Take 3: From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler (1995) Review

When Crystal, from In The Good Old Days Of Classic Hollywood, invited me to join her Third Annual Lauren Bacall Blogathon, I was aware of who Lauren is as an actress. In fact, I reviewed The Big Sleep for a blog follower dedication review back in August. For this blogathon, I wanted to pick one of Lauren’s films from outside the Classic/Golden Era of Hollywood. After looking through her filmography, I decided to review From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler! Before watching this movie, I knew that it was based on a book. However, I have never read the book or seen the film adaptation from 1973. I also heard that there was a mystery within this story. Because I like movies such as those from Hallmark Movies & Mysteries, I felt that this would be a film I might enjoy.

20191121_230936[1]
Because I had difficulty uploading an image of this poster, I decided to take a picture of it on my phone. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
Things I liked about the film:

The acting: Films that feature young actors as the leads can be hit or miss. Because of their limited talents, it’s difficult for the audience to know what to expect from that actor or actress. In From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler, the lead actors did a good job with the acting material they were given! Jean Marie Barnwell, who portrayed Claudia, and Jesse Lee Soffer, who portrayed Jamie, were both expressive and believable in their roles. They brought their characters to life with versatility, helping them present reactions that appeared realistic for children in that kind of situation. The supporting cast was also memorable in this film! Miriam Flynn, who portrayed Claudia and Jamie’s mom, mastered her role! She did this by bringing animation and emotion to her character. Miriam helped make her role distinct from the others in this film. She also had good on-screen chemistry with her fellow co-stars!

 

The cinematography: This film had better cinematography than I expected! The creative team behind the movie made some interesting choices when it came to how certain scenes were presented. One example is when Claudia and Jamie are hiding on the school bus. There was one scene where the camera was looking upward from the floor, focusing on the view from the window. This helped the audience picture the moment from the kids’ perspective. In the museum, there were close-ups of various artifacts. At opening or closing time, these close-ups emphasized the lights shining on these objects. Shots like these made the film visually appealing!

 

The locations of the museum and Mrs. Frankweiler’s house: Whenever I’ve talked about Murder, She Wrote, I almost always talk about how great the locations are. That series shares a similarity with this film. The museum and Mrs. Frankweiler’s house were the two best locations in the movie! Filmed in Los Angeles, both locations were captured very well on screen. They represent the impression that the creative team was going for: larger than life and exquisite. Not only were the exteriors impressive, but so were the interiors. From the domed ceiling of the museum to the grand staircase of Mrs. Frankweiler’s house, these facilities were some of the best parts of this project!

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
Angelic statue image created by Marcelo Gerpe at freeimages.com. “FreeImages.com/Marcelo Gerpe.”

What I didn’t like about the film:

Lauren Bacall’s brief appearance: In my review of One Christmas, I shared that Katharine Hepburn’s limited presence was something that I didn’t like about the film. From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler had the same problem. Like One Christmas, Lauren was the top-billed actor for this movie. This had given me the impression that she would appear in the majority of the project. But, similar to Katharine, Lauren only showed up in five scenes. Like I said in my One Christmas review, giving an actress like Lauren Bacall few opportunities to showcase her acting abilities does her a disservice. It also makes the movie’s creative team look like they’re making a promise they know they can’t keep. This decision came across as frustrating and misleading.

 

Over-shadowing the mystery: This story features a mystery about the authenticity of an angelic statue. While this was an interesting part of the overall narrative, it wasn’t given as much attention as I expected. Most of the story focused on Claudia and Jamie running away from home. The mystery itself wasn’t presented until forty minutes into the movie. Even then, the mystery was only discussed in a few scenes. It took a lot of intrigue out of the film, causing the story not to be as engaging or interactive.

