Just a quick blog for this Tuesday Night is Film Night film, as we watched it during a bout of illness and didn't get chance at the time to write up anything. Anyway, here's a quick rundown on;
Enigma
It is March 1943 and the staff at Britain's top secret intelligence headquarters, Bletchley Park, are struggling to break a new German naval code. Tom Jericho (Dougray Scott) is a mathematician newly assigned to the unit, and thanks to his brilliant insights the apparently unbeatable code begins to reveal its secrets. However, Tom has another, more personal, problem to solve - his former lover Claire (Saffron Burrows) has mysteriously disappeared, leaving only a few confused traces in her wake. Joining forces with the missing woman's bespectacled housemate Hester (Kate Winslet), Tom sets out to investigate.
OK, so it's a stolen synopsis from Amazon, but it covers the basics. Enigma is a good film, it's plausible, based on real locations, but it's woefully inaccurate with some of the Bletchley Park history. Plus, they didn't use Bletchley Park for any of the exterior shots, which is a little disappointing.
When I say it is inaccurate, I do so based on my knowledge of what actually went on at Bletchley and it is highly unlikely that some of the shenanigans that are portrayed in Enigma, would actually have happened.
That aside, it is entertaining and wonderfully filmed. Kate Winslett is gorgeous and makes the film for me.
It is a shame that the real Bletchley Park did not feature. Watch out for a cameo appearance from Mick Jagger, who stumped up some cash to fund the movie.
Enigma is only a good film, because of it's historical contents, albeit inaccurate, I still enjoyed it.
7 out of 10.
Tuesday, 26 March 2013
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
The Lost Valentine - 12th March 2013
Well, here we are again. Tonight we have gone for, what looks to be, a tear jerking, romantic tale of love and loss. Will it be love at first sight or the big heave-ho for;
The Lost Valentine
Released in 2011, The Lost Valentine is a made-for-TV movie. Normally, this should start alarm bells ringing. Made-for-TV movies are notoriously bad, but this one came highly recommended.
The story is as follows; Caroline Thomas, played superbly by Golden Girl; Betty White, is an old romantic who, although being told that her young husband was missing in action in the Second World War, still makes an annual pilgrimage to the Union railway station, to mark the day when she last saw him, as he departed for active duties.
The day that he left was Valentines Day.
Every year Caroline returns, hoping that he (Neil Thomas), may someday return. She has been doing this, for 65 years, every since they parted in 1944.
The story of this epic devotion, is picked up by the local TV network, who set up their glamourous reporter; Susan Allison (played by the ever-so lovely Jennifer Love Hewitt), to cover the story. Susan is not so sure that the story has any gravitas and says as much, accidentally in front of Caroline's grandson Lucas (Sean Faris). And although this meeting of Susan and Lucas gets off on the wrong foot, you know that there is a spark between the two, thus providing us with another layer of romance.
Susan eventually gets to interview Caroline and this is where the film starts filling in all the necessary detail, utilising flashbacks to the 1940's, where the young Caroline and Neil first get together.
Fair enough so far. The approach, layering and scene setting of the movie is very formulaic. However, what sets this film apart from the rest, is the story. We all know how the Americans love their war veterans (and rightly so). And we see in The Lost Valentine elements which are very believable. You can almost sense that it's real, that someone would have revisited such a special place, for so many years, just to relive the parting of a loving couple and hope beyond hope, that one day their loved one would return.
Above and beyond the great story, it is the way that it is bought to life on our screens so superbly by Betty White and Jennifer Love Hewitt. Aided extremely well by Sean Faris, that makes all the difference. If you believe the storyline, then this is enhanced by some great acting.
It is without doubt a tearjerker. Some may suggest that it's a little too much and over steps the line between a good romantic story and into a somewhat cheesy affair, but I would suggest not. I think it portrays a tender, believable story, laced with emotion, pride, honour and respect.
A good film and thoroughly enjoyable. Which scores a massive 9 out of 10 in this house.
The Lost Valentine
Released in 2011, The Lost Valentine is a made-for-TV movie. Normally, this should start alarm bells ringing. Made-for-TV movies are notoriously bad, but this one came highly recommended.
