Search
Search results
Mark @ Carstairs Considers (2072 KP) rated The Ninth Daughter (Abigail Adams #1) in Books
Mar 9, 2018
Abigail Adams is going to visit a friend, but her friends isn't home and there's a dead woman on her floor. Who is this woman? When John is accused of the crime, Abigail starts trying to clear her husband. Meanwhile, some tea has just sailed into Boston harbor…. I love Revolutionary era history, so I wanted to like this book. However, it let the detail of life during that time slow down the pace of the story. And the plot that was here was highly predictable.
<a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2013/01/book-review-ninth-daughter-by-barbara.html">My full review at Carstairs Considers</a>.
<a href="http://carstairsconsiders.blogspot.com/2013/01/book-review-ninth-daughter-by-barbara.html">My full review at Carstairs Considers</a>.
Phil Leader (619 KP) rated The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy in Books
Nov 14, 2019
What can be said about Douglas Adams' freewheeling science fiction comedy that hasn't been said before? Probably nothing but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve a review.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
I first came to the Hitchhiker's Guide series through this book. It was about 1981 I suppose and it was recommended by a school friend. I hadn't been aware of the radio series (although as luck would have it it was repeated on BBC Radio 4 within a few weeks) and it was a little while before the television adaptation appeared (which for all its faults - mainly a lack of budget - stayed true to the spirit of the books and the radio series rather more successfully than the film).
From the point I opened this and started reading I couldn't get enough Hitchhiker's Guide. Adams' style is so much like a swan on a lake - it all seems effortless on the surface but underneath there's a lot going on. As Adams' friend John Lloyd has commented, he had the ability to write backwards, so he would start with several pages of (what to other people would be) excellent material and after a couple of days' furious writing it would be down to 2 pages, but each sentence a carefully crafted gem. The result is like the difference between beer and vodka. You will enjoy drinking the beer but the distilled and concentrated vodka will knock you out.
There is real genius in the wit, ideas seemingly being pulled from nowhere and taking on a whole new aspect (towels for example). Delightful non-sequitors (especially from aliens who turn out to be pretty ordinary - or frequently less than ordinary), brilliant and inventive word play and sheer imagination and brio run through every page, all joined together by delightful asides from 'the book'.
The story itself is based on the radio series of the same name which was pretty much made up as it went along, Adams following whatever idea seemed to give him the best scope for a quick gag at the time. But somehow this all works and the story is remarkably coherent (although the book does veer away from the thread of the radio series at the very end). It has been said before that it resembles Gulliver's Travels as each new world reveals new wonders (or new banalities shining a light on our own humdrum existences here on Earth).
Oh the story? The book essentially follows one Arthur Dent, a completely unremarkable and normal human being apart from two things. Firstly his house is about to be demolished to make way for a bypass, a fact he was previously unaware of. Secondly his friend Ford Prefect (the book explains the name) is not from Guildford after all but from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. When aliens show up to demolish the whole Earth to make way for an interstellar bypass, Ford saves Arthur from certain death and reveals he is a reporter for a book called The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy and he got stuck on Earth for rather a long time.
Arthur proceeds to have a rather horrible time being shot at, thrown out of spaceships, patronised and generally baffled by everything that is going on around him. But The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is always on hand to try to explain things.
Incredibly amusing, brilliantly written and ultimately quoteable this not just a good book, it is something that really everyone should read.
Lindsay (1693 KP) rated Colton's Time Machine: Jefferson, Adams, Franklin (Book #3) in Books
Aug 28, 2021
Are you a history fan? Do you want a fun and enjoyable way to teach history lessons to your children or even your students? Well, Colton's Time Machine will help you with this. I have read and checked out "Colton's Time Machine: Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin" by Rebecca Massey.
Colton and his friends go on adventures to meet three historical figures. Each one is detailed and done well. Children will learn a bit of history about Thomas Jefferson, John Adam, and Benjamin Franklin. The way Colton deals with some of the antics the dragons do. It is enjoyable and teachable to any child or children. Children will be smiling and learning history lessons through the book; Not all but some American critical historical events.
