When I chose the theme for this year’s double feature, I wanted to do something different from previous double features I’ve hosted by reviewing four films. With The Golden Girls featuring four main stars (Betty White, Estelle Getty, Bea Arthur, and Rue McClanahan) and with those stars possessing their own filmographies, I found a reason to seek out more of their projects. The movies I selected, Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine, Mask, Mame, and The Little Match Girl, are just as unique as the “golden girls” themselves! I was reminded why I like Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine when I decided to revisit it. Not only did I rediscover forgotten elements like the story’s humor, I, once again, came to appreciate what makes the film good. Mask was such a pleasant surprise because of how solid the movie is! It’s a biopic that brings something different to the genre’s table as well as genuineness. While I found both Mame and The Little Match Girl fine, I enjoyed the films for different reasons. Mame’s choreography and colorful palette helped make the film as entertaining as it was. Meanwhile, the cleverly written dialogue in The Little Match Girl allowed interactions between characters to be memorable. Now, as the sun sets on Miami and all the cheesecake has been eaten, I’d like to say thank you for being a friend of the Golden Double Double Feature!
The Golden Double Double Feature banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by Touchstone Television, Witt/Thomas/Harris Productions, 20th Television, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)
Thanks for joining me for the fourth part of my Golden Double Double Feature! The majority of my review of The Little Match Girl is spoiler-free. If you’d like to learn more about why I chose this year’s double feature theme, you can check out the introduction in the link below.
The Little Match Girl(1987) poster created by NBC Productions and National Broadcasting Company (NBC).
1. Out of the movies from Rue McClanahan’s filmography, why did you select The Little Match Girl?
Unlike my decision to review Mask and Mame, I knew Rue starred in The Little Match Girl before selecting the movie for the Golden Double Double Feature. However, similar to when I wrote about Mame and Mask, I had heard of The Little Match Girl, but hadn’t seen it prior to this double feature review. I also knew the 1987 film was an adaptation of one of Hans Christian Andersen’s stories. When it comes to The Little Match Girl, though, I was surprised to learn how many times that story was adapted, including in the 1980s. Throughout my eight-year blogging journey, I have covered my fair share of Christmas movies, especially those of the made-for-TV variety. With all that said, I decided to give The Little Match Girl a chance!
2. In The Little Match Girl, Rue portrays Frances Dutton. How is Frances Dutton similar or different from Blanche?
From what I remember, Blanche Devereaux came from a wealthy, Southern background. This fact was brought up from time to time on The Golden Girls. Rue’s character in The Little Match Girl, Frances Dutton, comes from a wealthier background as well. However, Frances and Blanche possess a major difference. While Blanche is sassy, bold, and even flirty, Frances is the complete opposite. In The Little Match Girl, Frances is not only soft-spoken and tender-hearted, she also has a gentler persona. So, it was interesting to see Rue portray a very different character in the 1987 Christmas film.
3. According to The Little Match Girl’s poster, the movie is based on Hans Christian Andersen’s story of the same name. Is there any story from Hans’ bibliography you wish had received a film adaptation?
As I mentioned in answer number one, I was surprised to learn how many times The Little Match Girl was adapted, including in the 1980s. But there have been other stories from Hans’ bibliography that received adaptations, with The Little Mermaid being a notable one. Therefore, I’d like to see an adaptation of one of Hans’ more overlooked titles. For example, The Bell revolves around the mystery of a bell that only rings at sunset. With nature playing a major role in The Bell, an adaptation of this story could be presented as live-action, with the cinematography of natural landscapes stealing the show. However, I think The Bell could also work as an animated project.
4. Was there anything about The Little Match Girl you liked or didn’t like?
Screenwriting, including the dialogue, in made-for-TV movies can be hit or miss. In 1987’s The Little Match Girl, however, I found some of the dialogue cleverly written. One example is when Neville meets the titular little match girl, Molly. When he orders a coffee, Neville adds alcohol from his flask. After Molly asks Neville about the flask, he tells her its “courage”. Molly then responds by telling him, “It doesn’t come in a bottle”. Later in the film, Police Chief Murphy threatens to shut down a local newspaper if there are any reports of Fennel Street’s residents being forced to leave their homes before Christmas. Joseph, the newspaper’s editor, tells Murphy, “Why don’t you crawl back in my father’s pocket where you belong”? Murphy spats out his response to Joseph when he says, “Cause I’m too big”. Because of how clever these responses were, it made these interactions (and the scenes themselves) memorable.
Like I just mentioned in this review, Police Chief Murphy threatens to shut down a local newspaper if there are any reports of Fennel Street’s residents being forced to leave their homes before Christmas. Joseph wants to report this injustice in order to save the homes of Fennel Street’s residents. One tactic is placing Molly’s picture on the newspaper’s front page to draw empathy for the intended cause. But the movie’s viewers don’t know if this tactic worked. That’s because the viewers never see the newspaper with Molly’s picture on the front page in circulation. This is an example of telling instead of showing. It’s also an example of how the movie prioritizes the stories of the grown-up characters despite The Little Match Girl being the movie’s title.
5. As I mentioned in my review of 1974’s Mame, there were two Christmas episodes of The Golden Girls; ‘ ‘Twas the Nightmare Before Christmas’ and ‘Have Yourself a Very Little Christmas’. If the show had created more Christmas episodes, what type of story would you have proposed?
In The Golden Girls’ sixteenth episode from the fourth season, ‘Two Rode Together’, Dorothy and Sophia take a trip to Walt Disney World. This creative decision was part of a trend where various sitcoms would set aside a special episode showing their characters taking a Walt Disney World trip. Based on what I recall, I don’t think any of these episodes take place around Christmastime. So, I would propose an episode of The Golden Girls where the “golden girls” spend Christmas in Orlando. Walt Disney World at Christmastime has been known for its beautiful decorations. Plus, I can think of hilarious antics that could be written into a story like this. Since three of Walt Disney World’s parks were open during the lifespan of The Golden Girls, there are a variety of attractions that could be featured in the episode.
6. Did you develop any thoughts and/or questions while watching this film?
For this part of my review, I will spoil The Little Match Girl. If you have not seen this movie and are planning on watching it, skip ahead to question number seven.
Whenever Molly uses one of her matches, the flame sparkles. A snow angel she makes toward the beginning of the movie sparkles as well. In one scene, Molly explains to Joseph’s son, Jamie, that angels ride on shooting stars directly from Heaven if anyone in the world is in trouble. When Molly is discovered missing by Jamie’s grandpa, Haywood, it’s implied Molly was an angel the entire time. While this was an interesting plot twist, it’s a creative decision that left me with more questions than the movie was willing to provide answers for. Did Molly pass away prior to the events of The Little Match Girl or was she an angel that always existed in Heaven, similar to the angels from Touched by An Angel? How long has Molly been an angel? Has anyone known about Molly’s angel identity? The more I think about this plot twist, I more I believe there’s important lore missing from the script.
7. Throughout The Golden Girls, cheesecake became an iconic staple of the show. What would you say is the iconic staple of The Little Match Girl?
You would think I’d choose Molly’s matches, as the 1987 film is titled The Little Match Girl. But I’m selecting a candle instead. The residents of Fennel Street organize a protest at the Dutton family house, in an effort to save their homes. During the protest, they carry candles, with one of the protesters’ candles being lit by Molly herself. Toward the end of The Little Match Girl, Molly lights the candles of an angel themed Christmas decoration. But beyond the movie itself, candles are sometimes associated with Christmas décor; from candles in windows to candles placed on Christmas trees. Light is also a major theme of the Christmas holiday, such as the season of Advent and the Nativity Star. I’d even say light is a major theme of The Little Match Girl.
