The film's got a lot of stupidity here and there, especially the young couple, who don't bother checking Camilla's references before hiring her, or the fact that this caretaker happens to be able to move around so many residences freely without too much suspicion (okay, for a while, at least). And considering the fact Camilla's a Druid, where'd she get this tree? This is set in L.A., not Europe. As I said before, not much is answered, and I guess I should be grateful because I can't imagine any answers that wouldn't delve the material into further silliness.

But I credit director William Friedkin for handling all this with a straight face. Some of this stuff (particularly the scenes with the tree) could have been played as camp, but I'm rather glad Friedkin plays this seriously and, as he did with The Exorcist, he manages to craft some truly suspenseful and frightening moments here. Still, the film does slide into scenes that simply can't be taken very seriously; you'll know what I mean when you see the chainsaw scene near the end of the movie.

Unlike The Exorcist, he shows no restraint with violence, preferring to give us several enjoyably gory death scenes and a LOT of blood spattering everywhere. There's also a decent amount of nudity present, courtesy of the rather lovely Jenny Seagrove. She's not quite as effective a horror villainess as, say, Mathilda May in Lifeforce, but gets the job done. Dwier Brown and Cary Lowell are okay, a little flat during some scenes and certainly not aided by a script that makes them act like idiots, but are convincing enough as caring and concerned parents.

Surprisingly very little music is used, with Friedkin trying to use the sounds of the wind and other such natural elements to create goosebumps. It's a good attempt, and while it works during two very lengthy, suspenseful sequences, he's still no M. Night Shyamalan. Considering the rather negative critical response The Guardian received, it's easy to see why Friedkin hasn't made a genre film since. But I enjoyed almost every minute of it would recommend it to horror fans seeking a quick-paced, gory thriller.

Allow me to put this in perspective for you. I have only walked out of two movies, ever! "Arachnophobia" and "The Guardian." Truth be told, I'm a fan of Friedkin's work from "The Exorcist." His adaptation of his own novel was exceptionally executed and character driven. This film is merely a shallow attempt by a movie studio to bank on the naivete of horror fans. How? By repackaging and disguising a slasher script with clever direction by a horror film veteran and his impressive dossier.

Friedkin's vision is second to none, but the message and the suspense get lost in the predictable, cookie-cutter plot. Friedken works best as a builder of suspense by cultivating the charaters involved in the cine-play. The script for this film does not allow for this crucial development to take place. Thus, once the blood starts flowing we feel no remorse for any character's loss, or for the loss of any character for that matter. Very sad.

You will not be disappointed in Friedkin's direction. Hence the two stars. However, with dim narrative support, the film comes off as if Friedkin had been handed a butter knife to carve the Thanksgiving turkey. The vision is there, but the tools are not.

Save yourself twenty clams. If you want slasher suspense, invest in "Friday the 13th." Wait for this one to show up on UPN or a Turner network.

This movie is occasionally a little silly and without the info about the druids in the beginning, the story wouldn't make much sense. But that doesn'r matter. The Guardian is a nice and entertaining movie. A sequence in the middle of the movie and the ending are especially good. Jenny Seagrove is very good as Camilla. While not a masterpiece, this is an entertaining movie, definitely worth watching and a fun addition to your movie collection.