It's a Wonderful Life (James Stewart)

It’s almost eleven years since we first watched the classic film ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’, and while we recalled the basic idea, which is fairly well-known, we had entirely forgotten all the details. 

Made in 1946, the film is black and white, but after a moment’s adjustment, it didn’t matter at all. James Stewart stars as George Bailey, who is a frustrated, depressed and very worried businessman.

We don’t know why he’s like that at the start of the film, however. It starts with a few prayers followed by a kind of divine conversation, with 1946-style graphics depicting a trainee angel called Clarence (Henry Travers) who doesn’t yet have his wings, and who has an hour to persuade George that his life is worth living. 

Another angel then shows Clarence some snippets from George’s life, starting when he’s a boy of about eleven, sledging with some friends. There’s a near crisis which George averts, although he loses part of his hearing as a result.  

The next scene from George’s life shows him working in a shop which appears to have both sweets and pharmaceuticals. The pharmacist is confused and almost makes a fatal mistake, but thankfully George is able to stop him from doing so. 

The flashbacks then jump ahead to George as a young man, about to embark on a long-planned trip to Europe and elsewhere. He longs to get out of the small town where he lives, and has no wish to go into the banking and loans business which his father and uncle run. His parents are supportive...then tragedy strikes, and George puts off his travels and college plans in order to save the business.

This is a pattern for the next few years of George’s life. He has many ideas and ambitions, but cares more for other people, and continually puts their wishes ahead of his own. Not that he’s unhappy: he marries Mary (Donna Reed) who loves and supports him despite an often difficult life. They have four children by the time the story reaches the climactic incident where Clarence is called in, as a result of many people’s prayers. 

The first time we watched this, I kept waiting for Clarence to appear, not understanding that his part in the film, while essential, is relatively short. Most of the story builds up a picture of George’s background and personality, so that the viewer understands entirely why he’s so depressed - and we also know who is behind many of his setbacks, and the final crisis that precipitates the potential tragedy. 

Clarence takes action in an unexpected way, and then takes George on a tour of the town showing him what it would have been like - and which people would have been negatively affected - if George had never existed. It’s a powerful message, one that many people need to hear, even if their involvement in other people’s lives isn’t as significant as George’s. 

‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ is rated U, but I feel that the United States rating of PG is more appropriate. While there’s nothing explicit, there are plenty of innuendoes, and some mild violence. I don’t know that I’d class this as a family Christmas film. It certainly has its feel-good aspect, and a happy, heartwarming ending, complete with a Christmas carol. But some sections are quite disturbing, and I don’t think I’d want to show it to a child younger than about nine or ten. Indeed, as some of the banking and business conversations went right over my head, I suspect it wouldn’t be of much interest to children younger than around twelve or even older. 

But as a nostalgic film for adults, it’s one of the best, in my opinion, and we thoroughly enjoyed seeing it again. 

Definitely recommended. 

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Mrs 'Arris Goes to Paris (Angela Lansbury)

We wanted something light, undemanding and not too long to watch during a busy time of year. We hadn’t seen ‘Mrs ‘Arris Goes to Paris’ for almost nine years, and had only the vaguest memories of it. So it seemed like a good idea to watch it again.

What a lovely film it is, too!  Set in the 1950s, the star of this delightful film is Angela Lansbury, in the title role. Mrs Harris is a cleaning lady for the wealthy, widowed many years earlier. In one house she sees two stunning ball gowns, and can’t get over how beautiful they are. She decides that she will save up all her money until she can afford to buy a dress from Dior…

So Mrs Harris goes on an economy drive, giving up all luxuries and unnecessary expenses. She works hard for three years until she has managed to save 450 pounds, which would have been an enormous sum in those days. Her best friend tries to convince her to do something more practical with the money, rather than wasting it all on a dress that she will probably never wear. But Mrs Harris wants to follow her dream…

The main part of the film follows our heroine as she makes her way to Paris, via taxi and aeroplane - evidently considerably less expensive than the dress. And she manages to get into the Dior showroom building, via a back entrance. She has no idea about the system; she simply assumed she could look at a rack of dresses and choose one to buy. Instead, she has to watch a demonstration with models showing the dresses, and then when she finally sees one she loves, it has to be handmade for her specially…

Of course it’s not that simple. Mrs Harris was only planning to stay in Paris for one day, but it will take at least a week to make her dress. She has no extra money for accommodation. And the director of Dior is a snooty many who doesn’t want an English cleaning lady to have a Dior dress…

However the other staff are much nicer, and Mrs Harris wins their hearts through her kindness and wisdom. She manages, in the week she’s in Paris, to make many friends, to help mend a family relationship and to help someone else to start a romantic one. She does a lot to help everyone she comes across in a variety of ways, possibly unrealistically in such a short space of time, but that really doesn't matter. It’s heart-warming, and there are some very moving scenes.

Omar Sharif is excellent as a friendly Marquis who is charmed by Mrs Harris, but all the supporting cast were excellent. 

