Strangely I drove past his house last week and became certain he would soon be dead.

I loved his Sunday Times columns, hated his films.

Rotten films. I went to see Death Wish 2 at the Leicester Square Theatre in 1982...big mistake. Came out feeling physically sick. As someone else said 'Odd how Winner is the fiercest of Restaurant critics but has himself served up some truly terrible stuff at the cinema...'

I did titter when I saw the title of the article on the BBC News website:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21123532

I always wondered how on earth he got his movies made. Did he fund them himself?

I have never seen any of his movies, but I did like him as a person. I am just worried now then the CHUNTERS (compensation hunters) are starting to dive in and attack!! I did post a few comments on the BBC NEWS page, but both comments were removed.

Oh yes; very wealthy man, now dead and unable to defend himself, middle aged and elderly actresses who were suddenly 14 or 15 at the time... here we go.

The thing is, you don't really need proof now to get compensation!! It's all speculation, allegedly, and claims, but never real proof!! I find that rather sad!!

It strikes me - MW - MWT - an Exclusive ITV Exposure show called Death Wish 13 or Cash Wish on pervert Winner.... Duncroft girls come forward...

You may find it "rather sad"... 12 years ago some of us found it quite extraordinary and grossly unfair.

His movies are some of the best ever for me just a shame there were too many Death Wish sequels.

Only "quite"? More like "completely"!

One of Britain's great eccentrics. A sad loss in these days of banality......

And we do love great eccentrics in Britain, especially if we're after compensation...

andrew wrote:
His movies are some of the best ever for me just a shame there were too many Death Wish sequels.

guinness83 wrote:
The thing is, you don't really need proof now to get compensation!! It's all speculation, allegedly, and claims, but never real proof!! I find that rather sad!!

is this true?

actually I liked his trashy movies especially late at night.

bet he made a mint from them.

I honestly think he used to choose camera angles just to bemuse people. I remember seeing one of his awful movies late one night, there was a scene in a room, just two people chatting - nothing ominous - yet the camera appeared to be perched on top of a wardrobe. I another scene, it was inside a log fire. In another scene, it seemed to be in a deep hole. There was no rhyme or reason to it. Forget heroic/timid, powerful/powerless, knowing/ignorant etc conceits - it was random camera positions. I suspect he just liked to be on a film set and didn't give two hoots for the finished product.

Your asking if it's true? Look at the Savile story and ask again!! lol

guinness83 wrote:
Your asking if it's true? Look at the Savile story and ask again!! lol

You are = you're.

I have slight dyslexia, so I sometimes get my spelling and grammar wrong. Sorry if my spelling offends you.

guinness83 wrote:
Your asking if it's true? Look at the Savile story and ask again!! lol

but is it easy to get compo from the government??