Tag: adaptation

Take 3: Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit Review

On By 18cinemalane1 Comment

When I reviewed Curious Caterer: Foiled Plans back in April, that movie became the best Hallmark mystery of 2024. Now six months later, Curious Caterer: Foiled Plans is still the best Hallmark mystery movie of the year! When I learned Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit was on the horizon, I was so excited for the film’s release. Part of my excitement was due to how much I liked Curious Caterer: Foiled Plans. The Curious Caterer series is one of the strongest series Hallmark has ever created. The strength of Nikki Deloach’s and Andrew W. Walker’s performances, as well as their on-screen chemistry, is one reason why Curious Caterer has been an enjoyable collection of films. It also helps how the movies have been well written. Can Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit be just as good as Curious Caterer: Foiled Plans? Keep reading my review to find out!

Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit poster created by Timeless Pictures and Hallmark Movies & Mysteries

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: As I said in my review of Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, the strength of the cast can add to the story’s intrigue. Even though the acting has been consistently successful in the Curious Caterer series, this is impressive when you consider the series has utilized a rotating secondary cast! I have always liked Jaycie Dotin’s portrayal of Marla Maguire. I not only liked her performance in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit, I also think she and Luke Camilleri had really nice on-chemistry! When Marla meets Jax backstage before the concert, he shares a memento from his late sister. His entire demeanor is sad, yet he appears appreciative when Marla asks about the memento. Marla’s tone of voice indicates she’s trying to be understanding of Jax’s situation. Later in the film, when Jaycie and Luke appear together in another scene, Jax and Marla are all smiles. They both look comfortable in each other’s company and seem to enjoy spending time with one another. I hope Luke and Jaycie star together in another Hallmark production!

Another strength of the Curious Caterer series is the strong on-chemistry of Nikki Deloach and Andrew W. Walker. Their portrayals of Goldy and Tom were, once again, one of the best parts of the movie! Now that these characters have an established, romantic relationship, they received more opportunities to spend time together in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit. While observing Goldy’s mystery board, Tom asks why Selena would kiss her former band member, Derek. Goldy then proceeds to kiss Tom. After the kiss, Tom asks her if the kiss was meant to be evidence. Goldy happily replies she just wanted a reason to kiss him. Tom and Goldy’s interaction in this scene was not only sweet, it also felt genuine. Andew and Nikki’s acting abilities made their characters’ interactions enjoyable to watch!

A behind-the-scenes look at the music industry: The mystery in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit revolves around the death of a band member during a live performance. Because the band and those surrounding them are consistently involved in the story, the movie’s creative team gave the audience a peek behind the music industry’s curtain. During a discussion between Tom and the band’s manager, Nicola, Tom learns each band member was insured in order to keep investors happy. This was new information to me, as I had never heard of musicians being insured before. Prior to the concert, Goldy and Marla were preparing to make their catered food. They were told by the band’s electrician, Sam, they could only use one electrical socket due to the older age of the venue and the other plugged-in electrical equipment. When people attend a concert or a live performance, they are so focused on what is happening on stage, details like a venue’s age or electrical power grids may not cross their minds. Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit showed what goes into planning and delivering a musical event.

Incorporating serious, real-world topics: Hallmark productions, whether it’s a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie or a Christmas film, sometimes include serious, real-world topics into their scripts. What can make or break a script is how these serious, real-world topics are incorporated into the story. The way these kinds of topics were included in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit was more subtle, yet there was enough information for the audience to understand what was happening. As Goldy is serving drinks to the band members before the concert, she reassures Derek (a recovering alcoholic) there are no alcoholic ingredients in his drink. Because Derek’s drink and Jax’s drink appear similar, Goldy stops Derek from consuming Jax’s drink, which contains rum. This mistake causes Derek to accuse Jax of trying to break his sobriety. The scene I just described felt like a realistic interaction, with the subject of addiction naturally woven into the dialogue. This was made possible by the quality of the acting performances as well as the screenwriting.

Detective work image created by Photoroyalty at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/investigation-background-design_1041877.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by Photoroyalty – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

What I didn’t like about the film:

Miscast characters: Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit begins twenty years ago, with the band, The Faithfuls, celebrating the success of their single, “Love Me Always”. This opening scene implies the band members are in their early twenties, especially since they all share a bottle of champagne. Several scenes later, when Marla and Goldy explain to Olive who The Faithfuls are, Goldy and Marla claim they were high-schoolers twenty years ago. When the band members are reintroduced in the story, they appear to be the same age as Marla and Goldy. This creative flaw is not the fault of Garrett Black, Luke Camilleri, and Tammy Gillis, as they all did a good job with the provided acting material. However, I do fault the casting director for not recruiting actors who appeared older than Goldy and Marla.

Goldy’s limited involvement in the case: Throughout the Curious Caterer series, Goldy has worked alongside Tom to solve a given case. But in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit, Goldy’s involvement in the case is limited. She still created a mystery board (which she and Marla called “Rhythm and Clues”) and helped Tom solve the mystery. Compared to the other films in the Curious Caterer series, Tom did the majority of the sleuthing. Goldy did not question potential suspects or gather clues as much as she has before. She and Tom seemed to be on separate pages when it came to catching the culprit.

Lack of food footage: In my reviews of other Curious Caterer films, I have either praised the creative team for their use of close-ups of appetizers or criticized the creative team for their lack of close-ups of food. Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit adopted the latter flaw, as there were barely any shots of Goldy’s catered food at the concert. In the greenroom, there were a few close-up shots of the band members’ drinks. A quick shot of vegan drumsticks was featured in a fan’s video. But other than these, the audience isn’t given a clear idea of what else Goldy served at the event. To me, this was a missed opportunity, especially since I was curious why Marla and Goldy needed to use an air fryer.

Music and stage image created by Topntp26 at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/music-sign_1179519.htm’>Designed by Topntp26</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/vintage”>Vintage image created by Topntp26 – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

With Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit being the fifth movie in the series, this collection of films has found its rhythm (no pun intended) and understood what works for the overall story. Components like the acting, humor, and prioritizing the mystery have been consistently strong. There were even times when a Curious Caterer movie improved upon the flaws of the preceding chapter. I liked Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit! The peek behind the music industry’s curtain gave this film a unique identity. Serious, real-world topics, such as addiction, were thoughtfully incorporated into the script. Even though I thought the fifth movie in the Curious Caterer series was good, I still think Curious Caterer: Foiled Plans was slightly stronger. Goldy’s involvement in Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit’s case was limited, making it seem like she and Tom were on separate pages when it came to solving the mystery. I also believe the band members should have appeared older than Goldy and Marla. As of the publication of this review, Hallmark has not made any official announcements for movies premiering in 2025. But if there are more Curious Caterer films in the works, I would like to see a seasonal picture, such as a Christmas or Halloween themed Curious Caterer production!

Overall score: 7.6-7.7 out of 10

Have you seen Curious Caterer: Forbidden Fruit? Would you like to see more Curious Caterer films in 2025? Please tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker Review

On By 18cinemalane10 Comments

Last year, I claimed in my year-end list The Abigail Mysteries was one of the top three worst movies I saw. For me, this was a shame because, at the time, I had never talked about or reviewed a Great American Family movie. To make up for that, I chose to write about the network’s newest mystery production, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker. When Candace Cameron Bure starred in Hallmark’s films, I really enjoyed the Aurora Teagarden series. In fact, that series was one of the strongest series from Hallmark Mystery! So, after discovering Candace would be starring in a new mystery movie, I was intrigued about the project. However, this optimism was cautious due to how weak The Abigail Mysteries was. Did Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker learn from the mistakes of the 2023 film? The only way to solve this mystery is to read my review!

Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker poster created by Candy Rock Entertainment, Liquid Arts Media, Syrup Studios, and Great American Family

Things I liked about the film:

The acting: In a mystery film, the strength of the cast can add to the story’s intrigue. The facial expressions of the suspects can make the audience wonder if a particular suspect has something to hide, while the reactions of the protagonists will leave the audience wondering how they will save the day. Even though Candace was portraying a different character, her portrayal of Ainsley McGregor never missed a beat! Ainsley’s interactions with residents of Sweet River, Texas, came across as natural. Candace’s experience starring in the Aurora Teagarden series worked in her favor, as Aurora crossed paths with a variety of characters. It may be tempting to compare Ainsley to Aurora because of Candace’s performances. How Candace differentiated Ainsley from Aurora was adopting a more conservative approach to solving the mystery. In the Aurora Teagarden series, Aurora was eager to get involved with a case, even going so far as to bend a few rules. Because Ainsley is a former criminologist (which would give her a legitimate reason to work on any case), she tries to stay out of the police’s way and leaves some of the mystery solving to them.

As I just mentioned, the facial expressions of the suspects can make the audience wonder if a particular suspect has something to hide. The performances of the actors and actresses portraying suspects in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker proves this point. One of these performances that was a stand-out was Leanne Lapp’s portrayal of Rachel Dean! Rachel is the wife of the murder victim, giving her a reason to be seen as suspicious. During her questioning, Rachel is distraught over the accusations against her. Her eyes look both sad and confused, even overflowing with tears. This sadness can also be heard in her voice, as her tone reflects what’s in her heart. With Leanne’s strong performance, I wish Rachel appeared more in this movie.

The on-screen chemistry: When I discussed the acting performances in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, I talked about how I liked Candace’s portrayal of the titular character. Another reason why I liked this portrayal is how Candace and Aaron Ashmore displayed good on-screen chemistry! I remember when Aaron starred on Warehouse 13 as Steve Jinks. Since Steve didn’t have a love interest on that show, I didn’t know what to expect from Aaron’s portrayal of Jake, a character who develops a relationship with Ainsley. However, I ended up liking his performance in this film! What helped Candace and Aaron was how their characters already knew each other prior to the story’s events. This avoided that awkward introductory stage most protagonists experience at the start of a mystery series. Throughout the story, Ainsley and Jake consistently interact with one another. Their warm, friendly demeanors felt naturally genuine, successfully selling the idea these two characters could fall in love. The chemistry between Jake and Ainsley made Sweet River, Texas, a little bit brighter!

Ainsley’s dog, George: The protagonist of a mystery series will typically have at least one friend. This friend may serve as the story’s comic relief and sometimes receive their own subplot. But in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, Ainsley’s friend brought something different to the table. At various moments in the story, Ainsley talks to her dog named George. These moments are more light-hearted, giving viewers a break from the heaviness of the murder mystery. George sometimes joins Ainsley at Bless Your Arts, the marketplace Ainsley created. His presence brings joy and smiles to those who work alongside Ainsley. A mystery series’ protagonist having a pet is not a new concept. But in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, George plays a larger role in the story, giving this film a more unique identity! It also helps that George is adorable!

Vineyard on a sunny day image created by Jcstudio at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/green”>Green photo created by jcstudio – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

What I didn’t like about the film:

A slow, drawn-out story: A made for TV mystery movie will usually feature at least one subplot along with the story’s main plot. This subplot adds intrigue to the overall script while sometimes giving viewers a break from the mystery. The main plot in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker was the story’s only plot. It also doesn’t help how Ainsley wasn’t consistently involved in solving the case. These creative decisions led to a movie that felt slower and was drawn-out.

Constant reminders of story’s Texas setting: One story-telling technique that is sometimes incorporated into film-making is “show, don’t tell”. This technique can work in a movie’s favor because film is a visual medium. However, relying on showing can cause repetition. This is what happened in Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker. I mentioned earlier in this review how the movie takes place in Sweet River, Texas. Even though I knew this fact after reading the film’s synopsis, I was constantly reminded of this fact as I watched the movie. Several scenes featured at least one Texas flag in the background. A cactus was placed on the counter at Sweet River’s police department. Jake and Ainsley even go on a date to a Tex Mex restaurant. It’s important to establish the story’s setting. But this can be done in one or two scenes toward the beginning of the movie, not throughout the program.

Ainsley’s limited involvement in the story’s case: While discussing Candace’s portrayal of Ainsley McGregor, I brought up how Ainsley adopts a more conservative approach to solving mysteries due to being a former criminologist. This creative decision allowed Candace to differentiate Ainsley from Aurora Teagarden. It also takes away the fun of watching the protagonist solve the mystery and save the day. In the first half of the movie, Ainsley was hesitant to get involved in the case. Her choice was about allowing Sweet River’s police to do their jobs. It isn’t until approximately the story’s half-way point that Ainsley is finally encouraged (by members of her book club) to investigate the mystery. Ainsley’s hesitation is another reason why Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker had a slower, drawn-out story.

Magnifying glass image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/magnifying-glass-with-fingerprint-in-flat-style_2034684.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/flat”>Flat vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

When talking about The Abigail Mysteries in my list of the worst films I saw in 2023, I said Great American Family’s efforts needed to be better than The Abigail Mysteries if they were serious about creating more mystery projects. After watching Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker, it looks like the network took my advice! Though the movie has its flaws, the 2024 production improved upon what didn’t work for the 2023 film. One of these improvements was the on-screen chemistry between Candace Cameron Bure and Aaron Ashmore. Another good decision was prioritizing the mystery and keeping that as the main plot. It would be easy to claim Ainsley McGregor Mysteries is trying to become the next Aurora Teagarden series. This claim could be made because Ainsley’s book club turns into an investigation club and the story takes place in a small town. Personally, I believe Great American Family’s movie and Hallmark’s series just happen to share similar ideas. Unlike a lot of Hallmark’s newer mystery movies, Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker will receive a sequel! During this movie’s broadcast, a commercial announced Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Yarnmaker is coming in 2025. Based on that commercial, it looks like this series has the potential to tell many more stories!

Overall score: 6.1-6.2 out of 10

Have you seen Ainsley McGregor Mysteries: A Case for the Winemaker? Are you excited for the upcoming sequel? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Word on the Street: Movie Adaptation for Susanna Clarke’s ‘Piranesi’ on the Horizon

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

Whenever I review a movie that’s based on a book or pre-existing piece of literature, I usually find myself stating how the film is based on a book I haven’t read. This has led me to create the “Based on a Book I Haven’t Read Yet” award for my annual Gold Sally Awards. But for this piece of movie news, an upcoming adaptation is based on a book I’ve actually read! Reported two months ago by Bill Desowitz from IndieWire, Susanna Clarke’s novel, Piranesi, will be brought to life by animation studio, Laika. Travis Knight, the CEO and president of Laika, will direct the movie. Though not much else is known about the Piranesi adaptation, Susanna herself gave her approval, stating, “I’ve been inspired by so many animated movies; and Laika has produced such extraordinary work – movies like ‘Coraline’ and ‘Kubo and the Two Strings,’ full of beauty and wonder and weirdness. I’m thrilled that ‘Piranesi’ has found a home with them and I can’t wait to see what they do.” Meanwhile, Travis expressed his enthusiasm over the project, saying how Susanna is “one of my all-time favorite authors” and how “I can scarcely imagine a more joyful experience than wandering through the worlds Susanna dreamed into being”.

