Doctor Who series 2 (David Tennant)

(Amazon UK link)

We finished watching the first 21st century series of Doctor Who (with Christopher Eccleston in the title role) in mid October. So it was time to move on to Series 2. We found these DVDs individually in a thrift store, more than twelve years ago. So we don’t actually have a box set as such, which means there are no ‘extras’. But that isn’t really a problem. I don’t think we even noticed the lack the first time we watched them, early in 2012. 

The first DVD has just two episodes, including the Christmas special which introduced the new Doctor; the others each have three episodes.

The Christmas invasion

This ‘special’, introducing David Tennant as the 10th doctor, was shown on Christmas Day 2005. We first see Rose’s mother Jackie (Camille Coduri) preparing a Christmas meal. She does so rather poignantly, as she thinks about her missing daughter. Then she hears the sound of the tardis, and her hopes rise..

Rose (Billie Piper) emerges with the doctor, who, of course, Jackie doesn’t recognise. And he’s very weak from the regeneration. I don’t recall that happening with subsequent doctors; not as seriously as this, anyway. He’s in a coma in Jackie’s flat while Rose and her boyfriend Mickey (Noel Clarke) become involved with some very stressful attacks from ‘Santa’ robots. 

It turns out that the robots are scouts for some dangerous aliens in a spaceship who want to destroy a significant number of the world’s population. The one scene I had remembered from our previous viewing of this episodes was thousands of people, walking like zombies, right to the edge of the roof of high-rise flats. As one with a phobia of heights, the thought of this was quite terrifying. 

I liked seeing Penelope Wilton as the prime minister in this episode, taking her role very seriously in a way that made us smile. I also very much enjoyed seeing David Tennant, when he finally gets over his coma. At first he acts a lot like Christopher Eccleston in his smiles, his manner of speaking and his way of relating to Rose. Naturally he solves the problem, and it seems that everything is ending happily until Harriet makes a decision that the Doctor is very annoyed about...

New Earth

The second episode on the first DVD sees the Doctor and Rose travel many thousand years into the future, to a ‘new’ earth - created after the first one was destroyed (shown in series one, episode two). They are relaxing in clean air, looking at happy people and flying cars… and they’re being stalked by a mechanical spider, controlled by someone who wants to know why they are there.

The one thing I recalled from this episode is a hospital manned by feline nurses. I hadn’t remembered anything else about who they meet, or the very disturbing way in which the nurses were managing to cure even the most lethal or dangerous of diseases. It’s an exciting episode, one where both David Tennant and Billie Piper have to demonstrate a bit of extra acting talent (which they do extremely well). 

Tooth and Claw

The first episode on the second DVD in the series is very well done, we thought. It’s a historical one, set in 1979 Scotland, rather than 1979, where the tardis had planned to travel. This episode features an excellent Queen Victoria (Pauline Collins). She is temporarily staying in a stately home where something terrifying is going on... 

School Reunion

The second episode on the second DVD starts off a bit lighter. It features The Doctor as a new physics teacher in a school where strange things have been happening. Rose's boyfriend Micky is involved, and although some of this episode is a bit gross, we still thought it was very well done.

The Girl in the Fireplace

The next episode has a clever and rather involved plot. It involves a mixture of a spaceship and characters in 18th century France, including some who were real people. There are also mechanical 'people' who are rather spooky but, once again, this is an excellent episode. The ones involving historical characters are some of my favourites.

The second DVD could stand alone, and might be a good introduction to Doctor Who if someone didn’t want to start at the beginning. We like re-watching them in order, as there are recurring characters and mentions of previous situations.

Rise of the Cybermen and The Age of Steel 

The third DVD begins with a two-parter, which we watched in one evening. I really don’t like leaving these episodes on a cliff-hanger, and there was a very dramatic one at the end of the first part. 

I never did like the cybermen. It turns out, in this story, that they are taking over a parallel universe where the Doctor and Rose have landed, accidentally, through a breach, in the equivalent of London. The tardis has to recharge before they can leave. Rose finds that her father isn't just alive in this universe, but has become a big star. And he seems to have some connection with the big businessman who wants to 'upgrade' everyone into cyberpeople.

Then Rose's boyfriend Micky, also travelling in the tardis, is mistaken for his parallel person Ricky. These episodes are quite chilling, disturbing at times, but I very much liked the human interest parts, and thought they were extremely well done.

The Idiot’s Lantern

Episode 7 of the series, last on the third DVD, is set in London (in the normal universe) in 1953. The Queen is about to be crowned, and people are keen to get televisions. But some areas seem to have a huge number of TVs for the era. One particular salesman is making far more sales than would be expected.

There are bizarre disappearances, and something strange and disturbing happens to people who watch TV…

This episode is lighter than the Cybermen two-parter, with a positive ending. It’s also quite thought-provoking, although the usual dangers of too much screen-time are not as excessive as those portrayed in this episode!

We didn't watch the next two episodes on this DVD, either the first time we saw Series 2, or more recently. One of our sons had warned us that if we found cybermen scary, we would have nightmares from this two-part episode. I did read about them, and decided we would avoid them.  It was interesting to learn that they tell a story where the Ood race are introduced - the gentle, servant-hearted aliens who appear in future episodes.

Love and Monsters

The third episode on the fourth DVD, 10th in series 2, is quite light-hearted, with one or two scenes that made us smile. Rose's mother Jackie is involved, and the story is told by a young man called Elton who is filming a video in vlog format about his experiences. He and a group of four other people were involved in researching all they could about The Doctor, but gradually they started doing other things together, and became quite close. 

Then they're taken over by a very controlling man who - as is clear from the start - is not who he appears to be. He tries to make them focus on their ‘real’ purpose, and does so in highly coercive ways. This episode, like so many others in the series, is  very well made, and the main alien (apparently designed by a schoolboy for a competition) is bizarre enough not to be taken seriously, even though he's very dangerous.

The Doctor and Rose don't come into this episode as much as usual, but we enjoyed it anyway.

Fear her

And so to the final DVD in this series, with the last three episodes. The Doctor takes the tardis to 2012, shortly before the London Olympics, which they are planning to watch. They learn that the street where they arrive is full of fear, as children have been disappearing. It becomes clear to the viewer (though not, at first, to anyone else) that one little girl has strange powers. Whoever she draws will suddenly vanish. 

This, we thought was a very thought-provoking episode. There’s an alien (off screen entirely) who isn’t nearly as disturbing as it first appears. And there’s a human (also off screen) who is much more dangerous than the alien…

Army of Ghosts and Doomsday

Unsurprisingly, this series ends with another two-parter, and once again we watched both parts in one evening. The Doctor and Rose land in London again, only to find that every day some ‘ghosts’ appear. They seem to be harmless and amicable; Rose’s mother Jackie is certain that the one in her kitchen is her long-dead father. The Doctor knows this isn’t right and manages to trace the origin to Torchwood Tower. 

