Film Reviews by CV

Filmed in Tunisia, I believe, the set and photography is quite opulent and evocative. The nativity scene negates all the Christmas card cliches of a crowded stable where here it takes place in a vast empty cave. The title of Mary alludes to two Marys, Mary mother of Jesus and Mary Magdeline, and the storyline shows their interactive and parallel lives and influence on Jesus. Very visual and emotive but too often the dialogue is a dissonance of modern and quasi-archaic diction, but still a refreshing view on the old, old story.

Tom Stoppard is a great playwright: I recently saw 'Arcadia' a few weeks ago which play was loaded with much academic research but entertaining at the same time. I watched the first two scenes of this film and gave up in disbelief. The first scene should grab the audience's attention but here a coin was tossed interminably with the call of "heads" every time. The second scene was in a different location but with the same vacuous and tedious dialogue, if it was dialogue at all. I couldn't suffer any more so I stopped the film. I cannot believe that Tom Stoppard put his name to this puerile slew of nonsense. Watch Kenneth Brannagh's 'Hamlet' and get nearly four hours of solid enjoyment instead.

I read this book some time ago in our Book Club which was not my choice. I found the book more interesting than enjoyable. It's about an odd Welsh family set at the turn of last century. A Welsh farmer marries a well-to-do woman who is educated and well-travelled and they produce two twin sons who, though relationally close to each other, do not really socialize with others outside their family very successfully. Later there is a daughter who leaves the family. The story is essentially about the growing-up of these two sons who have a telepathic relationship with each other throughout their long lives. It seemed an odd theme for a novel and stranger still for a film. But I actually found the film quite enlightening and the producer has made a remarkable adaptation of the book, especially when it is set in location in the Welsh borders featuring all the seasons and aspects of Welsh social and farming history. Also, extras show two atmospheric films in black and white about sheep farming in the earlier 20th Century.

A short acted film followed by a long interview with no illustration. Even the film is mostly a monologue as a character tells a journalist his story of Billy the Kid and it looks also rather home-made (though I think it was filmed at Granada studios.) I followed all the facts and events as a best as I could, related by a gentleman (English, as it happened) who had devoted his career to the subject of Billy the Kid. Even so, I didn't really get the overall historical significance of what seemed to me another cowboy outlaw. The purpose of the film (if that includes both parts) was to sift through the evidence of the Kid's life and vindicate Billy the Kid and his associates and understand his actions from the point of view of the fact that he was very young (died at only 21) trying to survive in a land of virtual lawlessness. The expert said that it was the circumstances of not knowing everything that kept the legend alive: if all the evidence was known the story will have come to an end. Watch this film only if you want objective and detailed information of Billy the Kid: I would like next to watch an actual film of his life - even if it is doubtful in accuracy.

An extraordinary story of the first female Member of Parliament who was born the daughter of a railroad owner in Virginia, the American Civil War not too soon past. Living so as an aristocrat of Confederate sympathies, fate brings her to Great Britain after a divorce where she marries Lord Astor and later takes on his Parliamentary seat in Plymouth South. Family problems impinge on her professional ambitions and she becomes a very difficult to understand character. James Fox is barely recognizable as Lord Astor who he plays with exquisite perfection and manner. There are some notable big outdoor scenes and one gets a good feel of Clivedon both in and out.

The story is told from the point of view of four journalists who try to get the truth of the debacle of the Gallipoli "invasion" out to the British and Australian publics. The historical characters are vividly drawn and contrasted and Charles Dance as a gruff General Hamilton is a masterly performance. Charles Bean is a fascinatingly unlikely character who charges into the thick of the action without arms for the sake of observing every detail of battle. The dialogue is punchy and there are great one-line responses : the reporter Schuler presents the general with photographs of horrific wounds to individual soldiers. The general scoffs that no-one will see them (as he will confiscate them) but Schuler replies: "No, but you did." The theme is very topical with all that is going on in Russia concerning the war in Ukraine.

There is an interesting extra of the background and biographies of the various reporters and it is apparent that a lot of careful research went into the making of this feature film as Bean's diaries in particular were very detailed and presumably all his experiences were genuinely depicted. He is both superior and compassionate by turns and the actor is very well matched in appearance.

Yes, Keith Murdoch is the father of Rupert! While the son sought the truth in major issues of war, the son's newspaper makes vast sums of wealth, seeking the "truth" by spying on private lives!

One of the first things I remember when our family got our first black-and-white television in 1968 was the news reporting of Bobby Kennedy's assassination: the blurred images and shouts of panic caused me to run out of the lounge and tell my mother in the kitchen. She also, of course, remembered the shooting of his elder brother John F a few years before which had already caused her shock and disbelief.

Robert had been instrumental in the peaceful negotiation of the Missile Crisis in Cuba and had earned a reputation as a decent and strong runner for election. The film increasingly took on the form of a Passion Story: Bobby (the film title alone indicates his rapport with the people) appears in contemporary news reel (in colour) as himself and the whole film integrates these clips very neatly into the story-line. Like Christ advancing on Jerusalem to face the crucifixion, we are aware that Bobby Kennedy is also progressing to his own assassination and the whole action is that fatal day which takes place at a hotel. As Christ had spoken to and blessed the crowds days before his death, we feel the presence and expectation of Bobby's arrival having a positive effect on ordinary people who are at the hotel as staff or guests and their lives also are affected positively in anticipation of his visit: couples are reconciled, racial tensions are eased and personal relationships are deepened and this is how the film conveys "Bobby" as a spiritual influence. And the tragedy of his death also causes more reconciliation among these ordinary people.