8. The Little Match Girl is a made-for-TV film. How does this movie compare to other Christmas television movies you’ve seen and even reviewed?
Looking back on the Christmas television films I’ve seen and reviewed, some of those titles featured at least one younger protagonist. But if I had to compare The Little Match Girl to another made-for-TV movie I’ve covered, it would have to be the 1999 film, If You Believe. Both stories possess a younger protagonist whose actions significantly impact the life of at least one of the story’s key characters. If You Believe and The Little Match Girl contain a sense of magical realism. These movies share the flaw of telling instead of showing as well.
9. The Little Match Girl was released on December 21st, 1987 (within the third season of The Golden Girls). Do you think the show had any impact on the movie?
In my review of Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine, I speculated why the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection may not have cast any of the “golden girls” (Rue, Bea, Estelle, and Betty) in their movies during The Golden Girls’ lifespan. One of those speculated reasons was how Hallmark Hall of Fame and The Golden Girls were broadcast on separate networks. According to IMDB, 1987’s The Little Match Girl was not only produced by NBC Productions, it was also distributed by National Broadcasting Company (NBC). As I mentioned in my Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine review, The Golden Girls aired on NBC. With that said, I don’t believe it was a coincidence for The Little Match Girl’s creative team to consider casting Rue in their movie.
10. After watching The Little Match Girl, is there anything you can take away from your movie-viewing experience?
Like I said in answer number one, I have covered my fair share of Christmas movies throughout my eight-year blogging journey, especially those of the made-for-TV variety. When it comes to 1987’s The Little Match Girl, I found the movie fine and serviceable. While there were strengths within the film, such as the acting performances and the cleverly written dialogue, the movie’s flaws held it back from being a stronger presentation. Despite the movie’s title being The Little Match Girl, the script prioritizes the stories of the grown-up characters. This creative decision kind of makes the title seem misleading, as I expected the story to focus more on the titular little match girl, Molly. Even though the plot twist was interesting, it left behind more questions than the movie was willing to provide answers for. In my opinion, it feels like important lore may have been omitted from the script. Reflecting on The Little Match Girl, as well as other Christmas films I’ve seen and reviewed, I can think of titles that are stronger than the 1987 picture. However, I can also think of movies that are weaker than The Little Match Girl.
The Golden Double Double Feature banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by Touchstone Television, Witt/Thomas/Harris Productions, 20th Television, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)
April’s theme for the Genre Grandeur blogathon is “Courtroom Dramas”. Upon researching eligible titles for this review, I came across one I have heard of before. That title was 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution! Though this adaptation was recommended to me by Emily (from The Flapper Dame) and Eric Binford (from Diary of a Movie Maniac), it’s not the first time I’ve seen (and reviewed) any Witness for the Prosecution adaptation. Back in 2022, I wrote about 1982’s version from the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection. In that review, I criticized Wilfred (the film’s protagonist) spending more time on the story’s court case than the mystery wrapped around it. I believed that creative decision decreased the audience’s engagement. This is one of the reasons why I thought Hallmark Hall of Fame’s adaptation of Witness for the Prosecution was just ok. But will I feel similarly about the 1957 version of this story? In order to solve this mystery, you’ll have to read my review!
The acting: When I wrote about the Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation of Witness for the Prosecution, I praised the acting performances of Diana Rigg, Deborah Kerr, and Beau Bridges. Not only did Beau and Deborah utilize a variety of expressions and emotions, Diana’s portrayal of Christine was consistent. The acting performances in the 1957 adaptation of Witness for the Prosecution were also a highlight! But if I could use one word to describe them, it would be “animated”. Throughout 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution, Wilfrid (the movie’s protagonist) is a grumpy man who stubbornly likes to do things his way. However, the strength of Charles Laughton’s portrayal prevented Wilfrid from becoming a one-dimensional character. In a scene where Wilfrid rides on an elevating stair chair, Wilfrid smiles with a sneaky look in his eyes, scheming a way to foil Miss Plimsoll’s plans. Meanwhile, Tyrone Power gave a very well-rounded portrayal of Leonard Vole! One of the best examples of this statement is when Leonard finds out about his inheritance from the murder victim, Emily Jane French. Leonard’s eyes become very wide as he excitedly reacts to his new-found wealth. This excitement can also be heard in his voice. Then, without hesitation, Leonard’s face falls as he realizes this recently discovered information gives him a motive for murder. Concern replaced excitement in Leonard’s voice and fear even found a reason to exist in his eyes.
As I just mentioned in this review, Diana Rigg’s portrayal of Christine in Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Witness for the Prosecution was consistent. This was also the case for Marlene Dietrich’s portrayal of Christine in 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution. But like I said in this review, the cast’s performances in the 1957 movie were “animated”. That animation was woven into Marlene’s portrayal as well. Throughout Witness for the Prosecution, Christine carried herself with a poised confidence, refusing to let anything get to her. A perfect example is when she outsmarted Wilfrid’s “monocle test”. During Leonard’s trial, however, Christine’s emotions burst into the courtroom. Sometimes, she yelled out her answers with an intensely serious look on her face. There was even a scene where tears spilled from her eyes. Marlene’s performance added enjoyment to my movie-viewing experience!
The set design: One of the strengths from 1982’s Witness for the Prosecution was the set design. In my review of that film, I described the court room as well as Wilfred’s office, with the latter being my favorite set in the Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation. But in the 1957 version of Witness for the Prosecution, my favorite set was Emily Jane French’s living room! The room consisted of two closely situated spaces; a sitting area by a large window and a sitting area by a fireplace. The sitting area by the window featured at least one wicker chair, a hanging plant, and a magazine rack. Meanwhile, the sitting area by the fireplace proudly displayed African artifacts on the walls. The white walls surrounding the living room and the décor’s lighter hues helped the artifacts stand out. Mosaic tiles with a flower design added daintiness to the fireplace itself. Two matching wicker cabinets and a transparent shelf provided storage to the living room. The lower ceiling in the living room helped incorporate a sense of coziness. With everything I described, I wish Emily’s living room was featured more in 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution.
Showing as well as telling: A flaw I talked about in my review for Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Witness for the Prosecution was how dialogue heavy the story was. The emphasis of telling over showing left me disappointed. But this flaw was remedied in Witness for the Prosecution from 1957! Flashbacks presented how Leonard met Emily and Christine, which added context to the dialogue. Later in 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution, Wilfrid discovers evidence that could impact Leonard’s case. This discovery is actually shown on screen, with the mystery surrounding who gave Wilfrid the evidence and where that person got the evidence from providing intrigue. A handful of Wilfrid’s pills cleverly show the progression of time during Leonard’s case. Though the 1957 version of Witness for the Prosecution relies on dialogue, the creative decision to show and tell made the movie more engaging than Hallmark Hall of Fame’s adaptation!
Prolonged involvement: In my review of Hallmark Hall of Fame’s adaptation of Witness for the Prosecution, I was critical of Wilfred’s inactive detective role. The 1982 film placed more emphasis on showing Wilfred resolving Leonard’s case than solving the mystery surrounding the case. Witness for the Prosecution from 1957 still places emphasis on showing Wilfrid resolving Leonard’s case. But this time, he doesn’t officially get involved in Leonard’s case until about forty minutes into the hour and fifty-six-minute film. I understand any mystery movie, let alone a courtroom drama, requires build-up. However, in my opinion, the build-up in 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution lasted too long.