There are cybermen and daleks, infiltrating the world, and potentially leading to its doom. The Doctor manages a last-minute solution, but it means that Rose is forever separated from him, although with her other loved ones. There are some quite emotional scenes towards the end; I was quite engrossed in this story, and found it very moving.

Overall, we enjoyed this series very much. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

A Christmas Carol (Patrick Stewart)

(Amazon UK link)

One of the Christmas DVDs we had not seen for a long time is ‘A Christmas Carol’, the 1999 ‘made for TV’ version with Patrick Stewart starring as Ebenezer Scrooge. We saw it in 2008, so it was more than time for a re-watch. We watched it on Christmas Eve.

It’s at least three decades since I read the Charles Dickens classic on which so many films have been based. But the basic story is well-known. Scrooge is such a miser that his name has become a synonym for meanness. We learn that his business partner, Jacob Marley, has died - we even see a brief cameo of the funeral. Then the main story takes place seven years later, on Christmas Eve. 

Patrick Stewart does not look anything like I have ever imagined Scrooge to be. I don’t understand why he wasn’t given a suitable wig for this film, to make him look more Victorian and rather older. But really that’s my only gripe. He is such a good actor that, as I became absorbed in the film, I quickly forgot my preconceived ideas, and saw him for the penny-pinching businessman Scrooge. 

Scrooge has one employee, Bob Cratchett (Richard E Grant) who is also very believable in his role. He is paid fifteen shillings per week, on which he can barely scrape by. But he has a wife and five children, and they are all happy - much happier than Scrooge despite their poverty. The youngest, ‘Tiny Tim’ is crippled; there’s no indication why, but he walks with a crutch and mostly has to be carried. Ben Tibber, who must have been eight or nine when this production was made, does well in this role.

Saskia Reeves is excellent, too, as Mrs Cratchett, holding the family together by her excellent housekeeping and cooking. Her other children are less distinct and perhaps over-acting a bit, but it doesn't much matter. 

Scrooge reluctantly gives Bob a whole day off for Christmas, while muttering ‘humbug’, and then returns to his gloomy home where he starts seeing ghosts… starting with his former business partner. The ghost of Marley rattles chains and warns Scrooge that unless he changes, he, too, will be doomed to roam the earth full of regrets for his self-centered life. 

Some of the special effects look a bit dated, which isn’t surprising for a film that’s now over twenty-five years old. There are many adaptations of this story, and I expect modern ones are more realistic (if ghosts can ever be considered realistic), and perhaps more scary. But given the era, and the fact that the book was written for older children, it’s not inappropriate to have very different and unscary ghosts. The third, who doesn’t speak, is perhaps the most disturbing, but then the third ghost shows Scrooge what might happen if he doesn’t change his ways.

Dickens cared deeply about the impoverished in society, and many of his novels form a kind of social commentary. ‘A Christmas carol’ is obviously intended to be a moral tale, demonstrating why it’s important to be kind and generous. Scrooge’s change of focus is perhaps a tad unlikely after so many years of selfish miserliness. But it’s done so well in this film that it feels quite realistic while watching. 

Knowing the story well did not in any way detract from my enjoyment of seeing this version. It’s rated PG which seems about right; there’s no violence or bad language, and parents will know whether or not the situations portrayed might upset their children. I doubt if it would be of much interest to very little ones anyway.

But for a good portrayal of the story, fairly close to the book, I would recommend this. 

Other related films we’ve watched in the past few years include:

* Scrooged (with Bill Murray) - a modern take on the story, not for children

* A Christmas Carol goes wrong - chaos and some slapstick, as an incompetent cast attempt a play

* The man who invented Christmas - a fictional portrayal of Dickens’ life and the writing of the 'Christmas Carol' story 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Winter Solstice (Sinéad Cusack)

(Amazon UK link)

It’s six years since we watched the 2003 film ‘Winter Solstice’, based on Rosamunde Pilcher’s novel with the same title. I recalled the storyline fairly well, and also that it was quite an absorbing film, originally made for television. We count it as a Christmas one, even though it’s only towards the end of the movie that Christmas takes place.

The main character is Elfrida (Sinéad Cusack). She has recently lost the man she has lived with for fifteen years. Unfortunately for her, he was a risk-taker who left no insurance, and a large amount of debt. So she has to sell the house they have lived in, and - she hopes - find a job. Her age isn’t given but she must be somewhere between forty-five and fifty-five. She used to be an actor, and hopes to get back into that field.

Initially, after the house sale, she goes to stay with her good friend Didi (Marsha Fitzalan). Didi has two daughters: twenty-five-year-old Carrie (Sophie Schütt) and fifteen-year-old Lucy (Anna Maguire). Carrie lives abroad, so Elfrida is staying in her room… Didi is recently divorced, but can’t survive without a man. 

We then see Carrie with her boyfriend, who is promising to love her forever.  She gets a sudden shock, and her world is turned upside down. She gets on a plane and heads for home. 

We also meet Sam (Jason Durr) who is an accountant for a large business organisation. He is going to have to travel to the north of Scotland to close down a business that employs about a hundred people. He happens to sit next to Carrie on a plane, but she ignores him, deep in her misery. 

Elfrida goes to stay for a while in her lawyer’s holiday cottage, and gets to know her neighbours: Oscar (Jan Niklas), his wife Gloria (Geraldine Chaplin) and their delightful daughter Francesca (Emilia Streets) who is twelve. Then she manages to get an interview with her former agent so she rushes off to London… and while she’s away, a terrible tragedy happens. I knew it was coming, and still had to look away. It’s the worst part of the film (and the book, though it happens a bit differently in the book). 

The main part of the film takes place when five of these characters are heading towards an estate house in Scotland, which is half owned by Oscar, and half by Sam’s godfather. There’s some confusion at first (and a massive coincidence that this house has lain empty for a while and is suddenly occupied by so many at the same time. But Rosamunde Pilcher did tend to include this kind of situation in her novels). 

It’s a character-based film, like the book, although there are several subplots. I last read the book ‘Winter Solstice’ in 2018, so I was quite hazy on some of the details. I know that Carrie was Lucy’s aunt in the book, rather than her sister, and that Elfrida was rather older - comfortably retired, rather than penniless. But the basic outline and ideas are much the same. It doesn’t matter. Films and books are different media, and I’m not one who wants every detail to match. 

The scenery is gorgeous, the pace just right for our tastes. Elfrida, we thought, was perfectly cast, as was Lucy who manages to be a moody, sometimes angry teenager to perfection. Oscar is less believable; he and Elfrida have a good chemistry but he seems to get over his terrible tragedy to some extent rather rapidly. Others are more minor, and are sufficiently realistic that I was totally caught up in the story. 

It’s a couple of hours, so longer than most modern films, but felt like exactly the right length. There’s a bit of humour - particularly involving the delightful countess who appears towards the end of the film although it’s low-key and doesn’t detract from the poignancy and light romance of the story.  

