A Simple Twist of Fate (Steve Martin)

We first saw the film ‘A Simple Twist of Fate’ about nine and a half years ago, so it was definitely time for a re-watch. We had forgotten almost everything about the plot,  other than that a single man (Steve Martin) adopts a small child. But we could see that from the cover. The other thing I recalled was that we had been expecting something amusing, as we thought it was billed as a comedy - only to find that it was quite disturbing in places, and really not the kind of film that could be classed that way.

I had not recalled the opening scenes at all: Michael - played by Steve Martin - is a music teacher. We see him conducting a choir, in stark contrast to the traumatic scene that follows with his wife. The next time we meet him, some years later, he has become a recluse, and something of a miser, in a cabin away from the town. He works with his hands, making furniture, and is evidently quite talented at what he does. 

Meanwhile there’s a political sideline, involving two sleazy brothers, one of whom has an illegitimate child that nobody (other than his brother) knows about. The child’s mother is a drug addict, and when her financial support becomes less and less, she takes drastic action which leads to tragedy.

The main part of the story involves the gradual humanising of Michael, as he figures out ways to look after the toddler Mathilda, some of them quite unconventional. There are one or two light-hearted scenes, a few places where we smiled, and overall a heartwarming storyline, albeit with fighting, drama, theft and a difficult court case. 

Steve Martin carries this story, with a mixture of poignancy and his excellent comic timing that comes through in his facial expressions and some slick movement. It’s not a funny film - I realised that we had been confused because the back of the DVD case refers to Martin as a comedy actor - but it does have some very warm-hearted scenes, and a satisfying ending, even if preceded by a somewhat unlikely climax, given the timing.

Mathilda is played by several young actresses at different ages, but the one with the most to do is Alana Austin, who is Mathilda at ten. She is excellent in this role - believable, passionate, and ultimately very likeable. Her biological father John (Gabriel Byrne) is done well too, as someone easily led, after power and riches; not a bad person, but extremely self-centered. 

I wondered, in the first twenty minutes or so, whether we had made a mistake in choosing this film, but it does get better; the early sections are necessary to set the background for the story, and they’re probably all too realistic, unfortunately. I’m glad we continued watching, as the main part of the story was very watchable, paced just right, and - since we didn’t recall the ending at all - quite tense at times.

Apparently the plot is based on the classic novel ‘Silas Marner’, one I haven’t read. At times it reminded me of the children’s classic novel ‘Heidi’. 

‘A Simple Twist of Fate’ is rated PG in the UK, which I feel is too lenient; the US rating pf PG-13 is more appropriate, as there are some quite unpleasant scenes, and the storyline is not at all appropriate to younger children. 

Recommended to adults and older teens.

Review copyright 2021 Sue's DVD Reviews

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (Dev Patel)

We like re-watching films on DVD that we have not seen for at least six or seven years, since by that stage we have usually forgotten some of the storyline, and most of the details. It’s more than eight years since we watched ‘The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’, but we recalled enjoying it. So it seemed like a good film to choose for a light evening’s viewing.

We remembered the outline - that a diverse group of people travel to India to stay in a hotel which turns out to be nowhere near as glamorous as it’s advertised. It’s still being refurbished, the rooms are not ready… and there have not even been any previous guests. We remembered, too, the young and enthusiastic Indian owner Sonny (Dev Patel) - but that was about the limit of our recollections.

The film opens with brief scenes in the lives of the people who are going to be travelling. And it’s quite an all-star cast. Judi Dench - excellent as always - plays the recently-widowed Evelyn. She’s spent all her married life trusting her husband, and doing almost nothing independently. Now she’s discovered that he had a lot of debt… and her home must be sold. 

Maggie Smith also features in this - she, too, is superb as the elderly and extremely bigoted Muriel. She needs an operation but would have to wait many months with the NHS, so - somewhat under protest - she is sent to India. Muriel’s gradual healing and transformation - and the apparent shedding of a couple of decades - is one of the highlights of this film. 