There’s a great deal of humour too, and it’s interesting from the social history point of view as well. The theme about following one’s dream, no matter what, is a positive one.  Apparently the film, made in 1992, was based on a 1958 novel. The rating is PG - I’m not sure why it isn’t U, unless it’s due to a small amount of violence - and we thought it well worth seeing again. 

Definitely recommended.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Moonstruck (Cher)

We acquired and watched the film ‘Moonstruck’ in 2012, but had entirely forgotten what it was about. So we decided to watch it again, hoping for a light evening’s viewing.

Cher is the star of this film, as the thirty-something Italian American Loretta. She works for Johnnie (Danny Aiello)  and they get along well. She was widowed when she was younger, and so although she doesn’t love Johnnie, she likes him very much and she agrees to marry him.  

However his mother is dying, and he needs to visit her. He asks Loretta to call his brother Danny (Nicolas Cage) and invite him to the wedding, saying that they’ve been out of touch for five years, but not explaining why…

Loretta finds that Danny is very angry, unwilling to forgive his brother for a tragic incident that, he insists, destroyed his life. Loretta is immediately attracted to him, and decides to try to persuade him to make up with his brother… and they are inevitably drawn together.

Meanwhile her father Cosmo (Vincent Gardenia) who is married to Rose (Olympia Dukakis) is seeing another woman. And her aunt and uncle, who clearly love each other, keep getting into silly arguments. Oh, and there’s the grandfather, who is a tad deaf, and has several dogs that he takes out for walks.

There’s no great plot, but it’s a light-hearted look at Italian-American families, with plenty of hugs, meals, and heated debates. It was made in 1987, and feels not just a tad dated but rather sexist; perhaps that was typical of the era and the culture. There are some mildly amusing moments, and some poignancy too, particularly when Loretta learns what exactly happened five years earlier.

Cher is excellent as Loretta, although in the scenes where she dresses up, after a makeover and new haircut, we thought she looked fake and unattractive, unlike her ‘normal’ look. Apparently her ethnicity is Armenian, but she managed to look Italian. There was also an uncanny resemblance to Olympia Dukakis, who was more-or-less unknown before this film. She, too, somehow came across as Italian although we knew she has Greek roots.

The men, on the other hand, all came across as rather caricatured.  And the storyline is a bit disjointed, with several scenes including a sight of a large full moon, that ties the subplots together, but doesn’t really do anything for the story or characters. 

It was a pleasant enough light evening’s viewing, but nothing special.  

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Love Actually

It’s eight years since we first watched ‘Love Actually’, and although I remembered it with some reservations, it seemed like an ideal DVD to watch in the run-up to Christmas. It’s often recommended as a seasonal film, and there’s an all-star cast. But while recalling one or two details, I’d pretty much forgotten what it was about.. other than love. The theme is about several kinds of love, not just traditional romance, and it’s cleverly done, comparing and contrasting quite different people and situations. 

We first meet Billy (Bill Nighy) as an ex-addict pop singer, recording a new and rather naff Christmas single. He gets it wrong several times, but finally it’s done. Despite acknowledging that it’s dreadful, he promotes it in some unusual ways.  Although Billy doesn’t know any of the people from the other threads, his single crops up in several of the other scenes. 

The other storylines are a tad confusing at first, as there are several different ones running alongside each other. And they’re all connected in some way, although I’m not sure I grasped all the interrelationships.  We see Hugh Grant as a new Prime Minister, for instance, one who is rather lacking in confidence. And then he falls for Natalie (Martine McCutcheon) the young woman who brings him tea and biscuits. There’s a bit of jealousy along the way, and there’s  the added problem of him being in the media spotlight, but theirs is possibly the most ‘normal’ of the love stories.

The Prime Minister’s sister Karen (brilliantly portrayed by Emma Thompson) is married to Harry (Alan Rickman) who’s a somewhat abrupt businessman. They have two lively children and seem very well suited. We first meet Harry giving advice to Sarah, a young woman in his department who is in love with someone she works with.  And we then meet him with his PA, Mia, who is very overtly trying to seduce him…

There’s a wedding scene, featuring a young couple and his best man who appears not to like the bride much, but in fact is in love with her. At the wedding reception, some of the other characters appear although only in minor roles. But it’s clear that they know each other fairly well.

One of the people at the wedding is Jamie (Colin Firth) who is by himself because his girlfriend is ill. Or so he thinks. When he pops back to check on  her, he discovers that all is not as it seems.  He then goes to France to work on a book, and the Portuguese girl sent to be his housekeeper is increasingly attracted to him.  There are some quite amusing scenes when they are speaking to each other, neither understanding what the other says; the Portuguese is subtitled. 

Just with those mentioned so far, there’s a developing relationship, new married love, middle-aged married love with the temptation to infidelity, a broken relationship, unrequited love, and undeclared love. The undeclared love looks as if it’s going to be resolved, until we discover that Sarah has a brother who is mentally unstable, and who keeps calling her. She is unable to commit to any other relationship, as she has to keep running to her brother’s rescue, or to keep him company. Fraternal love, in this instance, is supreme.  