The ending, if somewhat predictable and open-ended, is encouraging for all concerned. Since this film was made for TV it doesn't have a UK rating, but I would expect PG or possibly 12, since there are a couple of scenes of people in bed after what was clearly a night of intimacy. There is also some minor violence when a fight erupts, and some bad language, though nothing too extreme. It's not likely to be of interest to anyone younger than about twelve anyway. 

Definitely recommended if you like a gentle, sometimes moving film that’s lightly Christmassy at the end. I still prefer the book, however.

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Nativity 2: danger in the manger (David Tennant)

(Amazon UK link)

We have over thirty Christmas DVDs, and we like to see at least four or five of them each Christmas season. I pulled out the ones we hadn’t yet seen, or hadn’t seen in a while, and my husband selected ‘Nativity 2: danger in the manger’. We saw this film in December 2014, and I recalled being somewhat unimpressed at the time. It didn’t seem like a worthy sequel to ‘Nativity’, which we thought excellent.

However, we’ve been watching season two of Doctor Who, with David Tennant in the title role. So we thought it might be amusing to see him in the rather different role of classroom teacher in ‘Nativity 2’. And I was interested to see whether I would find it better or worse than I did ten years ago. 

The film opens to a domestic scene. David Tennant plays a young man called Donald Peterson who has just moved house and has a new job. His wife Sarah (Joanna Page) is expecting their first baby. He’s a bit concerned about the school where he’s going to work, but says that the head seems very pleasant, and she has assured him that the children are well-behaved.

The action then moves to the classroom, where Mr Poppy (Marc Wootten), the classroom assistant, is in charge. There have been several teachers replacing the excellent Mr Maddens and we see brief cameos as each one comes into conflict with one or other of Mr Poppy’s wild ideas. The children adore Mr Poppy, but he’s like an overgrown four-year-old and has no concept of boundaries, or of education. He only has the job because the headmistress (Pam Ferris) is his aunt. 

Clearly Mr Poppy should not have the job, despite his relationship to the head. Whereas we found him somewhat amusing in the first Nativity film, he is somewhat irritating in this one. He encourages the children to think they can take part (and win) a singing competition, despite lack of talent, and little time to rehearse. The head refuses permission but Mr Poppy goes ahead and applies. Then, when the day comes for the contest, he uses sneaky methods to get the children away - kidnapping Mr Peterson at the last moment, to accompany them.

The journey to Wales is fraught with mishaps, as might be expected. And it starts to delve into silliness as the ridiculous bus turns into a boat which then runs out of fuel, and the children have to embark on a long walk. Mr Poppy urges them to hurry at times, and insists they take breaks at others. The distance is shown as extremely long, and some of the children have to be carried. But most of them make it without seeming at all tired, and they’re somehow ready to perform when they eventually arrive.

There are some amusing scenes in this film. David Tennant is excellent in his role, so much so that we didn’t even think of him as the Doctor. He is an excellent actor who becomes the person he’s portraying - and we thought of him during this film as the young, rather apprehensive Mr Peterson. At least, we did until the appearance of Donald’s twin brother Roderick, a high-flying and very snooty choirmaster who  also has a competing group. 

They have not spoken to each other in years, and Donald has felt like a failure as their father (Ian McNiece) always favoured Roderick. David Tennant plays Roderick brilliantly, a tad caricatured (but then that's the nature of the film). Moreover, he does this so differently from the way he plays Donald that I sometimes forgot, for a moment, that the same actor was playing both brothers. 

In the last half hour or so of the film we get to see the other acts that are competing, performing their song and dance routines. A couple of them are (deliberately, we assume) pretty bad - twee, schmaltzy and with costumes in bad taste, although the singing and dancing as such is mostly good. Roderick expects to win with his highly trained boys’ choir, dressed as church choristers, and he isn’t averse to a bit of cheating…

And yet, despite the surreal nature of a lot of the film, it’s very well done. The pace is good, the timing is great, and the conversation - most of it improvised rather than scripted - realistic. The humour is somewhat slapstick, but we smiled several times and laughed once or twice. And the finale - which we had completely forgotten, after the concert - is moving, and encouraging, sharing (in a low-key way) the real meaning of Christmas. 

So despite the complete lack of compliance with safeguarding laws, with the head and parents having no idea where the children are, and the annoying nature of Mr Poppy, I liked it rather more than I did last time. David Tennant’s brilliance means I would recommend it on the whole and expect to watch it again in a few years time.  The rating is U which seems about right, although I don't suppose that very young children would find much to interest them in this film. 

There are a couple of extras, including some deleted scenes, on our DVD, which we thought well worth seeing after watching the film. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

How about you? (Hayley Attwell)

(Amazon UK link)

December is here, so I pulled out our Christmas DVD collection. We have about thirty of them, currently; if we watch five each year that means we can see each one around once every six years. I usually like leaving at least five years before re-watching a film, unless it’s exceptional.

We saw ‘How about you?’ almost eight years ago in February 2017, rather later than the Christmas period. I recalled quite liking it, and also that it was loosely based on a short story by Maeve Binchy. My husband didn’t remember it at all.

Hayley Attwell stars as Ellie, a young woman who needs a job. She turns up at the care home for the elderly run by her sister Kate (Orla Brady), asking to work there. Kate is dubious: Ellie has a history of being irresponsible and causing problems by her outspokenness. But Ellie pleads, and Kate gives in.

One of the first residents whom Ellie gets to know is Alice (Joan O’Hara) who is frail, in some pain, and aware that she is dying. Alice feels hemmed in by her nurse, and wants the freedom to go out and about in her wheelchair. Ellie agrees to do this, and also to acquire some cannabis to ease Alice’s pain… but when Kate discovers it, she is furious. It could lead to the home being closed. It’s already lost some staff and several residents, mainly due to the bad behaviour of four of them.

These four are Georgia (Vanessa Redgrave), Donald (Joss Ackland), and two sisters called Hazel (Imelda Staunton) and Heather (Brenda Fricker). Georgia is a former stage star who hankers after her youth, and drinks too much. Donald is a supposedly reformed alcoholic who was widowed a couple of years earlier. Hazel is an artist who is over-protected by Heather. All four are rude, argumentative and demanding.

By the time the film was half-way through I was wondering why I had put it in our Christmas collection, but then, in the last half-hour or so, Christmas approaches. Most of the residents are collected by family members to be taken to their homes for a week or so. Ellie is eager to take a break, and only Kate will remain, to look after the four difficult residents who have nowhere else to go.