The story is as follows; Caroline Thomas, played superbly by Golden Girl; Betty White, is an old romantic who, although being told that her young husband was missing in action in the Second World War, still makes an annual pilgrimage to the Union railway station, to mark the day when she last saw him, as he departed for active duties.
The day that he left was Valentines Day.
Every year Caroline returns, hoping that he (Neil Thomas), may someday return. She has been doing this, for 65 years, every since they parted in 1944.
The story of this epic devotion, is picked up by the local TV network, who set up their glamourous reporter; Susan Allison (played by the ever-so lovely Jennifer Love Hewitt), to cover the story. Susan is not so sure that the story has any gravitas and says as much, accidentally in front of Caroline's grandson Lucas (Sean Faris). And although this meeting of Susan and Lucas gets off on the wrong foot, you know that there is a spark between the two, thus providing us with another layer of romance.
Susan eventually gets to interview Caroline and this is where the film starts filling in all the necessary detail, utilising flashbacks to the 1940's, where the young Caroline and Neil first get together.
Fair enough so far. The approach, layering and scene setting of the movie is very formulaic. However, what sets this film apart from the rest, is the story. We all know how the Americans love their war veterans (and rightly so). And we see in The Lost Valentine elements which are very believable. You can almost sense that it's real, that someone would have revisited such a special place, for so many years, just to relive the parting of a loving couple and hope beyond hope, that one day their loved one would return.
Above and beyond the great story, it is the way that it is bought to life on our screens so superbly by Betty White and Jennifer Love Hewitt. Aided extremely well by Sean Faris, that makes all the difference. If you believe the storyline, then this is enhanced by some great acting.
It is without doubt a tearjerker. Some may suggest that it's a little too much and over steps the line between a good romantic story and into a somewhat cheesy affair, but I would suggest not. I think it portrays a tender, believable story, laced with emotion, pride, honour and respect.
A good film and thoroughly enjoyable. Which scores a massive 9 out of 10 in this house.
Tuesday, 5 March 2013
The Runaways - 5th March 2013
Tuesday Night is Film Night spins the wheel of genre's tonight and it stops with it's arrow pointing straight at a music biopic. So will it be a hit or a miss, as we watch;
The Runaways
This film from 2010, traces the rise to fame, or possibly infamy of the real life band; The Runaways. The Runaways were an all girl group making their music out of Los Angeles from 1975 onwards. If you are still none the wiser, then their rhythm guitarist and singer was a one Joan Larkin, who changed her name to Joan Jett. Ah yes, her.
Based on the book; Neon Angel, written by The Runaways lead singer, Cherie Currie, The Runaways follows the lives of Currie and Jett and the other girls as the band is formed.
Down to the nitty gritty. Joan Jett is quite superbly portrayed by the sombre Kristen Stewart, dropping her vampire fangs, in exchange for a plectrum. Cherie Curry is bought to life on the screen by Dakota Fanning, who does a superb job recreating the teasing good looks and provocative nature of Currie.
Unfortunately, as with most music biopic's the other members of the band, the lead guitarist, drummer and bass player are lost to the background and although they are very much part of the band, they are reduced to bit parts in the film.
The only other real main character is that of Kim Fowley, a record producer, impresario and song writer, that pulls The Runaways together, developing their style and moulding their future. Fowley is apparently; "one of the most colourful characters in the annals of rock & roll...", as well as being; "....a shadowy cult figure well outside the margins of the mainstream." Either way he is played by Michael Shannon, who has appeared in many films, including previous Tuesday Night is Film Night films, such as The Woodsman and World Trade Center.
OK, so there we have our cast and the basic story. And I'm afraid the story is pretty basic and a standard music biopic. We see our band form, with ambitions to take on the world, but reality kicks them in the teeth, when they find out that the glamorous world of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll, is an arduous, hard slog, formed in the back of a van, trailing around tiny venues, scraping together a living, but only just. Working hard and waiting for that moment when they burst into headlines and into our ears.