Each chapter is separated for each prominent historical figure. The pictures are bright and fun to look at. It seems like Colton is teaching some dragons about sharing and asking to use things. There seem to be some life lessons through the book as well as some history.
Teachers and parents alike will want to add this series to their classroom or even their child or children's bookshelves. This series is a spin-off to Colton's Pocket Dragons. Suitable for children to learn about American history and the importance of democracy.
Colton and his friends go on adventures to meet three historical figures. Each one is detailed and done well. Children will learn a bit of history about Thomas Jefferson, John Adam, and Benjamin Franklin. The way Colton deals with some of the antics the dragons do. It is enjoyable and teachable to any child or children. Children will be smiling and learning history lessons through the book; Not all but some American critical historical events.
Each chapter is separated for each prominent historical figure. The pictures are bright and fun to look at. It seems like Colton is teaching some dragons about sharing and asking to use things. There seem to be some life lessons through the book as well as some history.
Teachers and parents alike will want to add this series to their classroom or even their child or children's bookshelves. This series is a spin-off to Colton's Pocket Dragons. Suitable for children to learn about American history and the importance of democracy.
Nick McCabe recommended Octet by Steve Reich in Music (curated)
Billie Wichkan (118 KP) rated The Greenway (Mike Croft, #1) in Books
May 22, 2019
AUGUST 1975: Cassie Malthams life changes forever one scorching day. She and her twelve-year-old cousin Suzie take a shortcut through the Greenway, an ancient pathway steeped in Norfolk legend. Somewhere along this path Suzie simply vanishes . . .
TWENTY YEARS LATER: Cassie is still tormented by nightmares, parts of her memory completely erased. With her husband Fergus and friends Anna and Simon, she returns to Norfolk, determined to confront her fears and solve a mystery that wont let her rest.
Then another young girl goes missing at the entrance to the Greenway, and Cassie is pushed once more into the darkest recesses of her mind.
John Tynan, the retired detective whod been in charge of Suzies case, is still haunted by her disappearance. He offers his help to Detective Inspector Mike Croft who is leading the increasingly frantic search for the missing child. Has evil returned? And what really happened all those years ago and who can be believed?
First time for me reading this author and it wont be last. The Greenway is a kind of pathway that connects two large empty fields.
This is a gripping mystery story.
A genuinely scary, psychological thriller.
I enjoyed the twists and turns in the plot. I enjoyed the story and the building of the characters.
This book was published originally in 1995, and is now being repackaged and republished now.
Very enjoyable and I am pleased to see there are another three Mike Croft books already published.
Recommend reading!
I would like to thank NetGalley, Joffe Books and the author Jane Adams for my ARC in exchange for an honest review.
TWENTY YEARS LATER: Cassie is still tormented by nightmares, parts of her memory completely erased. With her husband Fergus and friends Anna and Simon, she returns to Norfolk, determined to confront her fears and solve a mystery that wont let her rest.
Then another young girl goes missing at the entrance to the Greenway, and Cassie is pushed once more into the darkest recesses of her mind.
John Tynan, the retired detective whod been in charge of Suzies case, is still haunted by her disappearance. He offers his help to Detective Inspector Mike Croft who is leading the increasingly frantic search for the missing child. Has evil returned? And what really happened all those years ago and who can be believed?
First time for me reading this author and it wont be last. The Greenway is a kind of pathway that connects two large empty fields.
This is a gripping mystery story.
A genuinely scary, psychological thriller.
I enjoyed the twists and turns in the plot. I enjoyed the story and the building of the characters.
This book was published originally in 1995, and is now being repackaged and republished now.
Very enjoyable and I am pleased to see there are another three Mike Croft books already published.
Recommend reading!
I would like to thank NetGalley, Joffe Books and the author Jane Adams for my ARC in exchange for an honest review.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Amsterdam (2022) in Movies
Nov 21, 2022
Weak First Half Gives Way To Strong Second Half
There are certain Directors working today that gain such a reputation that most Major Movie Stars clamor to be in their films - no matter how big (or small) their part is. Quentin Tarantino, Wes Anderson and Christopher Nolan all come to mind. And, for some reason, David O. Russell is in that camp as well.