 

Too much suspension of disbelief: I’ve said before on my blog that movies with fictional stories require their audience to suspend a certain amount of disbelief. But for From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler asked me to suspend my belief more than I had planned to. One example is how the police don’t play a big role in trying to find Claudia and Jamie. I found that to be very unbelievable, considering the fact that these children have been missing for three days. The idea of people living in a museum is also not realistic, especially since most facilities have things like motion sensors and security cameras. Things like this partially took me out of the film.

Third Annual Lauren Bacall Blogathon banner
The Third Annual Lauren Bacall Blogathon banner created by Crystal from In the Good Old Days of Classic Hollywood. Image found at https://crystalkalyana.wordpress.com/2019/09/16/announcing-the-third-lauren-bacall-blogathon/.

My overall impression:

While I’m glad that I gave this film a chance, I can honestly say that it was just ok. Sure, there were things about the movie that I liked. But there were also aspects that could have made it stronger. From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler made the same mistake that One Christmas did: incorporating a legendary actress but not utilizing her talents to the fullest extent. After I watched Lauren’s film, I realized that her movie and Katharine’s movie were both released in the mid – ‘90s. I’m now starting to wonder if this was a trend from that decade? Until that question is answered, I just wanted to thank Crystal for inviting me to join her blogathon! I’ve participated in several of her movie related events and she is an excellent host! I can’t wait for the next blogathon!

 

Overall score: 6 out of 10

 

Have you seen any of Lauren Bacall’s films? If so, which one is your favorite? Please tell me in the comment section!

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

Word on the Street: Cast for Upcoming Hallmark Movie Revealed, Two Future Christmas Movies Announced

Yes, I know it’s been several months since I talked about a movie news story related to Hallmark. Also, the last time I discussed a movie news story that had something to do with a Christmas movie was back in April. But, when I discovered that very few people were talking about the stories in this Word on the Street post, I knew that I had to talk about them. In this article, I will share one movie news story about an upcoming Hallmark film and two movie news stories about future Christmas films. I will try my best to share my opinion on these stories, as well as report what I know about them. Now, let the movie news discussion begin!

Christmas Party Ticket Card Template
Christmas themed movie tickets created Kraphix at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/movie-tickets-christmas_971544.htm’>Designed by Kraphix</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/christmas”>Christmas vector created by Kraphix – Freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

On November 12th, Sleepy Kitty Paw, from the Twitter account, Ho! Ho! Holiday Viewing!, shared a tweet from Hallmark actor, Chad Michael Murray. In this tweet, it’s revealed that he will star in Alice in Winterland! This movie was originally supposed to be a Christmas film called Alice in Christmasland. However, it looks like it will end up becoming a “Winterfest” movie. Sleepy Kitty Paw shared some of this information in their tweet. Chad’s tweet mentioned two fellow Hallmark actors, Jack Turner and Italia Ricci. This indicates that these particular actors will also star in the film. Jack’s involvement in this movie will raise some interesting questions about another potential “Winterfest” project. At Hallmark’s Summer TCA Event this year, Taylor Cole, one of the stars of the One Winter series, announced that One Winter Wedding will be on its way. But the Twitter account, Hotline to Hallmark, revealed on November 5th that Taylor will be starring alongside Ryan Paevey in a Valentine’s Day movie on Hallmark Channel. In this specific thread, it was also revealed that, as of early to mid-November 2019, One Winter Wedding has not gone into production. Now that both leads for this series are working on separate projects surrounding the “Winterfest” line-up, it makes the reality of One Winter Wedding seem more distant. If this film is still being released in 2020, my guess is it will either be a “June Weddings” or a Christmas film.

You can visit the Twitter accounts of Sleepy Kitty Paws and Hotline to Hallmark by typing @SleepyKittyPaw and @HotlineHallmark into Twitter’s search bar. You can also visit Taylor Cole’s Instagram account by typing ‘taylorquinncole’ into Instagram’s search bar.

508771-pi9sq9-56
Ski lodge during winter-time image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/ski-station-background_3423830.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.

Three days ago, on November 11th, Candace Young, from soaps.sheknows.com, reported that Eileen Davidson will appear in a Christmas film. The Young and the Restless star will lead a movie called There Will Always Be Christmas. In this article, Candace shares the cast and the synopsis for the movie. As of November 15th, 2019, this film does not have a release date and/or a designated network or platform. All we know, so far, is that it will premiere sometime next year.

Here’s the link to the article I referenced in this paragraph:

Eileen Davidson’s Bittersweet ‘There Will Always Be Christmas’

1033
Group of Christmas figures image created by Pikisuperstar at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/christmas”>Christmas vector created by Pikisuperstar – Freepik.com</a>. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/hand-drawn-cute-christmas-character_3188970.htm’>Designed by Pikisuperstar</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

On November 13th, Melissa Hill, author of books such as The Summer Villa and A Gift to Remember, released a tweet that certainly got my attention. In her tweet, she revealed that she has “just been sent first draft screenplay for #TheCharmBracelet”! This indicates that we could see a film adaptation of one of Melissa’s books, The Charm Bracelet! Melissa didn’t reveal where or when this movie could premiere. For me, it’s exciting because this particular book has been on my TBR (to be read) list for a few years. Now I have an excuse to finally read this book!

You can visit the Twitter account of Melissa Hill by typing @melissahillbks into Twitter’s search bar.

P0YDNL0
Christmas book image created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-psd/christmas-mockup-with-open-book_1482296.htm’>Designed by Freepik</a>. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/mockup”>Mockup psd created by Freepik</a>.  Image found at freepik.com.

What do you think of these pieces of movie news? Are you looking forward to any of these projects? Tell me in the comment section!

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

My ‘31 Spooks of October’ Wrap-Up

422746-PDJWSQ-762
Image of ghost reading created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/book”>Book photo created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

Now that the first day of November has finally arrived, it’s time for me to reflect on my participation in this year’s ‘31 Spooks of October’. First of all, I’d like to thank K, from K at the Movies, for allowing me to contribute to their event. I enjoyed reading their thoughts on various short stories and I can’t wait to see what’s in store for next year’s line-up. As I look at the collection of articles that I’ve published, I can honestly say that I’m proud of what I accomplished. While I didn’t complete everything I wanted to, I did create a variety of posts that are interesting and, hopefully, entertaining. These articles are:

 

 

What disappoints me is how I wasn’t able to complete my reading goal. But this experience has taught me a lesson. Before the month of October started, I thought that I would be able to read five books in one month. However, several blog related projects prevented this from happening. I did read more for this year’s Spookathon readathon by reading two books instead of just one! Also, this was my first year taking part in the Sbooktober readathon! After this experience, I think it would be better to focus on reading two books a month. As for the books I didn’t read? I’ll read them this November, especially since I have started Murder on Ice. If I were to participate in ‘31 Spooks of October’ again, I think publishing a post a week is a good idea. That way, I can contribute to the event and complete others projects that I want to publish.

421943-PDGET9-253
Image of skeleton and friend reading created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=”https://www.freepik.com/free-photos-vectors/book”>Book photo created by freepik – http://www.freepik.com</a>. Image found at freepik.com.

Are you a fan of ‘31 Spooks of October’? Do you have any suggestions for future Halloween themed articles? Please tell me in the comment section!

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

31 Spooks of October Update: I Finished Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders

Yesterday, I finished the second book I had planned to read during “31 Spooks of October”, Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders! This book took me longer to read than California Angel. The only reason for this is because of how busy I’ve been working on other blog related projects. Since October is almost over, I don’t think I’ll get around to reading the last two books on my TBR (to be read) list. However, I will try my best to read Murder on Ice before the month is over. But now that I’ve finished Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders, it’s time for me to talk about on it!

20191024_192420[1]
Ignore the 50 cent sticker on the cover. I purchased the book at a used book sale. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders was a much better book than California Angel! This story is a new tale that takes place within the world of the Murder, She Wrote show. This made me appreciate the book more, since it wasn’t just a novelization of a pre-existing episode. However, the narrative did remind me of the two-part episode Nan’s Ghost, due to the similarities between them. The descriptive imagery and character development were very well-done. I was able to visualize all the locations that were described, from London to Wick, Scotland. Throughout the book, there were comments made about each character to help the reader remember who was who. Since there were a lot of characters in this book, I appreciate the attempt to make each person distinctive from one another. The show adopted a third person perspective when it came to visually telling the story. The book, however, incorporates a first-person perspective from Jessica herself. This new approach was different from the show, but I found it to be interesting. Similar to the show, there were a few thought-provoking moments and statements in this novel. It made me contemplate what I was reading as well as stay invested in the book.

173549-OW976O-997
Cute Halloween border created by Freepik at freepik.com. <a href=’https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/halloween-background-with-fun-style_1310632.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.

There were only two things that I didn’t like about Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders. The overall story was not as suspenseful as I expected it to be. Because I’ve seen several episodes of Murder, She Wrote prior to reading this book, I thought that it would have at least 50% of suspense. The other issue was how most of the story focused on Jessica and her friends going on vacation. A very small percentage was about Jessica solving a mystery abroad. This is different from the show, as there is a 50/50 presentation of the vacation adventure and the mystery itself.

 

Overall score: 4.2 out of 5

 

Have fun at the book store!

Sally Silverscreen

31 Spooks of October Update: I Finished California Angel

I was going to publish my second review for The Second Spencer Tracy & Katherine Hepburn Blogathon today. But since I finished the first book for 31 Spooks of October/Spookathon and Sbooktober yesterday, I decided to post my movie review tomorrow. If you read my article called “I’m partaking in 31 Spooks of October!”, you would know that the first book I chose to read was California Angel. When I published this particular post, I was half-way through the book. Now that I’ve completed the novel, I not only met the four challenges that were associated with California Angel, but I will also share my thoughts on it.

20191010_184611[1]
One book read, four more to go! Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
When I read the acknowledgements section that was featured in my copy of the book, the way Nancy Taylor Rosenberg, California Angel’s author, talked about the story made it sound like Touched by an Angel meets a typical Hallmark Movies & Mysteries movie. Since those are programs that I like, I thought that I would thoroughly enjoy this book. Sadly, I was mistaken. California Angel ended up becoming the worst book I’ve ever read. Why, you ask? Well here are a list of reasons why I didn’t like this book:

  • I found the majority of the female characters to be unlikeable. For this post, I’m going to be talking about just two of them. Toy Johnson is one of the worst protagonists I’ve ever read about in literature. She was self-centered, entitled, hypocritical, judgmental, close-minded, and ungrateful. What makes things worse is she used the ideas of selflessness, charity, and even faith as an excuse for her behavior. Let me share a passage from this book to give you an example of how selfish Toy really is. Just to preface, Toy is talking to her husband, Stephen, about how one of her dreams connects to an event that happened within the world of the story.

“No, you’re wrong. It’s something spectacular, something magnificent. Something about me is different from everyone else. I’m being dispatched on missions, like missions of mercy. What else could it be? All these dreams I’ve had. In every one there are children in some kind of grave danger. And I make a difference,” she said proudly, a fanatical fire burning in her eyes. “I feel great. It’s like my whole existence on earth has finally been validated, like I’ve been searching for this all my life”.

You see how often she refers to herself? That’s just one passage, Toy acts like this throughout the entire story. As you read, she is so set in her ways, that she doesn’t allow herself to take other people’s beliefs, views, and perspectives into consideration. A good example of this is her conflict with Stephen. This part of the story felt so one-sided, with Toy making Stephen look like an antagonist just because his way of approaching situations is different from her own. She also has a negative effect on those around her. One of them is Sarah Mendleson, who is the female friend of Raymond, an artist with Autism. Shortly after Sarah meets Toy, she decides to take advantage of Raymond, who, at that point in the book, is facing one of the lowest points in his life.  She disguises herself as Toy, whose encounter with Raymond left a positive impact on him, even going so far as to dye her hair the same shade of red as Toy’s hair. Sarah does this to trick Raymond into thinking she’s Toy and to try to make him her future husband. The sad part is how Sarah’s plan seems to work, as she becomes his girlfriend by the end of the book. Speaking of Raymond, all of the male characters in California Angel are either villainized because of their profession or are used just to, simply, make the female characters look good. Raymond is just one example. He was my favorite character and I found his story to be interesting. However, Raymond’s story ended up getting taken over by Sarah. After a while, his purpose turns into becoming Sarah’s love interest and standing up for Toy.

  • About 90% of this story revolves around Toy. Because of how unlikeable she was, it was difficult for me to get through this book.
  • I found the chapters in this novel to be longer than they should have been. In a typical thriller/mystery book, the pace is faster. This is done in an attempt to keep the audience on the edge of their seat and engaged in the story. But because the chapters in California Angel were too long, this makes it difficult to enjoy the book.
  • In the synopsis listed on the back of the book, it says that Toy, within the story, is accused of being a kidnapper and murderer. However, this part of the novel doesn’t happen until the last five chapters. The book had suspenseful moments sprinkled throughout the story. However, it was not a thrilling narrative from start from finish like I had expected.
  • There are several inconsistencies and flaws in logic that can be found in California Angel. In this book, Toy believes that the only way she can help children is in her dreams, which happen to translate into actual events within her world. However, Toy is a teacher and has provided financial assistance to one of the families that belong to her school community. Therefore, her actions and choices contradict her argument. When Toy receives letters from all over the world, her mother, Ethel, tells her that the letters were written by “little children” and “older people”. But two pages later, she references the letters again, saying, “all of them from lovely little children”. So, were children the primary authors of these letters then?
  • The way that Autism is talked about in California Angel sometimes feels outdated. In at least two parts of the book, Raymond refers to his Autism as an “illness”. After Toy’s encounter with Raymond, that happens in a prologue, it says that “Raymond had simply snapped out of it” and he recovered from Autism. I’m not as educated on this particular subject as other people are. But, based on what I do know, I know that this is not how Autism works. Autism is a neurological disorder that one must live with. Sure, there are ways to manage and even overcome the symptoms associated with this medical condition. However, it’s not something that simply goes away.
  • While reading this book, it felt like Nancy used her story to try to capitalize on Touched by an Angel and the remake of Miracle on 34th Street (which were both released in 1994, a year before California Angel was published) without showing a complete understanding or attempting to show a complete understanding of why people like those stories in the first place. In this novel, there was a courtroom scene that felt like a repeat of the aforementioned Christmas film. Even some of the events leading up to this scene felt reminiscent of that moment from the movie. But the difference between California Angel and Miracle on 34th Street is that Santa, for the entirety of the story, was portrayed as a likable character. This made it easy for the audience to root for him.

Overall score: 0 out of 5

Have fun at the library!

Sally Silverscreen

I’m partaking in 31 Spooks of October!

Back in August, Fable Fox and K, from K at the Movies, asked for feedback on potential topics for this year’s ’31 Spooks of October’, an event created by K. Thinking that this would be something worth my time, I chose to answer Fable and K’s call for content ideas. After putting a lot of thought into what I would contribute to this event, I decided to talk about something that doesn’t always get discussed on 18 Cinema Lane: reading. While my blog primarily focuses on movies and movie related topics, I try to add books into the conversation whenever it’s appropriate to do so. Last year, I participated in the readathon called Spookathon. In case you’re not familiar with this concept, a readathon is an event that requires participants to read a certain amount of books within a pre-set period of time. For last year’s Spookathon, I only read one of the three books that I had attempted to read. Because I came very short of reaching this goal, I wanted to try again at finding readathon success. So, I thought that “31 Spooks of October’ would be a perfect time to do this. This month, there are two readathons that are taking place around the same time; Spookathon and Sbooktober. I will be stretching my participation throughout October, instead of reading exclusively within the weeks set aside for these events. Below is my TBR (to be read) list and which challenges each book meets!

20191006_190858[1]
If you’ve read any of these books, please share your thoughts and opinions about them in the comment section. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
  • California Angel by Nancy Taylor Rosenberg

The first book I’m reading, which I’m already half-way through, is California Angel. For Sbooktober, which has a Harvest Festival theme, this book will fit the challenges for “a book you’ve been scared to read” and “a book that features transformations”. Out of all the books on this TBR list, California Angel has the greatest number of pages, with 359 to be exact. I’m also not enjoying the book, so far. But I’m hoping the second half is better than the first. Because the protagonist, Toy, is a teacher and because, according to the synopsis, she gets accused of committing a crime, she ends up transforming the lives of those around her. For Spookathon, this book will fulfill the requirements to “read a thriller” and “read a book with red on the cover”. California Angel is labeled as a “thriller”, especially on Goodreads. The copy that I own has a ruby ring on the cover, which means it contains the color red.

 

  • Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders

The second book I’m planning on reading is Murder, She Wrote: The Highland Fling Murders. This novel will satisfy the challenges to “read something you wouldn’t normally read” and “read a book with a spooky setting” for Spookathon. I don’t usually read books that are based on pre-existing television shows. But, since I’ve been watching Murder, She Wrote lately, I think this is a story I might enjoy. According to the synopsis, this story features a haunted castle, which is, indeed, a spooky setting. This book will also meet Sbooktober’s requirements for “a book that features water”, “a book with a journey or quest”, and “a book with orange on the cover”. In this book, Jessica and her friends take a journey to the British Isles and Scotland. These locations are surrounded by the ocean and, as you can see in the photo, this book has an orange cover.

 

  • Murder on Ice by Alina Adams

The third book that I hope to read is Murder on Ice, which is the first book in the Figure Skating Mystery series. It will fit Sbooktober’s challenges for “a book with a flower on the cover”, “a book you think will have twists and turns”, and “a book from a unique perspective”. Because this is a murder mystery, I’m guessing there will be several twists and turns in this story. The protagonist, Rebecca “Bex” Levy, is a figure-skating researcher, which is a profession and perspective that isn’t featured on Hallmark Movies & Mysteries. It also helps that Alina Adams, the author of this book, was also a figure-skating researcher. In the photo at the top of this article, you can see that there is more than one rose on the cover. This book will also fulfill only one challenge from Spookathon: “read a book with a spooky word in the title”. For Murder on Ice, the spooky word of choice is “murder” because murder mysteries are spooky.

 

  • Mandy by Julie Andrews Edwards

The fourth book on my TBR list is Mandy. Julie’s book will only meet one challenge from Sbooktober: “read a book someone “picked” for you”. When I asked a family member to pick a book for this readathon, they suggested this one! I’ve owned this book for so long, but now I have an excuse to finally read it! It’s also the only book of these five that isn’t a mystery.

 

  • Closed for the Season by Mary Downing Hahn

My final book is Closed for the Season. It will meet several requirements for Sbooktober: “a spooky book”, “a book with an animal in it”, and “devour a book in 24 hours”. Because this book is 182 pages, I think I can read it in a day or less. According to Goodreads, this book is featured on the shelf called “A boy and his dog”, so I’m hoping there’s a dog in this story. Since Closed for the Season takes place in an abandoned amusement park and it’s a murder mystery, it has the potential to be spooky.

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

 

If you want to learn more about these events, you can visit the Youtube channel, booksandlala, or type “#SPOOKATHON 2019 ANNOUNCEMENT” into Youtube’s search bar. You can also visit the Youtube channel, Paper Faerie, or you can type “SBOOKTOBER 2019 ANNOUNCEMENT!” into Youtube’s search bar. For the Sbooktober video, the portion about the readathon starts at 4:50 and ends at 6:31. If you want to read Fable and K’s post that I referenced in this article, here’s the link:

I’m FABLE FOX and I Want to GREET YOU

Siskel and Ebert at the Blogathon is here!

Welcome to my very first blogathon, Siskel and Ebert at the Blogathon! For five days, blogathon participants will share a variety of topics related to Gene Siskel and/or Roger Ebert. All of those posts will be listed on this community post, separated by the categories that were established in the announcement post that was published back in May. Every participant worked very hard on their article, so be sure to check out as many posts as you’d like!

Siskel and Ebert Profile banner
Created by me, Sally Silverscreen, on Adobe Spark.

Collection of Participants

Category A

18 Cinema Lane — Roger Ebert’s Movie Yearbooks: How Relevant are They Anyway?

Silver Screenings — Roger Ebert’s Landmarks of 20th Century Cinema

The Movie Shelf Reviews — Siskel & Ebert Blogathon: The Critic — “Siskel & Ebert & Jay & Alice”

 

Category B

Critica Retro — Z (1969)

Realweegiemidget Reviews — FILMS…Prizzi’s Honor (1985)

Dubsism — Movies Everybody Loves That I Hate: Episode 5 — “Casino”

The Midnite Drive-In — Make Room for Hannibal

Taking Up Room — Go Ask Shirlee

Pure Entertainment Preservation Society — 52 Code Films — Week #38: “A Star is Born” from 1954; “The Brightest Star” for “Siskel and Ebert at the Blogathon”

Category D

MovieRob — The Siskel and Ebert At The Blogathon – Opportunity Knocks (1990)

The Siskel and Ebert At The Blogathon – About Last Night (1986)

The Siskel and Ebert At The Blogathon – Rookie of the Year (1993)

Siskel and Ebert Film Reel banner
Created by me, Sally Silverscreen, on Adobe Spark.

The Conclusion to My Bonus Double Feature

Well, here we are. The conclusion of this double feature has finally arrived! At the start of this project, my goal was to figure out which adaptation of The Secret Garden was the best one. After reading the book, I watched and analyzed three of the most well-known film versions of this story. Now that we’re at the end of this double feature, it’s time for me to evaluate my results!

20190904_161300[1]
I know I’m featuring the photo from the Double Feature Introduction post. But, I figured it would fit appropriately with the context of this post’s topic. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
In the video, “Talking Anne with an E (Spoilers)”, Rachel and Amber, who are also hosts of Hallmarkies Podcast, share their thoughts on Netflix’s adaptation of Anne of Green Gables. During this discussion, Amber was saying how the film or television adaptation of this story is “not the end all, be all of Anne”. What she meant by this was that there is much more to the source material than just the first book, Anne of Green Gables. Other stories and characters from this series are just as important as the content that is considered when it comes to adaptations. Amber’s beliefs can also be applied to my double feature. No matter how many adaptations are made, they should never be a replacement for the source material. Each adaptation has a different creative team associated with it, so the beliefs about which elements are worth including in the movie are going to vary. With that said, I think that both the 1987 Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation and the 1993 version are the best adaptations of The Secret Garden! Both of these films have their fair share of similarities and differences. But I found them to be close enough to the book where I was satisfied. As a film, however, I would prefer the one from 1993 over the Hallmark Hall of Fame movie. While the 1987 production was good, it felt a little too drawn-out. I also think that Kate Maberly did a better job at portraying Mary than Gennie James did. Since I now found the answer to a question that I’ve wanted to find for years, I can honestly say that my mission is finally accomplished.

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

 

If you want to read the other posts from this double feature, go to these links:

An Introduction to My Bonus Double Feature

My Bonus Double Feature Has Arrived!