The portrayal of the formative years of the band, covering the years from 1975 onwards, is really quite good. A solid seventies soundtrack provides the back beat to the visual shenanigans of these five girls thrown together into an increasing sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll filled haze.
I don't recall so much swearing in the '70's!
In reality The Runaways were not that big. Their biggest hit is probably Cherry Bomb, however the film really does do justice to their story, from their nervous beginners, through the formative years and onto a degree of stardom, certainly in Japan and the far east. However, as with most stories from the music business, The Runaways eventually succumbed to the internal frustrations and external pressures and imploded. With the lead singer Cherie eventually walking out.
Of course, Joan Jett went onto bigger and greater things with The Blackhearts.
This is turning into a review of the band rather than the film!
One other point to make about the film, the cinematography is most excellent, the way the film is shot, brings an extra dimension to the movie, normally with a music based film, there is a lot of concentration on the music itself, with The Runaways this is not so true, but this is no bad thing, we get a very well rounded, visually attractive, study on music and musicians, seeing their highs and lows, the ups and the inevitable downs.
As a whole package, it's pretty good, but as a film, I'm not sure it would warrant the cost of a cinema ticket these days. Having siad that, if I were ever to see the book the film is based on, I might be tempted to buy it.
The film struggles to hit a score of 6.5 out of 10.
The Runaways
This film from 2010, traces the rise to fame, or possibly infamy of the real life band; The Runaways. The Runaways were an all girl group making their music out of Los Angeles from 1975 onwards. If you are still none the wiser, then their rhythm guitarist and singer was a one Joan Larkin, who changed her name to Joan Jett. Ah yes, her.
Based on the book; Neon Angel, written by The Runaways lead singer, Cherie Currie, The Runaways follows the lives of Currie and Jett and the other girls as the band is formed.
Down to the nitty gritty. Joan Jett is quite superbly portrayed by the sombre Kristen Stewart, dropping her vampire fangs, in exchange for a plectrum. Cherie Curry is bought to life on the screen by Dakota Fanning, who does a superb job recreating the teasing good looks and provocative nature of Currie.
Unfortunately, as with most music biopic's the other members of the band, the lead guitarist, drummer and bass player are lost to the background and although they are very much part of the band, they are reduced to bit parts in the film.
The only other real main character is that of Kim Fowley, a record producer, impresario and song writer, that pulls The Runaways together, developing their style and moulding their future. Fowley is apparently; "one of the most colourful characters in the annals of rock & roll...", as well as being; "....a shadowy cult figure well outside the margins of the mainstream." Either way he is played by Michael Shannon, who has appeared in many films, including previous Tuesday Night is Film Night films, such as The Woodsman and World Trade Center.
OK, so there we have our cast and the basic story. And I'm afraid the story is pretty basic and a standard music biopic. We see our band form, with ambitions to take on the world, but reality kicks them in the teeth, when they find out that the glamorous world of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll, is an arduous, hard slog, formed in the back of a van, trailing around tiny venues, scraping together a living, but only just. Working hard and waiting for that moment when they burst into headlines and into our ears.
The portrayal of the formative years of the band, covering the years from 1975 onwards, is really quite good. A solid seventies soundtrack provides the back beat to the visual shenanigans of these five girls thrown together into an increasing sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll filled haze.
I don't recall so much swearing in the '70's!
In reality The Runaways were not that big. Their biggest hit is probably Cherry Bomb, however the film really does do justice to their story, from their nervous beginners, through the formative years and onto a degree of stardom, certainly in Japan and the far east. However, as with most stories from the music business, The Runaways eventually succumbed to the internal frustrations and external pressures and imploded. With the lead singer Cherie eventually walking out.
Of course, Joan Jett went onto bigger and greater things with The Blackhearts.
This is turning into a review of the band rather than the film!
One other point to make about the film, the cinematography is most excellent, the way the film is shot, brings an extra dimension to the movie, normally with a music based film, there is a lot of concentration on the music itself, with The Runaways this is not so true, but this is no bad thing, we get a very well rounded, visually attractive, study on music and musicians, seeing their highs and lows, the ups and the inevitable downs.