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
The latest film from this cinematic auteur, AMSTERDAM, is jam-packed with stars from Christian Bale to John David Washington to Margot Robbie, Robert DeNiro, Zoe Saldana, Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Chris Rock, Michael Shannon, Michael Myers, Timothy Olyphant, Any-Taylor Joy and even Taylor Swift show up to play part in this drama/thriller/comedy that takes a real life event and gives it the David O. Russell touch.
And…what is the David O. Russell touch? It is - for better or for worse - a skewed perspective of the goings-on in the film, commenting on the action while driving a narrative forward. On the one hand, he is liked by many actors for he let’s them improvise and work through their performances. However, on the other hand, if he is not getting what he wants, he is also known as a antagonistic Director as he has had on-set feuds with George Clooney, Lilly Tomlin and Amy Adams. But…on the other hand…he has been nominated for Best Director 3x and quite a few of his actors (Bale, Adams, Cooper, Jennifer Lawrence, etc.) have been nominated for an Oscar.
For AMSTERDAM the film’s tone and intention meander for the 1st half of the movie - as do the performances - before settling into a crackerjack thriller/murder-mystery/espionage film.
And that’s too bad for many will be turned off by the 1st half - the meandering is detrimental to the audience’s enjoyment - it feels like a series of “acting scenes” and not a coherent grouping of scenarios leading to a plot. This will turn many off - and will have them turning off the film - before it settles down and becomes good.
As is often the case with Russell’s films, the performances are good (Washington), better (Robbie) and best (Bale, channelling his inner Peter Faulk) while the other actors support the 3 leads in surprising ways. If nothing else, see this movie to watch all of these wonderful performers plying their craft. Of course, you’ll be saying to yourself “that’s wonderfully acted” for you won’t be immersed into the people, emotions or the plot at the beginning.
And that is Russell’s issue. If he could have settled on the tone and focus of the 2nd half of the film in the first half, he’d have himself another Oscar contending film. But, as it were, it’s an interesting curiosity - one that will have you entertained for a few hours, but will leave you scratching your head longing for “what could have been”.
Letter Grade: B (“C” for the first half, “A” for the 2nd half)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated Amistad (1997) in Movies
Aug 13, 2020
Give Us Us Free
Slaves are put on trial when they start a mutiny on the ship bringing them over to America. Although a little long in the tooth, Amistad is a memorable movie that gives you something to root for.
Acting: 10
This was the first time I got to see a performance from Djimon Hounsou. I was blown away by his tenacity. You felt his passion in every single line he utters. This movie wouldn’t have been the same without him. I would argue the same for Anthony Hopkins playing the role of John Quincy Adams. Hopkins is no secret to blockbuster performances so it’s no surprise that he knocks this one out of the park.
Beginning: 10
This is how you start a movie! For me, it has one of the top ten beginning of all time for any movie. It’s riveting and terrifying at the same time. The way Spielberg shot it was genius.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
No surprise here with one of the most iconic directors of all time at the helm. He always has a way of choosing the best angle for the greatest impact. I could spend a whole entry talking about the subtle things he does to leave large impacts. It’s a cinematic treat.
Conflict: 7
The struggle here is the movie mostly revolves around two major cases. The courtroom can be boring in spots on the big screen if not done right. Even in the case of Amistad where things are done right, it can still be a bit much to consume. You feel like nothing is happening when actually there is a whole lot happening at once.
Entertainment Value: 8
I was intrigued to see how this story would unfold from beginning to end. I loved the character development and the understanding of what got both sides to their respective points. Again, despite its length, you will be engaged throughout.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 1
Plot: 10
Resolution: 9
Overall: 81
Improve the pacing here and you have a masterpiece point blank. Despite its length, Amistad is definitely worth the time spent. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
Acting: 10
This was the first time I got to see a performance from Djimon Hounsou. I was blown away by his tenacity. You felt his passion in every single line he utters. This movie wouldn’t have been the same without him. I would argue the same for Anthony Hopkins playing the role of John Quincy Adams. Hopkins is no secret to blockbuster performances so it’s no surprise that he knocks this one out of the park.