An underutilized character: Before Wilfrid officially becomes Leonard’s solicitor, Leonard meets Wilfrid with his solicitor, Mr. Mayhew. If Mr. Mayhew hadn’t given Wilfrid the information about Leonard’s case, Wilfrid would have never known about Leonard’s case. But after Wilfrid becomes Leonard’s solicitor, Mr. Mayhew disappears from the story. I was disappointed by his underutilization because he could have, somehow, continued contributing to Leonard’s case. This underutilization also does a disservice to the actor who portrayed Mr. Mayhew, Henry Daniell.
A predictable detail: Leonard is questioned about Christine when he first meets Wilfrid. During this questioning, Leonard shares an important detail about her that affects the movie’s later events. But as soon as Leonard brought this detail up, I knew how it would impact the story’s outcome. In fact, I saw a plot twist coming because that aforementioned detail about Christine was revealed earlier in the movie. Due to how soon Wilfrid (and the audience) found out about Christine’s detail, it kind of made the movie’s ending predictable.
In the introduction of this review, I asked if I’d feel similarly about 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution as I did Hallmark Hall of Fame’s version of the story. Now that I’ve seen (and reviewed) both adaptations, I can honestly say I like the 1957 film over the one from 1982! One improvement was the creative decision to show as well as tell, which added intrigue and engagement to the movie. It also helps how the purpose of Wilfrid’s “magical monocle” was brought up in the dialogue. Witness for the Prosecution from 1957 shares some of the same strengths as the Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation, such as the acting performances and the set design. However, the 1957 version of the story has its flaws. Because of how soon a detail about Christine was revealed, it kind of made the film’s ending predictable. I not only wasn’t a fan of how underutilized Mr. Mayhew became, I also didn’t like how Wilfrid got involved in Leonard’s case about forty minutes into the hour and fifty-six-minute movie. I’m glad I was recommended the 1957 production of Witness for the Prosecution! It gave me another chance to witness a different approach to one of Agatha Christie’s stories.
Overall score: 7.3-7.4 out of 10
Have you seen 1957’s Witness for the Prosecution? Are there any adaptations of Agatha Christie’s work you’d like to see me review? Please tell me in the comment section!
Thanks for joining me for the first part of my Golden Double Double Feature! The majority of my review of Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine is spoiler-free. If you’d like to learn more about why I chose this year’s double feature theme, you can check out the introduction in the link below.
Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentineposter created by Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, Ridini Entertainment, and CBS
1. Out of the movies from Betty White’s filmography, why did you select Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine?
When I created my Hallmark Hall of Fame tier rank list in 2020, I not only placed The Lost Valentine in the “Get It On Sale for Half Off” (a.k.a. Good) tier, I also recommended the film because of the use of flashbacks and recognition of Valentine’s Day. But it’s been over eight years since I’ve seen The Lost Valentine. While selecting the 2011 Hallmark Hall of Fame picture for this review, I didn’t know if my opinion on the film would remain the same as it was years ago. On my Year-Long Bingo Card, three of the bingo squares are “Review at least 2 Hallmark Hall of Fame films”, “Revisit a movie you haven’t seen in over 5 years”, and “Review a holiday themed movie that isn’t Christmas”. So, when I saw The Lost Valentine on Betty’s filmography, I remembered liking the movie, as well as how the movie would complete those aforementioned bingo squares.
2. In Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine, Betty portrays Caroline Thomas. How is Caroline Thomas similar or different from Rose?
On The Golden Girls, Rose Nylund is known for her innocence and naivete. These qualities add charm to Rose’s character, as well as provide some of the show’s comedic moments. Betty’s character in The Lost Valentine, Caroline Thomas, lacks Rose’s naivete for two reasons. Caroline’s experiences during World War II and even afterwards give her an awareness of how unpredictable life can truly be. Her lack of naivete also makes sense with the story itself, as The Lost Valentine is a serious drama grounded in reality.
3. Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine is based on a book by James Michael Pratt. What book adaptation would you have liked to see Betty star in?
For 2024’s Eurovisionathon readathon, I read The Readers of Broken Wheel Recommend by Katarina Bivald. From what I remember of the book, I could picture Betty portraying a character from that story. Katarina crafted characters that sounded and felt distinct from one another. Plus, the small-town setting seemed Hallmark-esque, creating a sense of community through dramatic and comedic character interactions. The “golden girls” have distinct personalities on The Golden Girls, allowing each character to be unique. Even though the show is classified as a sit-com, there were emotional, serious moments woven into episodes. With all that said, I think a story like The Readers of Broken Wheel Recommend would have complimented Betty’s acting talents, as The Lost Valentine perfectly showcased her comedic and dramatic timing.
4. Was there anything about Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine you liked or didn’t like?
As I mentioned in answer number one, I recommended The Lost Valentine because of the use of flashbacks. These flashbacks added context to the events presented on screen, especially when it came to Caroline’s part of the story. Meghann Fahy portrayed Caroline’s younger self while Billy Magnussen portrayed Caroline’s husband, Neil. Both Meghann’s and Billy’s acting performance was strong. But together, their on-screen chemistry effectively sold the believability of Neil and Caroline’s relationship! What works in the favor on this relationship is the emotional depth Billy and Meghann bring. A great example is how Caroline’s and Neil’s eyes possessed the pain of being apart from each other. Watching Meghann’s and Billy’s performance felt like witnessing a couple upholding their promise of love instead of two actors simply portraying characters. I wish Billy and Meghann had been cast in more Hallmark projects together.
Jennifer Love Hewitt stars in The Lost Valentine as a television reporter named Susan Allison. Susan received a subplot where she contemplates her future with her boyfriend, Andrew. This is one of those subplots where you know the relationship isn’t going to last because the film’s female protagonist will eventually fall in love with the male protagonist, which, in The Lost Valentine, is Caroline’s grandson, Lucas. That creative decision led to Susan’s subplot being predictable. Instead, her subplot should have prioritized her reconciliation with her family, especially since Susan mentioned toward the beginning of The Lost Valentine how she doesn’t have a strong relationship with them.
5. The Golden Girls didn’t receive any television films (like other shows such as Little House on the Prairie, Murder, She Wrote, etc.) In your opinion, why do you think this creative decision was made?
A typical episode of The Golden Girls is about thirty minutes long. Meanwhile, most television movies receive a run-time between an hour and thirty minutes to two hours. If a tv show’s creative team chooses to make a made-for-TV movie, they need to create a story that justifies a longer length of time. So, I’m guessing the creative team behind The Golden Girls never figured out a story that couldn’t be told in half an hour.
6. Did you develop any thoughts and/or questions while watching this film?
Like I said in my number one answer, it’s been over eight years since I’ve seen The Lost Valentine. Because of this, I had completely forgotten the humor woven into the story. Comedic moments sprinkled throughout the film was such a pleasant surprise for me. One of my favorite scenes was when Caroline reads a sports magazine to a group of veterans at a local hospital. While she’s talking about the New York Yankees, Caroline says she doesn’t hate the team, she just doesn’t like it when they beat a team she likes more. How that piece of dialogue was written, as well as Betty’s sweetly honest delivery, created a scene that was genuinely hilarious. Moments like the one I described alleviated some of The Lost Valentine’s heavier scenes yet never overshadowed the story’s serious subject matter.
For this part of my review, I will spoil The Lost Valentine. If you have not seen this movie and are planning on watching it, skip ahead to question number seven.
Toward the end of The Lost Valentine, after Caroline welcomes Neil home, she discovers rose buds growing on a rose bush in her garden. That specific rose bush was not only the first plant Caroline and Neil planted when they moved into their home, the rose bush was believed to be dead for the majority of the movie. When Caroline discovers the rose buds, she reminisces about Neil as she dances to music from the past. All of a sudden, a man who I assumed was Neil’s ghost appeared behind Caroline. After that, the hose Caroline was holding falls to the ground. But the scenes that follow are flashbacks of Caroline and Neil and scenes featuring Lucas and Susan. Is the fallen hose implying Caroline passed away, joining Neil in the afterlife? Or was Caroline so caught up in remembering the past, she dropped the hose by accident? That part of the story was, in my opinion, too open-ended for a stand-alone film. But because The Lost Valentine is based on a book, maybe the source material would provide a clearer explanation than the adaptation did.
7. Throughout The Golden Girls, cheesecake became an iconic staple of the show. What would you say is the iconic staple of Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine?
You’d think I’d pick the titular valentine, as it plays a significant role in The Lost Valentine. But, instead, I’m choosing the red rose. When it comes to growing roses, it takes time, patience, commitment, and care. Even as Lucas wants to uproot a rose bush he believes is dead, Caroline reminds her grandson how she doesn’t give up on things that easily. These aspects perfectly represent some of the major themes of The Lost Valentine; like serving others and putting your love toward something you believe matters. Caroline’s rose bush also provides the story with a nice full-circle moment.
8. The Hallmark Hall of Fame collection overlapped with The Golden Girls (in terms of existence). Why do you think Hallmark Hall of Fame didn’t try to capitalize on the popularity of the “golden girls”?
From 1979 to 2011, Hallmark Hall of Fame movies aired on CBS. The Golden Girls existed on NBC. While Hallmark Hall of Fame and The Golden Girls overlapped (between 1985 to 1992), there were two to four Hallmark Hall of Fame films released per year, implying tighter production schedules. Though a typical season of The Golden Girls ran from September to May, a certain amount of time needed to be set aside to film episodes, especially since The Golden Girls was filmed in front of a live studio audience. These factors may have made casting any of the “golden girls” in a Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation difficult, but not impossible. However, trying to accommodate any of the “golden girls” schedules could have affected the schedules of the other cast and crew members of a Hallmark Hall of Fame project.
9. Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine was released in 2011 (19 years after The Golden Girls ended). Is there any element from the movie you wish was incorporated on the show?
One of the overarching themes of The Lost Valentine is serving others. A great example is when Caroline visits veterans at a local hospital. On The Golden Girls, there were two episodes involving veterans; ‘From Here to the Pharmacy’ and ‘Charlie’s Buddy’. However, these episodes prioritized Rose’s and Blanche’s attempt to finding romance. As far as I know, there wasn’t an episode of The Golden Girls where the “golden girls” took the time to honor veterans. Therefore, I wish this type of story had been incorporated on the show. One example is the “golden girls” volunteering at an Honor Flight ceremony.
10. After watching Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine, is there anything you can take away from your movie-viewing experience?
For years, Hallmark’s motto has been “When you care enough to send the very best”. Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Lost Valentine perfectly represents that motto! The amount of care that Caroline put into waiting for Neil is a beautiful display of putting the needs of others before oneself, one of the major themes of The Lost Valentine. Other parts of the story represent this theme as well, such as Susan’s quest to find the truth about Neil’s whereabouts. By revisiting the 2011 Hallmark Hall of Fame movie, I was reminded why I like it. Strong elements, such as the acting performances and the screenwriting, made my movie-viewing experience enjoyable. I was also reminded of things I had completely forgotten, like the humor woven into the story. As I said in this review, the comedic moments alleviated some of The Lost Valentine’s heavier scenes yet never overshadowed the story’s serious subject matter. This is a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie that still holds up, even fifteen years later. Therefore, it will stay in the “Get It On Sale for Half Off” (a.k.a. Good) tier of my Hallmark Hall of Fame tier rank list!
The Golden Double Double Feature banner created by me, Sally Silverscreen. Original image created by Touchstone Television, Witt/Thomas/Harris Productions, 20th Television, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)
I first brought up The Wild Robot last March in my list of the Top Ten Best Stand-Alone Films. Then, in another list, I brought up the 2024 movie again. This time it was The Best and Worst Movies I Saw in 2025. As I was talking about the second best film I saw last year, I said while it was too early to say how The Wild Robot will stand in the test of time, I think it has potential. With the announcement of a sequel, this second chapter could help strengthen The Wild Robot’s legacy. Jeff Dodge, from ScreenRant, reported the creative talent involved in the upcoming project. The sequel, which is currently titled The Wild Robot Escapes, will be directed by Troy Quane. Directing alongside Troy is Heidi Jo Gilbert, who was promoted from The Wild Robot’s story team. Jeff Hermann will return as one of the sequel’s producers and Chris Sanders will also return to write the film’s screenplay. At the time of this Word on the Street article’s publication, the cast list and release date for The Wild Robot Escapes are still unknown.
As I said in this Word on the Street article, The Wild Robot was the second best film I saw last year. Not only was the animation itself impressive, I was pleasantly surprised by the movie’s emotional depth as well as an abundance of good messages and themes. With all that said, the news about The Wild Robot Escapes is, for me, an intriguing piece of movie news! What’s also intriguing is how The Wild Robot and The Wild Robot Escapes are adaptations of a pre-existing book trilogy. I honestly didn’t know about the book trilogy until I learned about The Wild Robot’s upcoming sequel. It looks like I may have some reading to do while waiting for the release of The Wild Robot Escapes!
What are your thoughts on this piece of movie news? Have you seen The Wild Robot? Tell me in the comment section!
The Gold Sally Awards, a beloved tradition on 18 Cinema Lane, have returned! For those new to my blog, this is an annual post I publish to commemorate my blog’s anniversary. Winners of the Gold Sally Awards are chosen based on movies I saw the previous year. The award categories are created by me, based on topics I’ve brought up on 18 Cinema Lane. Every year, I try to introduce at least one new award category. But in 2026, I’ve brought back two existing categories instead. I will discuss why I chose each recipient, like I’ve done in past award posts. So now, let the 8th Annual Gold Sally Awards begin!
8th Annual Gold Sally Awards Winners created by me, Sally Silverscreen.
The Standing Ovation Award
(Character Most Deserving of Receiving Their Full Potential)
Alfred White from Saving the Titanic
Overcoming a fear takes bravery, determination, and perseverance. When one conquers a fear that was holding them back, it is an accomplishment worth celebrating, especially considering what that person may have gone through to reach that accomplishment. In Saving the Titanic, Alfred White had a fear of heights. He eventually overcame his fear when tasked with reporting everything happening above Titanic’s deck. The fact Alfred faced and conquered his fear during the highly stressful time of Titanic’s sinking is quite amazing. But as Alfred was addressing his fear of heights, he also taught me about the Titanic’s fourth fake funnel, a fact I was unaware of before watching Saving the Titanic. For these reasons, I have chosen Alfred White to receive this year’s Standing Ovation Award!
The Hallmark Hall of Fame Award
(Movie That Feels Like It Belongs in the Hallmark Hall of Fame Collection)
An Old Fashioned Thanksgiving
When I gave Hallmark’s Frankenstein the Hallmark Hall of Fame Award last year, I described the 2004 television movie as an immersive experience. The combination of screenwriting, acting performances, set design, and costume design presented the illusion of transporting me to another time and place. This is exactly how I felt when revisiting An Old Fashioned Thanksgiving! In the case of the 2008 tv film, this illusion was achieved through attention to detail and historical accuracy. Similar to Hallmark’s Frankenstein, I’m surprised An Old Fashioned Thanksgiving wasn’t a Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation. It’s even more surprising none of Louisa May Alcott’s literary work was adapted into Hallmark Hall of Fame titles. So, those are the reasons why I chose An Old Fashioned Thanksgiving for this year’s Hallmark Hall of Fame Award!