As a whole package, it's pretty good, but as a film, I'm not sure it would warrant the cost of a cinema ticket these days. Having siad that, if I were ever to see the book the film is based on, I might be tempted to buy it.
The film struggles to hit a score of 6.5 out of 10.
Tuesday, 26 February 2013
Cheerful Weather for the Wedding - 26th February 2013
Tuesday Night is Film Night rolls up to the end of February, with a look at a fairly obscure film and one that may intrigue or disappoint, we shall see which it will be, when we watch;
Cheerful Weather for the Wedding
First off, Cheerful Weather for the Wedding, is a period drama, albeit with a soupçon of comedy thrown in. Set 1932 it portrays the wedding day of Dolly Thatcham (Felicity Jones), who decides to hide in her bedroom and contemplate her past and her future.
The film relies on flashbacks to revisit her previous romantic entanglement, with Joseph Patten (Luke Treadaway), who just so happens to turn up for the wedding, just to throw the day into further turmoil.
The film is reminiscent of Brideshead Revisited in it's style and quality, or any decent period drama for that matter. The location, the sets and the costume are just right, some may say visually stunning. However, although the setting is idyllic, the supporting cast sublime, with a few well known faces thrown in, the story is weak. There is very little plot, it is moreover the study of human emotions, when confronted with the finalisation of various romantic liaisons. An old flame being extinguished and a new future being forged through marriage. Seeing, as we do, Dolly's frustrations, as she sifts through her memories.
That is about the long and the short of it. Some points to note, these are the good points. Elizabeth McGovern, of Downton Abbey fame, plays Dolly's mother, a rather scatty character I found, but one which McGovern plays so very well.
Barbara Flynn is excellent as Aunt Bella. MacKenzie Crook. (you know, him from The Office) is really quite good as David Dakin and it's him along with his son Jimmy that provide some much needed comedic moments.
And we mustn't forget Zoë Tapper as Evelyn Graham, a friend of Dolly's. You may have seen Zoë Tapper playing Ellen Love in the current ITV drama Mr Selfridge.
And that really is about it. The film plods through 93 minutes of drama-less drama, with the occasional laugh. As I say, the setting is exquisite, if you are a fan of period drama's then you will probably tolerate the weak ramblings of Cheerful Weather for the Wedding. If not, you may want to give it a miss.
As to our rating for the film, it struggles to hit 5 out of 10.
Cheerful Weather for the Wedding
First off, Cheerful Weather for the Wedding, is a period drama, albeit with a soupçon of comedy thrown in. Set 1932 it portrays the wedding day of Dolly Thatcham (Felicity Jones), who decides to hide in her bedroom and contemplate her past and her future.
The film relies on flashbacks to revisit her previous romantic entanglement, with Joseph Patten (Luke Treadaway), who just so happens to turn up for the wedding, just to throw the day into further turmoil.
The film is reminiscent of Brideshead Revisited in it's style and quality, or any decent period drama for that matter. The location, the sets and the costume are just right, some may say visually stunning. However, although the setting is idyllic, the supporting cast sublime, with a few well known faces thrown in, the story is weak. There is very little plot, it is moreover the study of human emotions, when confronted with the finalisation of various romantic liaisons. An old flame being extinguished and a new future being forged through marriage. Seeing, as we do, Dolly's frustrations, as she sifts through her memories.
That is about the long and the short of it. Some points to note, these are the good points. Elizabeth McGovern, of Downton Abbey fame, plays Dolly's mother, a rather scatty character I found, but one which McGovern plays so very well.
Barbara Flynn is excellent as Aunt Bella. MacKenzie Crook. (you know, him from The Office) is really quite good as David Dakin and it's him along with his son Jimmy that provide some much needed comedic moments.
And we mustn't forget Zoë Tapper as Evelyn Graham, a friend of Dolly's. You may have seen Zoë Tapper playing Ellen Love in the current ITV drama Mr Selfridge.
And that really is about it. The film plods through 93 minutes of drama-less drama, with the occasional laugh. As I say, the setting is exquisite, if you are a fan of period drama's then you will probably tolerate the weak ramblings of Cheerful Weather for the Wedding. If not, you may want to give it a miss.