Then a crisis occurs, and Kate has to leave. So Ellie is in charge… she promises to behave, but becomes increasingly exhausted and stressed by the incessant demands of these angry people. She finally loses her temper and lets them know what she thinks of them. She also tells them that the home will probably be closed due to their attitudes and behaviour…

But it’s a Christmas feel-good film, so inevitably the four difficult residents are brought to their senses and decide to get along. Not that they are perfect by any means, and there are more difficulties for Ellie as she tries to treat them as a family. Then there’s always the worry of a health and safety officer arriving, since Ellie has no qualifications and leaving the residents in her care is not legal.

There are moments of humour in this film which, on the whole, is light-hearted, even though it includes some more serious issues. The acting is good, as one would expect with an all-star cast. It has just the right balance of poignancy and lightness, in my view.

There are some lovely Christmas scenes with amazing food, beautiful table layouts, and more, and while the ending is perhaps a bit predictable, it was very enjoyable to watch. The whole film is beautifully done, and we were totally engrossed. It’s not long - just under 90 minutes - and there are no extras on our DVD. But it made a good start to the Christmas season.

The rating is 15 which surprised me a bit, as there are only mild sexual references - no nudity or anything explicit - and no violence. But there are several instances of strong language, and the drugs… so that’s why it has such a high rating. I doubt if children or young teens would be interested anyway in a film about elderly folk in a care home.

But if you want a well-made, thoughtful film with a pleasantly Christmassy ending, I would recommend ‘How about you’.

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

A man called Otto (Tom Hanks)

(Amazon UK link)

A few months ago I read and very much liked the book ‘A man called Ove’, by Fredrik Backman. I already knew that there was a film based on the book, and had put it on my wishlist. I received ‘A man called Otto’ for my birthday, a few months before reading the book. But we hadn’t got around to watching it until last night. 

I was aware that Tom Hanks played the title role in the film. When I read the book, I imagined him in the part, and thought he was perfect for it. I don’t know why the title character’s name was changed from Ove to Otto, but it wasn’t a big deal. And while the book is set in a small town in Sweden, the film is set in a small town in the United States. There are other changes, too, which irritate some fans of the book. But they didn’t worry me. 

The film opens when Otto is trying to buy some rope, arguing with the sales assistant about the cost. It’s a good way to portray his extreme pedantry and precision of outlook. He is a very organised, controlled person who likes to follow the same routine every day. And as I expected, Tom Hanks is wonderful in this role. He is exactly as I had imagined Otto. 

After his purchases, we see him patrolling the grounds of the complex where he lives. He checks that the recycling bins are used correctly (and moves items placed in the wrong ones). And he gets into an angry debate with a delivery van who has - in Otto’s mind - trespassed by driving onto their private road without a permit. 

There are some new neighbours trying to move in. In the book they are a Persian family, but in the film they’re Mexican. But they are similar in outlook - very open-hearted, generous, and expecting everyone to be friendly. The wife, Marisol (Mariana Treviño) loves to bake, and regularly takes things to Otto. She has two children and is heavily pregnant. Her husband Tommy (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo) is kind, a bit naive and not all that bright. 

In the book there are a lot of neighbours - too many for me to keep track of. In the film, the only ones we get to know somewhat are Jimmy, who likes to keep fit; Malcolm, a teenager who first irritates Otto by leaving his bicycle in the wrong place, and an older couple, Anita and Reuben, who used to be close to Otto and his wife. But Reuben has some form of dementia, and Anita isn’t well either. Oh, and there’s also a woman with a dog who clashes regularly with Otto… and there’s a cat who won’t go away. 

The story itself is not one that would normally be thought of as suitable for a light novel or film. Otto does not want to live any longer. He’s recently retired, and as we quite quickly learn in the film, his beloved wife died within the past year. It takes much longer for this to be obvious in the book, which is quite complicated in places with flashbacks. 

The film makes it much clearer - the only flashbacks are the ones in which we learn about Otto’s relationship with Sonia (Rachel Keller). I thought they were very well done, with a younger man in Otto’s role. Truman Hanks is apparently Tom Hanks’ son, which is perhaps why he feels right for this part, despite not looking all that similar. 

During the course of the film, Otto attempts more than once to end his life. It could have been traumatic, but each time something happens - either the attempts fails, or he’s interrupted with something else. He can’t avoid answering doors, or helping people when they’re in trouble. Despite his grumpy, rigid attitudes, he’s altruistic and caring deep down. 

It’s character-based, and inevitably in an hour and a half can’t cover everything from a full-length novel. We don’t see much of Otto’s childhood, for one thing, or how he started work. But I thought that, overall, it was extremely well-done. There’s humour - often in Tom Hanks’ perfect timing of a remark - and light-heartedness in the joy of the Mexican family. There are also some deeper issues touched on: the role of the state in deciding where elderly folk should live, for instance, and how to relate to a transgender person. They’re done sensitively, and leave much to think about.

The pace is just right, the acting excellent, albeit caricatured (deliberately) in some cases. The ending is poignant, and yet there’s no other ending that would have worked. And it leads to positive changes in the lifestyle and expectations of others. 

The rating is 15 in the UK (PG-13 in the United States) which reflects the nature of the film rather than anything specific. There’s nothing remotely sexual, and only mild bad language. There’s some mild gore, but nothing gratuitous, and Otto’s first attempt at taking his life is quite traumatic, so it’s not a film I’d want a child to see, or a sensitive or depressed teenager. Nor would it be appropriate for anyone likely to be negatively triggered by a story about someone who wants to kill himself.

But, with those provisos, we thought it a very good film. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Heidi (Emma Bolger)

(Amazon UK link)

As a child I loved the book ‘Heidi’, which I had initially in abridged form. It’s the classic story of an orphaned girl who is sent to live with her hermit-like grandfather who lives high in the Swiss alps. Grandfather is rather spurned by the people of the local village, who fear him due to some damaging rumours. 

Heidi is lively and friendly, and her grandfather, despite his rather dour appearance, becomes very fond of her. She loves the simple life in the mountains and befriends Peter, the goatherd, who is the son of their nearest neighbours. When her aunt appears to take Heidi into the town to work as a companion to a wealthy disabled girl, Clara, Heidi is heartbroken… 

It’s a delightful story, one which I think I should read again some time soon. We watched the 2005 film adaptation on DVD over twelve years ago, and decided to watch it again last night. And it sticks pretty closely to the original story. The scenery is stunning, and given that it’s not a long film (not much over an hour and a half) it packs in plenty without adding anything unnecessary. The pace is good, and we were both engrossed in the story. 

But we were both disappointed by the three main child actors. We weren’t sure if they were over-directed, or if they weren’t involved enough in the story to be really believable. Emma Bolger plays nine-year-old Heidi, and she does it as an enthusiastic, animated child. She has a slight Irish accent, which is a little weird, but I quickly got used to that. However she shows little emotion at the more poignant times. When she has to wait (more than once) outside her grandfather’s chalet, she doesn’t look at all anxious or afraid. When she’s supposedly crying, there are no tears - just some artificial-sounding sniffs. When she’s tossing and turning in bed, it doesn’t look real at all. 

