Tara Road (Andie MacDowell, Olivia Williams)

(Amazon UK link)

I thoroughly enjoyed rereading Maeve Binchy’s lengthy novel ‘Tara Road’ in November last year. Then I noticed a DVD of a film adaptation, which was mostly well-rated, so I put it on my wishlist and was given it for my birthday a few months ago. We decided to watch it last night.

I realised there would have to be a lot of abridgement, to fit the novel into just an hour and a half, and I thought it was done very well. The DVD opens with a brief scene at a party, obviously caught on video, which leads to a terrible tragedy. It’s not something that actually comes into the book, and isn’t mentioned until near the end, but it works very well as a dramatic opening of this adaptation.

The main characters, Marilyn (Andie MacDowell) and Ria (Olivia Williams) are then introduced at the start, with action switching from one to the other. That, too, is different from the book; the first half of the book is only about Ria, and covers her teenage years, her romance and marriage to the handsome Danny (Iain Glenn), and the birth of their two children, Annie and Brian. The story in the film starts when Annie is already a teenager, clashing sometimes with her mother. 

So we know, from the start, why Marilyn wants time away from her husband Greg (August Zirner), and we see, very early in the film, why Danny and Ria separate - that doesn’t happen until half-way through the book. But then, most of the background and many of the minor characters aren’t necessary to the plot, although they add to the enjoyment of the story when reading. I thought Annie and Brian were excellent, very true to the characters in the book. 

Still, the main characters and their families are very recognisable from the book. Marilyn and Ria agree to swapping houses for the summer, and we see them slowly adjusting to each other’s cultures. Marilyn is much more reserved than Ria; this isn’t really shown in her American life, but is clear when she gently rebuffs some local attempts at socialising. And Ria, who is very sociable, befriends Marilyn’s neighbours, hosts parties, and even finds a temporary job. The neighbours and restaurant owners are caricatures, but that isn’t a problem: there’s some gentle humour which is a nice balance to the traumas and tragedies that have taken place.

The theme is of healing and growth in a new environment. Ria starts to move on and find new meanings to her life, while Marilyn slowly opens up about why she is so unhappy. Both of them meet men who are attracted to them, and both experience some temptations as well as making new decisions. I found Marilyn and Greg entirely believable; Ria is very well done, but feels a lot younger than I had imagined her. The actress was apparently in her late thirties when the film was made, but looks about twenty-five.

There’s also an important thread in the film involving Danny’s business, selling houses. Danny is a womaniser, as we learn early on, and not very reliable. But he seems to have been working honestly; so it’s a shock when his boss declares bankruptcy. This leads to some of the tension later in the film (as happens in the book) and the resolution is nicely done. 

Ria’s friend Rosemary (Maria Doyle Kennedy) is a lot stronger - and nicer - as a character in the book than she is in the film. Watching the movie, I couldn’t quite believe that she was such a close friend of Ria’s. But then we learn, early in the film, what she does that Ria doesn’t know about. It’s a shocking twist in the book; yet something obvious that is shown early on in the film, which makes her generally a less likeable character.

But given that the story had to be condensed so significantly, I thought it was very well done. My husband had never read the book, and he thought it an excellent film. The main characters are believable, and there’s a nice blend of humour and pathos. There’s some lovely images of the different locations, and some musical background, though I had not realise just how many until I saw the credits at the end.

The rating is PG which reflects the lack of nudity, bad language and intimate scenes. The opening scene is potentially quite disturbing, and the only other somewhat violent scene is dramatic and exaggerated; nobody is hurt. 

It’s unlikely to be of any interest to children or younger teens anyway. If you’ve read and love Maeve Binchy’s book, you might love it, as I did, or might find it a travesty as so much is left out. So if you’re a fan of the book ‘Tara Road’, I’d only suggest watching this if you’re happy to put aside any preconceptions and enjoy it for what it is.

But overall, we both enjoyed it very much.  And with the above caveat, I would recommend it to anyone who would like a well-made and thoughtful drama with a satisfying ending. 

There are no extras on our DVD.

Review copyright 2025 Sue's DVD Reviews

Groundhog Day (Bill Murray)

(Amazon UK link)

It’s at least ten years since we watched ‘Groundhog Day’, a 1993 film which is now considered a classic. Indeed, until this film became popular, the concept of ‘Groundhog Day’ was barely known outside the US. It referred (as we discover at the start of the film) to the superstition regarding a groundhog’s shadow on February 2nd foretelling whether or not winter was due to end.

We first saw this film at the cinema, and liked it very much. So, when we began collecting DVDs, around the year 2000 and later, this was one which I bought when it was on special offer at one of the online sites. We probably watched it around that date, but had not seen it again since then.