Probably my favourite storyline, however, involves the recently widowed Daniel (Liam Neeson) who is trying to develop a good relationship with his ten-year-old orphaned stepson Sam (Thomas Sangster). Sam is keen on a girl at his school, and the two bond over trying to find ways to make her notice him.  Daniel and his late wife were close friends of Harry and Karen. 

Then there are two storylines which I found less interesting, although they do provide some contrast, and also a bit of humour. There’s the rather nerdy Colin, who keeps putting his foot in it when he tries to chat up English girls. So he flies to the United States, convinced that his British accent will have the girls flocking around him. I had forgotten what happened, and assumed he would be mocked, if only behind his back. But his dreams come true…  

The other storyline, one which turns this into an ‘adult’ story (although the UK rating is only 15) involves two actors who are being filmed in rather explicit scenes of a film. Neither of them seem to feel the least embarrassment about being naked, or simulating passion… and it’s quite amusing that they are both quite shy as individuals.  

So there’s no single plot, just a series of snapshots in a wide variety of relationships, not all of them romantic. We see the different folk involved a month before Christmas, and at weekly intervals thereafter.  And at the end there’s another scene at an airport, a month after Christmas, where we see everyone and get a glimpse of how their lives are progressing.

The film is a good mixture of amusing and poignant, with some excellent acting as well as rather obvious caricatures. It made an excellent movie to watch in December, and I hope we’ll see again sooner than eight years’ time.  

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Mona Lisa Smile (Julia Roberts)

I had never heard of the film ‘Mona Lisa Smile’. But when I saw it - at 50 cents - in a church sale, I decided to buy it. Julia Roberts is usually good value and the story sounded interesting.  We watched it last night, and thought it a very good film, with plenty to think about.

The film is set in the 1950s. Roberts plays the main character, a young woman called Katherine Watson. We meet her when she is about to take up a post as lecturer in History of Art at a very conservative all-girls American university. She’s a little nervous, but this has been her dream for a long time - partly because she hopes to introduce some new ideas to the students.

There are quite a number of characters, but the  most important students soon emerge with their different personalities. Betty, who is soon to be married, is very condescending. Her parents are wealthy, and care for appearances above everything else.  Her friend Joan would quite like to study law, but is more interested in getting married.  And in those days having a career was not compatible with marriage, in most cases.

Then there’s Giselle, who is quite promiscuous but also very kind-hearted, and there’s Connie who’s somewhat insecure.  These four girls are some of the first to answer questions in Katherine’s first lecture, and they share an apartment. Katherine lives in a house with the elocution and poise lecturer, Nancy, who seems to spend her spare time in front of the television. 

It’s an interesting setup; Katherine is at first treated with scorn by the students, who have read all their course text books and know all the ‘answers’ - it appears at first that there is nothing left to teach. So Katherine introduces some new ideas - modern art, questions where the girls have to think for themselves, and decide what it is that makes something ‘art’.

Unfortunately, in doing this she comes up against the authorities, who want her to stick to the syllabus - after all, the girls are just biding their time until they can get married….

Julia Roberts is great as Katherine. She’s her usual self, looking very young, as this film was made in 2003. It’s never really possible to forget who she is as an actress, but it doesn’t much matter as she fits very well in this role. The younger woman who play the various students are good too, albeit rather caricatured. 

It all feels very old-fashioned, which isn’t surprising as it’s set seventy years ago.  Some of the customs of the university seem extremely strict and sexist; perhaps US colleges really were like that in the 1950s. I gather there were some ‘goofs’ and inconsistencies, but they don’t deter from the story,, which is, in essence about someone trying to make a difference, only to realise that perhaps not everyone wants to be changed.

Rated 12A in the UK, PG-13 in the US. There isn’t anything explicit, although there are lots of innuendoes and implications. There’s some bad language, but not an excessive amount, and  no violence or gore. However I can’t imagine that this film would be of any interest to children anyway.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe (Mary Stuart Masterson)

We wanted something reasonably light-weight to watch, and it had been nearly nine years since we saw ‘Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle-Stop Cafe’. We recalled liking it, but not much more, although I had, in the intervening years, read the book by Fannie Flagg on which the film was based.

It’s a dual-timeline story, set in Alabama in the Southern part of the United States. That meant that the accents were sometimes quite difficult to understand - but I got the general gist, and gradually attuned to the voices as the film progressed.

Evelyn Couch (Kathy Bates) is the character we meet first - she’s a middle-aged, overweight woman who eats compulsively, and is feeling rather unfulfilled in her marriage to the even more overweight Ed (Gailard Sartain). So she takes various classes in spicing up her marriage, or assertiveness - there’s some mild humour in these, but they’re not very successful. 

Evelyn and Ed regularly visit one of his aunts at a nursing home, but the aunt is bad-tempered and doesn’t want to see Eveyln. So she sits in the waiting room, and is approached by the elderly Ninny Threadgoode (brilliantly played by Jessica Tandy). Ninny wants to talk, and Evelyn is an eager listener.  So, over the course of several visits, the story is told.