The “She Won’t Give Me My Chocolate” Award
(Best Quote from a Movie)
“For those who make history needn’t read about it” – Eva, The Bride (1985)
I will admit this was the most difficult category to choose a winner for. That’s because there were several strong quotes that were deserving of this year’s “She Won’t Give Me My Chocolate” Award. But the quote I ended up selecting was the one Eva told Josef in 1985’s The Bride. Outside the movie’s context, the quote itself is powerful and epic. Within the movie, however, it’s a simplistic yet meaningful acknowledgment of how far Eva came from when she was first introduced in the story. By Eva telling Josef, “For those who make history needn’t read about it”, she’s no longer the blank slate Frankenstein originally created her to be. Instead, Eva can think and speak for herself, even if she did need some help along the way. This quote provides character development in an interesting and memorable way!
The Edwin P. Christy Award
(Most Annoying Character in Film)
Cameron Shannon from An Old Fashioned Christmas
Looking back on 2025, Cameron Shannon, from An Old Fashioned Christmas, sticks out in my memory. But his memorability is for the wrong reasons. As I said in my review of the 2010 tv picture, Cameron was the worst character in An Old Fashioned Christmas. This was due to how annoying he became over the course of the movie. Cameron always acted like he had something to prove, as well as attempting to get the last word in every argument or conversation. So, it was satisfying to see Gad confront Cameron toward the end of the story. Like I also said in my An Old Fashioned Christmas review, the majority of the film emphasized the love triangle between Tilly, Gad, and Cameron. Honestly, I don’t know what Tilly saw in Cameron because his unlikability was static.
The Edward Boult Award
(Missed Opportunity in Cinema)
Not giving Perry Mason: The Case of the Heartbroken Bride a unique and memorable story
Last July, when I reviewed Perry Mason: The Case of the Heartbroken Bride, I criticized the movie for its missed creative opportunities. This major flaw made the twenty-third chapter in the Perry Mason movie series lackluster. In my review, I gave two subplot ideas that could have helped Perry Mason: The Case of the Heartbroken Bride obtain a more memorable story. The first is how Hannah, the sister of Kaitlynn’s fiancé, converted her failed music career into a promising legal career. Kaitlynn’s real personality being quite different from her celebrity persona serves as the second subplot idea. Sadly, these ideas weren’t utilized nor did they contribute to the mystery of Perry Mason: The Case of the Heartbroken Bride. The 1992 television film was Perry Mason’s “bad day at the office”.
The “Based on a Book I Haven’t Read Yet” Award
(Movie Based on Source Material I Have Not Yet Read)
An Old-Fashioned Thanksgiving
Louisa May Alcott is best known for her iconic novel, Little Women. But she has written some short stories throughout her career. One of those short stories was An Old-Fashioned Thanksgiving, which was the source material for the 2008 Hallmark Channel movie of the same name. You’d think with how much I adore An Old-Fashioned Thanksgiving’s film adaptation, I would have read the source material by now. But as of late February to early March, 2026, I still have not read Louisa May Alcott’s short story. Hopefully, I can finally check out An Old-Fashioned Thanksgiving this year!
The Nosferatu vs. Dracula Award
(Two Movies That Feel Like You’re Watching the Same One)
From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler from 1973 and 1995
If you read my review of 1973’s From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler, you would know this adaptation, as well as the 1995 version, would likely receive the Nosferatu vs. Dracula Award. This is due to both movies sharing a lot of the same strengths and flaws. Even though each version of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler does have its differences, it’s not enough to give the films strong differentiations between them. Even though I slightly prefer the 1995 adaptation over the 1973 version, these movies made me feel like I was watching the same film twice.
The Kay’s Costume Party Dress Award
(Best Outfit from a Movie)
Marion’s Angel Costume from Wings of Desire
In my Comparing with the Critics review of Wings of Desire, I complimented the movie’s costume design. I even described one of Marion’s trapeze artist costumes in detail. That costume is the angel costume Marion wore when she was first introduced in Wings of Desire. The craftsmanship and detail that went into creating the costume allowed the costume itself to stand out long after the movie was over. As I said in my review, the exquisiteness of Marion’s costumes, including her angel costume, makes me wish they were shown in color more consistently.
Sally’s MVP Award
(Character Who Left a Memorable, Showstopping Impression)
Rinaldo from The Bride (1985)
Back in June, 2025, when I reviewed The Bride, I proclaimed Rinaldo was the movie’s MVP. So, when it came time to decide who should receive the Sally’s MVP Award, I already knew the perfect winner! From the moment he meets Viktor, Rinaldo genuinely has Viktor’s best interests at heart. He strives to give Viktor a better life than Frankenstein did, even going so far as to educating Viktor on the importance of his name, which means “He will win”. Rinaldo always refers to Viktor as “his friend”. If it wasn’t for Rinaldo, I don’t believe Viktor would have received the “hero’s journey” he did in The Bride. Similar to when I gave Madmartigan the Sally’s MVP Award last year, Rinaldo became The Bride’s MVP because of David Rappaport’s performance and the screenwriting.
The They Deserve an Award Award
(Someone Associated with a Movie Who Deserves Recognition)
Monika Jacobs (for her costume designs in Wings of Desire)
In the past, I would give this award to actors or actresses who gave a performance that was memorably showstopping. But this year, I decided to expand the They Deserve an Award Award to other departments of film-making. That’s because there are other important components of creating a movie besides acting. When I reviewed Wings of Desire, I praised the film’s costume design, specifically pointing out one of Marion’s trapeze artist costumes. I said I wish Wings of Desire’s costume designer, Monika Jacobs, was nominated for, at least, one award. Costume design isn’t just about crafting attire that’s appealing to the eye. It’s also about creating attire that compliments the actor or actress wearing it. Through Marion’s wardrobe in Wings of Desire, Monika achieved these objectives. Even though Marion’s trapeze artist costumes were stunning, her casual and formal attire made Solveig Dommartin look like the best dressed star of Wings of Desire!
I will admit I wasn’t familiar with Kenneth Williams as an actor before joining the Carry On Kenny! 100 Years of Kenneth Williams Blogathon. But like other blogathons I’ve participated in, I saw the event as an opportunity to expand my cinematic horizons. As I looked through Kenneth’s filmography, I discovered he starred in the 1984 made-for-tv movie, Aladdin and the Forty Thieves. Since I cover my fair share of television films, including those from the 1980s, I chose this production as my blogathon entry! When I recently wrote about Brigadoon, I said the fantasy genre was underrepresented on 18 Cinema Lane. I also said Brigadoon itself was a fine, pleasant presentation. With Aladdin and the Forty Thieves being the second movie from the fantasy genre to be reviewed this year, it almost seems like I’m making up for lost time. And now that I’ve seen the 1984 television film, I can say whether its stronger or weaker than Brigadoon.
Since Aladdin and the Forty Thieves doesn’t have an offical movie poster, I have to use this title card for my review. Title card created by British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)
Things I liked about the film:
Kenneth Williams’ performance: Since Kenneth Williams is the reason why I chose to review Aladdin and the Forty Thieves, I’ll talk about his portrayal of Mustapha Drink. In the 1984 movie, Mustapha is a storyteller who shares a tale about two Mandarins named Wing and Wong. Throughout this tale, Kenneth utilizes facial expressions and vocal inflictions to bring the story to life. He even gives the characters distinct voices to add memorability to the tale. Even though Mustapha appeared in only one scene, Kenneth did a good job, acting wise, with the material he was given. I, honestly, wish Kenneth had been the narrator of Aladdin’s story, presenting the illusion he was reading a storybook to the audience.
The costume design: While we’re on the subject of Kenneth’s portrayal of Mustapha Drink, I want to talk about the movie’s costume design. As he told the tale of Wing and Wong, Mustapha wore a long blue jacket with gold trim and detailing. Whether he walked or sat, the jacket sparkled in the light. Mustapha also wore a long red gown boasting an intricate gold design. The elegance of his outfit allowed Mustapha to stand out, even though he appeared in only one scene. This is just one example of the attention to detail and effort that went into the costume design of Aladdin and the Forty Thieves!
Certain ways Aladdin’s story was adapted: I must confess the adaptation of Aladdin’s story I’m most familiar with is the Disney animated picture from 1992. With that said, it was interesting to see how Aladdin and the Forty Thieves adapted Aladdin’s story compared to Disney’s production. The 1984 film features two genies, Genie of the Lamp and Genie of the Ring. Though I think it was a missed opportunity not to have the genies interact with one another, it was still an interesting creative decision to have more than one genie solve the characters’ problems. Toward the end of Aladdin and the Forty Thieves, Aladdin and The Princess Balroubador receive a magic carpet as a wedding gift. From what I remember of the 1992 movie, the magic carpet was more of a sidekick for Aladdin. The iconic “A Whole New World” scene just wouldn’t be the same without the magic carpet. Though Aladdin and the Forty Thieves and the Disney film each approached the same story, they brought it to life in their own unique way!
The musical numbers: Before I selected Aladdin and the Forty Thieves for the Carry On Kenny! 100 Years of Kenneth Williams Blogathon, I had no idea it was a musical. So, you can imagine my surprise when Genie of the Ring started randomly singing and dancing. Though the musical numbers themselves weren’t bad, some of them seemed like they were added to the movie just for the sake of including a musical number. When Aladdin’s Chinese village was first introduced in Aladdin and the Forty Thieves, some of the residents sang “Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah”. As I was watching this musical number unfold, I kept wondering what this song had to do with Aladdin and his story, especially considering the song itself was released in 1946. Creative decisions like this musical number left me confused of the creative team’s intent.
Unclear time period: Remember when I questioned the inclusion of “Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah” in Aladdin and the Forty Thieves, pointing out how the song was released in 1946? I brought this up to address one of the flaws of the 1984 television film; an unclear time-period. Based on the set and costume design, it appears the story takes place in Ancient China. Yet, in one scene, a vending machine not only served drinks, but also “hot & cold food”. Because of creative choices like the two I described, it makes Aladdin and the Forty Thieves look like it’s having an identity crisis.
The special effects: I know a television movie is, more often than not, going to receive a smaller budget. I’m also aware how cinematic technology from the 1980s is going to be different from today’s cinematic technology. But with all that said, I couldn’t look past the poor special effects throughout Aladdin and the Forty Thieves. One painfully obvious example is when, toward the beginning of the film, Abanazar transforms into a bird. This very fake-looking bird is superimposed over still photographs of landscapes, trying to present the illusion of traveling from one place to another. Making a movie isn’t easy and does require working within your means. However, I think using special effects hurt Aladdin and the Forty Thieves instead of helped it.
Have you ever watched a movie and wondered “what the heck did I just watch”? That’s what I was thinking when I saw Aladdin and the Forty Thieves. Was the 1984 movie supposed to be taken seriously or was it supposed to be silly, goofy fun? Why was it difficult to determine the story’s time period? It’s a shame this wasn’t a stronger picture because there are aspects of it I liked. Kenneth Williams did a good job, acting wise, in his role as Mustapha Drink. In fact, I think Kenneth should have been the one narrating Aladdin’s story. It looked like there was a good amount of effort and detail put toward the set and costume design. I even liked some of the ways Aladdin’s story was adapted in the 1984 film. But I have no idea what I was supposed to get out of Aladdin and the Forty Thieves. Therefore, I hesitate recommending it.
Overall score: 5.3 out of 10
Have you seen Aladdin and the Forty Thieves? Which adaptation of Aladdin’s story is your favorite? Let me know in the comment section!
I’ve been participating in Taking Up Room’s So Bad It’s Good Blogathon since the very beginning. Because I didn’t have a go-to “so bad it’s good” movie at the time, I have seen the blogathon as an opportunity to search for my “so bad it’s good” title, with the search itself becoming a saga on 18 Cinema Lane. In my review of Jesse James Meets Frankenstein’s Daughter, I learned to look for films that were built on a gimmick. Then, after watching Mount Hideaway Mysteries: Heartache and Homecoming, I learned to search for movies that are so bad, they are, at times, unintentionally funny. But for this year’s So Bad It’s Good Blogathon, I chose my selected title differently. I heard from several movie-related Youtubers that Kraven the Hunter possessed qualities that made the film “so bad it’s good”. Remembering their opinions, I picked the 2024 movie with an open mind, hoping I had finally found my “so bad it’s good” title. Though there were moments in the movie that were unintentionally funny, I can’t say Kraven the Hunter will earn the coveted title of “so bad it’s good”. To explain why I feel this way, I will compare the 2024 film to a movie that has been widely regarded as “so bad it’s good”; Mommie Dearest. Even though I will bring up the 1981 movie from time to time, it’s to emphasize the point that Kraven the Hunter didn’t really live up to its “so bad it’s good” potential.
Kraven the Hunterposter created by Columbia Pictures, Marvel Entertainment, TSG Entertainment, Avi Arad Productions, Matt Tolmach Productions, Film in Iceland, and Sony Pictures Releasing
When it comes to Mommie Dearest, I see the movie less as a “so bad it’s good” picture and more of a character study about family dynamics and the motivations behind them. However, I can recognize why the 1981 title is regarded as “so bad it’s good” in the eyes of many. One of these reasons is Faye Dunaway’s over-the-top portrayal of Joan Crawford. Her antics stand out against a backdrop that feels ordinary or mundane. Even her lines like “No wire hangers, ever!” and “Tina! Bring me the axe!” have become iconic because of Faye’s excessively dramatic delivery. But in Kraven the Hunter, the only memorable character is Sergei/Kraven himself, as he is the film’s protagonist. The rest of the characters weren’t given the context in order to stand out. Two of the movie’s villains, the Foreigner and Aleksei/Rhino, seemed interchangeable. They don’t have many discernible characteristics that allow them to embrace uniqueness. Even when Aleksei transformed into his alter ego, Rhino, it was for the benefit of the plot instead of helping Aleksei become a memorable character. Meanwhile, Sergei’s/Kraven’s father, Nikolai, tries to stand out within the story. However, these efforts feel forced, with his lines sounding less like conversation and more like lines found on the movie’s official merchandise.