Then Bill Nighy and Penelope Wilton play a not-very-happily-married couple, Douglas and Jean, who are looking at retirement homes. Douglas is very much in the style of Nighy’s other characters, but it works well. Jean is a complainer who doesn’t much like doing anything, but is quite outspoken. 

Celia Imrie is Madge, who is fed up with continual childminding for her grandchildren, even though she loves them. I found her character the weakest, not really fitting in with anyone else. She’s a snob, on the lookout for a man (so long as he’s high class, preferably royalty). But I couldn’t quite believe in her.

Finally there are two single men: Norman (Ronald Pickup) who is on the lookout for some intimacy with women, and doesn’t think his age should prevent him, and Graham (Tom Wilkinson) who has just retired as a lawyer, and is the only member of the group who has actually lived in India. 

These folk meet at the airport when their flight to the ‘Best Exotic Marigold Hotel’ is cancelled, and Graham is the one who organises their transport. It’s a stressful journey but they hope for a place of respite when they arrive… only to discover rooms that are full of dust (or worse), some without doors, none of them prepared. And the film is about the way that each of them, in different ways, adjusts - or doesn’t adjust - to the new environment, the sounds and colours in India, and the culture, which is quite alien to most of them.

With such an incredible cast, it’s not surprising that this film works extremely well, focussing on the friendships that gradually build up, and the ways that the people in the group change as their horizons are widened. There’s quite a bit of humour, and it manages to be amusing without being offensive; fun is poked not at Indian culture as such but at the foibles and biases of the English visitors. Dev Patel as Sonny is also extremely funny with excellent timing and expressions, as he works hard to persuade everyone around him to support his vision. 

It’s not just a comedy, though - there’s a romantic thread that looks at the way Indian marriages happen, and there’s a great deal of pathos, as some of the people confront excessive poverty and learn to behave in ways that do not conflict with the values of their hosts.

All in all we thought it an excellent film, and were only disappointed that the one ‘extra’ is extremely short, saying very little. The rating of 12 (UK) or PG-13 (US) seems appropriate; there's nothing explicit, but many sexual references, and some mild violence as well as one or two potentially disturbing scenes. However, a film like this about retired people is unlikely to be of interest to children or younger teens anyway.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Big (Tom Hanks)

(Amazon UK link)

Sometimes when we see a film after a gap of a decade or so, we recall the storyline once it’s started, even if we think we have forgotten. But that was not the case with the 1988 film ‘Big’, which we saw just over ten years ago. I did vaguely remember that it was about a boy who wanted to be bigger, but had the plot confused in my mind with other stories along similar lines. 

Josh (David Moscow) is twelve when this story opens. He and his best friend Billy (Jared Rushton) like to hang out together, and are just starting to take an interest in girls. Josh is particularly keen on one of the older girls at his school, and is waiting in line next to her at a fairground ride… only to be told he’s not tall enough to go on the ride. He’s embarrassed and angry, and at a rather spooky booth he pays twenty-five cents and makes a wish to be bigger.  

His wish is granted rather more drastically than Josh would like. He wakes up the following morning to find that he’s in the body of a thirty-year-old (Tom Hanks). He can’t fit into his clothes, he has hair on his chest and stubble on his chin… and when his mother eventually catches sight of him she is convinced he’s a kidnapper who has taken her son. 

Josh manages to persuade Billy that he really is his friend, and Billy - who is rather more streetwise - takes him to New York City, where he stays in a very run-down motel, hoping it will be for no more than one night. Josh is very much a twelve-year-old on the inside still, and very scared of all the noises outside. He misses his family, too. 

Unfortunately the documentation they need to find the fairground again is going to take six weeks. So Josh applies for a job testing toys - and is given it, possibly because he doesn’t look like (or behave like) any of the other applicants. And in a series of strange incidents, when he’s acting twelve again, he is promoted to a high level where he needs to design and explain new ideas for toys.

There’s a wonderful scene - the one that I did recall - involving Josh and his boss (Robert Loggia) on a huge digital piano on the floor of a toy store; there are also plenty of other amusing moments. Tom Hanks, despite looking so young in this film, has excellent comic timing, and manages to portray a teenage boy (he celebrates his 13th birthday with Billy) in the body of a thirty-year-old man.  