It’s done with flashback scenes to the 1930s, and although we don’t see Ninny as a child - she married into the family - we meet Idgie (Mary Stuart Masterson), her youngest sister-in-law, who grew up as something of a rebel. She’s honest and likeable, but did everything to shock her parents and their pastor. She’s a strong character who carries a lot of anger, possibly due to a tragic accident which we see early in the film. 

Ninny’s story starts by telling Evelyn that Idgie was arrested for the murder of Frank Bennett.  But then she jumps back to Idgie’s childhood and teenage years, and how she and her friend Ruth started running a cafe which specialised in fried green tomatoes; apparently this is a traditional and much-loved Southern dish.  

There are many important issues covered in this film, one of the significant ones being the treatment of black people in the 1930s. Idgie and her family are not at all racist, but they do have black workers and servants, though they treat them as friends, and Idgie stands up for them at risk to herself, at times. The attitudes of some other white people, including a sheriff from another county, are horrendous, however.

There are also insights into a a very abusive marriage, and hints of a lesbian relationship, although it’s so lightly touched upon that it would be easy to miss. And through it all, Idgie’s assertive, strong actions, as described by Ninny, are an inspiration to Evelyn.  

The rating is 12 (PG-13 in the US), which I think is about right. It’s a good story, but there’s some bad language, and some violence, albeit mostly off-screen. There are some traumatic scenes, and some very unpleasant implications, too, which I’m trying not to think about even now. But there’s also some gentle humour, and a great deal of warmth in the characters, particularly in the growing friendship between the elderly Ninny and Evelyn. 

All in all, we were quite engrossed for the two hours of this film, and liked it very much indeed.  Definitely recommended.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

The Wife (Glenn Close)

I hadn’t heard of the film ‘The Wife’ until I spotted it on my husband’s wishlist earlier in the year. It looked good, so I ordered it for his recent birthday, and we watched it last night. I had no idea what to expect, but was quickly engrossed in the story.

Having said that, the opening scene almost put me off entirely. Joe Castleman (Jonathan Price) is a bearded writer, apparently in his 60s, though he looks older. He’s woken up in the night and is eating in the bedroom. He then gets into bed with his wife Joan (Glenn Close) and there’s an implied scene of intimacy; nothing shown explicitly, but plenty is implied. Not at all a good way to start a film. 

However it quickly improves. The couple are awakened - probably in the same night, though that isn’t clear - by a phone call. It’s someone from Sweden, telling Joe that he has won the Nobel Prize for literature. He thinks it might be a scam at first, but it’s entirely real. Before long he, Joan and their adult son David are on their way to Stockholm for the ceremony. 

It quickly becomes clear that Joe is not a  likeable person. He’s a philanderer, and he shows little interest in his son, who is also a writer. The two keep clashing, while Joan attempts to keep the peace.  To add to the impression of Joe as a rather selfish person, there are flashbacks to the late 1950s when he is a ‘professor’ (what we would call a lecturer in the UK) at an Ivy League university; the young, star-struck Joan (Annie Starke)  is one of his students. Harry Lloyd, who plays the young Joe, comes across as egotistical and sexist. He’s married, and has a baby daughter; yet he encourages Joan as she falls in love with him, and the two start an affair. 

The main part of the story is set in the 1990s when the couple have been married for thirty years and Joe has produced a vast number of novels. He appears to be unfailingly generous in the way he thanks his wife for looking after him, and insists that she is the love of his life. And yet this continual praise falls rather flat, partly due to his known infidelities over the years, and partly because it somehow doesn’t ring true. Joan evidently doesn’t like it, and it’s not that she’s a shy, retiring kind of person. She is elegant, supportive, and mostly very loving…

It’s a study in character, and also revealing about attitudes. I hadn’t realised that, even in the late 1950s, it was difficult for women to be published. Those early scenes are very well done, contrasting with the later ones. Of course even the modern ones seem a bit dated; the cars are old-fashioned, and people still used telephones with wires rather than mobile phones. But for those touches, however, the story could almost have been current.  

And while Jonathan Price is good, and Max Irons as the moody, often angry David is also good, it’s Glenn Close, as the eponymous wife, who steals the show. She’s elegant, organised and a peacekeeper, staying with a rather unlikeable husband. At least, until things come to a head in Stockholm.  I believed in her, totally. The actress was 70 when this film was made, but looked no more than about 50. 

Christian Slater deserves a mention too, playing the rather sleazy Nathanial, a reporter who wants to write Joe’s biography, and who keeps trying to get snippets of juicy information. I didn’t trust him, but even he has a likeable side. And he’s the catalyst for some high drama and revelations towards the end. 

There’s some mild humour in the film; we smiled a few times, and it was good to have a little light-heartedness in what was overall a surprisingly intense and moving story. 

Brilliantly made, other than that rather trite opening scene; my only minor gripe is the immense amount of ‘strong’ language, which is what has raised the rating of this to 15 in the UK, R in the stricter ratings of the United States. An occasional instance in context is understandable, but it seemed excessive in this film. The story is unlikely to be of interest to children or younger teens anyway.  

