Change Your Image
daniel_clancy2001
Reviews
Murder with Mirrors (1985)
Getting there, but a long way off
It was with a sceptical frown that I put the tape in the machine and pressed "Play" - I had already seen four atrocious US TV films from the '80s. I was surprised enough to manage to watch it all the way through. FInally, the production team was starting to get the hang of Agatha Christie... just. However, I will not pretend that more Hayes-Marple films would be a good thing.
The updated plot is ridiculous and fanciful. The cast aren't even trying. Sparks flew between Bette Davis (Playing the kindly Carrie-Louise) and the rest of the cast. This shows, subtly, in that none of the cast will touch her and they always stay a good foot or two away, even in the friendly greeting scenes.
This is always advertised as "One of Bette Davis's last films", but most people fail to realise it was Helen Hayes's very last film, and Miss Hayes was critically ill at the time of shooting. This may be why everyone involved seems to lack passion. I don't like the cheap American titles, the cheap American sets, the cheap American costumes, the cheap American accents and the cheap American attitudes.
Guess which two words spring to mind (they begin with "C" and "s"). Frances de la Tour is more irritating than her character gives scope for, John Mills gives a reliable performance, as ever, but it is sadly wasted. The viewer can tell that the cast-members have just had a laugh at the writer's expense.
Compared to the less-than-perfect 1991 version, this is just a waste of film.
The Ghost Camera (1933)
Could do with a remake
The last reviewer has got it spot on, but I will add my comments nonetheless. Here we have a remarkable mystery in an unremarkable film. The Radio Times described this as an "unexceptional mystery" and then went on to talk about Sir John MIlls in the review, as there is little more to say about the film.
I watched this film because John Mills is my hero. I taped it and am pleased I did. This is a completely original story, and one I've not heard of elsewhere. I'm not a fan of remakes, but this cries out for one (Not with Chris Columbus). When I'm rich I'll produce, direct and star in a remake.
Possibly.
My Parents Are Aliens (1999)
Simply splendid kids entertainment
I am 15 and have been watching this show since it began, nearly five years ago. Since then, almost every thirty-minute episode has been of consistently high quality - now in it's eighth series, the show has lost none of the hilarity it started out with. The show is very amusing; it caters for all levels. The acting here is absolutely superb from everyone involved. I can honestly say that, as far as I know, this is one of the only shows on TV with child actors who can act. Not only that, but they are all very good actors. The loss of Barbara Durkin in 2001 led to a lot of people thinking: "Well, that's it." She cut a highly amusing figure as Sophie, the mother. The casting of the very different Carla Mendonca was, however, masterful, and I commend whoever thought of it. There is not a single weak performer in the show, the writing has sustained unbelievably high quality - although some of the humour can get rather crude at times - and there is little to criticise. The only thing I would advice they dropped in the next series is the canned laughter, which removes the sophistication of the all-round masterful show.
Oklahoma! (1999)
Very nice production with odd casting
I just bought and watched the video of this because I will be in an amateur production soon of "Oklahoma!", and my song was cut out of the 1955 film. First of all, Maureen Lipman was excellent as Aunt Eller, Josefina Gabrielle was a good Laurey, Shuler Hensley was absolutely brilliant as Jud and Peter Pollycarpou was alright as Ali Hakim, although the character he performed was nothing like the character in the script. I thought that Jimmy Johnston and Vicki Simon gave good performances, but they were terribly miscast, making my favourite double-act quite irritating Hugh Jackman is a good actor. He can sing, but he knows it and seems desperate to outsing everyone else, making one dread (quite justifiably) the big title song at the end.
What I liked about this production was the very lavish stage and Trevor Nunn's direction. What made me laugh is that the director is clearly trying to be as unlike the 1955 film as possible, and so are some of the cast. However, the other people are copying their 1955 contemporaries (why does Will never pronounce the "t" in "Kansas City"?), and whoever rewrote the script undoubtedly had the film in his mind. The director for the video is treating it as a film rather than a stage show, but the shot goes back to the audience occasionally, reminding us that it is a theatre.
The first thing I did after watching the tape was to rewind it and watch it again so that says something. The tape isn't that bad, and is certainly acceptable, at the least. I rated it 8 put of 10. I'd probably give it 8.5.
A Study in Terror (1965)
A delight for Sherlockians, a frustration for Ripperologists
I am both a fan of Sherlock Holmes and an interested observer of the case of Jack the Ripper. This film, with excellent show-saving performances by John Neville, Anthony Quayle, Robert Morley and the whole cast, was clearly written by a Sherlockian rather than a Ripperologist. A lot of Holmes's lines are lifted from stories in the original cannon. The fictional story here (where Holmes encounters Jack the Ripper) is good and basic, and I prefer the simplicity of its solution to the complexity of that in "Murder by Decree", the other Holmes-Ripper film, made in 1979. The research, however, on the Jack the Ripper crimes was clearly lousy, if not non-existent: From the first five seconds of the film, with Mary-Anne Nichols (nicknamed "Polly", but would The Times call her that?) having a knife stuck through her neck and seconds later a fat woman discovering her, when in reality, Nichols had her throat cut and her uterus torn out, two hours before she was discovered by two men. The "dear boss" letter is anything but complete here, there is no mention of the other letters or reasonable explanation for why the Ripper sent it. The writing on the wall for murder three is absent. Still, if you don't mind historical inaccuracies, this film is definitely worth watching. It has my approval.
Hustle (2004)
Fun
Certainly my favourite series of the year, "Hustle" is the type of fun thing that TV needs. I love the show - it's like the stories I write. The only real word to describe this is: "fun". The cast are enjoying themselves and that's nice to see. The story is twisted and moral. The episodes tend to end on a strange (if not predictable) note, but the starting music is so cool that one forgets nearly everything else. There's also a decent story for each episode.
Watching "Hustle" allows us to suspend our disbelief considerably. I forgot the real world when I watched it. It's great. Just sit down for an hour, forget everything and have fun. You deserve it.
I look forward to the next series.
Ordeal by Innocence (1984)
I wouldn't even watch it if it had Olivia Hussey!
It is difficult to describe this film without profanity. The rights to the book were clearly bought because of the title. I am a purist Agatha Christie fan, so I dislike adaptations which spoil her work. Normally, after the first three or four viewings, they grow on me (It happened with "Appointment with Death", it happened with the remake of "Murder on the Orient Express" and it happened with the remake of "Sparkling Cyanide"). I still hate this film. The cast are talented, but wasted - especially Faye Dunaway, who has about three words. The music is completely out of place. I expected them to start playing "The Merry Old Land of Oz" at the hanging. The story is unraveled ploddingly; a fiasco. I didn't understand it until I read the book. This is a pure waste of film.
Poirot: Five Little Pigs (2003)
Brilliant
This has to be, without doubt, the best Suchet-Poirot outing so far, except perhaps "Lord Edgware Dies" in 2000. At least Hastings, Japp and Miss Lemon haven't been injected clumsily into the story. A few things peeved me: Cara Lemerchant became Lucy Crale, Phillip Blake became a homosexual and Agatha Christie's autograph was all over the screen. Other than those points, the script is extremely close to the source, acting is of surprisingly high quality (We don't expect Marc Warren to be able to act - he normally can't), and Suchet's moustache is - at last! - convincing. Fans won't be disappointed; Despite some toning down of the original story, this production is definitely good viewing.