And he also discovers women in ways that are rather unexpected as far as Josh is concerned - and his obsession with one of them causes him to start behaving more like a young man of thirty than an adolescent. The point comes where he has to choose whether to continue in his crazy - but well-paid and luxurious - new life, or see if he can figure out a way to return…

The script is excellent, the acting believable (in the context of a very bizarre storyline) and the whole makes a very enjoyable light comedy which I’d recommend to any adults or teens. There’s nothing overtly sexual or violent, but plenty of kissing, and some implied intimacies. There are also one or two instances of strong language. The rating is PG but it’s unlikely to be of any interest to anyone under the age of about twelve or thirteen.

Review copyright 2020 Sue's DVD Reviews

Mean Girls (Lindsay Lohan)

A lot of our DVDs feature recently retired or eldelry people, and none of them felt particularly appealing last night. So we decided to re-watch ‘Mean Girls’, which is set in an American high school. Rather the other extreme, and I recalled finding it a bit strange, despite our son having recommended it. We first saw it in 2009 and I had not seen it since then, so although I remembered the name of the main protagonist, I had forgotten just about everything else.

Lindsay Lohan is very well cast as Cady (said like ‘Katie’ with an American accent). She is sixteen, and going to school for the first time. She’s been homeschooled while her family has been travelling - most recently in Africa - and while her parents are decidedly strange and protective, she seems quite normal and likeable, if a tad naive, when we first meet her. She feels a bit nervous going into a large and noisy high school for the first time, and nobody seems to want to speak to her. 

But eventually two people - Janis (Lizzy Caplan) and Damian (Daniel Franzese) befriend her. They look somewhat gothic, and are part of a clique of artists, or oddities, and they decided that Cady is something of a misfit too. They explain to her that the population of the high school is divided into many different cliques or groups: the sporty ones, the nerdy academics, the Asians… and many other stereotyped groups. In particular they point out the ‘Plastics’ - three attractive girls with lots of make-up who strut around as if they own the place. They’re treated as mascots for the sporty types, and set the trends for clothing. And they always hang out together. 

Then one of the Plastics decides to adopt Cady, inviting her to sit with them at lunch time. They tell her all their rules, which seem quite petty, but when she speaks to her friends they want to use her as a spy, to find out exactly what the Plastics do, and what they talk about. Cady agrees reluctantly. The Plastics are not the brightest of students and she feels that their lives are rather selfish and frivolous. 

She is in fact quite academically inclined and particularly good at maths. She’s working in a 12th grade calculus class behind a rather attractive guy, Aaron (Jonathan Bennett), and realises that in order to persuade him to speak to her, she must pretend to be struggling, and to make some mistakes.  

Apparently these types of clique, albeit caricatured in the film, are actually a normal part of many American high schools. And they form the basis of the story, although the Plastics are the main ones involved. Cady is surprisingly prone to peer pressure, and starts not just dressing like the Plastics but behaving like them too, talking behind their backs, saying unkind things about people she’s come across, and attempting to turn them against each other.

It’s actually quite a thought-provoking film with some important insights into the power of words. It highlights some of the problems that can arise when people lie to each other, or refuse to accept those who are different in any way. Cady is excellent in her part, and her transformation - and the inevitable, eventual realisation of what she’s done - is entirely believable. 

The school staff are shown as quite a mixture: the head and the maths teacher are encouraging and inspiring, although others are rather caricatured and unhelpful. There are some quite amusing moments, though nothing that made us laugh aloud, in addition to the important message underlying the film. 

All in all it made a good light evening’s viewing and I expect to watch it again in another decade or so. Rated PG, and there’s nothing explicit, but rather a lot of scenes of ‘making out’ in various degrees of intimacy, mostly implied. So in practice it’s more suitable for older teenagers, who are the intended audience, as well as adults.

Review copyright 2021 Sue's DVD Reviews