Very highly recommended.

There's a 'making of...' extra on the DVD edition we have, with some short interviews and snippets with various actors and production staff. Reasonably interesting, but nothing special.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Driving Aphrodite (Nia Vardalos)

It’s nearly nine years since we watched the light romantic comedy’ Driving Aphrodite’.  I didn’t remember much about it, although it’s a somewhat predictable story. I did recall that there were some cultural references and jokes that we could appreciate after living in a Greek culture for many years. 

Nia Vardalos stars as Georgia, a young Greek American woman who is a historian, specialising in Ancient Greece. She has applied for jobs lecturing in American universities, but so far has been unsuccessful. So she’s living in Greece for a while, to work as a tour guide. She finds it quite stressful, as she’s usually given a group with the difficult passengers, the old bus and fairly grim accommodation. 

The bulk of the film is about her tour, which she expects to be her last. Her driver Poupi (Alexis Georgoulis) does not appear to speak any English, and her tour group consists of a diverse bunch of people. They include an elderly woman who steals from market stalls, some young women who have recently ended relationships and insist they have given up men; an uptight couple with a sulky teenage daughter; and a late middle-aged man, Irv (Richard Dreyfuss) who tells bad jokes… 

Georgia believes that people come to Greece to learn about the culture, and the ancient monuments. So her tours are primarily educational. Her colleague Nico (Alistair McGowan) always gets nicer groups of people and a more modern bus and is popular with the tourists as he takes them for ice creams, shopping tours and to the beach. He gets good reviews while Georgia doesn’t, so she decides that this is going to be her last tour as she doesn’t want to compromise her principles.

However as she gets to know her group, she realises that they’re mostly likeable people with their own problems and griefs. She is persuaded, mainly by Irv, that she needs to lighten up a bit. She’s quite uptight and very keen to stick with her schedule - this contrasts well with Nico’s relaxed, materialistic outlook.  

The pace is good, with plenty of low-key humour and a developing romance, even if Georgia gets the wrong idea for a while. There are some sad stories too, and a dramatic climax to the book just as she is beginning to realise that she should be more Greek in her outlook and stop worrying about time and appearances.

It’s not the greatest film, but Richard Dreyfuss as Irv - once I managed to stop thinking of him as Mr Holland - is superb, and Alexis Georgoulis as Poupi does a believable and smooth metamorphosis. Other characters are caricatured but that doesn’t matter at all; digs are made at several cultures, including Australians whose speech is impossible to understand, and Canadians who really, really don’t want to be thought of as American.

We smiled in a few places, and it made a good film to watch when we were both tired and in need of relaxation.

The rating is 12 in the UK (PG-13 in the US) which seems about right. There’s nothing explicit, but plenty of innuendoes as well as an implied scene; and a great deal of discussion of sex (or the lack of it).  No major bad language, and only minor violence, mostly intended humorously. 

Recommended to anyone who likes this kind of lightweight romantic comedy with a Greek cultural twist. 

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Driving Miss Daisy (Jessica Tandy, Morgan Freeman)

It’s nearly nine years since we saw the film ‘Driving Miss Daisy’. We vaguely remembered the storyline - that an elderly white woman in the United States, back in the 1950s, employs a black driver - but we had forgotten everything else about it. Well, almost everything. I had recalled that it took me a good five minutes to start understanding the very strong Southern American accents.  But I knew it would be worth watching anyway.

We tried - and failed - to switch on subtitles at the beginning of the film, since, once again, I found it very difficult to understand more than about one word in three in the first few minutes of re-watching this. But it didn’t matter too much. 

The story itself is relatively straightforward. Miss Daisy - brilliantly portrayed by Jessica Tandy’ is a Jewish widow, living in the state of Georgia. She is such a bad driver that insurance companies will no longer insure her.  So her son Boolie (Dan Aykroyd) who is a businessman employs a man called Hoke (Morgan Freeman) who is clearly an expert with everything mechanical, as well as an excellent driver.

Miss Daisy doesn’t want a driver, and determines to walk everywhere at first. She insists that she is not prejudiced, and has, for the era, basically a good relationship with her housekeeper and cook Idella (Esther Rolle). But the class consciousness is as strong as that of the upper classes in 18th century Britain; Idella and Hoke can never eat with Miss Daisy, for instance. 

Morgan Freeman, as ever, is superb in the role of Hoke. He’s good-natured, and determined to break through the initial hostility displayed. He has a sense of humour, and strong integrity; so there are some quite amusing scenes here and there. But we also see just how difficult it was for people with dark skin in this era; Hoke had never travelled, and had lacked even a basic education as a child. 

The story covers a span of twenty-five years, and both the main characters age, Miss Daisy becoming more forgetful and Hoke remaining faithful and strong. There isn’t a great deal of action, although there are some very sad scenes as well as some that are quite uplifting. The point is made that even though Miss Daisy is white and wealthy, and thus privileged in many ways, being Jewish makes her a minority. Gradually she begins to understand some of what Hoke has to cope with daily.  

