The Terminal (Tom Hanks)

(Amazon UK link)

In the past few years, we have managed to watch a DVD about once or twice a month at most. Since we are often given new ones for birthdays and Christmas, our drawer of to-be-watched films has stayed fairly well replenished. However this year we have allocated Monday evenings, whenever possible, to watch a DVD together. So as our new supply was beginning to run low, I found the ones we watched and liked at least ten years ago, deciding I could deal with seeing them again. Last night my husband’s selection was ‘The Terminal’.

We first saw this film on Christmas Day 2006. The day is seared in my mind as a rather depressing one. Our older son had left home and was working on a ship the other side of the world. The friends with whom we had shared Christmas for the previous few years had gone back to live in the United States. Other friends, whom we had invited for lunch, were unavailable. So just three of us sat down to a traditional Christmas meal, feeling far from festive. After lunch we decided to watch this film, which our older son had recommended highly.

Eleven years later, all we could remember of ‘The Terminal’ was that Tom Hanks spent a long time living at an airport, due to political circumstances. We recalled liking the film, and one or two cameo moments. We also remembered having watched the ‘extras’, so we know that the airport terminal, in which most of the film takes place, was custom-designed and built in an old hangar, specifically for the filming.

The story opens with a general impression of an airport in New York - customs, passport control, and so on. Then we meet Viktor (Tom Hanks), a man from a small Eastern European country which apparently started a civil war while he was in the air. His passport had become invalid, as the US no longer recognised his country. So he could neither go out of the airport into New York, nor return to his home country. It doesn’t help that he has almost no English, relying on a phrase book to attempt to communicate. So he doesn’t understand what’s going on until he sees some news reports of violence and recognises his country…

Steven Spielberg directed this, and it’s a wonderful film: character-based, almost entirely, rather than having much plot as such. There’s a lot of low-key humour as Viktor teaches himself English, figures out ways to earn money so that he can eat, and makes himself a place to sleep in the airport. He is watched on security cameras by the airport customs staff, particularly the head (Stanley Tucci) who has no idea how to handle him…

Tom Hanks is excellent in this role, as a confused but likeable man who makes the most of his circumstances at every point. He is treated with suspicion at first by airport staff, but gradually breaks down their barriers. There’s also a low-key and bittersweet love interest featuring an air hostess (Catherine Zeta-Jones) who knows that she’s bad news, yet likes him despite herself.

We were mesmerised for an hour and a half. We had completely forgotten how it ended, and why Viktor was so keen to go to New York. We had not remembered any of the other characters, either, nor any of the interactions that work so well. We hadn’t remembered the mild slapstick humour that happens a few times on a slippery floor; it made us wince somewhat, but was so well choreographed that we smiled at times too.

I would recommend this to anyone who likes character-driven dramas with low-key humour and a feel-good ending. The rating is 12A (PG-13 in the US) and I think that’s about right. There’s some bad language, though nothing too ‘strong’, and some innuendoes, though nothing explicit. Violence on screen could be disturbing, however, as could some shouting and threatening that happens in an incident towards the end. I very much doubt if anyone under the age of about fourteen would find it of interest anyway as there’s not much action or story, and all the characters are adults.

The extras are well worth watching too, in my opinion, particularly those about the building of the set.

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews

Penelope (Christina Ricci)

(Amazon UK link)

I have no idea why Amazon recommended this particular DVD to me, unless it was that I had previously bought something featuring Reese Witherspoon. Not that she is a main character in ‘Penelope’. Whatever the reason, I liked the sound of the blurb and the reviews were good, so it went on my wishlist and I was given it for Christmas. We decided to watch it last night.

The opening scenes make it clear that this is a modern fairy-tale. The film was made in 2006, and the story was contemporary to that time. However it started some generations back, when an upper class 'blue-blooded' man fell in love with a serving maid, but his family did not allow her to marry him. The maid’s mother, who was a witch, cursed the family: the first daughter born to them would have the face of a pig. The curse would only be broken when someone ‘of her kind’ loved her for herself. It felt as if it should have been made in the UK, where 'old blood' and this kind of class snobbery is (or was) more common than the US, where it is set.

No daughters were born to the family over many decades, until Penelope (Christina Ricci) arrived. Her parents brought her up in a very isolated way, presumably educated at home but with every advantage which money could bring. We meet her when she is in her late teens, and her mother has started trying to attract suitors. She wants her daughter to get married as soon as possible, to someone who will presumably break the curse.