The film stars Bill Murray as a somewhat cynical TV weather reporter called Phil. Each year he travels to the small town of Punxsutawney where the groundhog - also called Phil - is consulted by the town dignitaries. Phil isn’t particularly keen on covering this story yet again, but sets off with his producer Rita (Andie McDowell) and the camera operator and driver Larry (Chris Elliot). They make their report, and decide to get back to Pittsburgh that night. But they’re stopped by a blizzard and have to return for another night.

When Phil wakes up the following morning, it’s February 2nd again. Nobody else seems to realise, but he goes through the same procedures, meeting the same people, becoming more and more confused and ending up stopped by the blizzard once more…

It’s no real spoiler to say that this state of affairs continues for some time. The phrase ‘Groundhog Day’ has come into common parlance meaning something like ‘ongoing deja vu’, or events repeating themselves, as a result of this film. Phil is at first mystified, then irritated, then decides he is so frustrated that the only way out is to kill himself. Some of the scenes that follow could be considered disturbing, but are done for comic effect… and each time he wakes up again at 6.00 on February 2nd, to the same music and banter on his clock radio.

He then decides to use this mysterious repetition of his days to learn new things about other people, in particular his producer Rita, whom he finds attractive. She is at first inclined to distrust him, but he gradually learns more about her likes and dislikes, and adjusts his own behaviour and conversation to suit her better. He changes in himself, too, becoming slowly less cynical and more humanitarian in his outlook.

The story of course is entirely surreal, and we never learn why this odd repetition of Groundhog Day keeps happening. But it works well as a story of self-discovery; of being forced to take stock, and to discover what really matters. I had forgotten most of the detail, other than the fact that Phil takes piano lessons, going from total beginner to concert pianist level in what appears to be a short time. But the day was supposed to repeat itself thousands of times, even though we don’t see every detail.

It’s a very well-made film, in my view, showing just enough to understand what is happening without overdoing it. There’s plenty of humour, but it’s mostly understated, and the inevitable slapstick in places isn’t repeated too many times. Phil is at first quite manipulative, once he adjusts to his bizarre repetitive lifestyle, but gradually discovers what really matters in life.

The rating is PG in both the US and UK, and I think that’s about right. There’s only the mildest of language, and a couple of passionate scenes go no further than kissing. The suicide attempts aren’t gratuitously violent but could be disturbing to a young child, or anyone who has lost someone in this way. I don’t think a child would find the film interesting anyway, though it might appeal to teenagers.

All in all, we enjoyed ‘Groundhog Day’ very much, and I look forward to seeing it again in another nine or ten years.

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews

Dinner with Friends (Andie MacDowell, Dennis Quaid)

(Amazon UK link)

I’m not entirely sure why this DVD was recommended to me by Amazon. However, the blurb and reviews made it sound interesting, so it went on my wishlist, and I was given it for my birthday a few months ago. Last night we decided, along with an adult son, to watch it. I chose it out of the selection he was looking at because it was the shortest, and I was tired…

‘Dinner with Friends’ is apparently based on a play of the same name. This makes a great deal of sense in retrospect. It was originally made for TV, back in 2001. There are only four significant characters, which is quite unusual in a film. Karen (Andie MacDowell) and Gabe (Dennis Quaid) are the main pair. They’ve been married for about twelve years, and work together as food photographers and reporters. They have recently returned from a trip abroad, and we meet them when they, and their young sons, are expecting their closest friends to dinner.

Beth (Toni Collette) arrives in pouring rain, along with her two children. But her husband Tom (Greg Kinnear) is not with her. She makes an excuse but it’s clear that there’s a problem. Gabe and Karen seem remarkably unobservant and tactless, and she eventually breaks down and admits that he’s left her, after falling in love with a travel agent called Nancy….

The rest of the story is about Gabe and Karen coming to terms with this shock, and re-evaluating their own relationship. We hear Tom’s side of the story, and then there’s a lengthy flashback to the time when Gabe and Karen were newly married, and looking forward to their two close friends getting to know each other….

The first half hour or so was really quite depressing, full of angst, and not at all the kind of light-hearted story I was expecting. Perhaps I should have read the blurb on the back rather than merely the length. But as it progressed, I found myself caught up in the lives of these two couples. There’s not a great deal of plot; it’s an exploration of character and relationships. I found it to be realistic, on the whole. Neither couple is portrayed as ideal, and even the best of marriages is shown to have tensions, misunderstandings and some anger.

