The Pink Panther (Peter Sellers)

(Amazon UK link)

Browsing stalls at a church sale a few months ago, I spotted a box set of DVDs containing five of the ‘Pink Panther’ comedy-detective series of films from the 1960s. I recalled quite liking them many decades ago, and they looked in excellent condition, so I bought the collection. 

Last night we decided to watch the first of them, simply titled ‘The Pink Panther’, which was the first of the series, produced in 1963. I’m not sure I’d ever seen this before, the film that introduced the legendary jewel known colloquially as ‘The Pink Panther’, because of a slight pink flaw. It’s owned by a princess; there’s a brief cameo at the beginning when we see her, as a small girl, being given it by her father. 

I remember watching the animated children’s show ‘Pink Panther’ when I was about nine or ten. I had no idea that this was a spin-off of a detective series, nor that the pink panther was anything other than the bright pink feline character who starred in the cartoons. Apparently it was invented for the opening sequence of this film - and it’s extremely well done; we were all the more impressed, knowing the credits were done by hand rather than using computer graphics.

The story is a bit confusing at first; there are several clandestine meetings, around the world, where (I gathered) valuable jewels had been stolen. But the action really begins in a hotel in Italy where the princess (with her pink panther jewel) is staying, as are several potential guests. It was hard to keep track of who was whom as they all had similar accents and clothes, all very 1960s, but it didn’t much matter.

But Sir Charles (David Niven) stands out early on, a suave womaniser who is set on seducing the princess. He has a nephew, too, called George (Robert Wagner) who has been educated in the United States and has just graduated. It’s quickly apparent that his personality is similar to his uncle’s, albeit without the elegance or suavity. 

The most important person, however, is Inspector Clouseau, brilliantly played by Peter Sellers. He’s investigating a series of robberies by a mythical ‘phantom’, and is convinced that the pink panther jewel will be stolen at some point over this weekend. Clouseau is a wonderful creation; he’s quite intuitive but very naive, and extremely clumsy. There are some cleverly choreographed scenes where he trips or breaks things, and where he’s entirely hoodwinked by his wife Simone (Capucine) who apparently entertains several lovers. 

There’s lots of silliness in the film, including a fancy dress/masked party where Clouseau and some of his colleagues wear the most bizarre outfits. Two people dressed as gorillas manage an excellent sequence, and there are car chases, ski chases, and a kidnapped dog. John le Mesurier makes a cameo role towards the end as a barrister, and Claudia Cardinale is a dignified, tee-total princess 

The script is clever, the music works well, the actors are believable (in a 1960s dramatic kind of way) and the story begins to make sense in the latter part of the film. There’s a lot of smoking, of course, and a surprising number of innuendoes and suggestiveness even though nothing explicit is shown, nor any nudity. Language is mild and there’s minimal violence (most of it comedic). The rating is PG which makes sense, although I can’t imagine many young children being at all interested in this film.

‘The Pink Panther’ is nearly two hours long, but I didn’t notice the time - although the pace is mostly quite relaxed, it didn’t feel at all dull. I liked the fact that there weren’t continually scene changes but a little more time to get to know some of the cast, unlike today’s fast-action films.

I understand that there's an updated 'Pink Panther' movie with Steve Martin in the role of Clouseau. I'm sure it's well done, but it's not the one we saw, and (according to some reviewers) not as good as the classic.

I would definitely recommend the original 'Pink Panther' film if you don’t mind silliness and a bit of mild slapstick (very well choreographed) and would like a light evening’s undemanding viewing.

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

8 Simple Rules (series 1)

(Amazon UK link)

I’m not sure where I picked up the DVD of the first TV series of ‘8 simple rules’. Perhaps it was at a church stall or a charity shop - I doubt if I paid more than about 50 cents for it. It looked interesting; I had not heard of the series, nor any of the actors, but we thought it would give a few evenings’ light entertainment.

We started watching a couple of months ago. The episodes are short - no more than about thirty minutes each - and we were quite shocked when the first one ended. So we’ve watched two at a time, one evening per week. There are 19 episodes in all, so last night we saw the last three. The DVD box says there’s also a blooper reel, but we couldn’t find it. Perhaps there was another DVD, no longer in our box set.

The series focuses on a family of five. The father, Paul (John Ritter) is middle-aged, genial but a bit naive. He’s struggling to know how to deal with his two teenage daughters Bridget (Kaley Cuoco) and Kerry (Amy Davidson). Bridget is tall, blonde, and not particularly bright. But she has the kind of appearance that’s attractive to young men, and has had a series of boyfriends. We understood that the ‘8 simple rules’ referred to her parents’ guidelines about dating, but it was never made clear what they were. 

Kerry, by contrast, is shorter, red-haired, and very bright. She’s attractive too, in a different way, but quite insecure and often feels she is in competition with her sister. She’s a couple of years younger and, at the start of the series, thinks she’ll never have a boyfriend.  

Then there’s Rory (Martin Spanjers) who must be about 12, and likes to stir….

Paul’s wife Kate (Katey Sagal) works as an emergency-room nurse, and is often out. Paul, who is a writer, works from home so a lot of the parenting falls onto him - and while he loves his daughters very much, he has little idea how to deal with them. 

