The Shell Seekers (Angela Lansbury)

(Amazon UK link)

Rosamunde Pilcher was one of my favourite writers of the 20th century, and I very much liked her saga novel ‘The Shell Seekers’. After initial reluctance, we acquired the DVD version back in 2006. When I first saw it, I kept comparing it to the book, and inevitably it fell short: there’s no way a 500+ novel can be condensed satisfactorily into a 97 minute film. But it wasn’t just that it missed parts out: it included scenes that didn’t exist - indeed, couldn’t exist - in the book.

When I watched it again, a couple of years later, I tried to see it as a stand-alone film, telling a story that’s ‘based on’ the novel rather than being the same story. And I liked it much more. So it seemed like a good idea to watch it now, nearly twelve years later, and I approached it with an open mind. I hadn’t forgotten that the pivoting - and shocking - incident towards the end of the novel is entirely missing from the film, but I didn’t recall much else about it.

Angela Lansbury stars as 63-year-old Penelope - and there was my first shock. Back in 2008 I was still in my late forties, but now it’s only a few years until I will be Penelope’s age. She looked more like 73 than 63, and considerably frailer than anyone I know in their early 60s. Penelope is a strong character in the book, and that came through. She’s certainly determined, and somewhat bohemian in her outlook. But somehow Angela Lansbury was playing a role that didn’t feel to me like Rosamunde Pilcher’s creation.

Penelope has three children, presumably in their late thirties and early forties. Anna Cartaret plays the insecure, materialistic Nancy and does so extremely well. Noel (Christopher Bowen) is believable as a greedy, manipulative conman; I think he’s rather nicer in the book. I had no sympathy for him at all in the film. And Olivia, Penelope’s youngest, is played perfectly by Patricia Hodge.

The two younger characters, Antonia (Sophie Ward) and Danus (Mark Lewis Jones) fit well with my perceptions from the book, but it was hard to see any real chemistry between them, so the final scenes (not in the book anyway) felt almost contrived. Particularly since Penelope’s children, who objected vociferously to her friendship with these two, appear to forgive them entirely and support them in what they’re doing without any obvious reason to change their minds.

The main story - about art, including a painting which gives the book its title - is there, but in such a short film there’s little time for any development. There are scenes in Cornwall, a place that Rosamunde Pilcher often wrote about, but they’re all too short. The film should really have been longer to allow for more development and a gentler pace, but it was made for TV so no doubt had both budgeting and time constraints.

The book has a lot in flashback, and most of that’s cut out of the film. What there is happens rathertoo fast; I had quite forgotten that one of the people from the past, who died in the war in the book, appears in a highly unlikely coincidence. But I suppose that was a way of filling in the gaps.

The scenery is good, but - from a perspective of thirty years after the film was made - the style feels very old-fashioned. There are a lot of nods and smiles at the ends of conversations which add nothing, and a gentle soft focus on Penelope, at times, which make her look even older.

If you like 1980s gentle films, then there’s nothing wrong with this; it made an enjoyable hour and a half’s viewing, and could make a good introduction to the book. The rating is U, and that seems entirely appropriate. There’s no hint of the affairs that creep into the book; the one scene of a fire is quick and as it’s in one of the flashbacks it’s not too disturbing. There are a couple of shouted arguments, but no real tension - it’s unlikely, in any case, to appeal to children or younger teenagers.

Recommended in a low key way.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews