musicnina Reviews

Close to Home (2005–2007)

Okay premise; poor delivery

[22 January 2006]

I keep waiting for this show to turn into something worthwhile. It has a fine cast, fairly decent plot ideas, and deals with popular subject matter -- but continues to have no character development, plot holes large enough to drive a Mac truck through, and dialogue that falls flat. Since somebody went to the trouble to move it into a slightly more promising time slot (sure, Friday nights stink -- but not as badly as opposite Law and Order: SVU when you're going for the same audience!), I sure hope they go to the trouble to find some decent writers. It might also behoove them to get some legal advice. There is generally at least one large legal error in each script -- unforgivable, when dealing with an audience that considers itself fairly sophisticated.

This show is designed for a classic CBS audience, the same audience that watched Murder She Wrote and Cold Case. Unfortunately, it will have to improve greatly to maintain that audience.

David Copperfield (1935)

Painful example of 30's cinema

[11 December 2004]

I've long been a fan of Dickens, and I usually prefer the old films to the new adaptations, but I'm afraid this one just doesn't work. Clara Copperfield is played with extreme melodrama -- much better suited for the stage. Perhaps as a result of sharing the screen with her, young Freddie Bartholomew is extremely painful to watch in most of the early scenes. Little Em'ly is played as a cute, talent-free toddler. Least over-blown of the child actors was the girl who played Agnes -- but she only had one scene! Most of the relationships between characters in this film are glossed over to such an extent that you simply must read the book in order to keep up. Steerforth comes in from nowhere, since the entire school situation is omitted. Barkis comes and goes in much the same way, and we don't really know why Mr. Micawber matters at all, except that he's W.C. Field. The most redeeming scenes are those with Betsey Trotwood, who is thoroughly eccentric and enjoyable to watch. Her characterization allows Mr. Dick and young Freddie to sparkle in a way most of the film lacks. I don't know the other film versions, or whether or not to recommend them, so I can merely suggest your time is better spent reading the book.

The Cowboys (1972)

John Wayne's good...Roscoe Lee Browne is better!

[10 January 2003]

This movie, for all that it's a fairly straight forward, shoot-em-up western, has some unique points that make it extremely artful. The boys were well-cast (though A. Martinez seemed to struggle in a role that was not fully developed), and those difficult psychological moments which were so important to the book translated to the screen without too much trouble. As is always the case, the book is able to take more time to expand upon the characters more thoroughly; if the movie left you a bit dry, visit the library to find the rest of the story!

The reasons I watch this show repeatedly are two of my favorite fellows: Roscoe Lee Browne and John Williams. Roscoe Lee Browne is able to sell lines that simply wouldn't work coming from somebody else (his dialogue with Coleen Dewhurst is priceless), and he is the unique feature that makes this film work. He graciously shares the screen with his co-actors as necessary, but he easily walks off with the movie nonetheless. John Williams' fantastic score could stand alone; though it is occasionally a little too cheery for the moment (after all, this is a pretty gruesome film, if you really think about it), it covers all the bases of the movie. Youthful innocence, becoming men, sorrow, success -- it's all right there in the score. Don't expect Star Wars music; frequently understated, the music carries a supporting role. As both John Williams and Roscoe Lee Browne displayed here, it is often the supporting actors that make the show a success!

Wild America (1997)

Really, it's not that bad!

[12 November 2002]

Despite the three young actors being "teen idols," they pulled off really good chemistry throughout the film. My primary faults with the film are not with the acting at all, but with the screenplay. Because of the writer's desire to put everything possible into one movie, he sabotaged its overall effectiveness. Is this a classic teen idol flick? Is it a nature film? Is it comedy/drama/action? It's really hard to say, as it doesn't succeed as any of the above! There are too many side-plots -- does the owl really need to be there? Or Leon? Or the man in the mountain? There are too many relationships given just a hint of substance, such as that with Mom, the town bully, the local girls, the college girls... In addition, Mark's character has little opportunity to develop, and the other boys leave a great deal to the imagination. And I ask you, is it necessary for Marshall to have three different nicknames? This is, unfortunately, one more movie that could have been really great. As it is, it is a fun film without enough substance.

On a side note, is there any particular reason that only one of the Stouffer brothers was involved in producing the show? I find that a little odd, myself.