It’s a good idea, and the series covers various issues: honesty, integrity, being over-protective, when to relax the rules, and so on. Unfortunately there’s a lot of laughter, which we assume is canned (the series is American) and it’s quite distracting. It's also a bit disturbing that the actors sometimes seem to pause while the laughter dies down, making us wonder if it was filmed before a life audience.

Since each episode is so short, not a lot happens and it all felt quite trite in the beginning. We almost gave up, but we didn’t hate it… so we kept watching, two at a time though no more than once a week. The characters began to feel familiar to  us, to get under our skins a little, and the stories became more interesting. 

My favourite character was Kerry, who seems a lot more realistic than the supposedly perfect Bridget. Kerry thinks for herself, and she cares about the rest of her family. Bridget is more narcissistic and shallow, and Rory is just irritating. I liked the parents too; Cate’s character develops more as the series progresses. 

So we see Bridget starting to drive, sneaking out of the house, dating unsuitable people, trying to figure out how to get around her parents' rules. We see Thanksgiving, and a Christmas episode that was a bit cheesy but enjoyable, and various minor characters, mostly boyfriends, who come and go. It's more like a soap than a sit-com, although each episode is complete in itself.

There's some humour in it - some clever lines here and there - but a lot of it was rather poignant, and some had us rolling our eyes at the father's naivety. Having now finished watching, we didn’t have any inclination to try to find the second series; one was quite enough.

I wouldn't recommend looking for this but if you come across it in a charity shop at a good price, it's not a bad show for light, undemanding viewing. Perhaps it would be of more interest to teenagers (or, indeed, parents of teenage girls) but apparently it was stopped after three series due to low viewing figures. 

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

Von Trapped (Caroline Quentin)

(Amazon UK link)

Sometimes I pick up a random DVD that looks intriguing on a church book stall, or similar. It’s probably a couple of years or more since I paid 50 cents or so for ‘Von Trapped’; it’s taken this long to decide to watch it. We had no idea what to expect…

Caroline Quentin stars as a hairdresser called Maria. She is obsessed with the film ‘The Sound of Music’, and has been for the past eighteen years since she was jilted at the altar by Larry (Jim Carter). She has brought up her child Lee as a single mother, helped - and sometimes hindered - by her mother, Kath (Una Stubbs). 

Unfortunately Lee is getting into some bad company and is seen shoplifting. And Maria is given an unexpected gift from a friend's lottery win to enable her to go to Salzburg. It’s been her dream for many years… so she goes, accompanied by both Lee and Kath.

The film, which was made for TV, is only an hour long. We nearly gave up watching after the first ten minutes or so, as it all seemed rather silly. But there’s a storyline, albeit a bit confusing, and some lovely scenery in Salzburg. The last fifteen minutes or so are worth watching as the story improves, albeit in a somewhat schmaltzy and unlikely way. But we were quite shocked when it ended so suddenly, not having realised how short it would be. 

There are some altercations - with Maria and Lee over a lifestyle decision, and with Maria and Kath over Kath’s regular attempts to control her daughter. Maria is perhaps too willing to let everyone else tell her what to do; she’s likeable, although with such a short film it was hard to feel anything much for any of the characters. There’s an important issue that’s explored in a mostly sensitive way; it would be a spoiler to say what it is, but that added something to the film.

I’d hoped it might be suitable for children but it’s rated 12 and I think that’s about right. There’s some violence that might be disturbing, and a lot of innuendoes and implications, even though nothing explicit happens on film.

I’m not sure I’d recommend it; I see that on Amazon there are some very high ratings, and some very low. It appears that most viewers either love it or hate it. My opinion is in the middle. I doubt if we’ll bother seeing it again, but it had some redeeming qualities, including one or two moments of humour and I think it’s worth seeing at least once, though probably not worth buying the DVD. 

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

23 Walks (Dave Johns, Alison Steadman)

(Amazon UK link)

Amazon recommends films to me, now and again, based on what I have previously bought and liked. One of them, towards the end of last year, was called ‘23 Walks’. I hadn’t heard of the film and knew nothing about either of the lead actors, but the storyline sounded good, and it was (mostly) very highly reviewed. So I put it on my wishlist, and was given it for Christmas.

Last night we decided to watch it. The idea is that two late middle-aged people gradually get to know each other over the course of 23 walks with dogs. The front of the DVD says it’s moving, relaxed, honest, complex and tender. The back says it’s a heartwarming comedy-drama. So I was expecting a lightweight but probably enjoyable film. 

It starts slowly. Fern (Alison Steadman) has a small dog, and her first meeting with Dave (Dave Johns) and his large dog does not go well. She’s annoyed that Dave’s dog is not on a leash, and stalks past with her dog in her arms.  

Over the course of the next few walks they start talking - rather stiltedly, but perhaps it’s realistic - and Fern realises that Dave’s dog is friendly and lovable, no danger to anyone. The two dogs become friendly, and their owners do too, albeit somewhat reluctantly. It’s all rather slow-moving; the scenery is pretty and the dogs are nice, but it was hard to see what Dave and Fern saw in each other, beyond the mutual dog-walking. 