Piranesi book cover image found on Goodreads

Like I said earlier in this article, I have read Piranesi. In fact, I read this book recently as one of my selections for this year’s Eurovisionathon readathon. When I first discovered the news about Piranesi’s adaptation, I wondered how this story would translate to the screen. This is because the story is written in a logical way, encouraging the reader to actively pay attention to what they’re reading. My interest piqued upon learning Laika would be creating the adaptation! I reviewed Kubo and the Two Strings back in 2019. The film was not only one of the top three best movies I saw that year, it was the first time an animated picture had earned a spot on my year-end best of list! The fact the same director and studio behind Kubo and the Two Strings will be working on the Piranesi adaptation makes me excited! It gives me a chance to check out more of Laika’s work, as well as showcases the creativity of a studio that, in my opinion, is underrated.

What are your thoughts on this piece of movie news? Are you looking forward to seeing Piranesi adapted as a movie? Let me know in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Referenced article: https://www.indiewire.com/news/breaking-news/laika-announces-new-stop-motion-piranesi-susanna-clarke-1235017992/

Take 3: Cricket on the Hearth (1967) Review

On By 18cinemalane5 Comments

You probably think it’s strange how, after a week and a half long hiatus, my first review back on my blog would be for a Christmas film (in the middle of August). However, I have a very good explanation for this choice. The first reason is how the 1967 animated movie, Cricket on the Hearth, is what I selected for Realweegiemidget Reviews’ (Aaron) Spellingverse Blogathon, as Aaron Spelling was one of the film’s executive producers. The second reason is how animated movies are reviewed so infrequently on my blog. In fact, Cricket on the Hearth is the first animated film to be reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane in 2024. When I chose to participate in the (Aaron) Spellingverse Blogathon, I knew I wanted to write about a made-for-tv movie. So, when I discovered the 1967 film on Aaron’s IMDB filmography, I felt I found the perfect movie for the blogathon, especially for the previously mentioned reasons! But did Cricket on the Hearth end up being the perfect choice to write about? Keep reading my review to find out!

Cricket on the Hearth (1967) title card created by Rankin/Bass Productions, Thomas/Spelling Productions, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)

Things I liked about the film:

The animation: Some of the best animated movies boast bright, colorful hues. These hues can be utilized in various ways, from creating imaginative worlds to providing interesting visual contrasts. Cricket on the Hearth was a very kaleidoscopic production! Scenes either burst with a bundle of color or at least one bold color sparkled against a darker background. Presenting Cricket Crocket in a mustard yellow suit jacket and shoes, paired with an orange vest and a red bowtie, was a smart creative decision. It forces the audience to focus on Cricket Crocket, especially when he’s standing on a dark wood table or a deep green top hat. The toys in Caleb’s toy shop come to life during the song, ‘Smiles Go With Tears’. Despite the title’s contraction, the song’s tone is joyful because the song is about someone shedding tears due to being happy. The joyful nature of ‘Smiles Go With Tears’ is wonderfully depicted in the presentation of the toys. From a doll’s bubble-gum pink dress and bonnet to a pair of bright yellow and blue elephants, this scene was great to look at!

While looking for a place to live, Caleb considers moving into a poor house. Because Cricket Crocket is perched on Caleb’s top hat, Cricket Crocket hangs upside down in order to face Caleb. While looking upside down, Cricket Crocket sees a nearby toy factory. As he is readjusting himself, the image of the toy factory flips from appearing upside down to becoming right-side up. Animated films from the 1960s, especially those that were made-for-tv productions, were created with limited resources compared to animated pictures from the twenty-first century. Therefore, scenes like the one I just described seem ahead of its time.

The songs: Before reviewing Cricket on the Hearth, I had never seen the 1967 movie. So, I was pleasantly surprised when I discovered the movie was a musical! The songs featured in this film sounded like relics of the late ‘60s, the time when Cricket on the Hearth was released. But these sounds, from emotional ballads to cheery tunes, felt nostalgic. Danny Thomas, who voices Caleb, sings a ballad titled ‘Through My Eyes’. Throughout this song, Caleb expresses his desire for his daughter, Bertha, to see the world how he wishes he could present it to her. The combination of Danny’s vocals and the orchestral music felt reminiscent of Judy Garland’s ‘Somewhere Over the Rainbow’ and Louis Armstrong’s ‘What a Wonderful World’, songs that exude a sense of hope and contain timeless elements. Another song of Danny’s I liked was ‘The First Christmas’! Before this song, Caleb wonders how he will provide the kind of Christmas Bertha hopes for. He learns how to resolve his conflict as the song carries on. The lyrics of ‘The First Christmas’ illustrate how Christmas doesn’t have to look the same for those who celebrate the holiday. The inclusion of the Norman Luboff Chorus added gravitas to this song!

The religious aspects of Christmas: Based on what I know about Charles Dickens and his stories, A Christmas Carol, one of his most well-known pieces of literature, is typically not known for addressing the religious aspects of Christmas. Though it was briefly incorporated in Cricket on the Hearth, I was pleasantly surprised by the recognition of Christmas’ religious aspects! As I previously said while talking about ‘The First Christmas’, the lyrics of the song illustrate how Christmas doesn’t have to look the same for those who celebrate the holiday. This point is emphasized by reminding the audience how Jesus had very little in terms of decorations and presents during the First Christmas. By the end of the song, the message is made clear; it’s not about what you have, but who you spend Christmas with that’s important. Before closing out the movie, Danny quotes a poem by Edmund Cooke. The quote itself goes “Tis not the weight of jewel or plate, or the fondle of silk or fur, ‘tis the spirit in which the gift is rich, as the gifts of the Wise Men were. And we are not told whose gift was gold or whose was the gift of myrrh”. Edmund’s poem brings up an excellent point, as the Nativity story does not specify which gift came from which Wise Man. This quote also highlights the point made earlier about Christmas being about who you spend the holiday with.

The (Aaron) Spellingverse Blogathon banner created by Gill from Realweegiemidget Reviews

What I didn’t like about the film:

Scenes that serve as padding: In order to satisfy a film’s run-time, a film’s creative team will, sometimes, choose to pad the story out by incorporating additional scenes or establishing shots. This creative decision was utilized in Cricket on the Hearth, mostly in between songs. During the song, ‘Through My Eyes’, a scene of Bertha dancing in a ballgown lasts for almost thirty seconds. The song itself takes up two minutes and twenty-three seconds of the movie’s run-time. I don’t think Cricket on the Hearth needed padding, especially since it lasted a little over forty-nine minutes.

The randomness of the ‘Fish and Chips’ song: I liked the featured songs in Cricket on the Hearth. However, there is one song that, in the context of the story, felt random. A cat named Moll, voiced by Abbe Lane, sings a song about the finer things in life called ‘Fish and Chips’. This song is sung to a jazzy, ragtime tune. During the performance, Moll dances in a red, low-cut, sleeveless dress and even attempts to flirt with the male characters in her audience. The animation in this scene didn’t look bad. Abbe Lane also did a good job with the material given to her. But the story appearing to take place somewhere in the 1800s and with the movie’s tone being mostly heartwarmingly gentle, Moll’s ‘Fish and Chips’ song feels out of place in Cricket on the Hearth.

Parts of the story that don’t make sense: For this part of my review, I will spoil Cricket on the Hearth. If you have not seen the 1967 film and are interested in watching it, please skip ahead to the part of my review titled ‘My overall impression’.

Cricket on the Hearth’s antagonist, Tackleton, has a pet bird named Uriah. More often than not, Tackleton and Uriah are inseparable. After Tackleton orders Uriah to get rid of Cricket Crocket, Uriah and two of his friends kidnap Cricket Crocket and try to sell him to a sea captain. During the scene of Uriah’s attempted business transaction, it is heavily implied Uriah and his friends died. Fast forward toward the end of the movie, Tackleton is upset by Bertha’s rejection of his marriage proposal. In fact, he’s more upset about Bertha’s rejection than the absence of his bird. If Tackleton and Uriah were as inseparable as they appeared to be earlier in the movie, wouldn’t Tackleton wonder what happened to Uriah? Wouldn’t Tackleton ask the other characters if they know where Uriah is? This is just one part of Cricket on the Hearth that, to me, didn’t make sense.

Three Wise Men themed wish list paper image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/christmas”>Christmas vector created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

As I watched Cricket on the Hearth, I was reminded of The Best Christmas Pageant Ever, the 1983 Christmas movie I reviewed last December. Both films are not only made-for-tv productions, they both feel more like television specials than movies. It’s expected to suspend some disbelief in stories from animated films. But Cricket on the Hearth tried to suspend disbelief to the point parts of the story didn’t make sense. Despite the movie being under an hour long, some scenes, including those in between songs, served as unnecessary padding. Throughout Cricket on the Hearth, however, I could tell the movie’s creative team tried their best to make their project as special as possible. The songs were not only well performed, the music and visuals provided a good combination for the song itself. Though briefly incorporated, I also liked the recognition of Christmas’ religious aspects. I have not read Cricket on the Hearth’s source material. But based on what I know about Charles Dickens’ work, this story seems different from his other adaptations, as Cricket on the Hearth relies more on elements of fantasy and magical realism.

Overall score: 6.5 out of 10

Have you seen or read Cricket on the Hearth? Which adaptation of Charles Dickens’ stories would you like to see me review? Please tell me in the comment section!

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Take 3: Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Brush with Fate Review + 490 Follower Thank You

On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

Recently, I published a list of the top ten “icks” from Hallmark
Hall of Fame movies. The list consisted of ten aspects of Hallmark Hall of Fame
films I don’t like. One of these “icks” is when a movie from this collection
glosses over a serious subject. Shortly after I published my list, I found I wasn’t
the only blogger to not like this particular “ick”. A fellow blogger,
Ospreyshire, brought up the 2003 Hallmark Hall of Fame production, Brush with
Fate, as an example of how Hallmark Hall of Fame can incorporate serious
issues into their stories. Since I hadn’t seen the film yet, I chose Brush with
Fate for this Blog Follower Dedication Review! This is only the second project
from the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection I’ve reviewed this year, so far. A
month ago, I wrote about the 1987 movie, Pack of Lies. Unfortunately, I
found the film disappointing, as the story was a two-hour build-up to an
underwhelming resolution. So, here’s hoping Brush with Fate is a more
enjoyable picture!

Hallmark Hall of Fame’s Brush with Fate poster created by CBS and Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions

Things I liked about the film:

An immersive experience: A movie’s creative team has the potential
to provide an immersive experience for their audience. To achieve this, attention
to detail must be emphasized. That piece of advice can work in the favor of a
historical period film. Brush with Fate explores several time periods and how a
valuable painting exists within a given period. Each time period represented
looked and felt historically accurate! Not only does every featured period
appear well researched, every detail was tended to. From the architecture to
the machinery, even right down to the characters’ shoes, the aforementioned attention
to detail was adopted by Brush with Fate’s creative team. The effort the
creative team took to make each part of the story appear authentic helped
create an immersive experience for the viewer!


Visual transitions: When a story moves from one point to
another, scenes will transition using visual cues to let the audience know when
the story is moving forward. Because Brush with Fate explores several
time periods, there are multiple transitions throughout the movie. These transitions
are creative and use visually interesting parallels. Toward the beginning of
the story, Cornelia puts her hand on her family’s
prized painting. As she begins to share the history of the painting, the next
part of the story begins with Laurens putting his hand on the same painting,
signaling a change in time periods. The transitions during Brush with Fate were also seamless, allowing
the story to maintain a steady flow.


Lessons taught by the painting: More often than not,
Hallmark Hall of Fame movies weave important lessons into their stories. While Brush
with Fate is no different, the way the story’s lessons were incorporated was
unique compared to other Hallmark Hall of Fame titles. In the 2003 film, different
characters learn a different lesson based on their experience with the
painting. In one part of the story, a woman from 1717 struggles to feed her
family. At the same time, she adores a painting she and her husband found.
Turning to her mother for advice, the woman is reminded how the painting is not
a blessing. This statement expresses that paintings are replaceable luxuries
compared to irreplaceable things like family.

Paint palette image created by Freepik at freepik.com <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/hand-drawn-artsy-tools_836777.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a> <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/hand”>Hand vector created by Freepik</a> Image found at freepik.com

What I didn’t like about the film:

Characters touching the painting with their bare hands: Fictional
movies typically make their audience suspend their disbelief. Sometimes, though,
audiences are asked to suspend more disbelief than they bargained for. Brush
with Fate revolves around a Vermeer painting that is known for being valuable
in historical and monetary importance. But throughout the movie, multiple
characters touch the painting with their bare hands, including Cornelia , who is well aware of the painting’s value. It
may seem petty of me to critique the movie for this small detail. However, this
happened enough times in the movie that I couldn’t look past it.


An unchronological story: As I mentioned earlier in this
review, Brush with Fate explores several time periods and how a valuable
painting exists within a given period. However, this story is not told in
chronological order. Instead, Cornelia shares the painting’s history by bouncing
around between time, going backwards and then forwards. Not telling the story
in chronological order raises unanswered questions, such as what happened to
the baby from the family in 1717 and who acquired the painting after Laurens’
daughter and her fiancé. Without spoiling the movie, I will say I know why this
creative decision was made. But I still wish Brush with Fate was told in
chronological order.

An abrupt ending:  Most
Hallmark Hall of Fame movies are stand-alone stories where the conclusions are
definitive. However, there are exceptions to the rule, such as Sweet Nothing
in My Ear and A Painted House. Brush with Fate is one of these exceptions. But, in my opinion, I don’t think this
movie should have received an open ending. The purpose of showcasing the
painting in multiple time periods is to elaborate how the painting’s history is
long-lasting. With the rather abrupt ending, this purpose seems defeated, like
the painting’s history has stopped short. It also leaves some unresolved loose
ends.

Art tools image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/flar-art-tools-pack_835368.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>.  <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/paint”>Paint vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

My overall impression:

Before I share my thoughts on Brush with Fate, I want
to thank every follower of 18 Cinema Lane! With each movie review, including
these Blog Follower Dedication Reviews, I try to find films I can recommend to
my readers. Looking back on this Hallmark Hall of Fame picture, I think I could
recommend it. This is a project where attention to detail was emphasized so
much, some parts of the movie felt theatrical. The creative team behind Brush
with Fate allowed their production to be an immersive experience for their
audience. However, I think this story would be benefitted by being presented as
a multi-part mini-series. With several time periods being explored, as well as
many heavy subjects woven into the script, there’s only so much story to tell
in two hours. By giving each time period their own episode, more time could be
spent getting to know the characters and receiving answers to certain
questions. Like many Hallmark Hall of Fame movies, Brush with Fate is
based on a pre-existing book I haven’t read yet. Therefore, I can only review
this film as a film and not an adaptation.


Overall score: 7.1-7.2 out of 10


Have you seen Brush with Fate? Which book do you
think should have been adapted into a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie? Let me know
in the comment section!


Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Top 10 “Icks” from Hallmark Hall of Fame Movies

On By 18cinemalane3 Comments

To address the elephant in the room (or on the blog in this case), the lack of blog posts this past week is due to how much time I’ve spent collecting research for my upcoming Sally Solves a Mystery article. While I have been working to solve a television-related mystery, the subject of Hallmark Hall of Fame movies came to mind. I’ve seen over fifty films from the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection. At this point, I, as a viewer, know what I like and don’t like when it comes to storytelling from this particular branch of Hallmark entertainment. These preferences are what inspired me to create this list of the top ten “icks” from Hallmark Hall of Fame movies! For my list, I will share which aspects of Hallmark Hall of Fame films I am not a fan of, providing examples from various titles in this collection. Before I begin the list, I want to address how this list is not meant to be mean-spirited or negative. My article is, simply, a way to express my opinion.

Taking out the trash photo created by Katemangostar at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/unhappy-woman-holding-trash-with-disgusting-smell_1305783.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/person”>Person image created by Katemangostar – Freepik.com</a>. Image found on freepik.com.

1. Underutilizing Talent

    In past movie reviews, I have pointed out when I felt an actor or actress’s talents were underutilized. What I’ve meant by this is an actress or actor’s talents not being incorporated into a film to the fullest extent. This can range from an actor or actress being miscast to an actor or actress having a limited presence in the movie, the latter serving two examples for this list. Marguerite Moreau’s involvement in 2002’s The Locket is one of the reasons why I wanted to check the film out. Because she was cast as the movie’s main supporting actress, I expected Marguerite to have a more consistent presence in the film than she actually did. As I said in my review of The Locket, Marguerite’s character barely appeared in the movie’s second half. Based on her performances I have seen from a variety of movies and television shows, I think Karina Arroyave’s acting talents could have lent themselves to a larger role in 2000’s Missing Pieces. Sadly, Karina’s on-screen appearances were so short, they seemed like “don’t blink or you’ll miss her” moments. While she was given a little more screen-time in the 1993 film, Blind Spot, I still feel Karina’s acting talents were underutilized.

    2. Films That Feel like Televised Plays

    When I choose to watch a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie, I expect to see a cinematic production of an original or pre-existing story. Some of these pre-existing stories happen to be plays. But there are times when a project’s creative team didn’t take advantage of how expansive film-making can be. Instead, they kept their adaptation as limited as the boundaries of the stages these plays came from. Like I pointed out in my review of the 1987 film, Foxfire, the cast is smaller and the story is condensed, forcing the characters to remain near or in Annie’s house. With the story surrounded by the natural beauty of Appalachia, I wish the movie’s emphasis had been placed on showcasing a variety of locations from this region. The 1972 remake of Harvey made similar creative choices, such as showing fewer locations throughout the story. This is different from the 1950 version of Harvey, where Elwood moves to multiple places.

    3. Oversimplifying Adoption/Foster Care

    Back in 2022, when I published my list of the top ten worst movies I saw that year, 1994’s A Place for Annie ended up as a Dishonorable Mention. One reason why I didn’t like this film is how the subject of adoption/foster care was oversimplified. For those who have never seen or heard of the movie, A Place for Annie is about a woman taking in a baby who is HIV positive. Over the course of the story, the woman, portrayed by Sissy Spacek, is in the process of adopting the baby. But she experiences an unexpected conflict when the baby’s biological mother shows up. The way Sissy’s and Mary-Louise Parker’s characters were portrayed and written presented a “good” mother vs. “bad” mother dynamic, even right down to the way each character dressed. Sissy’s character, Susan, becomes upset at the idea of Mary-Louise’s character, Linda, reuniting with her daughter, even though the intended purpose of foster care is for children to be reunited with their biological families. Because of the oversimplification of adoption/foster care in A Place for Annie, I couldn’t take the movie seriously.

    4. Characters Not Receiving Their Full Potential

    Speaking of articles from 2022, I’ll now bring up my list of top ten characters who didn’t reach their full potential. When I published this list, I explained when a character doesn’t receive their full potential, they aren’t given the opportunity to reach their goals, make their dreams come true, and allow their stories to be told to a satisfying extent. This list featured two characters from Hallmark Hall of Fame movies; Barry Klemper from The Boys Next Door and Amédée Chevalier from O Pioneers!. In the case of these characters, their stories were adapted from pre-existing source material. While I haven’t seen or read a stage version of The Boys Next Door, I have read O Pioneers!. I can understand why Willa Cather made certain creative decisions related to Amédée, as well as Hallmark Hall of Fame’s desire to keep the adaptation as close to the source material as possible. However, I still wish Amédée had received his full potential.

    5. Rehashed Stories

    For this part of my list, I am not talking about Hallmark Hall of Fame productions that are adapted from pre-existing plays or books. I am referring to Hallmark Hall of Fame movies that seem to copy stories from other films. Earlier in this list, I referenced the 1972 and 1950 versions of Harvey. After watching both versions, it feels like I watched the same movie twice, due to little variation between the two versions. I also felt this way about the 1996 film, The Summer of Ben Tyler. The movie seemed so similar to To Kill a Mockingbird, I wondered if Hallmark Hall of Fame was trying to remake the aforementioned film. I know story ideas are bound to get repeated over time. But, in my opinion, the Hallmark Hall of Fame productions should strive to create unique, distinct projects.

    Harvey (1972) poster created by Foote, Cone and Belding Productions, Hallmark Hall of Fame Productions, Talent Associates-Norton Simon, and National Broadcasting Company (NBC)

    6. Terrible Grandparents

    Grandparents, like any family member in a protagonist’s life, should, in my opinion, be a kind, friendly character that the audience can root for. Unfortunately, some protagonists aren’t so lucky. For the fifth annual Gold Sally Awards, when I created the inaugural Edwin P. Christy Award for most annoying character in film, I gave that award to Grandpa Marcus from 1995’s Journey. I explained how obsessed he became of his photography hobby, to the point where he became negligent of his grandchildren’s safety. In one scene, Grandpa Marcus makes his grandson, who doesn’t appear old enough to obtain a driver’s permit yet, drive a car so Grandpa Marcus can take pictures. The grandchildren make a joking comment about how their grandpa will photograph their car accident if something should happen to them, with the scene itself meant to be played as a wholesome, hilarious moment.

    Leonora Nelson is a bitter, mean-spirited woman in the 1997 film, Ellen Foster. At her daughter’s burial, Leonora blames her son-in-law for her daughter dying. She yells and screams at her son-in-law just seconds after her daughter’s casket was buried. As the story progresses, Leonora’s hatred for her son-in-law grows. Her actions range from smashing his Purple Heart medal with a hammer to telling her granddaughter, the titular Ellen Foster, she hates her because she looks like her father. I recognize Leonora is intended to be an awful character, serving as one of the many obstacles Ellen had to overcome. But that doesn’t take away from how, in my opinion, Leonora Nelson is one of the worst characters in Hallmark movie history.

    7. Productions That Feel Like Hallmark Channel Films

    Hallmark Hall of Fame movies began to premiere on Hallmark Channel in 2014. While there are films from this time period I like, such as Love Takes Flight and The Beach House, I am aware how, more often than not, these projects bear a formula similar to those from Hallmark Channel. One such example is how a romance is usually the center of a given story. The identities of films like The Beach House and Love Takes Flight are not as unique as Hallmark Hall of Fame movies from years past. Take, for instance, Missing Pieces and Caroline? from 1990. Both of these films revolve around mystery stories. However, each title presents its own distinct identity, with these two movies bringing something different to the Hallmark Hall of Fame collection.

    8. Unsupportive Parents

    Similar to what I said earlier about grandparents, parents of protagonists should, in my opinion, at least be supportive. Sadly, a protagonist’s parents may be unsupportive for a variety of reasons. In my list of top ten characters who didn’t reach their full potential, I mentioned how Barry Klemper’s father destroyed the momentum Barry had in The Boys Next Door. Long before his father showed up, Barry dreaded the meeting because of how unsupportive his father is. On the day of the meeting, Barry’s father intimidated and belittled his son, even making Barry feel incapable of performing a simple golf maneuver. There are times, however, when a protagonist’s unsupportive parents do not intend to be unsupportive. Heidi and Winston’s mother is a perfect example. In the 1990 movie, Caroline?, Winston and Heidi’s mother is overprotective due to Heidi having a disability. Her good intentions not only lead Heidi to be treated younger than her age, but also prevent Heidi’s academic needs from being met.

    9. Glossing Over Serious Subjects

    The Hallmark Hall of Fame collection has covered its fair share of serious subjects, ranging from the aforementioned adoption/foster care to terminal illnesses. But sometimes, a Hallmark Hall of Fame production will miss a good opportunity to address an important topic by glossing it over. The subject of racism is woven into the text of The Flamingo Rising book, with racism causing the protagonist, Abraham, to have self-image related issues. When the book was adapted into a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie in 2001, all mentions of racism were eliminated from the script. This decision was likely made to keep The Flamingo Rising movie “Hallmark appropriate”. At a very random moment in the 1996 film, Calm at Sunset, Russell Pfeiffer admits he has a drug addiction. There was no lead up to this revelation and the revelation itself was never addressed afterward. Calm at Sunset is based on a book I haven’t read. Therefore, I don’t know how the subject of addiction was addressed in the source material compared to the adaptation.

    10. A Dysfunctional Family for the Sake of It

      Six years ago, when I published my list of the top ten worst Hallmark movies of all time, I put the 2004 film, Back When We Were Grownups, at number one. As I mentioned in that list, the story’s family seems dysfunctional just for the sake of it. From what I remember, there was no clear reason for the family to be dysfunctional. This is very different from another Hallmark Hall of Fame production, 1998’s Saint Maybe. In that movie, a death in the family causes a ripple effect which leads to the family becoming dysfunctional. The dysfunctional nature of the family serves as motivation for various characters to make impactful changes in their lives. Comparing these two Hallmark Hall of Fame films, which are both adaptations of Anne Tyler’s books, I think Saint Maybe did a better job at showcasing how a dysfunctional family live their lives and work through their problems.

      Group of unhappy image created by Rawpixel.com at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by rawpixel.com – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      Have fun at the movies!

      Sally Silverscreen

      Concluding my Double Feature: 2004 Edition

      On By 18cinemalaneLeave a comment

      It’s time to wrap up another double feature, as both chosen titles, Hallmark’s Frankenstein and I Am David, have now been watched and reviewed! In the introduction, I brought up the following question:

      Based on these two movies, how has the cinematic landscape changed in twenty years?

      Looking back on each movie, a realization came to me. One thing I Am David and Hallmark’s Frankenstein have in common is the timelessness each story contains. It also helps how these stories are more straight-forward, which makes it easier for the audience to understand what is happening on screen. Realizing these statements could also be applied to The Polar Express, my answer to the aforementioned question is how, back in 2004, it seems like there was a desire on the cinematic landscape to create timeless entertainment. Now, twenty years later, studios and film companies are competing with one another to make the most relevant titles possible. On the current cinematic landscape, it’s all about capitalizing on trends and fads, creating titles for the here and the now. The problem with this film-making approach is how five, even ten plus years from that movie’s release, that movie will be dated on arrival. This film-making approach also makes movies seem more disposable instead of a long-lasting product with more opportunities to be revisited.

      Popcorn and movie ticket image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cinema-tickets-in-bucket-with-popcorn_2303439.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/layout”>Layout image created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      Have fun at the movies!

      Sally Silverscreen

      Take 3: Hallmark’s Frankenstein (2004) Review (Double Feature: 2004 Edition Part 2)

      On By 18cinemalane1 Comment

      Thank you for joining me for the second part of Double Feature: 2004 Edition! Similar to my review of Sesame Street Presents: Follow That Bird, this review of Hallmark’s Frankenstein will be spoiler-free. If you’re curious about why I chose Hallmark’s Frankenstein for this double feature, you can check out the introduction in the link below.

      Introducing my Double Feature: 2004 Edition!

      Hallmark’s Frankenstein poster created by Hallmark Entertainment, Hallmark Channel, Silverstar Ltd., Larry Levinson Productions, and RTL

      Before I start this review, I need to explain why I’m referring
      to this version of Frankenstein as ‘Hallmark’s Frankenstein’. On
      Wikipedia, there is a page chronicling all the Hallmark Channel movies released
      between 2000 to 2015. In the section listing Hallmark Channel’s films from
      2004, Vincent Perez is listed as one of the stars of Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein.
      But if you click on the italicized title of Frankenstein, the link goes
      directly to Wikipedia’s page about the Hallmark movie starring Alec Newman. While
      Vincent did star in an adaptation of Frankenstein released in 2004, it
      is not the Hallmark version. I didn’t discover this error until after I had
      seen Vincent’s film.

      The reason why I included this screenshot in my review is to show my readers how Hallmark’s Frankenstein is listed on Wikipedia. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.

      1. What are your thoughts on 2004 as a cinematic year?

      2004 was a year where “event entertainment” took place. When I say “event entertainment”, I mean television or movie premieres that are popular enough to become anticipated events. I remember when full print ads would boast a new Hallmark Hall of Fame production, marking the movie itself as “must see television”. Four sequels for popular predecessors were released in 2004, earning a spot among the top ten highest grossing films of the year. Twenty years later, consumers have more options when it comes to entertainment. This provides fewer opportunities for “event entertainment” to take place. Even events that have always been considered “event television” are struggling to capture audience’s attention.

      2. Frankenstein premiered on Hallmark Channel on October 5th and 6th, 2004. How has the network evolved since the movie’s release?

      When Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein premiered, Hallmark Channel was three years old. At the time, the network didn’t have the distinct identity it does today.  This allowed content to be less restrictive when it comes to creativity. 2004 saw the debut of Hallmark’s second network, Hallmark Movie Channel. On that network, a lot of Hallmark Channel’s previously aired programming made up Hallmark Movie Channel’s catalogue, as well as Hallmark Hall of Fame titles and acquired content. But in the twenty years this second network has existed, the channel’s name has changed twice, with the network now known as Hallmark Mystery. With Hallmark creating two channels, it provided more opportunities to create movies. As time passed, both networks adopted a more distinguishable identity.

      3. Is there anything about Frankenstein you liked or didn’t like?

      While I think the acting was one of the strengths of this movie, the two strongest performances came from Alec Newman and Luke Goss! Alec’s portrayal of Victor Frankenstein was so captivating because of the wide range of emotions incorporated into the role. His versatility made Victor feel like an authentic human being. From crying over the loss of a loved one to playfully teasing Elizabeth, Alec’s performance allowed Victor’s interactions with other characters to be interesting, with each interaction appearing genuine. Meanwhile, Luke utilized emotion to make The Creature a complicated character like he was in the novel. In fact, Luke’s emotionality spoke volumes in scenes where dialogue wasn’t required. One example shows The Creature after he escapes from Victor’s laboratory. When he seeks refuge in a barn, The Creature bursts into tears, overwhelmed by the fear and rejection directed toward him.

      When Frankenstein premiered on Hallmark Channel, it was released as a two-part mini-series. The first part revolved around Victor’s desire to create life, leading up to The Creature coming to fruition. But the second part was more drawn out, with scenes either longer than necessary or completely unnecessary. Frankenstein’s second part features a wedding reception that lasts about five minutes. I understand why that scene was included in the adaptation. In my opinion, though, the wedding reception should have been cut shorter or omitted from the script.

      4. In your Word on the Street story about a potential sequel for The Polar Express, you talked about the technology applied to that film. Could you detect any technology incorporated into Frankenstein?

      There were a few scenes where it appears CGI (computer generated images) was included in the film. Other than that, it didn’t look like technology (besides cinematography, sound editing, etc.) was relied on to create this adaptation.

      Snowy mountain image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/landscape-background-of-snow-track-and-mountains_968656.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/background”>Background vector created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      5. Did you develop any thoughts and/or questions while watching this film?

      In one of Victor’s science classes, Victor claims the brain is the most important body part because of its electrical connections between nerves and other body parts. As he is attempting to create life, Victor collects various body parts from the morgue and the graveyard. When The Creature is awakened, wouldn’t he remember his life and identity prior to passing away? Wouldn’t The Creature recognize the body Victor gave him is not the body he was born with? With Victor’s statement about the brain, wouldn’t the nerves in The Creature’s brain not connect with the rest of his body? I never thought of these questions until I saw Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein.

      6. You’ve mentioned reading Frankenstein, but seeing few adaptations of the story. How does Hallmark’s version compare or contrast to the Frankenstein related movies you’ve seen?

      Besides Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, I’ve seen three films that incorporate elements of Mary Shelley’s story. But because The Curse of Frankenstein follows the source material closer than the other two films, I’ll be discussing that movie alongside Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein. When I reviewed The Curse of Frankenstein last year, I was disappointed by the creative liberties the film’s creative team adopted. One of these creative liberties was presenting The Creature as a bumbling, destructive machine. As I mentioned in answer number three, The Creature was a complicated character in the novel. While he was destructive, The Creature’s actions were not always impulsive. In Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, Luke’s performance and the screenwriting illustrated how complicated The Creature is. The Creature’s intelligence was also highlighted in this adaptation, adding to The Creature’s complexity. Shortly after he escapes from Victor’s laboratory, the audience can hear how The Creature already understands the English language, grasping concepts like God and Heaven, as well as reading Paradise Lost.

      7. Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein is a made-for-TV production. Has there been a change in small screen cinema from 2004 to now?

      In the same year Hallmark Channel premiered their version of Frankenstein, Hallmark Hall of Fame movies debuted on major networks. But fast forward to 2024, Hallmark Hall of Fame is no longer utilized by Hallmark, even after moving to Hallmark Channel in 2014. These decisions are examples of how made-for-TV programming has become more exclusive. Since 2004, Hallmark Channel has grown into one of the biggest creators of made-for-TV content. In fact, Hallmark Channel and its two networks, Hallmark Mystery and Hallmark Family, are three of the few places creating and/or distributing made-for-TV movies today. Rewinding to twenty years ago, major networks were still willing to include made-for-TV programs in their schedules. With the changing television landscape, including the invention of streaming services, major networks are just trying to stay afloat.

      8. Now that it’s been twenty years since Frankenstein premiered, has it stood the test of time or become a product of its time?

      For the most part, Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein stands the test of time! It helps how this project is bringing to life a story that is iconic and timeless. I mentioned in my review of The Curse of Frankenstein how an overarching message in Mary Shelley’s novel is some good intentions possibly leading to bad results. This message also overarches Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein, as Victor strives to do the impossible. There are other timeless messages in this version of Mary’s story, such as prioritizing what is irreplaceable.

      9. After watching Frankenstein, is there anything you can take away from your movie viewing experience?

      Similar to my review of I Am David, I will describe Hallmark’s version of Frankenstein in one word. That word would be ‘immersive’. This production made me feel like I was transported to another time and place. A combination of the acting performances, set design, costume design, and screenwriting achieved the illusion of an immersive experience. As someone who has read Mary Shelley’s novel, I appreciate how close to the source material Hallmark’s project is. From what I remember, the majority of the book’s key events and elements were included in the script. With that said, I understand why Hallmark chose to split Frankenstein into two parts. But, in my opinion, the second part was weaker than the first part. Looking back on Hallmark’s adaptation and I Am David, Frankenstein is a more underrated film that was not only forgotten by time, but also overshadowed by other titles released in 2004, like A Boyfriend for Christmas and Love’s Enduring Promise. I’m hoping my review inspires other fans of Hallmark to discover this hidden gem!

      Popcorn and movie ticket image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cinema-tickets-in-bucket-with-popcorn_2303439.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/layout”>Layout image created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      Have fun at the movies!

      Sally Silverscreen



      Take 3: I Am David Review (Double Feature: 2004 Edition Part 1)

      On By 18cinemalane2 Comments

      Thank you for joining me for the first part of Double Feature: 2004 Edition! Similar to last year’s review of The Great Muppet Caper, my review of I Am David is spoiler-free. If you’re curious about why I chose I Am David for this double feature, you can check out the introduction in the link below.

      Introducing my Double Feature: 2004 Edition!

      I Am David poster created by Walden Media, Film and General Productions, Lionsgate Films, Artisan Entertainment, and David Productions Ltd.