Worse is Clara (Jessica Claridge), who comes across as likeable but rather twee, as if she’s repeating her lines rather than acting. And although Peter is more believable, he seems much too clean to be a believable goatherd. And his jealousy of Clara, later in the film, is not really explored at all and doesn’t seem to fit with what we see of his character in the earlier scenes. 

However, I thought that Heidi’s grandfather (Max von Sydow) was excellent. I could believe in him entirely as a lonely, irritable old man whose heart is softened by his lively granddaughter. I wasn’t sure why he seemed so old - he could have passed for eighty, which seems to me the age of a great-grandfather to a nine-year-old girl. But that wasn’t a huge issue and only occurred to me towards the end. 

Diana Rigg is also very well cast as Clara’s grandmama. She comes across as a delightful, realistic woman who looks as if she’s in her late sixties. She’s kind and understanding, and quite lively too.  And I liked Sebastian (Del Synott), the servant in Clara’s household, who befriends Heidi. His face is very expressive at times, as he attempts to be discreet and almost invisible serving at table, but also reacts to Heidi’s liveliness and naivete. There are one or two quite amusing scenes involving Sebastian, where his facial expressions made us chuckle. 

There are two obviously caricatured adult characters in the film. Pauline McLynn plays Heidi’s strict, penny-pinching aunt, and Geraldine Chaplin is the appalling Miss Rottenmeier, who for some reason is employed as housekeeper at the house where Clare lives. Neither is supposed to be liked, and the exaggerated nastiness is a good ploy in a children’s film, so that - hopefully - they’re not taken too seriously, and therefore won’t provoke nightmares.

It’s a story about families, and friendship; about loyalty and the importance of looking out for other people.  Despite the rather wooden acting of the younger people, I would recommend it, on the whole. The rating is U, and that reflects the wholesome story with a lack of anything that would merit a stricter rate. I don’t think it would be of much interest to anyone younger than about seven or eight, but for older children and teens (and adults who loved the book as children) it’s a good adaptation. 

Our DVD doesn’t have any extras. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Noises off (Michael Caine)

(Amazon UK link)

We’ve had the DVD of the film ‘Noises off’ for a long time. It was made in 1992 and I’m pretty sure we acquired the DVD early in our time in Cyprus, probably the late 1990s. I expect I watched it, too, but had no memory of it at all. Neither did my husband. But it looked like a light and possibly humorous film so we decided to watch it last night. Apparently the film was based on a play of the same name. 

It opens to a scene of traffic somewhere in the United States, and commentary from Lloyd (Michael Caine), worried about a theatre production called ‘Nothing on’. It’s billed as a sex farce from London. Lloyd wanders around the foyer of the theatre, but can’t bring himself to go in. He explains that it’s gone from bad to worse. 

Then the action takes us back to the dress rehearsal months earlier. It was taking place late at night and Lloyd tries to keep his temper as more and more actors forget their lines or directions. We meet the housekeeper Dotty (Carol Burnett) who has to answer a phone, then put down a plate of sardines and remove a newspaper. She keeps forgetting what she has to do, and is somewhat over-acting anyway. 

As she vanishes, finally, into the kitchen, John (Gary Lejeune) arrives with Brooke (Nicollette Sheridan) on his arm. They’re clearly there for an assignation. John assures her they are alone, and tells her that he owns the place. Brooke is not very bright, or observant, although the character she plays is quite seductive. 

After some misunderstandings they disappear into a bedroom, only to have the front door opened again to reveal another couple on an assignation. There’s a lot of cleverly done choreography as doors open and close, different people noticing - or not noticing - each other. Dotty keeps appearing with plates of sardines which are accepted or moved… and even though Lloyd keeps having to stop to remind people of lines or stage directions, it’s all rather cleverly done. 

However there are clearly different relationships off-stage. Lloyd, we learn, is intimate with Poppy (Julie Hagerty) who is the prompter, and general backstage manager. But she’s not the only one. I rather lost track of who was keen on whom, and it didn’t seem to matter as there was a lot of chaos, albeit well done.

After this dress rehearsal, there are two more sections of the film - I imagine they were separate acts in the stage play. In the first, everyone just about manages to hold things together as we see the first half of the play again.  In the second location, more and more things go wrong as people make mistakes, or go missing, or miss their cues… there were several times when we smiled, or even chuckled as unexpected things happened or went wrong. 

It’s a good idea, and I expect worked very well as a stage play. It was a bit strange having just a handful of characters, almost everything taking place in the same stage set, or behind it, with only Michael Caine’s character appearing in the foyer or audience. But we quickly got used to it, and on the whole liked it.

The UK rating is 15 which seems rather high. Although ‘Nothing on’ is supposedly a sex farce, there’s nothing too inappropriate that happens. Plenty is implied, and one character does spend most of the play in her lacy underwear, but there aren’t any actual scenes of intimacy.  There’s some comedic violence, and some bad language (including a couple of incidences of ‘strong’ language) but it didn’t seem overdone, and I’d have thought a rating of 12 would have been more appropriate.

Having said that, it’s not for the prudish. Innuendoes abound, and there’s a lot of general silliness and some slapstick. It rises out of the mundane by the excellent choreography and impeccable comic timing, but it’s not one I’d particularly recommend. Still, it made a good evening’s light viewing, and on the whole we liked it.

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Young at heart (Doris Day)

(Amazon UK link)

Another Tuesday evening, another opportunity to watch a film with my husband. We had quite liked ‘Pillow talk’, with Doris Day, when we watched it in September. So we decided to watch another film with the same star, which we were given by a friend who was downsizing earlier in the year. 

Doris Day plays a young woman called Laurie in this film. She lives with her father, her father’s sister Aunt Jessie (wonderfully portrayed by Ethel Barrymore), and her two older sisters in a large mansion. Her father Greg (Robert Keith) is a musician, and all three girls have learned to play instruments so they often play together in an ensemble. Fran (Dorothy Malone ), the oldest of the girls, arrives back from a date with Bob (Alan Hale Jr) and announces that they are engaged.

Laurie and her middle sister Amy (Elisabeth Fraser) talk about having a double wedding, or staying old maids together. Laurie has no young man in mind, although it’s clear that their plumber Ernie (Lonny Chapman) is very keen on Amy. Into their lives - via a litter of puppies at their neighbour’s - comes a competent, confident young man called Alex (Gig Young). He composes musicals, rather to Greg’‘s disgust, but he’s full of charm and very persuasive. He not only has dinner with the family, making it clear that he’s very attracted to Laurie, but becomes a house guest.

All three of the girls like Alex very much, despite him being somewhat overbearing at times, but he has eyes only for Laurie. We see them at the beach, and there are some light-hearted moments - it’s not a comedy, exactly, but there were places where I smiled. There might have been amusing comments that I missed since the dialogue was quite fast and strongly accented, so I realised that I missed quite a bit. 

