it wasn not until after i saw the movie on channel 4 tonight that i find out something relatively important and that be that the source novel by emile zola be set in 19th century france and not sometime 20th century yorkshire . i say 20th century yorkshire but i be very confused a to the time period because character wear relatively modern clothes and have electricity and have access to tractor but often cut wheat with scythe . it a if screenwriter andrew kotting have adapt the 19th century novel word for word in some scene and then forget this when he write his own scene . this lead to an anachronistic feel through out the movie and while i be watch it i be expect there to be a shock revelation at the end where it reveal the story be set in the 24th century and there have be an earth shatter catastrophe a couple of century before . this doesn not in fact happen and i felt cheat by this . i have no idea the nationality of kotting but i doubt if he from the north of england since he seem to be under the impression that yorkshire be a vast wilderness . even if the story be suppose to be set in the 19th century i doubt if the location would be a remote have make out on screen and rural yorkshire be not like rural france . obviously kottering have adapt the story badlybut it kottering direct style that make this filthy earth a terrible experience . within the opening couple of minute be treat to scene speed up and jump cut and slow motion and sequence shoot on 8 mm film . i suppose the director deserve some credit from audience member like myself who have never take hallucinogenics but have wonder what a bad acid trip feel like and watch this movie now iknow . but be there any context for do this . maybe there might have be if the wheat grain the farmer have collect have be ergotised but this type of food poisoning would have be rare in the north of england ( but not perhaps 19th century france ) whatever period it set in so it seem it be include by the director because it seem like a good idea . it certainly make for a memorable movie but not in a good way . i mean if a film ( that get it tv premier at 2 . 30 in the morning ) start with a close up on a bull erection it usually the sign of an unwatchable art house movie . we also have to endure a close up of a human erection slip in and out of a human front bottom later on so you have be warn a for the rest of kottering hand at the helm i wonder if he a native english speaker . it just that i have a serious problem wonder what the character be say and not so much their dialect ( though it be difficult to understand sometimes ) but the way the actor deliver their line and they either mumble them or they scream them out very loud and very fast . be this a conspiracy so that people will buy the dvd and watch the movie with subtitle turn on . i wouldn not be surprise since it the only way that you will be able to follow the story . despite this he cast well and the actor involve do their utmost best to make their character come across a hateful inbreed idiot . however it important an audience can relate to character in a movie and when you have get such despicable genetic mutation a the one see here it difficult to connect with the story especially if you can not understand what be say so i have slag off this movie and i have every right to . i can not believe that the average rating be 6 . 0 and but this come from somewhere in the region of 36 voter and the credit of the filthy earth contain more than 36 people i think you know what i be imply here . let me just repeat that this bizarre movie would not appeal to anyone outside the hardcore die hard art house brigade . it a memorable movie for sure but for all the wrong reason . i repeat you have be warn .