As to our rating for the film, it struggles to hit 5 out of 10.
Tuesday, 19 February 2013
My Sister's Keeper - 19th February 2013
Tuesday Night is Film Night swaps genres again tonight and this time there will be tears, as we find out about;
My Sister's Keeper
A definite tear jerker this week. Nick Cassavetes directs this adaptation of the novel by Jodi Picoult.
Abigail Breslin portrays superbly, Anna Fitzgerald a 13-year-old girl who was conceived by IVF in order to be a genetic match for her older sister, Kate.
Kate is played by Sofia Vassilieva, who is totally outstanding and mesmerising as the suffering sibling, who has battled leukaemia since early childhood.
Despite being a normal, healthy child, Anna has undergone countless surgical procedures, transfusions and injections to aid her sister. Now, at the age of 13, she decides enough is enough and although she should donate a kidney to her sister, who has gone into renal failure, Anna starts proceedings to sue her parents (Cameron Diaz and Jason Patric) for medical emancipation.
As you watch the opening sequences, you pick up the story, discovering the history, hardship and heartache the whole family have been through, but the unique twist of Anna serving her parents with a writ to take control of her own body, is a bit of a surprise, leading one to think; which direction will the story take?
Anna finds Campbell Alexander, (Alec Baldwin), an attorney who is willing to take on the case and fight Anna's parents through the court, to allow her the right to protect her body. Whilst her mother Sara Fitzgerald (Diaz), who just happens to be a lawyer, protests that she is too young to make such a decision.
Throughout the film, we see flashbacks to earlier parts of the family's lives, filling in detail, to keep you up to speed with the plot. The use of flashbacks in films, can sometimes be confusing, but in My Sister's Keeper, it is done really well and a provides the back stories to some of the current storylines.
It is extremely difficult to write down here what happens in the film, beyond the basic facts, you need to see the film, to feel the emotions that it portrays. The subject matter is sad, there's no question, but it's not just the subject of cancer that is so sad, it's the way that this family, which has been so close, can be pulled apart, whilst trying so hard to stay together.
It is certainly a film to tug at the heart-strings. More-so due to the outstanding performances by the child stars. Cameron Diaz puts in a glowing performance as well, so not just there for her beauty. Kudos must also go to Joan Kusack, who plays the judge presiding over the trial, which provides a pivotal moment in the story.
All in all a really good film, great acting, fantastic story and emotions a-plenty.
As to the score, we're giving it 9 out of 10.
My Sister's Keeper
A definite tear jerker this week. Nick Cassavetes directs this adaptation of the novel by Jodi Picoult.
Abigail Breslin portrays superbly, Anna Fitzgerald a 13-year-old girl who was conceived by IVF in order to be a genetic match for her older sister, Kate.
Kate is played by Sofia Vassilieva, who is totally outstanding and mesmerising as the suffering sibling, who has battled leukaemia since early childhood.
Despite being a normal, healthy child, Anna has undergone countless surgical procedures, transfusions and injections to aid her sister. Now, at the age of 13, she decides enough is enough and although she should donate a kidney to her sister, who has gone into renal failure, Anna starts proceedings to sue her parents (Cameron Diaz and Jason Patric) for medical emancipation.
As you watch the opening sequences, you pick up the story, discovering the history, hardship and heartache the whole family have been through, but the unique twist of Anna serving her parents with a writ to take control of her own body, is a bit of a surprise, leading one to think; which direction will the story take?
Anna finds Campbell Alexander, (Alec Baldwin), an attorney who is willing to take on the case and fight Anna's parents through the court, to allow her the right to protect her body. Whilst her mother Sara Fitzgerald (Diaz), who just happens to be a lawyer, protests that she is too young to make such a decision.
Throughout the film, we see flashbacks to earlier parts of the family's lives, filling in detail, to keep you up to speed with the plot. The use of flashbacks in films, can sometimes be confusing, but in My Sister's Keeper, it is done really well and a provides the back stories to some of the current storylines.