We knew that Frank Sinatra was billed as Doris Day’s co-star but he doesn’t appear until quite a way into the film. He plays Barney, a cynical, rather depressed musician who plays in restaurants, and who does the arranging of Alex’s music. Barney is convinced that life is against him, that he will never have a ‘hit’, and that if anything good happens, he’ll soon be brought down. 

Laurie, who is cheerful and upbeat, can't believe that anyone can be quite as cynical as Barney. She does her best to persuade him to smile, and to be more positive, not realising that he is starting to fall for her. She and Alex seem made for each other...

The acting, 1950s style, is over-played, and we didn’t think there was much chemistry between any of the characters, let alone the ones who ended up getting married. There’s a fair bit of singing - not ‘musical’ style, but in appropriate situations; mostly in the house, as part of a family get-together, or elsewhere, trying out a new song. Both Doris Day and Frank Sinatra sing very well, of course, and I liked the music sections of the film. 

It’s quite a complex story, too. It includes some traumatic scenes, with a jilting at the altar, almost literally, and a marriage that is very one-sided. There's also a dangerous drive through a snowstorm, with increasingly ominous background music… and more. It’s perhaps a bit slow-paced by today’s standards, and some of  the direction and filming seemed a bit crude. But the story is well-told, the ending quite satisfactory.  

I doubt if we’ll watch it again, but it was worth seeing once. The rating is U, although I’d have thought PG would be more appropriate, given the tense nature of some of the incidents. But there’s no bad language, no nudity or even innuendoes.  There’s a lot of cigarette smoking, but that’s not unusual for this era.  It’s not the kind of film likely to appeal to anyone under the age of about 12 anyway. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

The cutting edge (Moira Kelly, DB Sweeney)

(Amazon UK link)

It’s nearly eleven years since we watched the DVD of ‘The cutting edge’. We remembered that it was about ice skating, but nothing much else. Indeed, we briefly confused it with the film ‘Ice Princess’, which we saw in 2021.

This film opens at the 1988 winter Olympics, but starts with two separate storylines. Kate (Moira Kelly) is a wealthy and very spoiled figure skater. She has trained extensively, on her private rink, and is strongly encouraged by her father (Terry O’Quinn). But her arrogant attitude has lost her several different skating partners. During her performance, her current partner drops her, meaning they lose their chance of a gold medal. She doesn’t really do solo skating, so her trainer Anton (Roy Dotrice) has to find someone else to be her partner. 

Meanwhile, Doug (DB Sweeney), a young man from a much more impoverished background, is a champion ice hockey player. He is also playing in a match at the Olympics, although he arrives late after a night with a girl. It’s clear that he’s rather arrogant, too, confident in his abilities. But there’s an accident during the game, giving him a head injury, which leads to permanent damage to his peripheral vision. 

This means he can no longer participate in competitive ice hockey. His brother Walter (Chris Benson) wants him to help in the family business and he does so, playing ice hockey in a local league but hoping for more. His brother has little patience with his ambitions and doesn’t understand his need to skate. 

Unsurprisingly, Anton tracks down Doug, and invites him to try working with Kate. Doug rather looks down on figure skating, but he’s willing to give it a go. He’s shocked at the magnificence of Kate’s family home and her private rink, and rather scathing at what he is expected to do. He struggles at first with the figure skating boots, and doesn’t like Kate laughing at him when he falls down. They have a lot of conflict, but he’s persuaded to stay… 

Most of the film charts their progress as Doug realises just how strong and flexible he has to be for figure skating. He and Kate have a lot of arguments but evidently she needs someone with a strong character who is willing to stand up for her. And he’s full of determination and courage. 

There are scenes at the US national competition where Kate and Doug just scrape a place at the next winter Olympics. And then they work on a new routine which includes a dangerous and unusual move which takes them a long time to perfect. Even then they’re not sure that they’re going to include it…

Alongside this, rather inevitably, Doug and Kate realise they find each other very attractive. It’s kept as a low-key part of the story, which contributes to the film's PG rating, despite some bad (though not ‘strong’) language in places. We see Doug in a ‘morning-after’ role more than once with other women, but there’s nothing explicit. 

In a sense there isn’t much of a storyline: without the skating it would be a very predictable romance with two people clashing strongly and gradually realising they are attracted to each other. But the ice dancing makes this a different and very watchable film, with some humour as well as some exceptional skating. It’s also interesting to see how the two principals gradually mellow - just a little - realising they have to rely on and trust each other.  

I wouldn’t class it as one of my favourite films, but I’m glad we decided to watch it again, and expect we’ll get it out to see again in another decade or so. Cheesey? Undoubtedly, but the figure skating pulls it out of the ordinary.  According to the IMDb site, neither of the main actors could skate at all, so they had to undergo three months of extensive training prior to filming. I assume that some of the most advanced skating must have been done by stunt doubles although it's not mentioned anywhere that I can find. 

Recommended for teens and adults if you like films about ice skating with a bit of romance thrown in.

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Doctor Who Series 1 (Christopher Eccleston)

(Amazon UK link)

Although the 21st century Doctor Who revival started in 2005, we didn’t watch the first series until 2011. Since then we have gradually acquired DVDs of the various seasons and ‘specials’. We finally caught up with ourselves in June this year, when we saw the 60th anniversary specials that followed the 13th series, ‘Flux’. At that stage, there were no more DVDs to be bought. 

So we decided that we would re-watch from the beginning, starting in the middle of August when we were both back in Cyprus after travelling. It’s going to be a lengthy process, watching Doctor Who one evening per week, so we agreed that sometimes we would watch two episodes in an evening. 

Disc One

The first episode of Season One, just called ‘Rose’, is, I thought, very well done. We first meet a young woman (Billie Piper) who works in a big department store. At the end of the day, she has to take something down to the basement… and very peculiar things start happening with the display mannequins. Then her hand is grabbed by a strange man, who rushes her away and saves her. Christopher Eccleston tells her he is ‘The Doctor’, and leaves her to go home. 

But he hasn’t stopped the danger. Rose’s boyfriend Mickey (Noel Clark) is somehow assimilated and cloned, and once again the Doctor comes to the rescue - although Rose has to rescue him, too. Little bits of information about the Doctor are cleverly introduced for the benefit of anyone who was not familiar with the series before. It’s a dramatic episode, with a bit of humour here and there to lighten the mood.

The second episode, ‘The End of the World’ sees the Doctor taking Rose several billion years into the future, to the moment half an hour before the Earth is due to be destroyed. They arrive on a spaceship with many different representatives of a variety of alien races, including the last ‘human’, Lady Cassandra. She has had so many surgeries to preserve her essence that she looks nothing like a human. Inevitably there are more dangers, and sabotage, and more information about the Doctor is revealed, including the fact that his own planet (Gallifrey) no longer exists.