Once my ears had attuned to the strong accents, I was completely immersed in this beautifully made film, which is thought-provoking, revealing, and ultimately - even if it’s a cliche - heartwarming. The rating is U, and I would recommend it to anyone wanting to see a little of what Soutnern US culture was like in the 1950s and subsequent decades. 

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Little Women (Saoirse Ronan)

When the 2019 version of ‘Little Women’ was released, I wasn’t sure if I wanted to see it. I have loved the books on which it was based for many years, and thoroughly enjoyed an earlier film adaptation, although it’s many years since I last saw it. But the new one, I was told, was updated for a modern audience, and had a somewhat confusing time switch, as well as some scenes that were not in Louisa May Alcott’s original. 

However my son gave me the DVD of this film for my birthday a few months ago. It’s quite a long film - over two hours - so we had to find an evening when we had more than ninety minutes available. We finally sat down to watch it last night, and were hooked almost from the start.

Saoirse Ronan is excellent as Jo March. It took me a couple of scenes to accept her as Jo; I had somehow always thought of Jo as having very dark hair. But she has just the right  personality. The film starts with Jo nervously knocking on the door of an editor, submitting a short story for newspaper publication. She’s told to write something more gothic and dramatic, and returns to the boarding house where she’s living.

This part of the story is in the book ‘Good Wives’, the second volume of (or sequel to) ‘Little Women’, and as the film moves forward it is interspersed with flashback scenes from seven years earlier.  In the earlier scenes, Jo is just fifteen. Her older sister Meg (Emma Watson) is sixteen; their younger sisters Beth (Eliza Scanlen) and Amy (Florence Pugh) respectively thirteen and twelve. 

I was a tad confused at first about which scenes were which; had I not been familiar with the story, I think I might have got lost. I realised quickly that the hairstyles changed between the two eras, and that some characters looked older. Jo succeeds, more-or-less, in demonstrating the difference between fifteen and twenty-two, although she doesn’t change all that much. That’s not a problem as it fits with her character.

Emma Watson is, in our opinion, the most skilled at playing Meg both a young married woman of twenty-three alternated with a sixteen-year-old girl who dreamed of romance. But we were less impressed with Amy who never looks twelve, although she plays the character of Amy well. 

Meryl Streep has a lesser part as Aunt March, and does it brilliantly, as one would expect, looking really very old in the later scenes. And we were extremely impressed, too, with Laura Dern, who plays ‘Marmee’.  I had never had much of an image of this unusual American women; I think this portrayal is exactly right. 

The story is of the girls’ growing up, of Meg’s falling in love; of Laurie - their neighbour - being their best friend and thinking himself in love with Jo. It’s also about Jo’s literary struggles and successes, and about general family life. There’s quite a bit of squabbling, and the rivalry between Jo and Amy more marked than I recall from the book. But it works extremely well.

My husband has not read the books and didn’t remember having seen an earlier version of the film, but he had no trouble understanding the story, and also liked it very much. The pace was good, the scenery and costumes excellent, and despite veering significantly from the books in places, I thought it an excellent adaptation.

There are some very interesting extras, too, including a ‘making of’ documentary, where we were surprised as just how many of the cast were not American!  

Very highly recommended, so long as you don’t mind when a film version of a classic book takes several deviations from the original.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Finding Neverland (Johnny Depp)

We wanted to watch something that was about an hour and a half long, which we hadn’t seen for a while. ‘Finding Neverland’ was in the to-watch drawer, where it’s been for a couple of years. We hadn’t seen it since 2008, and had almost entirely forgotten it. I knew it was about the writing of the classic ‘Peter Pan’, but didn’t recall anything about the story. 

While there are, inevitably, some deviations from the true story, the gist of it is as it happened. JM Barrie (brilliantly portrayed by Johnny Depp, although apparently JM Barrie was considerably shorter) is not having much success with his plays. He goes for a walk in the park, and comes across a young family with their mother. Apparently in real life he met just the oldest two sons; in the film he meets all four sons, and their mother Sylvia (Kate Winslett). 

Barrie had an emotionally stunted childhood, after his older brother was killed in an accident; this comes through in the film, as does his feeling of never having grown up. He likes to entertain the children, and becomes very fond of them in a paternal kind of way. In the actual story, Sylvia’s husband was still alive; in the film, she has recently been widowed and is struggling to cope with four very lively children. 

I felt quite sorry for Barrie's wife Mary (Radha Mitchell) who wants him to spend more time with her. She supports him in his writing and looks after him, but he is rarely home, and doesn’t seem to have much in common with her. So it’s no surprise that she becomes friendly with another man, as her husband becomes friendlier (in an entirely innocent way) with Sylvia and her sons. 

There’s a nice mix of reality and fantasy; the boys play all kinds of imaginary games, with pirates, native Americans, and sharks; as he watches - and often joins in - Barrie gets ideas for a new, different play featuring children and a boy who never grows up. He names him after one of the boys, Peter, but Peter Pan is really a mixture of all the boys. 