From what I’ve heard over the years, Mommie Dearest was never intended to be a “so bad it’s good” presentation. In fact, it was meant to provide a chance for Faye to potentially earn an Oscar, let alone a nomination. Despite this good intention, the 1981 film shows its audience how good ideas led to bad results. The simpler reasons for the movie’s existence allow viewers to accept its “so bad it’s good” status at face value. As I watched Kraven the Hunter, however, I kept wondering what the point of the movie was supposed to be. When I brought the film up in my list of Ten Movie Trends I Don’t Understand, I said it was a Spider-verse villain movie without the presence of Spider-Man. But Kraven the Hunter doesn’t take the time to build up Sergei/Kraven as a legitimate threat for Marvel’s friendly, neighborhood superhero. Instead, Sergei/Kraven is reminiscent of Eric Draven and Ashe Corven from The Crow and The Crow: City of Angels; only inflicting violence on villains and criminals that deserve to face accountability. This makes some of the characters’ warnings about karma and the dangers of Sergei/Kraven becoming like his villainous father not make sense. Even the movie’s plot twist was so convoluted, it makes that part of the story pointless. Instead of seeing Kraven the Hunter as “so bad it’s good”, it was so confusing, I found it difficult to understand what the film was trying to say.
One of the most unbelievable moments from Mommie Dearest is when Joan took her daughter, Christina’s, role on the soap opera Christina starred on. While Christina (who was 27 at the time) was recovering from surgery, Joan temporarily starred on Christina’s soap opera as Christina’s character, even though Joan was much older than the character herself. Though this moment seems too good to be true, it actually happened. There’s even a New York Times article about this creative decision. The idea of Joan, who was 60 years old when she appeared on Christina’s soap opera, portraying a character that’s in her twenties seems “bonkers”, adding to Mommie Dearest’s “so bad it’s good” reputation. Kraven the Hunter, on the other hand, doesn’t really have any “bonkers” moments or situations. This is because the film takes itself a little too seriously as an action picture. The concept of a man possessing animalistic instincts, skills, and powers to defeat other characters could sound “bonkers” on paper. Even the idea of a man becoming a rhino seems like a silly gimmick. But the creative team behind Kraven the Hunter didn’t embrace the sillier aspects of the source material they were adapting. While there were moments in the movie that were unintentionally funny, as I mentioned in this review’s introduction, these moments were inconsistent.
According to IMDB, Paramount (the studio that distributed Mommie Dearest) took advantage of their audience’s fascination with Mommie Dearest by billing “the film as a camp classic”. People even “flocked to see the film armed with Ajax and wire hangers to actively “participate” with the film”, in a similar fashion to movies like The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Like I mentioned earlier in this review, Mommie Dearest featured iconic lines like “Tina! Bring me the axe!” and “No wire hangers, ever!”. There are also memorable moments like Joan cutting Christina’s hair. People developed an interest in Mommie Dearest because it was memorably bad. But Kraven the Hunter lacks the memorability Mommie Dearest achieved. One previously mentioned contributor was the lack of stand out characters (besides Sergei/Kraven himself). Another contributor is how, in Kraven the Hunter, there are stretches of time where characters just talk between each other. If these dialogue-heavy moments had been evenly spaced out throughout the story or had the writing itself been a little bit stronger, maybe the dialogue could have added memorability to the movie. But the writing was so flat, it made Kraven the Hunter feel uninspired. The stretches of time featuring dialogue-heavy scenes not only affected the overall pace of the film, it also caused Sergei/Kraven to have less screen-time than the title of the movie would suggest.
Have you ever seen a movie that was just “meh”? That’s how I feel about Kraven the Hunter; too weak to be good or great but not outrageous enough to be bad or disappointing. When I participate in the So Bad It’s Good Blogathon, I expect my selected movie will not be as strong as movies I’ve actually enjoyed. But I hope my experience watching the film will, at least, be somewhat entertaining. While there were entertaining moments because they were unintentionally funny, I can’t say the same for the rest of Kraven the Hunter. The film as a whole was uninspired largely due to the writing. From most of the characters being unmemorable to stretches of time where dialogue-heavy scenes were emphasized, I found myself being underwhelmed, more often than not. But the biggest opportunity missed by the film’s creative team was not embracing the gimmick and its silliness from their project’s source material. If Kraven the Hunter’s creative team hadn’t taken their project so seriously, maybe my movie-viewing experience would have been similar to when I reviewed Tarzan in Manhattan last year. Or maybe finding my “so bad it’s good” movie requires an acquired taste I haven’t quite received yet.
Great American Family’s Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series has become a pleasant surprise for 18 Cinema Lane. My review of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker became one of my most popular movie reviews of all time, garnering over seven thousand views in almost two years. The positive reception of this review led me to cover the sequel, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Yarn Maker. That review has also been well received, obtaining over two hundred views so far. When I discovered Great American Family was not only releasing a third chapter, they were also premiering the third chapter in January 2026, I knew that’d be one of the first movies to be written about in the New Year! Though there’s only been two movies in the Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series, so far, the series as a whole has been quite enjoyable. What has worked in the series’ favor is improving upon the flaws of the previous chapter and providing consistent strengths. Will the third chapter, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, continue this pattern? Let’s find out in this review!
Subtle hints of Texas: When I reviewed Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, I criticized the film for its constant reminders of the story’s Texas setting. To me, these reminders tried to make the movie’s setting a little too obvious for the audience. This flaw was remedied in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker! References to the series’ Sweet River, Texas setting were represented through some of the women’s wardrobe. One of the Book Club members, Maria, sometimes dons turquoise jewelry. Another Book Club member, Lily, wears a sweatshirt featuring a cowboy/cowgirl hat and cowboy/cowgirl boots. Even Ainsley herself can be seen wearing a blouse similar to those worn by country music stars. Besides the wardrobe, there were other subtle hints of Texas found in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker. A great example is when one of the Book Club members uses a pen shaped like a cactus.
Selecting a cold case: While seeking another mystery to solve, the Book Club decides on a cold case. As they mentioned in the movie, the cold case provided a nice change of pace for them. Not only did this decision benefit the Book Club, it also benefitted Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker! By having a cold case as the movie’s main mystery, it prevents the series from becoming repetitive, as the previous two chapters revolved around murder mysteries that happened in the present. This creative choice shows other ways mysteries can become solved as well. In the case of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, most of the clues were found within the dialogue. Selecting a cold case for the characters to solve was definitely an interesting decision for the third film in the Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series!
Rance Moseby: A new character that was introduced in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker was Rance Moseby, the proprietor of a local pawn shop. At first, Ainsley and Jake believe Rance may be up to no good. But as the story progresses, Rance proves that looks can be deceiving. While I was watching Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, I grew to like Rance as a character. David Milchard, the actor who portrayed Rance, had great on-screen chemistry with the movie’s cast. The strength of David’s acting talents helped make Rance seem like he was always meant to exist in the world of the Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series. Rance’s drier sense of humor nicely provided the film’s comic relief as well. If there are more Ainsley McGregor Mysteries movies in the works, I really hope Rance Moseby becomes a part of the series’ regular cast!
An unnecessary subplot: Throughout Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, a subplot revolved around Jake’s past romantic relationship with the mayor of Sweet River, Jane Reval. Even though it was interesting to see how this new character connected to an established character like Jake, I found this subplot unnecessary. Because Jake and Ainsley are currently dating, Jake has no interest in reuniting with Jane. This fact prevents the subplot from going anywhere. It also doesn’t help that the subplot has a loose connection to the main mystery. In my opinion, the least interesting part of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker was the subplot between Jane and Jake.
Inconsistent humor: In my review of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Yarn Maker, I praised the movie’s inclusion of humor. It was not only sprinkled throughout the story, it was also woven into the dialogue. While there was humor in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, it wasn’t consistently featured in the story. In fact, most of the movie’s humor was found in the second half of the film, when Rance becomes more involved in the mystery. This flaw kind of makes me wish Rance debuted in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker sooner.