While Karen’s strongly Southern accent is a little difficult to understand at times, she gives a great performance. The chemistry between her and Gabe works extremely well. Tom, too, is mostly convincing, but we found Beth a little fake at times. As a young bohemian artist she is believable; towards the end, having lunch with Karen, she is also authentic. But we couldn’t quite believe in her grief-stricken and angry phase, which is the main part of the movie.

The children have occasional bit parts which are realistic, and they all did well in a film which, presumably, they weren’t able to see in its entirety as it’s not intended for children. I didn’t find any of it humorous, though there were odd mildly amusing moments, mostly connected with the children.

I didn’t like the amount of bad language, which is probably what gives this a 15 rating in the UK, and R in the stricter United States. There’s a fair amount of discussion about sexual issues too, which would also make this unsuitable for children or younger teens, but there’s nothing explicit, nor any nudity, and the one mildly violent scene is not particularly disturbing.

I can’t imagine that the content would be of interest to anyone younger than about twenty or so anyway as it’s essentially all about marriage, long-term friendship, and growing older.

I found the ending encouraging and positive, and by that stage was completely engrossed in it.

No extras.

Review copyright 2016 Sue's DVD Reviews

Four Weddings and a Funeral (Hugh Grant)

(Amazon UK link)

We saw this film at the cinema, back in the early 1990s when it was first made. We thought it very well done, but shocking in places, although quite thought-provoking in others. I remembered it as amusing but bitter-sweet. And when we first started collecting DVDs, around twelve years ago, I saw that ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’ was considered a classic. It was on special offer, so we bought it.

My husband and our teenage sons watched it, shortly afterwards, but I don’t think I saw it at the time. Perhaps I felt uncomfortable with teenagers around, although both were over 15. In any case, it’s been sitting on our shelves for many years, until I decided it would be good to see it again on Sunday afternoon. We sat down with our 20-something son, who also hadn’t seen it for some years.

The style is immediately dated, but suggests a light-hearted story. However, I’d forgotten that after setting the scene rather cleverly, seeing people arriving for a society wedding, the first speech is a series of expletives. What would be listed as ‘strong’ language is uttered because the hero, Charles (Hugh Grant, looking remarkably young) oversleeps on a morning when he’s supposed to be Best Man. He and his sister Scarlett (Charlotte Coleman) make it to the wedding just in time, but then he realises he’s forgotten the rings….

Charles and Scarlett, we quickly discover, are close friends with a diverse group of people, all of whom are single. They regularly attend weddings but are more inclined to casual relationships than commitment. Charles, in particular, seems commitment-phobic, although he’s very attracted to Carrie (Andie McDowell) whom he meets at the wedding.

The story really does encompass little more than four weddings and a funeral, not quite in that order. The second wedding is an unexpected result of the first one and follows a similar pattern…. except that Carrie has some news that shocks Charles to the core.

It’s a relationship-based story, a series of sub-plots and interactions rather than a single plot, with Charles as the main character, everything seen from his perspective. Hugh Grant manages this part to perfection, in an almost Bertie Wooster style of an upper-middle class well-meaning but often bumbling Englishman. It’s the role which put him in the public eye, and which probably spawned many of his later and better-known roles.

Other characters are rather more stereotyped, particularly the participants in the second wedding; that didn’t matter too much, and the caricatured roles of some of Charles’ friends helped me to keep them separate in my mind. We particularly enjoyed the lively and highly eccentric Gareth (Simon Callow), and the cameo role for Rowan Atkinson as a new and very nervous priest.

The one slight disappointment in the casting is Carrie herself, supposedly the romantic lead, but with little to recommend her other than her looks. She doesn’t feel quite real; she’s hardly a role model (she admits to being highly promiscuous, not to mention materialistic). Yet she’s not a humorous exaggerated American, but the female romantic lead. The chemistry - and growing friendship - really doesn’t work.

There’s a great deal of humour in the film, most of it understated but cleverly done. The comic timing is perfect, and we found ourselves chuckling more than once. It makes the shocking parts stand out all the more; and the recital of a poem at the one funeral is extremely moving. I recall finding that (or what it implied) rather shocking when I first saw the film over 20 years ago; it was a theme that wasn’t explored nearly so often as it is today. It made an excellent point about love - real love - transcending all boundaries and cultural expectations.

The 15 rating is still appropriate; the ‘strong’ language is there for effect, and it might well be down-rated to a 12 by today’s standards if that were all. But there are several rather overt scenes of intimacy; no nudity as such, but several scenes that lead little to the imagination. It’s rated R in the United States.

Overall, we enjoyed it very much and I would recommend it in general to older teens and adults. But if you’re offended by strong language or overt sexuality, this is probably one to avoid.

Review copyright 2015 Sue's DVD Reviews<