Change Your Image
molly-cutpurse
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Wuthering Heights (2011)
A big Fat zero
One, I've never read the book, so I could not follow it. When one is watching a film, one ought not to guess. I need to be told the story. Two, it was too dark for me. As in, there was not enough illumination. Three, use a tripod! At the very least, use a steady cam. Four, watching out of focus images does nothing for me. Five, close ups of insects and other unimportant stuff does not drive the story forward. And what's with the 4:3 aspect ratio?!! All else is forgiven. Nice countryside. Good accents. I closed my eyes at the animal slaughter because I am squeamish.. Unnecessary. Now I shall read the book. And maybe look at other versions.
Sapphire & Steel (1979)
How can I rate this?
This series is trapped by the morality and technicality of the time. I watched it when it was broadcast, and as a young woman who enjoyed programmes that were a little out of the ordinary, at the time, I enjoyed it. But that was a long time ago! I now remember very little about the story- lines, but do remember the station episode. The second. Now I am over sixty, and apart from being thankful because it helped kick-start my own career, I cannot recommend it. The script has too much exposition, and the sounds and effects are terribly dated. However, one has to admire the imaginative efforts for producing it at the time. I have never been keen on critique. One man's meat, etc, etc. Nevertheless, I have to say that I prefer stories that are complete, and that are logical. Constructing stories leaving huge gaps, inviting the viewers imagination to interpret the empty space, does little for me. In this regard, I made little headway with the first story. I was simply confused. The fact is, it is far easier, from a writer's point of view, to leave things to the viewer's imagination rather than take the hard road of constructing a logical storyline. And I fear, that that is what the writers have done here. Nevertheless, watch it out of sentimentality and nostalgia, and you probably will not be disappointed.
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Fantastically fine fun!
I remember seeing a preview for this in the theatre. And when the big ball rolled down, two middle-aged men began laughing. But at it, not with it. Bet they are not laughing now, considering how famous it's become. I like this movie. In fact, I'm watching it as I type. I certainly think that it is the best out of the four. It has a rawness about it, and a lovely lack of CGI of course, it being 1981. In reading the, 'reviews', I noticed a lot of comments about CGI. But here's the thing. That department is so well established in film studios now, that it would almost be disrespectful not to include them in the 'family of film-makers'. This is on the same principle as writing in scenes that involve snow and rain. It passes the money around and keeps people employed. That's why many films have CGI. I think they have their place, but come on guys. Put creativity first, not finance. The trouble is, it's all getting cheaper to do and solves big production problems. Back to the film. Yes, never a dull moment, plenty of humour, great music and high adventure. It's a film, guys. Get over yourselves, you critics. There are no black holes here. Dr Jones obeys the rules of the universe. No deus ex machina here! Anybody notice how perfect the scene in Nepal was? So well planned and choreographed. As was the plane blowing up sequence. Not to mention the lorry sequence! The film does not require me to think. Perfect viewing for the end of the day and a glass of wine!
The Lady Vanishes (1979)
Just one question: Where did she keep her lipstick?
Always one to buck the trend, I love this film! And has done since it was made. It was the fantastic music to begin with, but it drew me in. Goodness knows why it's taken me such a lengthy time to write this. It's an excellent cast, very well photographed and makes me smile. What's not to like? So, it's different from the 1939 version? Of course it is: there's forty years between them! One isn't better than the other. They're just different. However, any film which makes me smile is a winner in my book. I have it on DVD, but I'm always glad to watch it on the telly. Did I mention I love the music? I wish I could buy that on its own.
Magic Beyond Words: The J.K. Rowling Story (2011)
It was magic for me
Reviews can be considered an interesting exercise for the ego. After all, what are we criticising? The film, or our reaction to it? How is it possible to be objective? Honesty first: I attempted to read, The Philosopher's Stone when it was released, but gave up after fifty pages. This is not to say it was poorly written, just that, at the time, I was not eleven. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the films and the story arc. Admiration and respect has to be given to anybody who has written seven novels. Much has been written about how she plagiarized, or a more pleasant word might be, poached, elements from other writers, but I am not concerned by these irrelevant rumours. What is important is she has brought happiness to millions, if not billions, of people. How many critics can die with that achievement on their lips? I'm also not concerned about the accuracy of this film. As far as I understand it, the major elements are there; the rise of a desperately poor mother (with circumstances whom most of us can sympathise) with a dream, to unparalleled success. Is that not enough? Is that not the quiddity of what this film is about? Therefore, you can tell that I enjoyed the snapshot of this woman's life. It was competently made and acted. Nothing jarred. However, what was important, was that it moved me. And at the end, to joyful tears. Isn't that the highest recommendation? Only one point deducted for not taking her story up to the present.
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
Just pretend it isn't what it is!
I wanted to enjoy this movie. And I did most thoroughly. There wasn't a single part of it I could criticise. It just wasn't the film I wanted to see. In the UK, we've had it so good. Have you ever seen the beauty, charm and grace of The Dancing men with Brett as Holmes? Fantastic acting, sober and as real as one can imagine life was back in the nineteenth century. A perfect visual and auditory treat. That's what this version has to compete against. The problem is not that this is a bad film, but that it has to compete against years of what has been made before, and to which we are accustomed. Everything in this movie may be true to the books, but it isn't true in our heads, and that's where it counts. Guy has made a sharp and interesting film. The music was brilliant I thought. I hope that comes out on an album. Perhaps a little heavy on the CGI for my tastes (sometimes nowadays I feel as if I'm watching a cartoon instead of a film - I did spot the CGI man running! They didn't quite get that right) but I really did enjoy it...just as long as I pretended that it wasn't a Sherlock Holmes film!