I mean... yes... nice premisse, nice plot. Some good actors. And I read that the costume department got awarded. Okay... but.... the production value is a bit low here. It is also very obvious that all the actors had to dub their own voices.... it feels a bit like a film student's exercise. The storyline jumps are at times a bit rough, and the characters are looking a bit too much 'real time'. If you know what I mean. You see actors sitting in a set, with costumes on. It is hard to get lost in this film because you are so much aware that there are actors acting, in sets with costumes on speaking lines from a script. That being said: I think there should be a remake of this film, with a higher budget. I like the idea of an upper-class house where the residents and the servants all live their own free lives hidden from the rest of the world. And of course more problems would arise, which are not shown in here. When servants become equals and hold secrets, they become real people demanding more space, more rights. When done like this, this could be a series.
14 Reviews
An unconventional (but a bit cheap feeling) period comedic drama.
laslopaniflex6 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
*Spoilers within*
There are a number of extreme reviews for this film, either really harsh or overtly positive that seemed to have been written by friends of the filmmakers.
I wanted to give a fair and balanced review, to give a more in-depth look at the pros and cons so I researched the production and learnt a little more about the cast and crew.
Plot and script:
Lady Penelope (not from Thunderbirds!) is in an arranged marriage to Mr Jonathan Alexander. They move to the country where Penelope is left isolated while Jonathan has a gay affair with George the butler. After the gardener is accidentally crushed to death, he is replaced by Richard Reynolds, the love of Penelope. Both couples become aware of the affairs and team up to hide them from outside parties and therefore become The Scandalous Four !
The script was improvised by a lot of the cast, using a rough treatment from the director. This is evident in some of the dialogue, which is often meandering and some of the expositional dialogue is pretty cack-handed. The plot is also a bit all over the place. It takes a while for the story to get going and then a whole bunch of sub plots come out of nowhere. It's 40 minutes into the film before Richard (the love of Penelope) comes back into the film after his introduction in the opening 10 minutes. I'd almost forgotten he was still in the film by that point!
In the final third, Penelope falls into a random plot coma and suddenly George the butler is announced as an expert shaman (!?!?!?) and proceeds to get Richard and Mr Alexander to help him perform some kind of pagan séance to bring her back from her coma. Where did that all come from??
There is also a superfluous voice over from Penelope explaining what is blatantly obvious on screen. "I was feeling isolated and sad" she states over shots of her looking isolated and sad. Really? Come on, give your audience a bit more credit!!
That said, the overall story is (sort of ) there. Two separate couples teaming up to hide their affairs from the prejudiced outside world (their country house being something of an isolated safe haven of tolerance and acceptance) and become a unconventional family together gives it some narrative thread. But this plot line is often lost and muddled.
The Actors:
Samantha Hills as Penelope has the difficult task of carrying the film. I thought she did a decent job as our protagonist into the story, but there were a lot of factors that had a detriment to her performance. She had a likable presence and, even with the pointless and dull voice over, I was engaged in her story.
Alistair Lock plays George with a humanity and subtle wit and shares good chemistry with Meredith Colechester as the conflicted Mr Alexander. The gay relationship developing and potentially tearing them apart works well for the story.
Jez Hughes as Richard is definitely a weak link in the acting. He has no chemistry/passion with Penelope and his delivery is flat and unengaging.
There's also some decent cameos from the fun maids, Penelope's flirty friend Reginalda and Cuthbert an oafish Canadian bring some nice comedic touches. Chris Butler and Gayle Dudley bring some much needed tension as a sinister priest and Penelope's shrewish Mother.
Directing:
Director Christianne Van Wijk has taken on an ambitious project for her first feature. There is a definite style/tone at play here, with a nice dry comedy, such as an amusing montage of terrible potential husbands for Penelope or scenes of drama/tension that are well handled (such as Penelope confronting Mr Alexander when he challenges her on her affair) Overall the balance of wry comedy and romantic drama is pitched well.
The themes of tolerance, love and acceptance give the film a positive message, and making a period drama with elements of comedy with an uplifting happy ending was a welcome change to similar types of drama. But a lot of those themes were buried/lost with random or pointless scenes. The spiritual based third act seems like a different film, is pretty cringey and veers into unintentional comedy.