Since Penelope does not go out, young man ‘of her kind’ are invited to the mansion, where they speak to her without seeing her, at first. Unfortunately, when they finally see her face, they are so shocked that they escape as fast as they can, signing a nondisclosure agreement so that nobody else knows what the problem is.

It’s quite a fast-moving film, with some humour in places, and a great deal of action. There are journalists, and a suitor who makes friends with Penelope before seeing her, and isn’t repulsed by her face, but still insists he cannot marry her. Eventually, covering her face with a scarf, she runs away from home…

There’s a love story running through the latter part of the film, but it’s very low-key. The story is really about finding acceptance; about personality being far more important than looks. Essentially it’s ‘Beauty and the Beast’ in reverse. I was totally caught up in the storyline and worried for a while that Penelope might marry the wrong man. I wasn’t expecting some of the ending but it all worked well, and was a very satisfactory film overall.

The casting is excellent, with appropriate amounts of melodrama and over-acting from Penelope's mother and a few other caricatured people. Reese Witherspoon doesn't actually appear until about half-way through the film, and portrays rather a different character from her normal types.

The rating is U (G in the US) and I think that’s appropriate. Other than a mildly tense scene at the beginning, and an innuendo that would go over most young children’s heads, it’s free of anything that might upset or offend anyone. Very little bad language, as far as I recall; no scenes of intimacy; no violence - other than a few broken windows. It’s a film I’m going to recommend to three young friends of mine, aged between twelve and seven.

Highly recommended for anyone wanting a light, somewhat surreal but undemanding and enjoyable evening's viewing.

There's a short 'extra' on the DVD with a few brief interviews, and explanation of how Penelope's pig face was made.

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews

Mrs Dalloway (Vanessa Redgrave)

(Amazon UK link)

We have had this DVD sitting in our unwatched DVD drawer for some years now. It was originally a freebie issued with a newspaper, and we acquired it from a relative. I’m not really a fan of Virginia Woolf’s novels, but we’re trying to watch a film once a week, so we finally decided to watch ‘Mrs Dalloway’ last night.

It’s a 1920s drama starring Vanessa Redgrave as Clarissa Dalloway, a middle-aged socialite who is giving a party. The whole film takes place over the course of a day, although there are many flashbacks to her youth. She is from a privileged, moneyed class, married to a politician - and while she is a little stressed over the details of her party, all the work is evidently done by her household staff.

There’s not a great deal of plot. I gather that the novel is mostly stream-of-consciousness style narrated by Clarissa, and that’s the general effect of the film. We see most events from her perspective, and sometimes hear her thoughts, given separately from the action or spoken words. There’s an entirely separate subplot featuring a young war veteran who is having horrible flashbacks and hallucinations, and his wife; they are, perhaps, shown as a stark contrast to the lavish lifestyle of Clarissa and her friends.

The novel was probably considered very risqué when it was first published. The young Clarissa, in flashback, has a brief romantic encounter with her close friend Sarah. But she is also very attracted to a young and somewhat demanding man called Peter. She ends up marrying a safer, more caring man and is reasonably happy; however an encounter with Peter on her party day starts her wondering what might have happened if she had made different choices.

The film is beautifully made, and very well-casted; Vanessa Redgrave, as ever, is perfect in her role. The younger Clarissa and friends are similar enough to their middle-aged selves that there was no problem remembering who was whom. I was a tad confused by the two time-frames for the first few minutes, but it soon became clear what was going on.

However, it’s not a film that caught my emotions, particularly. I could see that it was a high quality film, with great attention to period detail. As a piece of social history, it's excellent. And yet, I didn’t particularly enjoy it. That’s partly because the plot concerning the war veteran was quite disturbing, and partly, I suppose, because the Dalloways' lifestyle is so far removed from anything I’ve experienced.

I’m intrigued enough that I may decide to read the book at some point, but I doubt if I’ll want to see the film again. It made a pleasant enough evening’s viewing; the rating of PG (PG-13 in the US) seems about right, although I cannot imagine it would appeal to anyone under the age of about sixteen.

The film doesn't seem to be easily available any more; second-hand editions on Amazon are very expensive. But if you can find this at a charity shop, or similar, it's worth seeing once.    

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews

Sliding Doors (Gwyneth Paltrow)

(Amazon UK link)

I don’t know why Amazon recommended this film to me, unless it’s that I’ve liked other films with Gwyneth Paltrow. However, the blurb sounded intriguing, and I put it on my wishlist. I was given it for Christmas a few weeks ago, and we watched it on Monday evening. I was surprised to learn afterwards that it's twenty years old; it didn't feel particularly dated at all.