Limited screen-time for George: One of the aspects I liked in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker was Ainsley’s dog, George. Moments where Ainsley talks to George gave viewers a break from the heaviness of the story’s murder mystery. Plus, his larger role in the first chapter gave the film a more unique identity. But in the second movie, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Yarn Maker, George’s screen-time was reduced. I was hoping this flaw would be corrected in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker. But, unfortunately, George received even less screen-time, only appearing in two scenes. The reduction of George’s screen-time as the Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series continues disappoints me, especially since George is one of my favorite parts of this series.
When I talked about Mystery by the Book in my list of The Best and Worst Movies I Saw in 2025, I brought up how Great American Family’s Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series is growing stronger in quality. The third chapter, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, proves my statement correct, as I found it the best movie in the series so far! Selecting a cold case as the movie’s main mystery prevented the overarching story of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries from becoming repetitive. The creative team behind the 2026 film improved upon flaws from the previous titles, such as making subtle references to the series’ Texas setting. Even though the acting was, once again, one of the strengths of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker, David Milchard’s portrayal of Rance Moseby stole the show. In fact, I’d say Rance was the MVP of this movie! Despite the film having its flaws, the film itself shows the Ainsley McGregor Mysteries series is moving in the right direction. I do hope this series continues, as I believe there are many more stories to tell!
Overall score: 7.5-7.6 out of 10
Have you seen Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Watchmaker? What would you like to see happen if the series continues? Let me know in the comment section!
As I explained in my recent review of A Circle of Children, I’m covering the sequel, Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II for the Film. Release. Repeat. Blogathon. Because I’ve been meaning to review the 1978 television film since 2022, I believed the blogathon was a great time to finally check the movie out! But as I also mentioned in my review of A Circle of Children, I haven’t found a made-for-tv movie from the 1970s I actually like. Whenever I’ve selected this particular type of film to write about, I find the film itself either fine, ok, or underwhelming. This is one of the reasons why I put “1970s Made-for-TV movie” on my Year-Long Bingo card, so I could, hopefully, find a television movie I enjoy from that decade. When I saw and reviewed A Circle of Children, I thought it was just ok. Will its sequel be better? Let’s begin this review to find out!
Lovey A Circle of Children, Part II title card created by Time-Life Television Productions and CBS
Things I liked about the film:
A smaller cast: In my review of A Circle of Children, I mentioned the film containing a large cast of characters. This is one of the reasons why the audience was forced to either only become familiar with the characters or not getting to know them at all. This flaw became remedied in Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II! In the 1978 sequel, the cast is much smaller. Even Mary’s class contains fewer students. Because the story has less characters to keep track of, it gives the audience an opportunity to truly get to know the characters. The audience also has more time to spend with characters like Mary’s students and even Mary’s boyfriend, Cal, because of a tightly written script.
Progression that’s written gradually: When I reviewed A Circle of Children, I talked about how Sarah’s sudden achieved progress taking place after being a static character for half the movie felt like it was written into the story for the sake of plot and time convenience. Even though I was happy to see Sarah achieving progress, I wish that progress was gradually woven into the script. It seems like the creative team behind Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II felt the same way I did, as Hannah’s/Lovey’s progression was gradual. Hannah/Lovey joins Mary’s class as an unruly child who is very unpredictable. But as the film goes on, Mary’s influence takes effect on Hannah/Lovey as she becomes more responsive, less violent, and even participates in class. The smaller cast size I talked about earlier certainly influenced this part of the story. It allowed Hannah’s/Lovey’s progression to receive emphasis instead of competing against other stories. The transformative power of Mary’s teaching abilities is also on full display because of the gradually written progression of Hannah/Lovey.
The dialogue: Like I said in my list of The Best and Worst Movies I Saw in 2025, how well-written the dialogue was in The Chalk Garden allowed me to remember what Laurel said about the term “good morning”. The quality of the screenwriting was also a strength in Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II! Some of the dialogue in the 1978 movie sounded profound without trying too hard to be philosophical. A great example can be heard during a conversation between Mary and a fellow teacher named Patty. Patty feels discouraged over the lack of progress from her students. Mary reassures Patty that her impact on the students has been positive, reminding Patty how hope comes from believing the children can learn something. Patty then tells Mary, “Yeah, but you can’t mop the floors with hope”. Mary experiences her own period of discouragement after Hannah/Lovey has an angry outburst involving paint. In a voice-over, Mary says, “For a moment, my dreams and plans for Hannah shattered. But paint is only paint and never worth a dream. Besides, a teacher’s dream dies hard”. The two examples I provided show how Mary’s and Patty’s frustrations and concerns were eloquently and thoughtfully written into the script.
How Hannah was introduced: As I’ve already said in this review, Hannah/Lovey joins Mary’s class as an unruly child who is very unpredictable. However, I found her introduction in Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II to be distasteful. As Mary walks down the hallway to retrieve Hannah/Lovey, suspenseful music plays over the scene. The music itself sounds as if it came straight out of a horror movie. The reveal of Hannah’s/Lovey’s face was prolonged because of specific camera angles that were utilized. When Hannah’s/Lovey’s face was finally revealed, a frozen close-up shot was presented to intentionally appear frightening. To me, the introduction I described felt sensationalized to the point of being counterproductive of what Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II was trying to achieve; making the audience feel empathetic toward Hannah/Lovey by looking past her horrific behavior. I truly believe there was a more tasteful way Hannah/Lovey could have been introduced in the story, especially compared to how some of the students were introduced in A Circle of Children.
Doris’ limited involvement in the story: A Circle of Children introduced Doris as the director of the Children’s School for Special Education. Though she appeared in only a handful of scenes, Doris’ role was pivotal as she literally and figuratively opened the door for Mary to the world of Special Education. Doris was one of the few characters from the first movie to return in the sequel. But she was given even more limited involvement in the second film. While she was still the director of the Children’s School for Special Education, her role in Mary’s story had a reduced significance. I wish Doris received more to do in Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II because I think she could have made a bigger impact.
Lack of further progression: I said earlier in this review how Hannah’s/Lovey’s progression was written gradually into the story. Even though this was one of the movie’s strengths, I didn’t like how there was a lack of further progression for two of Mary’s students. While Hannah/Lovey was improving her reading skills and Brian (from the first movie) was learning how to board the bus by himself, Rufus and Jamie were at a standstill in their education. With a smaller cast size I talked about in this review, there should have been room in the script to give Jamie and Rufus at least a small victory. At the end of Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II, Mary reveals through a voice-over what happened to her students. However, not showing Rufus and Jamie achieving further progression in the movie was a missed opportunity.
Sometimes, a sequel ends up becoming better than its predecessor. Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II just so happens to be one of those films! Some of the flaws of A Circle of Children were improved upon in the second chapter, such as containing a smaller cast and the script featuring a gradual progression for Hannah/Lovey. The sequel even had its own unique strengths from its predecessor, like how well-written the dialogue was. But despite these positive aspects, Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II did have its flaws. I believe there are more respectful ways Hannah/Lovey could have been introduced into the story, as her debut in the film was too sensationalized for my liking. I not only wish Jamie and Rufus had received further progression in the movie, I also wish Doris was given a greater significance in the script. But similar to what I said in my review of A Circle of Children, I’m grateful Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II exists at all. The 1978 film gives the audience a glimpse into what Special Education was like in the 1970s. It’s a made-for-tv movie that was spared from getting lost to time as well.
Overall score: 7.2 out of 10
Have you seen Lovey: A Circle of Children, Part II? Are there any made-for-tv movies from the 1970s you’d like to see me cover on 18 Cinema Lane? Please tell me in the comment section!
18 Cinema Lane 