Editing and cinematography:
It's fair to say the editing is definitely one of the weaker elements. It all felt very sluggish and made the film seem very cheap. The film is far too long which deflates any potential intrigue or drama (especially with the pointless voice over). It also doesn't do any of the actors any favours. They are clearly amateur and some of the badly edited scenes highlights their inability at times rather than emphasising their performances. The cinematography is also not flattering to them and the lighting/colour grading makes the whole thing seem a bit cheap and awkward.
Conclusion:
This genre has a high pedigree of production value, like Downton Abbey and big budget movies based on Jane Austen novels etc. As Scandalous 4 will be compared to that standard I think the director and producers should have done a lot more to make their film comparable to those productions. I appreciate the film was a no budget production, however the director also edited the film but needed to do a lot more. When you don't have big named actors/slick production values, you need to do everything else in your power to make your story engaging and stand up as an enjoyable viewing experience to the audience. And the story and themes would have been interesting enough to carry the drama, but the execution let it down. That said, if you fancy trying out something unconventional with an offbeat feel and can look past the amateurness of the production, you may find some fun elements.
There are a number of extreme reviews for this film, either really harsh or overtly positive that seemed to have been written by friends of the filmmakers.
I wanted to give a fair and balanced review, to give a more in-depth look at the pros and cons so I researched the production and learnt a little more about the cast and crew.
Plot and script:
Lady Penelope (not from Thunderbirds!) is in an arranged marriage to Mr Jonathan Alexander. They move to the country where Penelope is left isolated while Jonathan has a gay affair with George the butler. After the gardener is accidentally crushed to death, he is replaced by Richard Reynolds, the love of Penelope. Both couples become aware of the affairs and team up to hide them from outside parties and therefore become The Scandalous Four !
The script was improvised by a lot of the cast, using a rough treatment from the director. This is evident in some of the dialogue, which is often meandering and some of the expositional dialogue is pretty cack-handed. The plot is also a bit all over the place. It takes a while for the story to get going and then a whole bunch of sub plots come out of nowhere. It's 40 minutes into the film before Richard (the love of Penelope) comes back into the film after his introduction in the opening 10 minutes. I'd almost forgotten he was still in the film by that point!
In the final third, Penelope falls into a random plot coma and suddenly George the butler is announced as an expert shaman (!?!?!?) and proceeds to get Richard and Mr Alexander to help him perform some kind of pagan séance to bring her back from her coma. Where did that all come from??
There is also a superfluous voice over from Penelope explaining what is blatantly obvious on screen. "I was feeling isolated and sad" she states over shots of her looking isolated and sad. Really? Come on, give your audience a bit more credit!!
That said, the overall story is (sort of ) there. Two separate couples teaming up to hide their affairs from the prejudiced outside world (their country house being something of an isolated safe haven of tolerance and acceptance) and become a unconventional family together gives it some narrative thread. But this plot line is often lost and muddled.
The Actors:
Samantha Hills as Penelope has the difficult task of carrying the film. I thought she did a decent job as our protagonist into the story, but there were a lot of factors that had a detriment to her performance. She had a likable presence and, even with the pointless and dull voice over, I was engaged in her story.
Alistair Lock plays George with a humanity and subtle wit and shares good chemistry with Meredith Colechester as the conflicted Mr Alexander. The gay relationship developing and potentially tearing them apart works well for the story.
Jez Hughes as Richard is definitely a weak link in the acting. He has no chemistry/passion with Penelope and his delivery is flat and unengaging.
There's also some decent cameos from the fun maids, Penelope's flirty friend Reginalda and Cuthbert an oafish Canadian bring some nice comedic touches. Chris Butler and Gayle Dudley bring some much needed tension as a sinister priest and Penelope's shrewish Mother.
Directing:
Director Christianne Van Wijk has taken on an ambitious project for her first feature. There is a definite style/tone at play here, with a nice dry comedy, such as an amusing montage of terrible potential husbands for Penelope or scenes of drama/tension that are well handled (such as Penelope confronting Mr Alexander when he challenges her on her affair) Overall the balance of wry comedy and romantic drama is pitched well.
The themes of tolerance, love and acceptance give the film a positive message, and making a period drama with elements of comedy with an uplifting happy ending was a welcome change to similar types of drama. But a lot of those themes were buried/lost with random or pointless scenes. The spiritual based third act seems like a different film, is pretty cringey and veers into unintentional comedy.
Editing and cinematography:
It's fair to say the editing is definitely one of the weaker elements. It all felt very sluggish and made the film seem very cheap. The film is far too long which deflates any potential intrigue or drama (especially with the pointless voice over). It also doesn't do any of the actors any favours. They are clearly amateur and some of the badly edited scenes highlights their inability at times rather than emphasising their performances. The cinematography is also not flattering to them and the lighting/colour grading makes the whole thing seem a bit cheap and awkward.