Beginning: 10
This is how you start a movie! For me, it has one of the top ten beginning of all time for any movie. It’s riveting and terrifying at the same time. The way Spielberg shot it was genius.
Characters: 10
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
No surprise here with one of the most iconic directors of all time at the helm. He always has a way of choosing the best angle for the greatest impact. I could spend a whole entry talking about the subtle things he does to leave large impacts. It’s a cinematic treat.
Conflict: 7
The struggle here is the movie mostly revolves around two major cases. The courtroom can be boring in spots on the big screen if not done right. Even in the case of Amistad where things are done right, it can still be a bit much to consume. You feel like nothing is happening when actually there is a whole lot happening at once.
Entertainment Value: 8
I was intrigued to see how this story would unfold from beginning to end. I loved the character development and the understanding of what got both sides to their respective points. Again, despite its length, you will be engaged throughout.
Memorability: 6
Pace: 1
Plot: 10
Resolution: 9
Overall: 81
Improve the pacing here and you have a masterpiece point blank. Despite its length, Amistad is definitely worth the time spent. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
*＊✿❀ Maki ❀✿＊* (7 KP) rated The Warrior Heir (The Heir Chronicles, #1) in Books
May 3, 2018
[a:Cinda Williams Chima|125308|Cinda Williams Chima|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1291420167p2/125308.jpg] was my biggest takeaway from [b:The Way of the Wizard|8121665|The Way of the Wizard|John Joseph Adams|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1297656860s/8121665.jpg|12917149]. I absolutely adored the short story of how Linda and Hastings met, and knew that I had to read the actual series.
You can definitely tell that this was written a few years before the short story in The Way of the Wizard. The writing isn't quite on the same level - all of the key elements are still there, but in a rawer form.
That's not a bad thing. I'm not insulting the quality of the writing, at all. It was still a very enjoyable story, and the writing and the editing were solid. And I'm happy to watch the progression of the narrative, as it gets stronger over time.
...but. If I had read The Warrior Heir before I read "The Trader and the Slave", I probably would have enjoyed this book more than I did. Part of me kept waiting for the dark, grittiness that the short story had, and it never really showed up.
Were parts of The Warrior Heir heavy? Sure. There's a lot of double-crossing, morality, and self-sacrifice in there. But it wasn't quite the same.
Sorry for that slight detour there. I felt that, before I started talking about the book itself, I should explain the factors that went towards my final rating.
Because, in general, I loved this book. It was a lot of fun to read. I loved the "world" and the magic system, I loved the history and explanations of why magic works, and where it came from. The dedication to the magic system was very nice, and much appreciated in such an action-based fantasy book.
The main characters all managed to keep me interested in what was going on (even though there wasn't nearly enough Linda and Hastings in there for me), and the antagonists walked a delicate balance of being evil, and just doing what they thought would be best for themselves, or for those around them. Even some of the protagonists walked that line, which was <i>really</i> nice to see.
Morality - it's pretty important to the story.
There weren't really any surprises in the plot department. It was incredibly easy to guess the various "twists" the book had to offer. <spoiler>Especially anything having to do with Ellen.</spoiler> But personally, I was too distracted by the world-building to overly care about how predictable things were.
Because in Maki-land, well-established magic system > plot.
You can definitely tell that this was written a few years before the short story in The Way of the Wizard. The writing isn't quite on the same level - all of the key elements are still there, but in a rawer form.
That's not a bad thing. I'm not insulting the quality of the writing, at all. It was still a very enjoyable story, and the writing and the editing were solid. And I'm happy to watch the progression of the narrative, as it gets stronger over time.
...but. If I had read The Warrior Heir before I read "The Trader and the Slave", I probably would have enjoyed this book more than I did. Part of me kept waiting for the dark, grittiness that the short story had, and it never really showed up.
Were parts of The Warrior Heir heavy? Sure. There's a lot of double-crossing, morality, and self-sacrifice in there. But it wasn't quite the same.
Sorry for that slight detour there. I felt that, before I started talking about the book itself, I should explain the factors that went towards my final rating.
Because, in general, I loved this book. It was a lot of fun to read. I loved the "world" and the magic system, I loved the history and explanations of why magic works, and where it came from. The dedication to the magic system was very nice, and much appreciated in such an action-based fantasy book.
The main characters all managed to keep me interested in what was going on (even though there wasn't nearly enough Linda and Hastings in there for me), and the antagonists walked a delicate balance of being evil, and just doing what they thought would be best for themselves, or for those around them. Even some of the protagonists walked that line, which was <i>really</i> nice to see.
Morality - it's pretty important to the story.
There weren't really any surprises in the plot department. It was incredibly easy to guess the various "twists" the book had to offer. <spoiler>Especially anything having to do with Ellen.</spoiler> But personally, I was too distracted by the world-building to overly care about how predictable things were.
Because in Maki-land, well-established magic system > plot.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Finding your feet (2018) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Foot tapping and Tear Jerking.
There are some films whose trailers really don’t properly represent their contents. The trailer for the new ‘grey-pound’ film “Finding Your Feet” promised a light hearted and witty foray into an elderly dance-club. And, yes, you get some laughs. But it’s very much a bitter sweet comedy, and the bitterness is ladled on by the bucketload leading to more tears than smiles through the majority of the running time.
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).
Sandra (Imelda Staunton, “Pride“) – now Lady Sandra, after her husband’s latest knighthood – is in a predictable, sex-free but reasonably happy marriage to legal beagle Mike (John Sessions, “Denial“, “Florence Foster Jenkins“) when her world is shaken to its core on discovering that Mike has been having a five-year affair with her best friend Pamela (Josie Lawrence). Moving in with her Bohemian sister Bif (Celia Imrie, “Bridget Jones Baby“), she struggles to integrate into her decidedly lower class lifestyle and find common ground with Bif’s dance club friends Charlie (Timothy Spall, “Denial“, “Mr Turner”), Ted (David Hayman) and Jackie (Joanna Lumley, “The Wolf of Wall Street“).
Can Sandra turn her downward spiral around and find love and happiness again? Well, the posters scream “The Feel Good Film of the Year” so you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know the answer to that! But it’s a bumpy journey for sure.
Getting all the acting honours is Timothy Spall, who is far too good to be buried away in this small British rom com. To watch him do “ordinary bloke doing ordinary things” is an absolute delight. He adds class and distinction to every scene he’s in, especially for those concerned with his truly tragic and upsetting back-story. Running a close second is Celia Imrie who has a wicked smile off to perfection and adds a lot of emotional depth to her performance: and she needs the range, since she too is on a pretty emotional journey through the second half of the film.
John Sessions and Josie Lawrence – old compatriots of course from the original version of TV’s “Whose Line Is It Anyway” – also deliver marvellous cameo performances, as does Phoebe Nicholls (“The Elephant Man”, “Downton Abbey”) as the tennis playing friend Janet.
Less convincing for me was Imelda Staunton, particularly in the first half of the film: for me she never quite pulls off the icy cold emotional wreck of Sandra, but is much better once the thaw has set in.
The film is written by Meg Leonard (in a debut script) and Nick Moorcroft (who did the “St Trinians” scripts). And there are some funny lines in there, although it has to be said that there are not enough of them. The majority of the best ones in fact are in the trailer, never bettered by Joanna Lumley’s zinger…. “My last marriage ended for religious reasons…. he thought he was God and I didn’t”! There’s not much more room for comic lines, since the rest of the script is stuffed with the dramatic outcomes from various flavours of old-age malady. Fortunately I was one of the younger members of the generally grey-haired audience, but for those further up the scale it must have been like staring into the void!
The film will win no awards for choreography, since the dance scenes are gloriously inept and out of sync. But this all rather adds to the charm of the piece.
Directed by Richard Loncraine, director of the equally forgettable Brit-flick “Wimbledon” and the rather more memorable “Brimstone and Treacle”, this is as Douglas Adams would have said “Mostly Harmless”: a film that most over-50’s will find a pleasant way to spend two hours. But go in expecting a drama with comic moments, rather than the hilarious comedy predicted by the trailer, and you will be better prepared.
(I should comment that the rating below is my view: my illustrious wife declared it a triumphant chick-flick and gave it FFFFf).