Danielle Steel is a very popular novelist, although I was not particularly impressed with either of the books I have read by her, so far. I don't suppose it would ever have occurred to me to get hold of a DVD of an adaptation of one of her books. But we were given this - a freebie from a weekend newspaper in the UK - by a relative. It has sat on our shelves for quite some time, but last night we finally sat down to watch it.
'Secrets' is set in Hollywood. It's the story of a group of people who get together to make the pilot series of a new TV show called 'Manhattan'. The director, and really the star of the whole film, is called Mel. He is nicely played by Christopher Plummer in a role that seemed to suit him well.
The cast he gets together are a somewhat caricatured and unlikely mix. There's Sabina (Stephanie Beacham) who really doesn't like TV, but very much likes Mel. Yet she keeps popping off to San Francisco for some purpose which is not revealed until the end. There's Jane (Linda Purl) who is in a horribly abusive marriage. There's Zack (Gary Collins), a likeable guy who becomes quite protective of Jane, yet evidently has a worrying secret of his own. There's Gaby, apparently a diva, who turns out to be rather wealthy, and Bill (Ben Browder) whose wife is a druggie.
Somehow all these confused and hurting people manage to create a show that is a terrific hit. The movie shows the filming interspersed with scenes from their increasingly unpleasant private lives. The film was well done in a 1990s kind of way (I had thought it earlier than that). But the story itself is artificial, with exaggerated traits in all the cast, and a tidy, predictable outcome. There seem to be rather a lot of bedroom scenes, too. They're fairly subtly done with no nudity as such, but by the end had become somewhat tediously repetitive.
It isn't a bad film, if a bit depressing in places. I thought Christopher Plummer held it all together very well, and the ending is at least positive, if unlikely. But the story feels too plastic to be interesting. Perhaps it somewhat reflects life in Hollywood, but the characters do not seem believable in the ways they behave. I was not at all inspired to get hold of the book.
Oh, and there was a very odd start and end to the film, featuring Danielle Steel herself thanking the viewers for watching. I expect she's a very nice person, but these parts are cringeworthy, and very off-putting. Perhaps they were put on the DVD for the freebie version.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
I'm not sure how 'Moonstruck' found its way to my wishlist; perhaps it was recommended because I've enjoyed other films of similar genre. Perhaps it was because I've rated highly a couple featuring Olympia Dukakis. Perhaps it was just random. Whatever the reason, I'm glad I was given it; we watched it last night, and enjoyed it very much.
It's a film about Italian Catholics in the USA, made in 1987 and I assume contemporary for the time. I suppose vinyl records were still played in that era. It stars Cher as Loretta, a rather down-to-earth bookkeeper, whose husband died suddenly seven years previously. I had not previously thought of Cher as an actress, but she plays the part very well.
Loretta decides that she will accept a marriage proposal from the middle-aged Johnny (Danny Aiello), an old friend whom she likes but does not love. He doesn't seem particularly keen to make any arrangements, but she is determined to do the wedding 'properly'. He hurries away to the deathbed of his mother, instructing Loretta, at the last moment, to get in touch with his estranged brother Ronny (Nicholas Cage). Loretta does just that…
The film is good fun, and quite engrossing, despite being somewhat caricatured. The box said it would be a 'comedy', but we thought it mildly amusing rather than hilarious, with some comic moments. However there are also some bittersweet parts, and some quite thought-provoking scenes which are far from funny. We liked the almost farcical scenes of confusion and misunderstanding which develop towards the end.
All in all, 'Moonstruck' was nicely done, the characters not too extreme or unbelievable (despite the plot being a little extreme in places) and there was a good, encouraging ending.
Recommended. It's rated PG in both the US and UK, with nothing unsuitable for children, but the content would not really be of any interest to a child.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
This is another of those films which Amazon must have recommended to me - possibly because of the actors in it - and which I was given by one of my relatives. It's sat on our unwatched-DVD-shelf for some time, but we decided to see it with a friend a couple of evenings ago. I don't usually watch this many films in a month, but the blurb on the back suggested that this would be a gentle and undemanding story.
'Driving Miss Daisy' proved to be exactly that. We first meet Miss Daisy (Jessica Tandy), an elderly Jewish widow, when she has a little prang with her car. She wants to keep her independence, but cannot get car insurance. Her son (Dan Aykroyd) tries in vain to reason with her, then goes ahead and employs an African-American chauffeur called Hoke (Morgan Freeman) for her.
The film is set initially in the 1940s, in the American South. While Miss Daisy insists that she is not prejudiced, there's an overt difference between her and her black cook Idella (Esther Rolle), and she really does not want a chauffeur of any kind. She reluctantly agrees to let him drive her car, but the relationship is often rather strained at first.