Conclusion:
This genre has a high pedigree of production value, like Downton Abbey and big budget movies based on Jane Austen novels etc. As Scandalous 4 will be compared to that standard I think the director and producers should have done a lot more to make their film comparable to those productions. I appreciate the film was a no budget production, however the director also edited the film but needed to do a lot more. When you don't have big named actors/slick production values, you need to do everything else in your power to make your story engaging and stand up as an enjoyable viewing experience to the audience. And the story and themes would have been interesting enough to carry the drama, but the execution let it down. That said, if you fancy trying out something unconventional with an offbeat feel and can look past the amateurness of the production, you may find some fun elements.
a story that deserves better production
OJT8 October 2022
Well, 5,3 on imdb is about right, so do not listen to all but one (so far) giving this a 10 or 9 out of ten. Well that is purely ridiculous.
The film starts out NOT well played, NOT filmed very well, NOT stylish, NOT well instructed, and sound is like it's put on in a studio.
So how then could this be a 10/10!?
Well, the film strangely gets better half an hour in. Even production values.
But worst is the instruction in the start, which is like a partly bad comedy, but it takes on to a better path.
That is, if you can see through all this, the film is watchable and to some degree an OK film, but it's not worth more than a 6/10 in my book.
This story would have deserved so much more.
The film starts out NOT well played, NOT filmed very well, NOT stylish, NOT well instructed, and sound is like it's put on in a studio.
So how then could this be a 10/10!?
Well, the film strangely gets better half an hour in. Even production values.
But worst is the instruction in the start, which is like a partly bad comedy, but it takes on to a better path.
That is, if you can see through all this, the film is watchable and to some degree an OK film, but it's not worth more than a 6/10 in my book.
This story would have deserved so much more.
This is embarrassing
rejnkarlgren-5786026 September 2023
This is an embarrassing piece. The directing is poorly done, the acting is bad, the script is terrible, the dialogue is stumbling and have resemblance to a porno and the editing isn't thigh enough. Even some of the camera angles is questionable. The milieus and some of the costumes are pretty nice, even though it fail accomplish the feeling of older times.
The only reason for me not to give this the lowest rating is because something MAY be worse somewhere at some point. I just don't know how. Maybe you can feel enjoyment with this if you see it with someone with a sense of humor and have a really good laugh. It's a terrible performance in almost every sense.
The only reason for me not to give this the lowest rating is because something MAY be worse somewhere at some point. I just don't know how. Maybe you can feel enjoyment with this if you see it with someone with a sense of humor and have a really good laugh. It's a terrible performance in almost every sense.
This film had so much potential
chanellfoster25 October 2022
The story is great, had all the makings of a great period drama but unfortunately the production and budget are awful. I couldn't stop watching though because I really wanted to know what happened as the story could is really good.
The costumes are not bad, the houses are lovely but the editing seems sharp and does not flow as it could. It seems they saved in all the wrong places. The acting was not terrible but it was no Keira Knightley or Rosamund Pike from Pride and Prejudice.
Overall not unwatchable but won't watch it again, which is a shame as I love a good period drama and could watch them over and over again.
The costumes are not bad, the houses are lovely but the editing seems sharp and does not flow as it could. It seems they saved in all the wrong places. The acting was not terrible but it was no Keira Knightley or Rosamund Pike from Pride and Prejudice.
Overall not unwatchable but won't watch it again, which is a shame as I love a good period drama and could watch them over and over again.
BAD BAD BAD
geewhiz469 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Within the first two minutes I was wondering what I had let myself in for.
It is set in the nineteenth century or thereabouts - maybe earlier.
A somewhat chubby heroine is choosing a potential husband from a crew of particularly unattractive males.
She chooses one - although she is in love with her music teacher - hmm - why - he has no charisma and even fewer acting skills.
After finding out about her husband's orientation and his connection to the butler - she is lonely and frustrated - but hey - when their gardener is fatally rolled over, back comes her music teacher who can somehow replace him because he liked walking in the garden after a music lesson.
When she sees him it's all systems go, and they start an affair.
Her husband sees them and is jealous - thinking back, of whom was he jealous? - maybe her - because her lover was certainly more attractive than his.
