally worked, but having all the plot of a bacon sandwich and the dialogue of laundry list, it is hard to see how any of the audience will be still in their seats after 5 minutes of this bunk. Who wants to see endless hypodermics in use, maggots crawling across a dummy of a man who has had his head shot off or a solider excreting the contents of his bowels in graphic detail on the big screen? With its flashes of nature and stop motion photography of plants flowering and dying in one day, total chaos is added to the confusion of this plotless dirge. Tasteless, incomprehesible, artsy bunkum.

TANK 432 is one of those low budget British horror flicks with little explanation or reason behind it. The story opens in the middle of action as a squad of soldiers are pursued (in the present day) by enemies unknown. Through various stupidities of the story, they take prisoners and hole up inside a tank (actually a large personnel carrier) before finding themselves trapped inside. The amateurish script really lets the movie down, offering across the board unpleasant characters, some quality actors (Rupert Evans, Michael Smiley) unable to do anything with their one-dimensional roles, and dialogue which merely consists of characters repeatedly shouting "what the f is going on?" over and over again. The horrors are left unseen and there are a few violent moments, but nothing that qualifies this as a proper horror movie; just an exercise in tedium, much like A FIELD IN ENGLAND with which this has a few similarities (perhaps A TANK IN A FIELD IN ENGLAND would be a better description). After seeing him in this, THE GHOUL, and PREVENGE, I'm beginning to think that the presence of Tom Meeten in the cast is the kiss of death for any movie.

It could be a headline from The Sun newspaper, or role play in a fetish club. Unfortunately, it is this movie, and not much else.I gave it three stars for the acting - which is quite good - and the tech aspects, which are OK. You may think this film is around 88 minutes long but by the time you finish watching it will seem like several very, very long tedious hours, where your time could be better spent poking your eyes with a sharp stick to see (get it?) what happens.Nope - not one on my memorable films list and and it would be more entertaining videoing your toilet flushing with your camera phone.

This is the worst movie I've seen in years. Why did I continue watching? Because I felt there had to be improvements and explanations coming if only I stayed a few minutes longer. I was wrong. It starts fine, but accumulates mysteries, stacking one atop another, for 80 minutes and answers almost none of them. From the beginning, I asked myself "Why did (character) do/say that?" Never explained. Repeated repeatedly over the entire course of the 88 minutes. It's too late for me... save yourself.