Jessica Tandy is superb in the title role, which she filmed when she was 80 according to the brief ‘making of’ extra. During the course of the movie she starts as a sprightly woman of around 70 and eventually becomes very frail, approaching 90. She is entirely believable as both. Freeman, too, is excellent as Hoke, surprisingly confident and determined, while aware all the time of his 'place'.
There's not much action, or indeed plot. However, this is a wonderful, character-driven gentle film that was engrossing. There were a few humorous moments too, and some poignancy when it became clear (though never fully spelled out) that both the main characters were sometimes the subjecs of prejudice.
My one problem with this film was that the Southern accents were so strong that I could not understand a lot of the dialogue, particularly that spoken by Hoke. As it turned out, it didn’t matter too much, but was frustrating at first; so much so that we even wondered if we could switch on sub-titles, but they were not available with the DVD.
Definitely recommended.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
I'm not quite sure why 'Must Love Dogs' appeared on my wishlist; probably Amazon recommended it to me, based on other films I had rated and enjoyed. The reviews sounded reasonably positive, and it's in the light-hearted romantic genre, so I was pleased to receive it as a gift for Christmas.
So, with a free evening last night, we sat down to watch this with a guest. We expected something fluffy that would not require much thought, and, indeed, that's what we got.
The plot is about Sarah (Diane Lane) who is recently divorced. She works as a pre-school teacher, and is happy enough. However, she's part of quite a big extended family, who think she must be desperate for romance, so try to set her up with other men. Her family includes a womanising father (played by an aging Christopher Plummer) and a busybody sister Carol (Elizabeth Perkins) who sets Sarah up on a matchmaking website.
Of course, not all the guys who get in touch with Sarah are suitable... we see cameos of various dates with caricatured bores, geeks and even one who bursts into tears every couple of minutes. Sarah really isn't interested in another guy; she prefers to hang out with some safe gay friends who reassure and comfort her.
However, there are two rather nice men Sarah comes across who do appeal – the ‘incorrigible’ Bob, father of one of her students, and Jake, a perfectionist boat-builder who doesn’t seem able to make a sale. It's not immediately obvious which one she was going to end up with, although it soon became clear.
There were a few dogs thrown into the mixture, some lines that made us smile, and a happy, if predictable ending. All in all, 'Must love dogs' was a pleasant evening’s viewing.
Rated 12 in the UK, PG-13 in the US, probably due to repeated references to sex. However, there is nothing explicit in the film, no nudity, no violence, and - unusually - we didn't notice any bad language.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
I'm not entirely sure how this particular DVD ended up on my wishlist; possibly it was recommended to me by Amazon because I so much enjoyed the TV adaptation of 'The Shell Seekers' which starred Angela Lansbury. Lansbury stars as a very different elderly woman in 'Mrs 'Arris goes to Paris', and does so with equal aplomb.
Mrs Ada Harris is a London charlady, and one of her clients is a wealthy duchess. Ada's aesthetic longings are triggered by seeing a couple of Dior dresses. Shocked to hear their approximate cost, she nonetheless is determined to have one for herself, despite her friends telling her to stop being silly. She saves every penny she can for three years, cutting back on all non-essentials, and then takes off for Paris with her hard-earned cash in a bag.
Unprepared for the world of fashion, Mrs Harris discovers that she can't just choose a dress and buy it off the shelf. Angela Lansbury shows her confusion, her hurt as she is almost turned away, and also her indomitable spirit. Ada is a likeable, friendly woman who endears herself to almost everyone around her, including catching the fancy of a lonely Marquis, played charmingly by Omar Sharif. There are those who don't like her, who are shown as caricatured snobs... but with those she cares for, Mrs Harris spreads an almost magical sparkle, bringing people together and encouraging them to see beyond their problems.
In one sense it's a silly and materialistic plot, but the film is delightful; beautifully done, showing the importance of holding onto one's dreams. Originally made for TV in 1992, it's set in the 1950s and feels more that era. Poignant in places, there are a few very funny moments too.
Rated PG in the UK, I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't have a U rating (in the US it does have a G rating). Definitely recommended.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
Having finally watched the second 'Chronicles of Narnia' film (Prince Caspian) last week, we decided to watch the third in the sequence, 'The Voyage of the Dawn Treader', which I was also given for Christmas.
It's many years since I read the book - probably the last time was when I read it aloud to my sons, at least twelve years ago. But I re-read it many times as a child and young adult, and know the story well. It begins with Lucy and Edmund, the two younger Pevensie children, staying with their somewhat ghastly relatives, including their young cousin Eustace.
Eustace is taunting them about their past when a picture of a boat comes to life, and they are drawn into the scene, finding themselves in Narnia - or, rather, sailing away from Narnia on a quest with their old friend Caspian.