Dave tells fern that he was widowed a couple of years earlier; Fern says her husband left her and is with someone else. So they’re both available… and while Fern is quite bruised and has no wish to enter into a romantic relationship, or anything more than a casual friendship, Dave is rather keener. They have some days out together, and Fern meets some of Dave’s family - he has two delightful grandchildren, although their mother Donna (Natalie Simpson) really doesn’t want her father seeing another woman… 

There’s more, and in the second half of the film the story got going somewhat. Fern discovers something Dave has been keeping from her, and it looks like their friendship is at an end… 

The film acknowledges some important issues, such as homelessness and the appalling condition of some council houses; the way some people can be too compliant, bossed around by family and friends; the difficulties inherent in looking after someone with dementia; the loneliness that single or widowed people can experience, particularly when their offspring live abroad. Other issues are lightly touched upon in what felt quite realistic ways.  

But somehow… it never grabbed us. There wasn’t any chemistry between the two principals, and the final (perhaps inevitable) scene is much too drawn out and, I felt, unnecessary to have shown at all. There’s some poignancy, but even one scene which should have been very sad failed to move us. The acting felt awkward; possibly deliberately, so as to reflect the difficulties of getting to know another person, and the script was a bit turgid. I’m not sure what happened to the walks, as they became incidental after the first handful. 

So although it wasn’t a bad film, and the adjectives ‘relaxed’ and ‘honest’ could certainly apply, we didn’t find it at all moving, complex or tender. And we’re mystified as to why it was billed as comedic. There wasn’t anything remotely amusing about the majority of the film. We did smile at one moment when the dogs switched water bowls, and when there was an unexpected round of applause after an incident later in the film. But that was it. The storyline was essentially rather depressing with no real hope for the future.  

The rating is 12 but there are some instances of ‘strong’ language, and a rather explicit scene towards the end, albeit mostly covered in a sheet.  I think I’d have rated it 15.  However I can’t imagine anyone under the age of about 40 being interested in this anyway.

No extras on the DVD, and overall I wouldn’t recommend it. But don't take my word for it - the film has some excellent ratings and is apparently very much appreciated by quite a significant audience.

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

Peter Pan goes wrong

(Amazon UK link)

We had never heard of ‘The Mischief Theatre Company’, or the film ‘Peter Pan goes wrong’. I doubt if I would have picked it up if I had seen it in a charity shop, but we were given it for Christmas by one of my adult sons. He said he had very much liked it, and thought we would too.

So last night we decided to watch it, with little idea what to expect. It wasn’t until after we’d seen the ‘making of’ extra, and read about it online that I understood that this started as a stage play which was very popular, including a West End season. This film is a TV adaptation, involving David Suchet as the narrator and the play performed in front of a live audience.

The idea is that an amateur dramatic company is going to perform ‘Peter Pan’; we meet them discussing the potential problems, including two cast members who are romantically involved, and one who is extremely nervous, and one who can’t remember his lines… it doesn’t sound very promising.

Then David Suchet starts narrating, reading the opening of JM Barrie’s classic story, and sprinkling - a little dubiously - some glitter. Things start going awry almost immediately as the scene shifts to the Darling family’s nursery.  The three young children - played by adults - are out of the spotlight and have to shuffle forward, looking awkward. The tallest of all announces that he is four. The girl playing Wendy tries to get them all in bed, and the person playing the dog Nana gets stuck in a rather large flap in the door. 

It doesn’t sound very amusing when written out, and it could have been terrible. But the timing is so good that it works - and we found ourselves laughing aloud more than once, as the scene becomes more and more chaotic. Mr and Mrs Darling are wonderfully exaggerated; the man playing Mr Darling could have been a younger John Cleese, and his wife switches costume rather rapidly to become the housekeeper. That works extremely well and I thought their scene excellent. 

When Peter Pan arrives the wires enabling him to fly go wrong and he turns somersaults and crashes into the wall before finally landing - indeed, pretty much everything goes wrong, cleverly choreographed and well executed. I found some of it rather too weird; I’m not a fan of slapstick, and don’t find it funny when people get hurt, but this first part of the play is mostly very amusing.

Then the scene switches to Neverland, after some clumsy attempts at flying, and cast members are duplicated again as pirates, with battles ensuing. I didn’t like this section so much, although the pirate chief (the same actor as Mr Darling) is exaggeratedly excellent. But too many people become hurt, some of them quite badly, and I began to find the fast action and slapstick rather less amusing. 

Still, the ending works well with some surprising scenes as the pirate ship breaks loose and can’t be stopped, even if the eventual chaos in the nursery is so appalling as to be disturbing rather than funny.

The rating is PG, which makes sense given the content and the general level of humour, although there are one or two scenes that some parents might baulk at, including one where three characters are seen in their underwear, and another where two others are seen kissing passionately. There are a few references to cast members sleeping together, too, although they would no doubt go over the heads of the very young. 

Recommended if you want a light evening’s entertainment and don’t mind a bit of silliness.

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews