svenzen From this month's DVD Review (by Henry Yates): RABBIT FEVER - Not the sequel to Watership Down...Brought to the nation's attention via an early episode of Sex And The City, the dual-action, bunny-shaped vibrator known as the Rabbit is now apparently a mainstay in the handbags of Britain's independent women (supposedly selling in greater quantities last year than appliances such as the washing machine and the tumble dryer). As a phenomenon, of course, this has "quirky-but-quickly-forgotten British comedy" written all over it, and writer Stephen Raphael has obliged with a straight-faced mockumentary investigating the Rabbit and its fallout.Rabbit Fever should be awful, really - it's a one-joke movie that polarises its audience (inevitably, men will laugh less than women) and is neither lewd enough for the hen parties nor subtle enough to take seriously. Yet there's something strangely endearing about director Ian Denyer's execution that not only keeps you loafing on the sofa for the duration but also prompts a handful of genuine chuckles.Over a light-footed two hours - and a handful of deleted scenes that should have stayed that way - we're introduced to the men who manufacture the colourful dildos, the women whose lives revolve around them, and the bruised egos behind the pleasuring. Indeed, the funniest moment comes when sidelined husband (played by Green Wing's ever-reliable Julian Rhind-Tutt ) reacts to his wife's new obsession by boiling her Rabbit on the stove, a la Fatal Attraction.The acting helps. Bar a typically wooden cameo appearance in which Richard Branson announces free Rabbits on all Virgin Atlantic flights, the cast are generally convincing enough to carry the scenarios and, at its best, this gives Rabbit Fever a feel that approaches vintage Brass Eye. It all adds up to a diverting effort that deserves to cause a certain amount of buzz. *** An endearing little comedy - get it in your handbag...

mehbarton It's very rare that a British film lives up to its billing or promise. How many times have we felt betrayed by the monikers "Best British Film of the Year" or "Funniest British Film of 2006". The answer? Countless times. It's more often than not a deflating experience watching British films, especially comedies. Well, feel betrayed no longer. It's time to reflate yourselves because finally we have a film that delivers what it says on the packet. This is a wonderfully conceived low-budget British comedy that takes a simple premise - are vibrators destructive to society? - and runs with it in a delightfully silly mockumentary style. Throw into the mixer the inventive and hilarious use of cameos from the likes of Tom Conti, Stephanie Powers, Tom Hollander, Germaine Greer, Richard Branson & William Boyd (to name but a few)- some "playing" themselves, others playing parts in the film - and you have a fresh, vibrant, colourful, unconventional & fast-paced film that leaves you laughing throughout and feeling good at the end. Isn't that what British comedies are supposed to be about?

TaZmAnOO7 I saw this in a preview screening and have to say that this documentary style movie is the biggest load of tripe I have ever seen.Completely unfunny, low budget, boring, rubbish script, terrible acting - The entire audience (young and old) sat through the film comatose without laughing for most of it... there were literally only about 2 places you will laugh in the entire movieMany people left halfway - Can't blame them... I stayed thinking that the film would pick up, however, it never did and I wish I'd left. The humour was really lame and I am surprised that this ever made it on to the big screen. I am not someone who is offended by the adult content of this movie at all - It just wasn't funny. The people who made this movie really don't deserve your money, so please don't pay to see this film.This isn't even funny enough to be shown on TV, let alone cinema...I wanted to give it 0 out of 10, but the system won't allow it...

Ron Heywood Rabbit Fever is one of those film oddities. It's an enjoyable 90 minutes, demands little of the viewer, and delivers as much, and on any terrestrial television channel even in a prime time slot I think that Rabbit Fever would be rather well received. Which makes me wonder why it has been pushed into cinemas.The movie is filmed in the style of a television documentary, and introduces us to 6 women who have am addictive relationship with the Rabbit Vibrator. The film is primarily focused on investigating a supposed addictive quality to the famous sex aid product. The narrative is 100% tongue in cheek throughout.The storyline is strong, an introduction to some well rounded and likable characters, some enjoyable back-story, peripheral characters and situations develops into an engaging story, and pleasing conclusions. Sadly there's nothing that feels clever or new. Rabbit Fever has some sharp moments, a few switches that hint at what the writers are capable of, and all credit to them it's not just 90 minutes of knob gags and innuendo, I could probably watch it with my mother. But there's a laziness about some of the scenes that holds it back, those moments went you are up for it, when you want it to be outrageous, and all you get is a dollop of sit-com.I chuckled, I left the theatre feeling empathy for the characters, but I also left with the bitter thought that someone had taken a 90 minute reel of made for TV, light entertainment and tried to put it into national cinema. I think Rabbit Fever achieves some of what it set out to do, it's a quirky subject, a rounded storyline, a well presented cast and a good diversion for 90 minutes. But there's nothing in this that can justify the extravagance of a movie theatre environment. Quite the opposite - a few commercial breaks would have given the viewer chance to grab a breath of life that Rabbit Fever seems to lack.