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