Lady in White (1988)

An inconsequential film, but highly enjoyable

[10 November 2002]

This film is a low budget, late 80's horror film that dared to be different from most of that time and genre. Without the use of blood and gore, it succeeds in presenting some very haunting moments and images. The overall concept is muddied by extraneous side-plots, which are occasionally distracting and occasionally helpful to character development. Lukas Haas is one of very few children who could convincingly pull off this main role, and the supporting cast was strong; I felt, however, that more help from the director in the use of camera angles and timing was in order. The ending, unfortunately, is laughable, thus ruining much of the effect of the film. Overlooking that, I would happily watch and re-watch the movie for its kinder-gentler thrills. Perhaps this is not a film that deserves to live forever, but it makes for a pleasant evening.

A Walk to Remember (2002)

Standard, but innocent

[17 July 2002]

Surely this film has the best of intentions -- the Drab Girl proves to be wonderful, the Bad Boy with the heart of gold reforms, the Cool Kids regret their cruelty when they begin to reform, faithfulness is promoted as a virtue (how common is that these days?), and astronomy is billed as a great way to pick up girls! There is some objectionable dialogue (family-oriented readers be fore-warned!), but only one overly coarse scene. The reasons I didn't particularly enjoy this movie were simply the amazing triteness of the plot, the low-caliber acting skills of the main cast, and the ineffective dialogue. I'm glad that it is so popular -- there are many, much more harmful films out there -- but I can't help wishing it were generally of better quality. A sweet, simple story -- but it rivals most high-school productions for mediocrity.

Pleasantville (1998)

So, why are they changing colors?

[17 July 2002]

I didn't think I would enjoy this movie, let alone find it introspective and psychological. I was fairly certain it would be simply an anti-suburbia, anti-housewife, anti-fifties liberal comedy. None of which I generally enjoy. Frankly, I expected to turn it off within fifteen minutes. Obviously, I didn't. For one thing, Tobey Maguire was, as previously mentioned, is an Actor. (That can't be taken for granted in today's movies, unfortunately.) Also, my mother asked a very relevant question during the five minutes she watched: Why do the characters turn into color from black and white? I said it happened when they changed. But I don't think that summed it up. Many of the reviewers mention sex, liberation, and open-mindedness as reasons for the change. Before I saw the movie, I would have agreed. I've decided, though, that the difference is in depth. Depth of character, life, emotions -- these were what was lacking in Pleasantville. These were what was lacking in "Mary-Sue/Jennifer" and "Bud/David". It was realizing the innate depth of character of Real People, renouncing former shallowness as incomplete life, that made the characters more complete (ie. "colored"). How I wish there was a way for real teenagers to discover this as easily!

Not a perfect movie, though. I could really have done without all the sex stuff (along with the lack of morals encouraged by the kids). The ending was admittedly weak, but not enough to ruin the film, in my opinion. I especially liked the growth of "Bud's" character from the standard, shallow-but-pretends-to-be-deep social reject into someone who had a reason for his life. I thought this was aptly demonstrated in the final scenes, particularly in his choosing to go home.

Perhaps this is a film best rented, though not bought.

Haunted Honeymoon (1986)

A bizarre late-night laugh

[5 January 2002]

This is the sort of off-the-wall comedy that is perfect for the wee hours -- so long as you don't wake up the rest of the household, either screaming or laughing! DeLuise and Radner were especially good (as you might expect) -- it would be hard to beat their duet of "Balling the Jack." If you're looking for a logical plotline, you will have to go elsewhere. There are more twists and turns and unresolved moments than actual dialogue, I believe. However, if totally bizarre is what you're after, this is it! I found it thoroughly enjoyable.

Lady Audley's Secret (2000 TV Movie)

An interesting opportunity for character study

[8/10 · 12 August 2001]

I thoroughly enjoyed this film, even though it's not something I would generally pick up to watch. I think it is a bit bizarre that Lady Audley was created for "Mystery" -- the mystery portion itself was the least interesting. The challenge both for actors and audience lies in trying to uncover what makes these characters tick. Especially good is Julliette Caton, as the ingenuous Alicia; the best part of the story is watching her grow up. It was also impossible to think badly of Jamie Bamber's George Talboys, who seemed like a genuinely great guy. I plan to check the library for the book, because there are complexities that cannot be explored properly in a television special.

If you are looking for Poirot, pass this by. I would place this more along the lines of a dark Jane Austen novel.