I knew, from the description on the back of the DVD, that it was the story of a young woman called Helen who is shown in two parallel lives, depending on whether or not she makes a particular action. It’s just as well I knew this in advance or I might have been confused. It’s no spoiler to mention this, as the turning point happens quite early in the story.

Helen lives with her boyfriend Gerry. He is an aspiring writer, and she commutes to an office where she works to support them both. On the day when we meet them, she is given the sack so has to go home early. What she doesn’t know is that Gerry is having an affair…

As Helen rushes for the train, she just misses it. Then there’s a back-track when we see her getting to the platform just in time to catch it. From that point, there are two parallel stories. In the one where she catches the train, she sits next to a chatty young man called James (John Hannah) - and then, inevitably, walks in on Gerry with his other lover. When she misses the train, she gets involved in an accident so does not arrive home until her normal time - and is met instead with sympathy and affection.

As the film progresses, the two strands of Helen’s future diverge more and more. In one she gets a glamorous haircut which makes it much easier to remember which life we’re seeing. Sometimes the same basic scenario is shown from two different perspectives, depending on what Helen knows, and whether or not she is still living with Gerry.

There’s quite a bit of humour in the film, mostly from James. I kept wondering where I had seen his distinctive face before, and afterwards discovered that John Hannah was in the classic ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’. James is a very likeable person, which makes it all the more shocking when Helen (in the first scenario) discovers something unexpected about him…

While the storyline itself is far-fetched, it’s a thought-provoking idea to show how a life can change so dramatically depending on such a small incident. I wondered how it was going to end, and thought it was managed very well indeed. Moreover, there’s a strong hint that some things are meant to be, and will happen eventually.

Some poignant moments, some great acting, and an ultimately satisfying film. Definitely recommended. The 15 rating (PG-13 in the US) is about right, in my opinion. There are ‘bedroom’ scenes which, while not explicit, are rather obvious, and there’s some bad language including some normally considered ‘strong’. It’s not the kind of film that would appeal to anyone under the age of about fifteen anyway.

Definitely recommended.

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews

Mrs Palfrey at the Claremont (Joan Plowright)

(Amazon UK link)

I had this DVD on my wishlist for a while; Amazon recommended it to me, and it sounded like a gentle, thoughtful film for a winter evening. I was given it recently for Christmas. I was tired by the evening of New Year’s Day and knew I would struggle to understand the plot of some of the films in our to-be-watched drawer, but the blurb on the back of this suggested that it would be straightforward, with British rather than American voices. It sounded ideal.

Joan Plowright stars as the elderly, genteel Mrs Palfrey. We meet her as she is about to take up residence at the Claremont Hotel in London, after it has been recommended to her. She is determined to live independently of her daughter, and this hotel offers long-term accommodation, with other elderly people. However she’s initially rather horrified at the old-fashioned decor and unfriendly seating arrangements of the hotel dining room. The food isn’t great either.

I thought at first that the setting was perhaps the 1970s or even earlier; the hotel certainly seems to be from that era. But mentions are made of laptops and mobile phones, and it becomes clear that the film was in fact contemporary when it was made in 2005.

Mrs Palfrey has a grandson, Desmond, who lives in London. She’s written to him, and hopes that he will get in touch and come to see her. But weeks pass, and the other residents begin to think she’s making him up. She isn’t ready to join in with all the activities of those around her, and is clearly very lonely, still missing her husband who died some years previously. She has just one daughter and she’s not on great terms with her.

A slight accident leads to Mrs Palfrey meeting the young man Ludo (Rupert Friend). He’s an impoverished writer who lives in holey jeans and scruffy tops, but is a deep thinker, and also extremely kind. The two ‘click’... and as their friendship develops, links are seen between their lives, as they discuss favourite films, favourite songs, favourite place, and favourite poetry. The two have a wonderful chemistry, and the are totally believable in their very different roles.

There’s a bit of light humour in the film. Some of the Claremont residents are caricatured, and predictable, but amusing nonetheless. There’s also a great deal of poignancy. A relationship between a young man and someone old enough to be his grandmother is an unusual plot device; apparently the film is based on a novel of the same name, and it makes a very watchable and moving film.

The rating is PG, which is probably right; there’s no violence, no bad language as far as I recall, and just one ‘intimate’ scene in which not much can be seen. It’s not the kind of film that would appeal to young children anyway, though I should think that more thoughtful pre-teens and teenagers might well like it if they are happy to see films without any children in them.

The ‘extras’ were a bit disappointing: stills from the film, and information in textual form only. But that's only a minor glitch. The film itself was excellent and I would recommend it.

Review copyright 2017 Sue's DVD Reviews