Watch Frauds For Free
Frauds
The film is a story of the ways in which insurance investigator Roland Copping interferes in and manipulates the lives of others with outrageous games and gimmicks. Eventually he becomes involved in an escalating vendetta with a couple who make an unusual insurance claim.
Release : | 1993 |
Rating : | 5.9 |
Studio : | Australian Film Finance Corporation, Latent Image Productions Pty. Ltd., |
Crew : | Art Department Coordinator, Art Direction, |
Cast : | Phil Collins Hugo Weaving Josephine Byrnes Peter Mochrie Helen O'Connor |
Genre : | Comedy Crime |
Watch Trailer
Cast List
Related Movies
Reviews
I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much
Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike
People are voting emotionally.
A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.
"Frauds" is a well acted, weirdly entertaining sadistic fun house ride. Phil Collins, who quite frankly can quickly wear thin, uses that annoyance to full advantage while putting the squeeze on husband and wife Hugo Weaving and Josephine Byrnes. Insurance fraud leads to blackmail and a living nightmare in the form of insurance investigator, Collins. The most intriguing part of "Frauds" is most definitely Collins's neon lit fun house where he resides. That imaginative set piece drives this film. If only it had concluded in a more satisfying manner. The resolution is indeed the weakest part of an otherwise winning movie. - MERK
I realise the first thing people who look at this movie will think 2 things. Australia and Phil Collins grumble, grumble, grumble...Well I watched this film in as best an objective observer as I could be. I like Phil Collins as a musician, I say like, I mean I really like, but however if I thought he was awful I would say so. Sure this film was not going to win an Oscar, But it's clever, Quirky and the humour is darkly rich. The 3 leads are excellent, All border line madness as their worlds collapse around them at various moments. I really enjoyed this film and also goes to show that not only do you not have to spent mega bucks on a good wacky thriller but keep your eyes peeled, The uk and USA don't have the rights anymore on making appealing movies. Rent it, Buy it, Watch it, It will make a good Saturday night :)
When Roland Copping was a child, he rolled the dice with a stipulation that if its his number, his brother would have to ride on a river. If its his brother's, then he'll write it. A roll of the dice later, Copping's brother inadvertently did a header off a water fall and has been in a catatonic state ever since.As for Roland, he becomes a claims investigator and, sure enough, with every roll of the dice, he is a menace to those ranging from his neighbors and passer byes, to the very people he's investigating. And why is this? Simple... his numbers came up.Hitchcock always had a motive for his villains, Stephin King even wrote reasons why his insane creatures and villains did what they did, Roland Copping chooses to be a jerk because... of a roll of the dice. That's it. This somehow is to explain why he keeps harassing the main characters in this movie, despite the fact that he defraud them and disproved their false claim, he STILL went after them. He went as far as to take their BMW just so he could rig up a remote control to it to harm a passer by.Maybe I'm not getting something, and if I'm not somebody explain it to me, but this movie made no sense. I only give it a three because Collins surprised me with his acting chops (Haven't seen Buster yet) and can play a jerk very well. I just wish it made some sense.
Coming across this late at night on ITV1 was quite a find really. I had heard of it, and the idea of Phil Collins as a demented villain did appeal. I really liked the oddball quality of it all, with Collins wonderful as a jovial, buffoonish grinner, treading the line between menace and absurdity in portraying one Roland Copping, who one might call a tad eccentric. The lunacy and non-sequiturs build up very effectively in the middle of the film; perhaps the tone might have been made a little more dark, or perhaps less light, presumably with different, less jaunty music.Maybe it tails off slightly, but the ending somehow seems to me a gem. The absurdism isn't compromised by a happy ending, it is strengthened by a subtle, fitting conclusion.I wouldn't say this was a perfect film, but it is damn enjoyable, far from the mainstream and never bland. The sets, by the way, for Copping's house, are fab; just thought I had to add that!Rating:- *** 1/2/*****