My Best Friend's Wedding (Julia Roberts)

(Amazon UK link)

We were given the DVD of ‘My Best Friend’s Wedding’ for Christmas eleven years ago, after I had put it on my wishlist. I didn’t have any idea what it was about, but Amazon recommended it and the reviews were mostly positive. We watched it in January 2009, and last night decided it was time to see it again.

With a gap of almost eleven years, we had almost entirely forgotten what the film was about. Julia Roberts stars as Julianne, a woman in her twenties who works for a very likeable gay boss called George (Rupert Everett). Out of the blue, she gets a phone call from her best friend Michael (Dermot Mulroney). She was just thinking about him, realising that they had made a jokey promise to marry each other if neither was wed by the time they were 28 - and that date is fast approaching.

However, Michael is ringing to tell Julianne that he is about to get married to someone else. She’s younger than he is, and he’s quite nervous about it and would like his best friend to be there. Julianne realises that she loves him herself, with more than just the affection of close friends. So she flies to the wedding, purportedly to support him and make friends with the beautiful Kimberley (Cameron Diaz) - but hoping to steal Michael for herself.

It’s not the usual storyline, but it’s very well done. Julianne is really quite unpleasant in some of her methods; she tells herself she’s doing them both a favour, that Kimberley is really too young for Michael and won’t deal with his jet-setting lifestyle. She succeeds in making them both increasingly tense, and while much of it’s amusing, I felt almost uncomfortable at times. I could not remember how the film ended; but by the time it was half-way through I was rooting for Kimberley.

Although some of Julianne’s ideas are quite nasty, the film is tinged with humour. There are some clever pieces of dialogue, some great choreography, and a scene where the two women get into a fight… surrounded by other women, cheering them on. It’s not a deep film, and there wasn’t anything much to ponder at the end; but I thought it an enjoyable, relaxing piece of escapism.

One scene that came back to me, as it developed, was the final one - it would be a spoiler to say what happens, but it gave a positive slant to what might have been a bittersweet conclusion.

The rating is 12 (PG-13 in the US) and I’d say that’s about right. There are inevitable sexual references, and one instance of very strong language, but nothing explicit. There are a few shots of people in scanty clothing or underwear, but no nudity, even partial. There’s no real violence, and I would be happy to show this to teenagers of around fourteen or fifteen, if they were interested in this kind of film.

My husband liked it too, and I would certainly recommend it to anyone who enjoys the light romantic comedy genre.

For more information about this film, and a brief trailer, see My Best Friend's Wedding at the IMDb site.

Review copyright 2019 Sue's DVD Reviews

A Midsummer Night's Dream (1999)

(Amazon UK link)

We have watched one or two films based on Shakespeare plays in the past and liked them very much. So when I saw the 1999 film version of ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’ at a church sale, it was an easy decision to buy it. We noticed a few well-known actors and actresses listed, and finally watched it yesterday evening.

Rather than being set in the 15th and 16th centuries, the film is set at the start of the 19th century, in Italy. So the clothes and some of the settings are rather more modern than would be expected, in particular several bicycles. But the language is Shakespeare’s.

I don’t know how true to the original play the script is as I haven't read it in many years. There may have been additions or deletions. But I certainly recognised many of the more famous speeches or dialogues, and it felt authentic. And as when seeing any Shakespeare production, the text became easy to understand after the first few minutes, once my ears were attuned to the style. The cast have a slightly odd mixture of English and American accents that jarred a little at first, but we gradually got used to that, too. 

The story is well-known. It's set both in the real world of autocratic fathers and unrequited love, and also the woodland full of fairies and sprites. Two young men, Demetrius (Christian Bale) and Lysander (Dominic West), are both in love with a girl called Hermia (Anna Freil). She loves one, but her father wants her to marry the other. And he threatens her with death or a convent if she fails to do his bidding.

Hermia’s friend Helena (Calista Flockhart) is in love with Demetrius, but he ignores her. And while I found Hermia quite believable, Helena’s histrionics felt exaggerated and fake at times. Perhaps it’s in keeping with a Shakespeare comedy - there’s certainly plenty of exaggeration later - but I didn’t much like Helena. Hermia and Lysander decide to run away into the forest, and their friends follow… only to be caught up in the fairyland world, in particular the mischievous sprite Puck, brilliantly played by Stanley Tucci. I had thought of Puck as a much younger lad, but could almost believe in this one.

Michelle Pfeiffer is excellent as the slighted queen of the fairies, Titania, who is bewitched to fall in love with the weaver known as Bottom (Kevin Kline). Rupert Everett makes a good Oberon too. The real and fairyland worlds weave together very well, fairies shown as mischievous, liking drink and dancing and various kinds of carousing.

The scenery, the magical effects and the acting and directing were all excellent, we thought, even if there was rather more implied intimacy than I had ever seen before in productions of this play. While there’s nothing untoward shown, there are several scenes where it’s obvious that couples are naked, and in at least one of them it is very clear what is about to happen.

Shakespeare’s plays are full of innuendoes and bawdiness, but it was rather more overt in this production than in the live theatre I have seen previously. So I was a little surprised that it was only rated PG, at least in the UK. The US has rated it PG-13 and I feel that would be more appropriate.

That apart, I would recommend this very highly, if you don’t mind a rather different style of production. It was very amusing in places, and we enjoyed it thoroughly.

Review copyright 2019 Sue's DVD Reviews

The Importance of Being Earnest (2002)

(Amazon UK link)

There are some stories that form part of national consciousness, it seems to me. I don’t think I have ever read or seen Romeo and Juliet, for instance, yet I know the story well. I don’t recall when I first knew about ‘The Importance of being Earnest’, Oscar Wilde’s classic play set in the late 19th century. But I feel as if I’ve always been aware it was about upper class foibles, deception, and of course a pun on the name ‘Earnest’.

I’m pretty sure I saw a film version years ago, probably the 1952 version, which is - apparently - fairly true to the original. My memory is of most of it taking place indoors, in formal drawing-rooms, but I also recall finding it quite confusing. I read the book on my Kindle a few years ago, and was surprised how much I enjoyed it. 

When my husband suggested watching our DVD of the play last night, I somehow thought it would be the version I had seen before. I don’t remember when we acquired it. Perhaps it was part of a special offer, back in the days when I was trying to buy classic films on DVD to start a collection.

I turned out that we have the 2002 film adaptation of the book, with Dame Judi Dench playing Lady Bracknell, the overbearing matriarch. Colin Firth stars as the young man Jack Worthing who has invented a brother called Ernest. When he goes into town, ‘for pleasure’, as he puts it, he assumes the identity of Ernest. Jack’s friend Algie (Rupert Bracknell) is Lady Bracknell’s nephew, and very keen to meet Jack’s ward, 18-year-old Cecily. Jack, meanwhile, is in love with Lady Bracknell’s daughter Gwendolen (Frances O’Connor).

The film is produced on a larger scale than the earlier versions, with scenes in London clubs and streets, and a lot of the story taking place outside. A young Reese Witherspoon is excellent as the imaginative, beautiful Cecily, her upper class British accent so perfect that we forgot her American nationality. I was also very impressed with Anna Massey as her elderly governess Miss Prism. As with the play, there are only seven main characters, plus a couple of minor ones, although we see plenty of extras in the outdoor scenes.

Most of the text is straight from Oscar Wilde’s play, as far as I can tell, although it’s somewhat cut down. I don’t think anything new was added, but am not familiar enough with the text to say for certain, and have no plans to re-read the play to check. Whether or not it was all Wilde, it was in the right style and despite the somewhat caricatured nature of the people and ridiculous twists of the plot, it was very enjoyable to watch. I appreciated the low key humour and satire, and thought Judi Dench superb in a role which, apparently, she had previously played on stage. Lady Bracknell has some wonderful lines, and she delivers them perfectly.

There are a few extras on the DVD showing the ‘making of’ the film with a few deleted or edited scenes, but all quite short and without adding more than a few glimpses of the cast and crew working together.

The rating is U (PG in the US), probably because there’s no sensuality beyond some kissing and a few innuendoes, no violence other than a couple of mild humorous scenes, and only the mildest of bad language. There’s plenty of drinking and smoking which is appropriate in the historic context of the play, but it’s not the kind of storyline to interest anyone under the age of about thirteen (or older) anyway.

Overall we enjoyed this very much.

Review copyright 2018 Sue's DVD Reviews