Bobby Kennedy was clearly adored and raised such hopes of racial reconciliation and a respectful exit from the Vietnam War. News footage reveals his genuine compassion for all people and he did not shirk from going right into their midst to be with them. One scene shows him talking to children in a school about pollution which we would now include in the environmental problem. Now the Trumps and Johnsons of this world have made all this seem as though this all took part on another planet.

I don't remember this series at all in 1979 but was delighted to have watched it now. Interesting to hear King George's frequent statements against female politicians as the year the series was made, Margaret Thatcher entered the first year of her premiership! The series of eight substantial episodes covers strictly the Regency period which also covers King George III, magnificently played by Nigel Davenport who commands such presence even on a small screen. But the whole is really dominated by the ever engaging character portrayed by Peter Egan. Whatever prejudice one has for this king, who is always imagined as a frivolous dandy, one is won over to a sympathetic understanding and even a fondness for this "merry" monarch as he seemed always to have had good intention and generosity of spirit. The condition of the series is excellent and the aging processes are incredibly well done in make-up and acting style. Well done Cinemaparadiso for preserving these wonderful forgotten series!

The influence of theatre is still present in this early 1969 production in the respective of stylized acting and small sets and the camera work also adds a creative and meaningful dimension to the whole. The casting is excellent and acting vivid and well-differentiated. I haven't read the book but one feels the dialogue is verbatim and that most of it is retained in the script. The black and white production also adds a Dickensian shade of atmosphere. You will notice that the introduction boldly says "Dramatized by" rather than vaguely "Based on" as so many modern productions are obliged to. I do remember watching this series at the time with my family and the catch-phrase "Stand by!" has always been with me!

I was intrigued to see if the singer Antonio Theba was actually playing the violin and found out that he was! Although the picture is excellent for 1973, the singing for this operetta by Franz Lehar was badly dubbed in this film version . In fact it felt more like a popular Broadway musical and one of the two lighter numbers didn't seem to be by Lehar at all as they were dance-band style with trumpets and drum-kit. Mildly entertaining and interesting but I had hoped for a staged version despite the scenic locations on the film.

I'm afraid many will find this the aural equivalent of paint drying. While the audience seem to be an appreciative beard-scratching lot, I can imagine the boy up the tree (in the Emperor's New Clothes story) shouting out "But it's just four simple chords repeated over and over again!" Maybe I did nod off but I saw no references to Martin Luther King and there was just a hint of Tolstoy in the first act. Bland, very concordant and simple harmony but do give me that old, old piercing dissonant kind of music instead! The picture quality was also poor. How performers memorized such repetitive music and posed in static tableaux for minutes on end I know not.

This film is just over three hours long and you feel it. The story of Nero is presented as a Greek tragedy, his hubris being his allegiance to a slave-girl romance in tension with his desire to change the world for good by seizing power. The film relies too much on the romance, which all looks too modern in style, and the dialogue is ever soporifically banal. There is one character, a veteran senator, who attempts profundity with lines such as "All liars believe what they say - until they've said it." That's as good as it gets.

With a big smile the producer said he wanted to make a film that was not the usual BBC Period Drama. So we were presented with an unbelievable exclusively Lesbian sex story that had the flimsiest connection with real history with only nominal reference to what was happening politically outside the queen's court. Too silly to be serious and too bad-taste to be funny. Surely the challenge for a producer IS to make actual history interesting and captivating and not make your own imaginary sexed-up history instead. All three female characters rapidly became tedious, revolting and despicable in their own particular selfish and ambitious ways. And the modernistic dialogue with all its expletives - colourful language of the time was much more imaginative - clashed with the effort of providing lavish period costume. One star only for artistic presentation, none for content.

I was pleasantly surprised that Cinemaparadiso had this film as I had recently read the original novel hidden away in the "Classics" section of the local library. The dominant theme is that of class prejudice where a government minister falls in love with a young lady of dubious background. She had been born out of wedlock and was adopted by her mother's subsequent husband who ran a brothel "downstairs". The girl is educated and is innocent of her step-father's double occupation. The family falls on hard times and Fanny has to make her way relying on family friends and a long-standing friend, Lucy, who has becomes a dancer and actor. Made during the war, the film does well and is a good Sunday afternoon watch. Note a young James Mason as a villain and a very young Stewart Grainger in their early careers.

Incidentally, the novel is told by an elderly Fanny who has retired in a French Pension, looking back over her life. There is much that is poignant in the novel, more detail of the brothel activities and characters who are staunch, generous and kind despite their lowly circumstances.

I suppose you would call this film an acted documentary and it is fascinating to see acted scenes spliced with interviews with the actual characters recounting their wartime experiences many years later. It is a testament to both the bravery and ingenuity of a group of Jewish students who change their identity and live a precarious existence constantly evading detection by the Gestapo authorities and trusting Jewish-sympathising Germans who also put their lives on the line. Even though the various personae live to tell the tale, as it were, there is still nail-biting tension in the acted scenes. Germans who defied the Nazi regime must be the greatest heroes of the war as they must have felt everyone was their enemy and had everything to lose. How good it is to have this document so well made by the people themselves.