It is extremely difficult to write down here what happens in the film, beyond the basic facts, you need to see the film, to feel the emotions that it portrays. The subject matter is sad, there's no question, but it's not just the subject of cancer that is so sad, it's the way that this family, which has been so close, can be pulled apart, whilst trying so hard to stay together.
It is certainly a film to tug at the heart-strings. More-so due to the outstanding performances by the child stars. Cameron Diaz puts in a glowing performance as well, so not just there for her beauty. Kudos must also go to Joan Kusack, who plays the judge presiding over the trial, which provides a pivotal moment in the story.
All in all a really good film, great acting, fantastic story and emotions a-plenty.
As to the score, we're giving it 9 out of 10.
Tuesday, 12 February 2013
Taken 2 - 12th February 2013
After two old black and white films, we jump back to the present day for this week's Tuesday Night is Film Night film, as we discover the story behind;
Taken 2
So Taken 2 is a sequel to Taken, well no surprise there! And the action is pretty much the same, although the story is different.
Just.
This time it is Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) who is taken, along with his ex wife Lenore (Famke Janssen), in a revenge kidnapping, by the father of the man that Mills killed in the first Taken movie.
Make sense?
This time the Mills' daughter Kim is spared the kidnapping and is therefore free to assist in breaking Bryan out from his captors.
As an action thriller, it is thrilling and there's action, but it seems to be a repeat of the first movie. Neeson playing the gritty, rough and craggy Mills, manages to defy the laws of luck and physics by pulling every known trick to evade his kidnappers. Kidnappers, who spend more time napping, than learning to shoot straight, as Neeson ploughs through yet another room full of gun toting goons and emerges the other side, without a scratch, whilst leaving a room full of corpses.
Yes, it is far fetched. Even the alternate ending was not that alternate.
If you haven't seen Taken, then Taken 2 will be bearable. If you enjoyed Taken, then Taken 2 maybe disappointing.
Action films are allowed some poetic licence to be far fetched, but when that fetchness is too far, then it becomes laughable. Sorry Taken 2, you've taken too much of a liberty with your storyline.
I may be alone is this summation, as the other members of the household scored it higher than I did. Taken 2 manages a fairly respectable 7.5 out of 10. (Not as good as the first one though!)
Taken 2
So Taken 2 is a sequel to Taken, well no surprise there! And the action is pretty much the same, although the story is different.
Just.
This time it is Bryan Mills (Liam Neeson) who is taken, along with his ex wife Lenore (Famke Janssen), in a revenge kidnapping, by the father of the man that Mills killed in the first Taken movie.
Make sense?
This time the Mills' daughter Kim is spared the kidnapping and is therefore free to assist in breaking Bryan out from his captors.
As an action thriller, it is thrilling and there's action, but it seems to be a repeat of the first movie. Neeson playing the gritty, rough and craggy Mills, manages to defy the laws of luck and physics by pulling every known trick to evade his kidnappers. Kidnappers, who spend more time napping, than learning to shoot straight, as Neeson ploughs through yet another room full of gun toting goons and emerges the other side, without a scratch, whilst leaving a room full of corpses.
Yes, it is far fetched. Even the alternate ending was not that alternate.
If you haven't seen Taken, then Taken 2 will be bearable. If you enjoyed Taken, then Taken 2 maybe disappointing.
Action films are allowed some poetic licence to be far fetched, but when that fetchness is too far, then it becomes laughable. Sorry Taken 2, you've taken too much of a liberty with your storyline.
I may be alone is this summation, as the other members of the household scored it higher than I did. Taken 2 manages a fairly respectable 7.5 out of 10. (Not as good as the first one though!)
Wednesday, 6 February 2013
An Inspector Calls - 6th February 2013
First things first, the more astute amongst you will notice that the date for tonight's film, is not a Tuesday, we are a day behind this week. Matters not.
We continue with our retrospective type season, with another black and white film, this time dating back to 1954. Tonight we see what happens when;
An Inspector Calls
As I say, a 1954 classic, based on the stage play of the same name by J.B. Priestly, An Inspector Calls is a drawing room drama, set in 1912, centred on the rich Birling family of Brumley. Sitting down to dinner one night, celebrating the engagement of their daughter Sheila, Inspector Poole pays them a visit and to impart the news, that a young girl has died, a young girl it seems that has touched the lives of each family member, unbeknown to each other.