In the third episode, the Doctor takes Rose to the 19th century where they discover an alien force trying to take over the bodies of people who had recently died. I found it  a bit disturbing at first, but the episode is lightened by their meeting with Charles Dickens. He is played to perfection by Simon Callow, who apparently loves Dickens, and has acted his character many times. The ‘extras’ on the first DVD mention that the Doctor has not previously been shown with historical figures, although in the previous incarnations he sometimes mentioned having met them. Historical figures play a significant role in many of the later ‘new’ seasons: I had not realised that the 20th century episodes did not include these. 

Disc Two

The second DVD in our box set has three episodes. It’s a good thing we allowed the time to watch two of them, as the first two are a dual-part episode. ‘Aliens of London’ begins with Rose discovering that she’s been away for longer than expected. Then a spaceship crash-lands in the Thames, after destroying the clock face of Big Ben. This is the episode where the ‘Slitheen’ are introduced. I found them quite scary when we first saw them, thirteen years ago. This time they looked rather dated, and much less intimidating. 

There’s some humour in the episode as well as tension, and it ends on such a cliffhanger that I would have wanted to see the sequel at once, even if it had been late. That episode, ‘World War Three’, resolves the issue, as we expected. It also includes some good scenes with Rose’s mother Jackie (Camille Coduri) and also her boyfriend Mickey. Harriet Jones (Penelope Wilton) is introduced, as a backbencher with political ambitions. We thought she was excellent, providing some of the light relief as well as aiding in the eventual solution. 

I was not looking forward to Episode Six (third on the second DVD), simply entitled ‘Dalek’. Of all the Doctor Who enemies, the daleks are the ones who terrify me the most. But it was a very good episode. The Doctor and Rose land in a kind of museum of aliens, and discover the final dalek in existance. It is being tested and tortured to try to make it speak, but only in the presence of the Doctor does it find its voice. By the end, I almost (though not quite) found myself feeling sorry for this dalek… 

Disc Three

The third DVD begins with episode Seven, ‘The Long Game’, which features a satellite populated with humans many thousands of years in the future. They are apparently all happy, and are broadcasting news around the universe. I had vaguely remembered some of what transpired; it’s perhaps a warning not to accept the status quo, and to be suspicious of ‘promotion’ which nobody is allowed to speak about.

‘Father’s Day’ is the next episode, one I thought particularly engaging. Rose asks to go back in time to the day her father died. She’s warned about the dangers of time travel to one’s own past, and that it might be traumatic for her. But the Doctor doesn’t take into account Rose’s emotional reaction to seeing her father hit by a car. And then it becomes rather disturbing, with results quite at odds with the principles established in the very different ‘Quantum Leap’ series. But I very much liked the background into Rose’s life, and the scenes involving her mother Jackie.

It’s a good thing we had plenty of time the following week when we watched ‘The Empty Child’, another episode that’s full of human interest. The Doctor and Rose arrive in London during the Blitz, to find odd things happening after a strange object landed near a hospital. Jack Harkness, another time traveller from the distant future, is introduced in this episode. I recalled him appearing every so often throughout the series, with a mixed kind of relationship with the Doctor and his companions. John Barrowman is excellent as a charming rogue who rather bewitches Rose, and makes the Doctor oddly jealous.

That episode ended on such a cliffhanger that we immediately watched its sequel,’The Doctor Dances’. Again there’s a lot of human interaction and some insights into the London Blitz. For instance, we see a young girl, stealing from wealthy houses during air raids in order to feed hungry boys. And the conclusion of this double episode was, we both thought, very well done and entirely satisfactory. 

Disc Four

The fourth DVD in our box set contains the last three episodes of Series One. The first, ‘Boom Town’ takes place in Cardiff. The Doctor, Rose and Jack think they’re just relaxing for a few hours while the Tardis recharges. But it’s quite a stressful episode, featuring an alien whom the Doctor thought had been fully destroyed. There are some interesting exchanges and it’s impossible to know who can be trusted. There’s also some emotional turmoil as Rose catches up with her former boyfriend Mickey.

Then there’s another two-parter to end the series: ‘Bad Wolf’ and ‘The Parting of the Ways. The Doctor, Jack and Rose are back on the satellite of episode Seven, a hundred years later. This time it’s broadcasting game shows, many of them spoofs on real television game shows. But there’s a drastic end for anyone eliminated from the competitions. It’s quite a complex storyline involving some unexpected terrible enemies and the potential destruction of the human race.

The climax of ‘The Parting of the Ways’ is a bit ‘deus ex machina’ but well done nonetheless, after some humorous attempts on Rose’s part (helped by Mickey) to open up the tardis. What happens is far from amusing, and I’m not sure I entirely understood the significance. But in the end, as we knew would happen, The Doctor is unable to continue as he is, and regenerates into a very young-looking David Tennant. 

There are a couple of interesting ‘extras’ on this last DVD of the set. One of them looks at the incredible detail put into the creation of the sets (in particular the tardis) and some of the aliens. I’m astounded that anyone would spend so much time and effort on things that were only needed for one episode, but the people involved loved what they were doing. The second extra is by John Barrowman, talking about Jack - I found that rather more interesting, but then what matters for me is the human interest part of the show. 

Three things struck me overall, watching these episodes again, thirteen years after we first saw them. One is that the pace is rather slower than it was in the later series. I liked the slower pace very much, as it makes the stories so much easier for me to follow. 

The second thing I noticed is that the Tardis looks oddly old-fashioned! It reminded me somewhat of the 1960s Tardis, which, perhaps, was deliberate. By the thirteenth series, it had been modernised and transformed many times.

The third is that, although I thought Christopher Eccleston did a good job as the ninth Doctor, he seemed quite hard in the earlier episodes. He did soften in the later ones, and I thought he was an excellent choice to introduce Doctor Who to a 21st century audience. 

Rose, we thought, was a very good companion. We weren’t too sure the first time around, as she looks a bit too like some of the rather fluffy companions of the past. But she has lots of determination and ideas, and The Doctor is evidently very taken with her. We’re glad to recall that she remains as companion to the Tenth Doctor in Series Two, which we hope to start watching next week. 

I would recommend this series very highly to anyone who likes this kind of TV show. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

The King's speech (Colin Firth)

(Amazon UK link)

It’s twelve years since we first watched ‘The King’s Speech’. We recalled liking it very much, despite our general lack of interest in royalty. It’s the story of King George VI’s ascension to the UK throne, with Colin Firth brilliantly starring in the title role. His performance is flawless. 

The story starts when his father King George V is still alive, though elderly. Michael Gambon is excellent as the grumpy monarch who feels a lot of frustration with his two adult sons. David (Guy Pearce), the elder, heir to the throne, is something of a womaniser. And while that’s not unusual for royalty, if discreet, he is currently involved with Mrs Wallace Simpson, an American who has already been married twice. At the time it was unthinkable that a monarch could be married to someone who was divorced. 