They enter a woke wonderland of free love until she falls ill - out of the blue - no reason given. But it does give George a chance to shake out his Shaman gear and save her life.
Such absolute nonsense.
But what do you expect when none of these people are actually actors - they are just bunch of gay sympathisers making a teensie little protest about the unfair treatment of gays back in the day. They made no comment on a priest who visited them to warn them of their sexual sinning - that hypocrisy seemed to escape them.
They should put a warning on this film before they charge people to see it. You shouldn't have to pay professional charges for amateur awfulness like this.
It is set in the nineteenth century or thereabouts - maybe earlier.
A somewhat chubby heroine is choosing a potential husband from a crew of particularly unattractive males.
She chooses one - although she is in love with her music teacher - hmm - why - he has no charisma and even fewer acting skills.
After finding out about her husband's orientation and his connection to the butler - she is lonely and frustrated - but hey - when their gardener is fatally rolled over, back comes her music teacher who can somehow replace him because he liked walking in the garden after a music lesson.
When she sees him it's all systems go, and they start an affair.
Her husband sees them and is jealous - thinking back, of whom was he jealous? - maybe her - because her lover was certainly more attractive than his.
They enter a woke wonderland of free love until she falls ill - out of the blue - no reason given. But it does give George a chance to shake out his Shaman gear and save her life.
Such absolute nonsense.
But what do you expect when none of these people are actually actors - they are just bunch of gay sympathisers making a teensie little protest about the unfair treatment of gays back in the day. They made no comment on a priest who visited them to warn them of their sexual sinning - that hypocrisy seemed to escape them.
They should put a warning on this film before they charge people to see it. You shouldn't have to pay professional charges for amateur awfulness like this.
It is rare to find a film which conveys enough of a message to change the viewer, yet after watching this I find myself motivated to find more honesty, and joy in my own life.
dickonwalker10 January 2012
This story begins at the start of a loveless marriage of convenience, placing us in the marital bed as the obvious lack of connection between the bride and groom, creates a painful awkwardness to which we become witness.
From here, the film plays with the well examined theme of repression and denial which was so prevalent in the social mores of it's chosen period, however the resolution of this keenly felt atmosphere from the early scenes allows for far more of its opposite emotions than many other films do, replacing those uncomfortable exchanges with a highly contrasted sense of release and liberation.
The characters were entirely believable and very much of their time, and although the journey each one takes is an unusual one I was entirely carried along on those journeys with each of them. I am not usually a fan of period dramas, I felt this film to have message that is entirely relevant for our times, and it in no way came across as though it was looking back nostalgically as an escapist reaction to current concerns.
The theme of the redeeming power of love may not be unusual, however the sense of this creative energy comes bursting through in the direction of this film, and illustrates without qualification quite how transformational the combination of truth and love really can be.
I highly recommend this film, it is a real testament to the value of a good story vivaciously presented. For both it's inspirational and entertainment value, I rate this movie as a 10/10.
From here, the film plays with the well examined theme of repression and denial which was so prevalent in the social mores of it's chosen period, however the resolution of this keenly felt atmosphere from the early scenes allows for far more of its opposite emotions than many other films do, replacing those uncomfortable exchanges with a highly contrasted sense of release and liberation.
The characters were entirely believable and very much of their time, and although the journey each one takes is an unusual one I was entirely carried along on those journeys with each of them. I am not usually a fan of period dramas, I felt this film to have message that is entirely relevant for our times, and it in no way came across as though it was looking back nostalgically as an escapist reaction to current concerns.
The theme of the redeeming power of love may not be unusual, however the sense of this creative energy comes bursting through in the direction of this film, and illustrates without qualification quite how transformational the combination of truth and love really can be.
I highly recommend this film, it is a real testament to the value of a good story vivaciously presented. For both it's inspirational and entertainment value, I rate this movie as a 10/10.
Funny, heartbreaking and inspiring
lianne_campbell6 January 2012
Thoroughly enjoyed this funny, heartbreaking and inspiring film. A steady and interesting start establishing the characters really well, when the pace picked up the twists and turns of the plot kept me riveted. The story unfolds in a way that gives insight into each individual's struggles and dilemmas, creating a feeling of genuine care and interest for the destiny of these quirky and brave characters. Clever acting, fabulous direction and beautifully made, This film is a testimony to the free spirit that resides in all of us regardless of our gender, class or the age that we live in. I feel inspired by what the film makers have achieved on such a low budget and look forward to future productions from Christianne Van Wijk and Madelon Coomber. Lianne Campbell - Lewes
Brilliant storyline, worth a watch.
nolanpeter18 December 2011
Although this film gets off to a somewhat slow start, once the initial 15 or 20 minutes of scene setting is through this is a truly fantastic film. It mixes humour with drama nicely.