The quest is to find seven lost lords who were exiled some years previously. The crew visit various islands, with some exciting adventures along the way. Eustace is obnoxiously awful at first, but a dramatic experience improves his character enormously.
At first, the film version - with Georgie Henley as Lucy, and Skandar Keynes as Edmund, a little older than in the previous films - stays fairly close to the book, at least, as far as my memory goes. However there are some rather odd extra themes thrown in - such as a green fog, the 'dark', which threatens to overtake everyone. I suppose it helps to show the rise of evil in a visual way. I wouldn't have had too much of a problem with that - but for the fact that this 'dark' can only be conquered by seven swords being placed on Aslan's table... a storyline which does not exist at all in the book, and seems rather pointless.
The book, at one meta level, is about each individual's responsibility for their own actions and behaviour. It demonstrates the ease with which we fall into temptation (Edmund wanting to be in charge, Lucy wanting to be beautiful, Eustace being generally horrible). It also shows the need for everyone to overcome their failings and errors individually. So the idea of a 'dark' which can be conquered by magic swords rather misses the point, in my view.
There are, of course, other deviations from the story, but they were less significant and we could see why they were done. Afterwards we watched a few deleted scenes which were truer to the book, but which, we could see, would not really have added anything to the story. I just wish they had also cut one or two of the fighting scenes that were included.
However, overall, we thought that 'The Voyage of the Dawn Treader' was very well done. Eustace (Will Poulter) is wonderfully done, quite believably dreadful - arrogant, bullying and generally rude - and his eventual transformation seems entirely believable. Reepicheep the mouse is brilliant. Modern technology makes the talking animals seem almost realistic, and Reepicheep's character comes through delightfully.
Definitely worth seeing for anyone who has enjoyed the books, or who has seen the earlier films. It makes sense on its own, but I would recommend watching 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe' first (or, at least, reading the book).
Rated PG in both UK and US, as there are some potentially disturbing scenes which might upset sensitive children.
Our version had very few extras - the deleted scenes mentioned above were the only ones worth watching. There were some rather odd music videos, and a commentary about the film, but no 'making of'. Perhaps the two-disc version would have more.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
The seven Narnia books by CS Lewis were some of my favourite stories as a child, and a teenager, and, indeed, as an adult. I was pleased when the BBC made a version of the first four, back in the 1980s. But inevitably they were low-budget, and animation wasn't very advanced, and some of it seemed trite.
But then, in recent years, Disney has started to produce film versions, under the group heading of 'Chronicles of Narnia'. We saw the first one at the cinema at the end of 2005, and liked it very much. However, Prince Caspian is probably my least favourite of all the books. Early reviews said that it veered a long way from the book and was full of battles, with a spurious - and unnecessary - love interest which was never intended by Lewis.
It didn't sound very appealing.
And the years went by... but finally I thought it would be good to see this on DVD. We sat down to watch it last night with my son and daughter-in-law.
The opening of the film works well, with the birth of a new baby boy, heir to the teenage Prince Caspian's uncle. Caspian's mentor was exactly as I had imagined him too, urging his young protegé to escape with his life. And the scenes when Caspian is discovered by the Narnians living secretly in the woods is also, I felt, close to the book.
We then switch to scenes in London. The four Pevensie children are going home from boarding school, waiting for a train, when they are tugged into Narnia again. There seemed to be some irrelevant extra parts, but they arrive at the ruined castle, and gradually realise what's going on... so far, so good.
It's a long time since I read the book - at least twelve years. But even so, I became aware of more and more deviation from the book. Particularly irritating is the unpleasant rivalry between Peter (William Moseley) and Caspian (Ben Barnes). On the other hand, the 'love interest', such as it was, seems very low-key and not actually unrealistic or unlikely in the circumstances. It wasn't necessary, but it didn't seem to me to do any harm.
Aslan and the other talking animals are very well done. I was captivated by the mouse Reepicheep, who provides some light humour in the midst of some quite tense scenes.
But, I have to say, the early reviews were correct in saying that the film was, basically, a series of battles. After the opening scenes - which I very much enjoyed - there did seem to be just one battle after another, played out in rather too much detail. The book does have a lot of fighting; but one can skim the detail in a book, or just accept that it is happening, whereas it has to be shown in a movie. Some of it is rather violent. I would personally have given the film a '12' rating rather than the 'PG" which both the UK and US censors decided was appropriate.
I suppose the film would probably make sense to someone who had not read the book. But I think it would be confusing if one hadn't already read (or at least seen) 'The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe'.
Certainly worth seeing as part of the series, but it's not a film I'll be coming back to regularly.
Review copyright Sue's DVD Reviews