But the King rather despises his second son, known by the family as Bertie. Bertie is married to the beautiful Lizzie (Helena Bonham Carter), who is elegant, and charming, and very supportive of him. They have two young daughters, Elizabeth and Margaret. Bertie is shown as a fond father and loving husband. But he has a speech defect: a terrible stammer, which has affected him since early childhood.

To make things worse, he has to make speeches in public, some of which are broadcast on the ‘wireless’, as the early radio was known. And he is very nervous of the microphones, which tend to echo back everything he says, making him even more inclined to stammer. As his father becomes frailer, Bertie has to make more speeches, and feels increasingly humiliated. 

Lizzie has persuaded him to try working with several renowned speech therapists, none of whom has been the slightest use. Then she finds Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a specialist at Harley Street. His initial meeting with Bertie is not very encouraging, but Lionel is confident that he can help, if only Bertie will cooperate. He is very discreet, but insists on terms of equality. Although this leads to a lot of frustration at first, the two start to develop a relationship of trust, and eventually a real friendship. 

The story is superbly told, the pace exactly right to hold our interest, with some moments of mild humour which nicely contrast with the seriousness of the story. When David takes the throne as Edward VIII, he is unwilling to make any real decisions despite the likelihood of World War II breaking out. And he is torn, eventually (as is well known in 20th century history) abdicating for the sake of the woman he loves. 

So Bertie, who has been the Duke of York, has to take the throne. He adopts the name of King George VI, but he is not well respected due to his speech problems. Thus it becomes increasingly important for him to develop techniques that enable him to read a speech without stammering, particularly when he has to make important announcements over the radio. 

We see quite a few of the speech therapy sessions, in one of which Bertie is persuaded to swear since he doesn’t stammer while doing so. It’s the scene which has given this an ‘18’ rating in the US, as there are a large number of instances of ‘strong’ language. But, as our DVD says on the back, they are all in a speech therapy context, and the UK censors, rather more reasonably, have given it a ‘12’ rating. Were it not for this scene it might even have been PG, since there’s nothing else that would trigger warnings: no nudity or violence, and only hints at what Bertie’s brother is up to with Mrs Simpson.

We thought the principals were all extremely well cast: Jennifer Ehle as Lionel Logue’s wife Myrtle deserves a mention too; her expressions of shock are entirely realistic when she learns, unexpectedly, who her husband’s eminent client is. As for Helena Bonham Carter, we had forgotten that around the same time she was playing Bellatrix Lestrange in the Harry Potter series. We would not have recognised the same actress as the gentle, but firm young woman who was eventually to become known as the Queen Mother. 

However it was quite a jolt to see Winston Churchill played by Timothy Spall, looking almost exactly as he did when playing the traitorous Peter Pettigrew in the Harry Potter franchise. He did Churchill very well, as did the actors who played other important politicians and churchmen of the time. But it was a pity his face wasn’t made up to look more Churchillian.

That’s a very minor gripe in what was, overall, an excellent film that tells the true story in a believable and watchable way.   

We saw a couple of the ‘extras’ afterwards: a ‘making of’ documentary which was interesting, and a fascinating interview with the real Lionel Logue’s grandson, who had found a box of his grandfather’s diaries just a couple of months before the filming started.

I would highly recommend this film whether or not you have any interest in the British royal family.

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews

Relative values (Julie Andrews)

(Amazon UK link)

It’s nine years since we watched ‘Relative values’, and we had both entirely forgotten what it was about. That’s possibly because the plot isn’t all that memorable. But we watched it again yesterday evening, and thought it was good light entertainment. Apparently it was based on a Noel Coward play of the same name. 

The opening sequences are quite long and somewhat hectic, with newspaper announcements flashing up, and photos of film stars. It doesn’t make much sense but gives a hint of what’s to come. The story involves an American film star who has been romantically linked to other actors. But she is now engaged to be married to a British peer. 

Julie Andrews is one of the main characters in this 2000 film, which is set fifty or so years earlier. She is perfectly typecast as the widowed marchioness, Felicity Marshwood. We meet her discussing her son’s engagement with her maid and close companion whom she calls Moxie (Sophie Thompson). Neither is happy about him falling in love with someone unknown, who is not in their circles. And the engagement has happened far too rapidly for their tastes.

Julie Andrews is a great actress, but as she grew older she almost always seemed to play exactly the same kind of person. It was impossible to forget who she was, while we were watching the film. And at times Felicity reminded me forcibly of the grandmother in ‘The Princess Diaries’. Not that it mattered at all. 

The other family resident of the stately home is Felicity’s nephew Peter, played to perfection by Colin Firth. Again, the character was very much in keeping with many of the actor’s other roles, and we couldn’t forget who he was. But he and Julie Andrews have excellent screen chemistry in this film, and some of the humour comes from Peter’s rather sarcastic asides, given with excellent timing. 

The other famous actor in a typecast role is Stephen Fry as the butler Crestwell. Although rather older, he’s very similar to Jeeves, in the brilliant TV adaptations of PG Wodehouse’s iconic series. Perhaps he was specifically chosen for the role due to the similarity. 

Felicity’s son Nigel (Edward Atterton) arrives in a sports car with the flashy Miranda (Jeanne Triplehorne) who is welcomed, but rather clearly not popular. She admires the stately home, but isn’t entirely comfortable in it. Her agent - and former boyfriend - Don (William Baldwin) follows her and tries to persuade her to return to the United States with him to continue her career. He’s rather sleazy but although she resists, it’s evident that he’s not going to take ‘no’ for an answer…

There’s one extra subplot which relies on a huge coincidence but works well all the same. Felicity’s maid Moxie doesn’t feel that she can remain in the same household with Miranda visiting. When she eventually explains her reasoning, Felicity, Peter and Crestwell come up with a story to make her look different, and behave like a close family friend. It’s all a bit ridiculous but Moxie does this very well, and there’s a lot of humour in the interactions that take place over dinner. There’s also some poignancy and anger which arise later. 

The story is partly about class consciousness and snobbishness, and partly about some of the differences between American and British culture. It’s dated, as one would expect of a Coward story, set in the 1950s, but the people seem believable for the era, and the story, if somewhat ridiculous, works well as a film. We chuckled at one scene and smiled several times as it’s extremely well made. 

The outcome is somewhat predictable, with a nice little cameo scene at the end as the family go into church on a Sunday morning. We were a bit caught between eye-rolling at the snobbery and amusement at the way it was made. We didn't think it 'outstandingly funny' as the DVD case suggested, nor did we roar with laughter. But overall, I liked it very much.  

Recommended if you like this kind of film. 

The rating is PG which reflects the refreshing lack of bad language, nudity and scenes of intimacy.  But it's unlikely to be of interest to anyone under the age of at least fifteen. 

Review copyright 2024 Sue's DVD Reviews