Just what I expected

A different way of telling a story

The movie is surprisingly subdued in its pacing, its characterizations, and its go-for-broke sensibilities.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

You know that when a movie begins with the introduction..."For thousands of years a religious order known as the Druids worshipped trees, sometimes even sacrificing human beings to them. To these worshippers, every tree has it's guardian spirit. Most are aligned with goodness and life, but some embody powers of darkness and evil." ...that it's probably not going to suck. And Friedkin certainly doesn't disappoint with this underrated cult gem (does he ever!?).Basically, an immortalized witch has made a pact- through sexual union- with a dark entity that resides in a giant old tree. In exchange for a youthful longevity, she must provide the tree with offerings in the form of a child under the age of 4 months (prior to some sort of metamorphic shift in the child's blood occurring). When presented to the tree, the child-offering is absorbed into it- as if carved into it.In order to obtain these child sacrifices, this woman- Camilla- uses stolen identities to garner herself positions, as a Nanny, through childcare agencies. And she has just been hired by the family we are following in this film.When she's not caring for the child,- or seducing the husband- Camilla is out having lustful intercourse with the tree, which is indicative of her reverence for, and union with, it. The tree also kills people. Yep, it's a killer tree that f*cks.And The kills are badass!!! Although there are not enough of them, in my personal opinion...the way it takes out that trio of rapists is amazing.I thoroughly enjoyed this, especially near the end when everything get's all evil dead-like (buddy even looks a bit like Ash when covered in blood and wielding that chainsaw)! The tree monster, though sparsely used, is pretty awesome. And there is just enough gore to keep interested through all the drama. Decent film! 6.5 out of 10.

I have a feeling that 'The Guardian' started off as a very different film. I have a feeling that it started off as the story of a beautiful, kindly babysitter who moves into a family unit with the intent on doing harm to the child. That, at least, would have been a good arena to start in but then the idea pops up in the producer's mind that she has to be a Druid who wants to make the babies part of a gnarled old druidic tree.The opening scene of the movie establishes all of this before the second half intersects. Camilla a kindly young governess with a calming British accent takes the job of caring for the infant child of Phil and Kate (Dwier Brown and Cary Lowell). She is a parent's dream, knowing every single detail about children but with no explanation of why she has no children of her own.These scenes give the film a calming heir settling us down before the secret of her true intentions are made clear. But instead the movie turns out to be one of those special effects bloodbaths in which everyone who has a supporting role becomes fodder for the effects technicians who keep coming up with new ways to kill them.Phil and Kate live, conveniently, at the edge of a forest where Camilla's tree resides. This brings about the film's biggest mystery, if Camilla is centuries of years old and so is the tree, how has she toted it around for all these millennia? The movie was directed by William Friedkin apparently on the basis of his credit after having directed 'The Exorcist' but this film has no brain, no patience and no build-up it's just a clatterbox of would-be shocks and needless gore.

Busy career-oriented, Phil and Kate decide to get a nanny for their two-week old newborn, however unbeknownst to them the one they pick, Carmilla, is a Hamadryad (google it) who feeds newborn babies to her favorite tree who happens to love her back, so that's mutual. Yea it's as ridicules as it sounds.What is, for all intents, simply a watchable gory b-movie schlock fest, would be an enjoyable enough time-killer if not for the mere fact that I hold William Friedkin of a higher caliber than that. With the sheer amount of brilliant films that he's made, I can't really help but think of this one as a misstep, one that turned out as a guilty pleasure, but a misstep nonetheless.My Grade: CEye Candy: Jenny Seagrove shows T&A multiple times. . Carey Lowell gets topless (might be a body double though)

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.