Dustin Hoffman deserves an enthusiastic mention as Barrie’s sponsor and producer Charles. The two have a close friendship, and there’s some wry humour in their interchanges. Hoffman’s expressions and reactions are excellent; very realistic and with perfect timing.  And while all four of the boys are good, Freddie Highmore as Peter is superb. Apparently he so impressed the cast, and Johnny Depp in particular, that Depp recommended him for ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ which was made a year later. 

Johnny Depp is believable as Barry; both he and Kate Winslet show their versatility in this, a rather different kind of film for both of them. Their chemistry, in a mostly platonic way, is good, and the sad scenes towards the end brought a tear to my eye more than once. 

With this all-star cast, and a great script, it’s not surprising that we were gripped from the start, and thoroughly enjoyed seeing this film again. Even knowing that Peter Pan would become a classic, it was tense waiting for the first night, not knowing how the audience would react. 

The rating is PG, which reflects the lack of violence, intimacy and bad language; there are one or two minor words that are barely noticeable, and a broken arm is the worst of the violence. However, being PG rather than U acknowledges the sad, potentially traumatic scene towards the end. The film is unlikely to appeal to young children anyway; I’m not sure I would want to show it to a sensitive 12-year-old, although the subject matter would be of interest to anyone who has enjoyed the book or film of ‘Peter Pan’.

With that caveat, I would recommend this very highly.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Jane Eyre (Sorcha Cusack)

Back when I was a teenager, studying the classic book ‘Jane Eyre' in English Literature, there was a new BBC mini-series based on the book, starring Sorcha Cusack and Michael Jayston. I watched it avidly, developed quite a crush on Michael Jayston, and hoped, for years afterwards, that it would be repeated.

So I was extremely pleased when I discovered, back in 2006, that this series had been produced on DVD. I watched it in 2007 with my husband and teenage son, one episode at a time, and we all liked it very much.  My husband had not read the book, although he had at some point seen a different adaptation; my son, like me, had read and enjoyed the book, and we all thought this version excellent.

I don’t re-watch DVDs very often, preferring a gap of at least eight or nine years between viewings, and this is a long adaptation: five episodes of nearly an hour each. But after thirteen years it seemed like a good idea to see it again. So my husband and I re-watched it over four evenings in the past two weeks. 

The first episode is a bit slow-moving. We meet Jane at the age of ten, excellently played by Juliet Waley. She lives with her cruel aunt and spiteful cousins, and is treated worse than a servant. She is constantly reminded of her aunt’s ‘charity’ in taking her in, and is struck and bullied badly by her cousins - who can do no wrong in their mother’s eyes. 

Jane is not a docile child, and she fights against her tormentors, earning herself some quite cruel punishments. Eventually she’s sent away to school, where she even has to stay for holidays. And even though it’s an extremely unpleasant school for orphans, run by the selfish Mr Brocklehurst, where Jane is often hungry and cold, she prefers it to her previous life. It’s a sad and insightful picture of the horrors of some institutions in this era. But eventually it is given to kinder managers, and Jane grows up to become an assistant teacher, and then applies for - and gets - a job as governess to a young French girl. 

The second and subsequent episodes are mainly based at Thornfield Hall, where Jane endears herself to the other household staff, and becomes very attached to the master of the house, Edward Rochester. He is unpredictable, often rude and abrupt, but there’s a chemistry between the two which works extremely well. There’s even some humour now and again, albeit quite low key.

Thornfield Hall has its dark secret, one that is quite well-known, but which was a huge shock to me the first time I read the book. Jane is convinced that one of the servants is rather dangerous and somewhat unhinged; there is a nasty scene when a visitor is attacked, and one in the fourth episode where, even knowing what was coming, I hid my hands. 

We watched the fourth and fifth episodes together; the end of the fourth was quite a cliff-hanger, and even though I knew what was coming I wanted to see the end by that stage. And it’s all very well done.  The BBC was always very good at period dramas. The costumes are authentic, the house realistic, and the conversation taken straight from the book, for the most part. 

There isn’t a huge cast, but they were all fully believable in their roles. To me, Sorcha Cusack is Jane Eyre; Michael Jayston in the role is exactly how Mr Rochester should look. And Megs Jenkins as Mrs Fairfax is delightful, with some wonderful facial expressions that communicate her thoughts perfectly.

There are various other adaptations of this classic novel, though as far as I know I’ve only seen one of them. It’s hard to imagine anything coming close to the original as this mini-series, as so much would have to be cut out for a two-hour film version. 

Definitely recommended if you like films to stay close to the books from which they’re taken.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Julie and Julia (Amy Adams, Meryl Streep)

We watched the film ‘Julie and Juila’ nearly nine years ago, and liked it very much. So we decided to watch it again last night. I had forgotten the plot, but did recall that it was based on a true story, and also that it was about cooking.