      1. What are your thoughts on 2004 as a cinematic year?

      When I look back on the cinematic landscape of 2004, my first thought is how studios and film companies were more willing to create stand-alone productions. Twenty years ago, about fifteen sequels were released in theaters. In 2024, that number has increased, with about twenty-three sequels scheduled to premiere. My second thought about 2004 is how creativity was celebrated at the box office. The Polar Express, the reason why this double feature exists, was the tenth highest grossing film of 2004. Even though that movie was based on a pre-existing book, the production was not a remake or a sequel of a preceding film. Plus, The Polar Express brought something new to the cinematic table, as the movie was created through motion-capture technology.

      2. I Am David was released on December 3rd, 2004 (around “award season”). Why do you think the film was overlooked on the award circuit?

      The 77th Academy Awards was a televised event. This means those involved with the creation of the show had to make decisions that would increase or maintain higher viewership numbers. Million Dollar Baby, the movie that won Best Picture, was a film the majority of the Academy Awards’ audience had either heard of or seen. The movie was directed by Clint Eastwood and starred Hilary Swank, two actors this same Academy Awards audience were familiar with. Because I Am David premiered around the same time as Million Dollar Baby and lacked the star power Million Dollar Baby had, I Am David became overshadowed by a bigger, more popular production.

      2004 was when The Passion of the Christ made waves at the box office. Becoming the third highest grossing film of that year, it earned the distinction of being one of the most successful faith-based movies in history. Similar to Million Dollar Baby, The Passion of the Christ contained star power, directed by Mel Gibson and starring Jim Caviezel. I wouldn’t go so far as to call I Am David a faith-based movie. However, elements of faith are woven into the story. While Jim Caviezel stars in I Am David, his presence in this film is very limited. With all that said, I Am David became overshadowed by another big, more popular title.

      3. Is there anything about I Am David you liked or didn’t like?

      The story of I Am David revolves around the titular character escaping from a Bulgarian labor camp in 1952. Throughout his journey, David takes refuge in the natural landscape surrounding him. The natural environment in this film serves two purposes; protecting David and giving him a gateway to freedom. A peaceful scene where he casually walks through a tunnel of trees beautifully captures this idea, providing a symbolic light at the end of the tunnel. The importance given to Europe’s natural landscape allows it to become its own character, with the elements, more often than not, working in David’s favor. It also showcases a side of Europe that could be easily taken for granted.

      I Am David is a story where the audience learns more about David as the film progresses. While this keeps the audience invested in the film, this creative decision means answers aren’t provided until toward the end of the movie. On the one hand, I, kind of, wish some of the revelations about David were revealed sooner. But, on the other hand, major questions were answered within two plot twists that I found effective. Even though the longer wait for answers is a flaw, I was able to, for the most part, overlook it because of the strength of the plot twists.

      4. In your Word on the Street story about a potential sequel for The Polar Express, you mentioned the technology that was applied to the film. Could you detect any technology incorporated into I Am David?

      As far as I could tell, I didn’t sense any technology within I Am David other than cinematography, sound, and editing. Because of the nature of the movie, though, I don’t think technological film-making techniques were necessary.

      Italian countryside image created by Bill Silvermintz at freeimages.com. “FreeImages.com/Bill Silvermintz.” Photo by <a href=”/photographer/edudflog-58908″>Bill Silvermintz</a> from <a href=”https://freeimages.com/”>FreeImages</a&gt;.

      5. I Am David is based on a book published in the 1960s. Has the entertainment industry changed its approach to adapting pre-established stories?

      Throughout 2004, about twenty adaptations based on literature premiered in theaters. Out of those twenty, eleven adaptations contained a built-in audience for a variety of reasons. Observing which movies are scheduled to premiere in 2024, the entertainment industry is, once again, choosing source material with a built-in audience. But now this selection process has expanded beyond literature; with movies, tv shows, and popular characters receiving their own adaptations. Even though there were productions in 2004 based on popular IPs (intellectual properties), the number of adaptations based on IPs has doubled in twenty years, with about 44 of 2024’s films fitting this criterion. One of these films is the musical remake of Mean Girls. While the original movie was based on the book, Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman, the remake is based on the 2004 film.

      6. Did you develop any thoughts and/or questions while watching this film?

      I didn’t develop any questions while watching I Am David. But as I followed the story, I took note of the film’s exploration of light and darkness. When the film begins, David attempts his escape from the labor camp. This scene is intense, emphasizing David’s dire situation through limited lighting, cinematography, and music. Flashbacks are sprinkled throughout the story, showing only enough harshness to get the point across. When the lighter moments appear in the movie, they feel earned, taking place after David experiences a trial in his journey. Primarily showcased in bright lights and with peaceful, even cheery music playing in the background, these lighter moments address how our world can be a beautiful place. Showing the light and darkness taking place in the world, especially in Europe post World War II, is a more balanced way of presenting the environment surrounding David.

      7. On Ebert & Roeper, I Am David was not covered. Why do you think the movie was omitted from the show?

      Ebert & Roeper, one of the iterations of At the Movies, was a nationally televised program. Smaller titles with limited releases were sometimes featured on the show. But the types of movies that populated the program were mainstream productions with widespread releases. This decision was likely made to maintain the show’s viewership, similar to the aforementioned 77th Academy Awards. The choice to emphasize more mainstream films was also probably made to provide the show’s audience with a chance to check out the movies brought up on the show, as those titles would be showing in more theaters.

      8. Now that it’s been twenty years since I Am David premiered, has the movie stood the test of time or become a product of its time?

      This film has definitely stood the test of time! A major reason for this is due to the timeless, universal messages woven into the script. Perseverance, trying to find the goodness in our world, and kindness progressing the journey forward are messages most people can appreciate. These messages may also inspire audience members to apply them to their own lives.

      9. After watching I Am David, is there anything you can take away from your movie viewing experience?

      If I could describe I Am David in one word, it would be ‘genuine’. Every aspect of this film, from the acting performances to the screenwriting, allowed the story of David and his journey to be told with genuine emotion and sincerity! Creative decisions were delivered as pleasant surprises for me, such as the plot twists that caught me off guard. I was really impressed by the inclusion of Europe’s natural landscape, given enough emphasis to be its own character. The exploration of light and darkness provided a more balanced perspective on David’s world. I Am David is a movie I wish had been nominated during “award season”. In fact, I wish more people knew about this film! But if someone wanted to watch I Am David, I would suggest watching it knowing as little information about the story as possible, as I don’t want the film’s aforementioned plot twists to be spoiled for first time viewers.

      Popcorn and movie ticket image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cinema-tickets-in-bucket-with-popcorn_2303439.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/layout”>Layout image created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      Have fun at the movies!

      Sally Silverscreen

      Introducing my Double Feature: 2004 Edition!

      On By 18cinemalane2 Comments

      Every time I publish one hundred posts, I commemorate the achievement by creating a double feature; reviewing two films that have at least one thing in common. My 800th blog post was a Word on the Street story about the possibility of a sequel for The Polar Express. Since that movie was released in 2004, I chose two titles from that year to review in this double feature. Those titles are I Am David and Hallmark’s adaptation of Frankenstein. It’s been a while since I attempted to answer a question through my double feature reviews. So, this time, I will try to find an answer to the following question:

      Based on these two movies, how has the cinematic landscape changed in twenty years?

      Popcorn and movie ticket image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-photo/cinema-tickets-in-bucket-with-popcorn_2303439.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/layout”>Layout image created by Freepik</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

      Have fun at the movies!

      Sally Silverscreen