Inspector Poole, calmly, carefully and in a laid back manner, cross examines each family member in turn, delving into their past and their involvement with the girl. Establishing the facts and making out each person to be, in some way responsible for the girls death.
The story is gripping, riveting even. And the fact that it is set, apart from the story establishing flashbacks, in almost one room, is most impressive. Obviously, plays of this ilk maintain the one location, but to do so well, rely on a marvellous story to keep the viewer enthralled and hanging on their every word and action.
Inspector Poole is played by the incomparable Alastair Sim, who is totally and utterly sublime in this role, holding court as he does, as he questions the Birling family in turn.
Obviously kudos must also go to J.B. Priestly for the marvellous story, which maintains it's hold on the viewer, right until the end, introducing twists and turns, all the way. I confess that the ending is slightly disappointing, as it leaves a few things unanswered, but then it wouldn't be the gripping classic that it is, without leaving certain elements open to interpretation by us, the humble viewer.
Look out for a young George Cole as the tram conductor. Also a young Norman Bird, a well known character actor who seems to have been in everything, pops up as the factory foreman.
Others to note are, Bryan Forbes (husband to Nanette Newman and father of Emma Forbes), plays the always squiffy Eric Birling and does it rather well too. And Brian Worth plays Gerald Croft, the business man getting engaged to young Sheila Berling. Worth has acted with Alastair Sim previously, playing his nephew Fred, in the classic A Christmas Carol, just 3 years previously, in 1951.
All in all An Inspector Calls is a must see piece of theatre. I think we should do more of these films on a Tuesday night or Wednesday for that matter.
And to the scores. An Inspector Calls ranks 8 out of 10.
We continue with our retrospective type season, with another black and white film, this time dating back to 1954. Tonight we see what happens when;
An Inspector Calls
As I say, a 1954 classic, based on the stage play of the same name by J.B. Priestly, An Inspector Calls is a drawing room drama, set in 1912, centred on the rich Birling family of Brumley. Sitting down to dinner one night, celebrating the engagement of their daughter Sheila, Inspector Poole pays them a visit and to impart the news, that a young girl has died, a young girl it seems that has touched the lives of each family member, unbeknown to each other.
Inspector Poole, calmly, carefully and in a laid back manner, cross examines each family member in turn, delving into their past and their involvement with the girl. Establishing the facts and making out each person to be, in some way responsible for the girls death.
The story is gripping, riveting even. And the fact that it is set, apart from the story establishing flashbacks, in almost one room, is most impressive. Obviously, plays of this ilk maintain the one location, but to do so well, rely on a marvellous story to keep the viewer enthralled and hanging on their every word and action.
Inspector Poole is played by the incomparable Alastair Sim, who is totally and utterly sublime in this role, holding court as he does, as he questions the Birling family in turn.
Obviously kudos must also go to J.B. Priestly for the marvellous story, which maintains it's hold on the viewer, right until the end, introducing twists and turns, all the way. I confess that the ending is slightly disappointing, as it leaves a few things unanswered, but then it wouldn't be the gripping classic that it is, without leaving certain elements open to interpretation by us, the humble viewer.
Look out for a young George Cole as the tram conductor. Also a young Norman Bird, a well known character actor who seems to have been in everything, pops up as the factory foreman.
Others to note are, Bryan Forbes (husband to Nanette Newman and father of Emma Forbes), plays the always squiffy Eric Birling and does it rather well too. And Brian Worth plays Gerald Croft, the business man getting engaged to young Sheila Berling. Worth has acted with Alastair Sim previously, playing his nephew Fred, in the classic A Christmas Carol, just 3 years previously, in 1951.
All in all An Inspector Calls is a must see piece of theatre. I think we should do more of these films on a Tuesday night or Wednesday for that matter.
And to the scores. An Inspector Calls ranks 8 out of 10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)