Set in a beautiful stately home it strikes you as a blast from the past. A refreshing look at how it wasn't all grim in time of old.
The low budget does show a little and the sentence composition can seam a little unnatural at points but overall the drama is enacted well.
A brilliant storyline and twists you would never expect.
Definitely worth a watch, and it's always nice to support those filmmakers who don't live in Beverly hills. ***** ****
Set in a beautiful stately home it strikes you as a blast from the past. A refreshing look at how it wasn't all grim in time of old.
The low budget does show a little and the sentence composition can seam a little unnatural at points but overall the drama is enacted well.
A brilliant storyline and twists you would never expect.
Definitely worth a watch, and it's always nice to support those filmmakers who don't live in Beverly hills. ***** ****
LIKE FINDING A GOLD NUGGET IN SMELLY OLD HAYSTACK
simonwelsh45421 August 2021
I was surprised by how much I liked this film. I'm quite a film snob, on the whole, and I grew up amongst aristocracy, although I was never one of them... so I know what feels true and what feels made up.
This film is made up. But guess what. It feels true... there is a consistency in the character development that makes the story completely believable and by the end it feels more like a history than a fantasy or a reimagining...
I was surprised by how invested I became in the characters... all 4 of them ... and by how much I didn't want the film to end in tragedy. I believed these characters so much and felt so strongly that they all deserved to live happily ever after, that there were moments I actually found myself shouting at the screen, almost as if I were trying to discourage the characters from being their true authentic selves for fear of being exposed and thereby put in danger... I found myself caring about their well-being deeply...
A thoroughly enjoyable watch and one to be repeated.
This film is made up. But guess what. It feels true... there is a consistency in the character development that makes the story completely believable and by the end it feels more like a history than a fantasy or a reimagining...
I was surprised by how invested I became in the characters... all 4 of them ... and by how much I didn't want the film to end in tragedy. I believed these characters so much and felt so strongly that they all deserved to live happily ever after, that there were moments I actually found myself shouting at the screen, almost as if I were trying to discourage the characters from being their true authentic selves for fear of being exposed and thereby put in danger... I found myself caring about their well-being deeply...
A thoroughly enjoyable watch and one to be repeated.
Period drama with a modern twist
aussiefilmlover18 January 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I really enjoyed that all the language and clothing was true to the period. There are gay themes and storyline that were appropriate to the time. Historically there are documents of countless marriages such so it's not that farfetched even if we do not have all the details of what was called marriage of convenience and romantic friendships. The biggest leap is the cross class interactions. Still while it seems far fetched elements of the movie such as the metaphysics or the dramatics with the servants can be found in the novels of the time.
Interesting. What else do we need in low budget film?
l-chwalko24 May 2012
It looks like a mature film. Also it's a chamber film, few people and relations between them in one place, I like it. It reminds me of "The dreamers" by Bertolucci and most of Polanski's films. Also I very much like the subject. Changes inside the characters after they have accepted their differences, which by the outside world would be considered intolerable and scandalous. I think some of the exterior shots are great (almost like Visconti :P). Much better than the interiors, but I guess it was very hard work to have them done right. At the beginning I hated these old English style of living/behaving but it's only my opinion. This is why I didn't feel good in the UK. I am a simple Slavic human being. It's a very interesting film, well made and with very good acting which is unusual in most of low budget films.
What a nice lovely encouraging little movie!
benwkwu24 March 2024
I really like this wonderful movie. Some viewers complain about the acting and production value. Yes, it has no famous actors actress, and no big budget, so what! It someway somehow brings out our emotions, sorrow, pain, joy and love ; and probably even one's experience and memories. Look around those movies of nowadays, how many you will find a good one which can achieve this goal?? Those movies might have taken a well famous director, beautiful and famous actors and actress and supporting stars, but if the story itself is empty and tasteless, it will just mean nothing at all. If those awful Odd-Scar winner movies like Bla Bla Land, Bla Bla Bi and QueenSinger etc. Can get a rubbish price, this encouraging lovely little production certainly deserve 9 points from me. I do hope that someday some one will remake it with a bigger budget, with a new and bigger team to make an even better one.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