What we had not remembered, until it got going, is that it’s actually based on two true stories. One is that of Julia Child, who was an American living in France in the 1940s. In the film, played brilliantly by the wonderful Meryl Streep, she is quite an outspoken woman who adores French cooking. 

Her husband Paul (Stanley Tucci) is a diplomat who is regularly posted in different places, but Julia doesn’t like to be inactive. So she decides to take cookery classes, and ends up amongst a group of men training in Cordon Bleu. And when - eventually - she finishes, she determines to write a book that will help American women learn to cook in the French way. 

It’s a long and complex journey to publication, but the end of the film sees her holding in her hands a copy of ‘Mastering the Art of French Cooking’. It’s not a spoiler to say this because the other storyline, running concurrently through the film, is that of a young woman called Julie (Amy Adams), in 2002,  who is persuaded by her husband Eric (Chris Messina) to start a blog. For her theme, she determines to work her way through every one of the recipes in Julia’s book in the course of a year. 

In a sense there isn’t much plot; we know that Julia’s book is eventually going to be published, and we assume that Julie is going to succeed in her challenge. But there’s a great deal of characterisation, and many little subplots, laced with some humour and also some poignancy.  Julia’s relationship with Paul is contrasted subtly with Julie’s relationship with Eric; both are strong, loving marriages, but Julie’s inevitably has a different kind of balance; for one thing she’s working full-time as well as learning to cook. 

There’s also a huge contrast in the large house where Julia and Paul live, versus the small flat with a tiny kitchen where Julie and Eric find themselves. And Julia is a much stronger personality, while Julie is sensitive and easily upset.  They have friends; Julie does a lot of entertaining with the dishes she produces, and Julia collaborates with various people over her book. 

But the four main characters carry most of the story.  And they’re all excellent, but of course Meryl Streep still stands out; she IS Julia. Stanley Tucci is great as her husband, and the two have quite a believable chemistry. But he’s still Stanley Tucci, and I was reminded, several times, of other roles I’ve seen him in. I didn’t recognise the younger couple at all, so they were easy enough to believe in. But Meryl Streep is unique. We’ve seen her in many, many roles but each one is entirely different. Other than a few facial expressions and a characteristic eye roll, we kept forgetting that it was an actress, let alone one we’ve seen in many other parts. 

The ending is a little strange and abrupt, but generally encouraging.  And there’s a ‘making of’ documentary with our DVD which was watched, and found very interesting. The only bit I really didn't like was a scene involving a live lobster (shudder).

Rated 12A, which seems a little high; there's some bad language but it's not excessive, and nothing explicit. However it's not likely to be of interest to children anyway.

Highly recommended.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Maid in Manhattan (Jennifer Lopez)

We wanted to watch something light, not too deep and not too long. We hadn’t seen ‘Maid in Manhattan’ since 2011, shortly after we acquired it, and although we had entirely forgotten the storyline, it looked as though it would meet our requirements. 

The main character in this film is Marisa (Jennifer Lopez) who works as a maid at a hotel in Manhattan. She is a single mother raising her son Ty, who must be about eight or nine. His father is notoriously unreliable, regularly promising to do things with him and then letting him down at the last minute. Ty is a likeable boy, very realistically played by Tyler Posey but quite lacking in self-confidence. We see him, early in the film, forgetting a speech he has been working on, as he becomes nervous. 

Marisa works hard and conscientiously, and is very good at her job. So when a position comes up in management, her colleagues think she should apply.  She’s not at all sure, and is distracted by one of her friends persuading her to try on an extremely expensive outfit belonging to a wealthy socialite called Caroline who is staying at the hotel.  

We had remembered this scene, and some of the story started to come back to us as Marisa is mistaken for the wealthy lady in question, after Ty meets another guest - a guy called Chris Marshall (Ralph Fiennes) who is hoping to become a senator. Chris has a large and friendly dog, and Ty loves dogs.  The two form a surprising bond, and Chris then sees Marisa dressed up and persuades her to go out for a walk…

In a nutshell, it’s a predictable rom-com, with a strong Cinderella theme. But there are a great many stumbling blocks in the romance, with Caroline (Natasha Richardson) playing the part of a pushy, arrogant ‘ugly sister’.  There are some one-liners that made us smile, and some quite poignant scenes too, particularly one where Chris takes the time to help Ty understand how he too becomes nervous when he makes speeches.  

But it’s extremely well done, with a good pace, and some excellent supporting cast including Stanley Tucci as Chris’s harassed press officer and Bob Hoskins as the hotel butler.  There's good chemistry between the two main characters, and the scenes involving Ty are delightful. There are some thought-provoking comments about how hotel staff can seem invisible, and are sometimes considered inferior to wealthy socialites, but it's not done in a heavy way.

All in all, it was the perfect film for our requirements, and we enjoyed it very much.

Although apparently it was previously rated 12 in the UK, it’s now PG, which seems about right. There’s minor bad language and hints of nudity, but nothing explicit. However I can’t imagine it would be of any interest to anyone under the age of about fourteen or fifteen. In the US it’s rated PG-13. 

Definitely recommended.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews