Invisible Child (Tushka Bergen)

(Amazon UK link)

A few months ago I bought four DVDs from a local charity shop, and we finally watched the last of them, a film made in 1999 called ‘Invisible Child’. The title sounds as if it might be science fiction, or perhaps a political drama. But it’s neither. It’s a family-based story that’s based on a very unusual premise…

Gillian (Tushka Bergen) is newly arrived in the United States, with no job, and nowhere to stay. She happens to spot an advert in a shop window for a nanny, and decides to call at the house in the hope of an interview. She meets the father Tim Beeman (Victor Garber) who introduces her to his ten-year-old daughter Rebecca, known for some reason as ‘Doc’ (brilliantly portrayed  by a young Mae Whitman). Gillian also meets his four-year-old son Sam (David Dorfman).

There’s not much of an interview, but Tim lets her know that an important part of her job would be helping to maintain a rather bizarre fantasy. His wife Annie (Rita Wilson) believes she has another child, Maggie, who is a year older than Sam.. and who is invisible to everyone else. Sam apparently believes he has an invisible sister and claims he can hear her speaking. But Doc, along with her father, play along knowing that Maggie isn’t real. 

Gillian takes the job and quickly learns to join in the pretence: she pushes ‘Maggie’ on a swing, talks to her in the bath, tucks her in at night… and she also endears herself to both Doc and Sam. But now that ‘Maggie’ is five, and supposedly attending Kindergarten, it’s harder for the pretence to continue and there are some awkward moments. Gillian feels more and more uncomfortable and decides to consult some professionals, which creates a huge crisis…

Outside of science fiction it’s one of the strangest premises for a film that I can recall. Annie is a loving wife and mother, she’s friendly and encouraging - but she lives in this fantasy world. And it raises all kinds of questions: is this a mental illness, or the result of stress? Is she a danger to anyone? Is Doc in danger, colluding with her father to maintain the pretence?  Is Sam in danger, growing up in the belief that Maggie is real…? And is it really helpful for Annie to have everyone else protecting her, going along with her fantasy?

There’s a wonderful pivotal scene about three-quarters of the way through, when Doc is being interviewed by three social workers. She comes across as friendly, intelligent, and open - posing her own questions about whether an invisible, imaginary ‘friend’ is really any different from belief in the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus. The script is very cleverly written, and the actors play their roles so well that we were completely drawn into the story, almost as part of the family.

It’s inevitably a bit dated, having been made nearly quarter of a century ago, and the quality of our DVD wasn’t the greatest. It claims to have ‘bonus material’ but it’s just text about the actors and something about the film - no interviews or ‘making of’ documentary or outtakes. It would have been interesting to know if the story was based on a real situation or person, and how the actors felt about the story.

I don’t think I’d class it as one of my favourite films, but it was well worth seeing, and very thought-provoking, making us consider in a new way where the boundary is between living in a fantasy world and mental illness.  It's light-hearted in places, but also warm and surprisingly moving. 

The rating is PG which I think is about right; there’s nothing a child shouldn’t see and not much that they shouldn’t hear, but the storyline and its eventual outcome could be disturbing for a young or sensitive child.  

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

Ginger in the Morning (Sissy Spacek)

(Amazon UK link)

A couple of months ago, I bought four DVDs at a local charity shop. I had never heard of any of them, but they looked quite appealing, and the blurb on the back sounded interesting. We loved the first one we watched, ‘Keeping the Faith’. We liked the second one we saw, too, ‘Reluctant Angel’.

So last night we decided to watch the third one I picked up, ‘Ginger in the Morning’. As it started, we quickly realised that it was an old film; the style looked almost 1950s, as did the cars and the way people dressed and spoke. But it was in colour, albeit faded, and one or two references made us realise it was either late 1960s or early 1970s. When the film ended we looked it up, and learned that it was made in 1974.

It’s a bit startling that the film, almost fifty years old but well in our lifetime, looks as dated as this one does. Not that it matters; there were some excellent films made in this era. Unfortunately, this was not one of them.

The story opens with a young woman, Ginger (Sissy Spacek) saying goodbye to someone who has been giving her a ride on a little-used American road. She has a guitar case and a small suitcase, and walks along the road, trying to thumb a lift but mostly being ignored. Eventually Joe (Monte Markham) stops and picks her up.

We’ve already met Joe in a kind of prologue to the film, when he’s walking through an airport accompanied by someone he evidently just met. This companion is pushy, rather coarse in his language and ideas, and convinced he knows what Joe should do to help him get over his recent divorce.

Ginger is something of a hippy - I wouldn’t have known if it hadn’t been mentioned several times - and Joe quite serious, but they get along well and are looking forward to a night together when Joe’s best friend Charlie (Mark Miller) turns up. Charlie is quite loud and boisterous, and when Joe makes some unwise comments about Ginger he’s overheard… and she is extremely hurt.

So it’s essentially a standard and predictable romance with a remarkably rapid attraction, an unpleasant misunderstanding, and attempts on Joe’s part to redeem himself. To add to the story, Charlie’s ex-wife Sugar (Susan Oliver) is brought in, which works well until she rather demeans herself in a most unlikely scene.

The acting is not great; it’s very much in the style of 1950s American films, so much so that I was half expecting people to break out into singing and dancing. That doesn’t happen; instead there’s a snowball fight (amidst snow that suddenly appears and then vanishes) and a lot of drunken staggering about that’s rather distasteful.

There’s some quite nice scenery, and one or two places that feel poignant, but there seemed to be a lot of plot-holes. Quite apart from the unlikely snow, I have no idea how Ginger managed to produce full evening dress from her small suitcase of poetry books, for instance. And although she has no money, she manages to buy quite a few groceries. We kept watching; I wondered why, once or twice, but there was nothing so bad it made me want to give up. But it’s not a film we’re likely to see again.

The rating is only PG, probably because there’s almost no bad language, no nudity and no scenes of intimacy although there’s some quite frank discussions and many implications that would not be appropriate for children. 

It’s unlikely to be of interest to anyone under the age of about fifty anyway, unless someone really likes these 1970s films. I gather it's quite popular with some folk; I had not heard of any of the cast, but apparently they've made other films and have quite a following. I don’t suppose we’ll want to see it again, but maybe in another decade or so. 

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

Something's Gotta Give (Diane Keaton)

(Amazon UK link)

I’ve no idea why Amazon recommended this DVD to me, unless it was because I had previous liked films with Diane Keaton in. It looked like a good film, anyway, and I bought it second-hand from World of Books online to collect during a recent visit to the UK. I had no idea what it was about but we decided to watch it last night.

Diane Keaton is excellent - playing Erica, a rather different kind of character from her usual somewhat harassed mother of several children. In this film she’s a slim, attractive playwright in her early fifties; separated from her husband (Paul Michael Glaser) amicably - so much so that he still works as her agent. They have one daughter, Marin (Amanda Peet), who’s 28. We meet her as she’s on her way to the huge family home for a weekend with her new boyfriend. 

Which would be fine, except that the ‘boyfriend’, Harry, is played by Jack Nicholson, and is 63. There’s nothing wrong with a large age gap between partners, but we quickly learn that Harry is a serial womaniser who only ever dates women under the age of 30. As so often with characters played by this actor, he’s sleazy, and (in my view) entirely unappealing. 

Mild humour emerges when Erica and her sister Zoe (Frances McDormand) arrive unexpectedly and think Harry is a burglar. Once that’s sorted out, they’re both quite accepting of him as a partner for Erica’s daughter, and they agree to stay, keeping out of each other’s way… until a medical emergency sends them all to hospital. Keanu Reeves plays a very helpful, friendly and attractive doctor called Julian, who turns out to be a huge fan of Erica’s plays. I thought he was one of the nicest characters in the film. 

There’s a bit of slapstick, and reality has to be suspended several times. For instance, Erica’s plays are all instant hits… her daughter sells million-dollar art at an auction… Harry has had not just a few or even a dozen but apparently hundreds of relationships with young women. But the most unlikely thing, in my mind,  is Erica being attracted to Harry, who comes across as untrustworthy, unreliable, and extremely unhealthy. 

There’s a lot of ‘adult’ humour and bad language that really adds nothing to the plot; bedroom scenes are not explicit so that the rating is 15; not that anyone under the age of 30 is likely to have any interest in a film like this. There are some partial nudity shots (with a great deal more implied) done for humour rather than being provocative, and we did smile a few times. But the ‘romantic’ threads of this ‘rom-com’ really did nothing for me. 

The film was made in 2003; we had guessed it was at least fifteen years old, partly because Diana Keaton looks so young - and partly because of the very basic mobile phones that do nothing but phone calls and text messages. However it didn’t feel all that dated otherwise. And it’s well done, with a good pace, and a few thought-provoking comments - such as the problems older, intelligent single or divorced women apparently have in finding romantic partners. 

Diane Keaton is perfect in her part; sometimes exaggerating her emotions and actions, sometimes giving her amazing smile, sometimes wise and intelligent. She’s a bit of an uptight character at first - despite being so relaxed with her daughter - and is released from that in a way that feels unrealistic and rather sleazy. I have never much liked characters played by Jack Nicholson, and Harry is no exception. He supposedly realises the error of his ways towards the end of the film, but it appears artificial; I didn’t trust him at all. 

I didn’t like the ending much, either. I would have cut the last brief scene set in Paris towards the end, and then changed the epilogue scenes to involve a different character. The way it ended left me feeling a bit disturbed. I suppose it’s a mark of a good film that the characters got under my skin so much. 

There are a few extras - mainly commentaries, and one deleted scene involving a somewhat schmaltzy song. 

I sound negative - but it’s not a bad film; I felt quite engrossed in the story for most of it. Apparently Diane Keaton won several awards for it.  We may well watch it again in a few years. 

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews

The Second-Best Exotic Margold Hotel (Dev Patel)

(Amazon UK link)

After we re-watched the excellent film ‘The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’ nearly two years ago, I was eager to see the sequel again. But it wasn’t on our shelves; eventually I recalled that it was our son’s DVD of ‘The Second-best Exotic Marigold Hotel’ that we saw back in 2015. It took me over a year to acquire the sequel for ourselves - I eventually found it at a good price on Amazon UK and it was brought out to us by relatives who visited at Easter.

It took a few more months before we sat down to watch the film, and found that we couldn’t remember the storyline at all. It opens in the United States; Muriel (Maggie Smith) and Sonny (Dev Patel) are hoping to expand the hotel, and are asking for support from an American hotel chain. People are staying long-term at the ‘Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’, and there are almost no rooms available for new arrivals.

Sonny is a wonderful creation, full of enthusiasm, but not understanding how to present his case in a way that might be attractive to the American chain. The owner does agree to send an inspector, but it doesn’t look too hopeful.

Back in India, two new guests arrive, and Sonny decides that one of them, an American called Guy Chambers (Richard Gere) must be the inspector. So he goes overboard with compliments, tries to allocate him the best room, and barely acknowledges the other guest.

Meanwhile Sonny’s fiance Sunaina (Tina Desai) is learning new dance moves with her brother’s best friend. Sonny, who’s oddly insecure under his extraverted enthusiasm, is convinced he has a rival. All the more so when he learns that the hotel he hopes to acquire has been bought already. He tries to persuade his mother to go on a date with Guy Chambers, but she is reluctant.

There are several other subplots too, involving the other characters: Douglas (Bill Nighy) would love to become closer to Evelyn (Judi Dench), but she’s wary - and she’s been offered a job, too, despite being close to eighty. Muriel, meanwhile, has what is evidently unpleasant news from her doctor, although we never learn what it is; she’s a bit grouchy at the best of times. And Norman (Ronald Pickup) is a bit concerned that he’s asked his taxi driver to do something he doesn’t want at all…

It’s all quite complex, with the background of the noise and vibrancy of Indian markets as well as day-to-day life in the hotel. There are a few surprises - we had entirely forgotten what happened - and I was a bit puzzled about one or two of the storylines. But it didn’t matter. With the all-star cast, the conversations and action move ahead flawlessly, with some beautifully choreographed light humour, as well as some poignancy amidst the various stresses and misunderstandings.

We enjoyed the film very much, and afterwards watched the ‘theatrical trailer’ extras which gave short snippets from some of the cast and film crew. It was good to see how enthusiastic the cast were, and how they had all been delighted to take part in a sequel to the first film.

The rating is PG, which makes sense: there’s no violence, or anything explicit and I didn’t even notice any bad language. However there are a lot of innuendoes and implications; the storyline is unlikely to be of any interest to children anyway.

Definitely recommended, although I think it would be extremely confusing if you haven’t first seen the original ‘The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’ film. 

Review copyright 2023 Sue's DVD Reviews