If you want to watch the video that I referenced in this post, type “Talking Anne with an E (Spoilers)” into Youtube’s search bar or visit the Youtube channel, Rachel’s Reviews.

My Bonus Double Feature Has Arrived!

Welcome to my Bonus Double Feature! Just to let you know, there will be spoilers within this post. If you want to read the introduction, here’s the link:

An Introduction to My Bonus Double Feature

The Secret Garden 1949 poster
The Secret Garden poster created by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Loew’s Inc. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_Secret_Garden_FilmPoster.jpeg
  1. In what way is the adaptation like the book?

1949: There were several similarities to the book in the 1949 adaptation of The Secret Garden. One of them was the incorporation of the wind. In the book, the sounds of Colin’s cries blend with the sounds of the wind. Mary quickly picks out the cries from the wind and notices that something isn’t right. In the movie, this aspect sounded just like how it was described in the book. If one wasn’t paying attention, they would assume that the cries were a part of the wind. The other element was the path to Colin’s room. Mary, in the book, enters different rooms and passageways in order to find the source of the crying. In the movie, when Mary attempts to find out where the crying comes from, she travels through various rooms and hallways, which take her to Colin’s bedroom door. While this trip takes place in a shorter amount of time, the visuals of the different places in the house shows just how intertwined Misselthwaite Manor really is.

 

1987: More similarities were found in this adaptation than in the 1949 version. The one that I was pleasantly surprised by was Mary’s characteristics. Despite Gennie James’ inability to carry a British accent, she made up for this by embodying the spirit and persona of her character. Through her emotions, actions, and behavior, Gennie brought the likability and unlikability that Mary Lennox is known for. Two examples are when Mary was more upset about losing her doll over her parents and when she became friends with the robin. While we’re on the subject of this friendship, Mary forms a relationship with a robin that is also very fond of Ben Weatherstaff. By befriending the robin, in both the book and movie, Mary’s transformation from self-centered child to selfless individual begins. As for the character transformations, they were developed very well in the source material and the adaptation. Even though the movie was drawn out, it showed that the transformations of characters like Mary, Colin, and Mr. Craven happened over the course of several months. It also showed that these transformations take time and patience.

 

1993: Similar to the 1987 film, the characteristics of Mary are pretty close to how the character was written in the book. But in this adaptation, the characteristics of almost all the characters seemed like it reflected the book very well. In the 1993 movie, Kate Maberly’s performance was the best portrayal of Mary Lennox! Not only was she able to carry a British accent throughout the entire film, but she also did a really good job at bringing a balance of emotions to her role. During the scene where Martha accidently offends Mary, the angry emotions that Kate brought to her character reminded me of how the character would have behaved in the book. Another good example is when Dickon and Mary are in the secret garden, while they are singing “Mistress Mary Quite Contrary”. Even though she’s happy to be spending time with Dickon, she’s reminded of the painful memories when she arrived in England. Speaking of Dickon, Andrew Knott’s portrayal of this character was the best out of all three adaptations I’ve seen! He did a fantastic job pulling off a Yorkshire accent and brought a sense of likability to his role. The scene where Dickon and Mary meet for the first time is a good example of this.

 

As I just mentioned, Dickon and Mary sing “Mistress Mary Quite Contrary” in the 1993 movie. This song plays a small role in the book. At the beginning of the story, the song is sung to Mary in a manner of teasing. When the story goes on, she reflects on the song’s meaning and questions her outlook on life. Another aspect of the movie that reflected the book was the interior designs of Misselthwaite Manor. Mary’s and Colin’s room are a great example, as tapestry can be seen on the walls. This is an important detail to mention because tapestry was described in the novel.

 

  1. Was there anything in the adaptation that was different from the book?

1949: In the 1949 adaptation, there were just as many differences from the book as there were similarities. One notable difference is how emotional Mary Lennox is. In the film, Mary bursts into tears when she finds out that her parents have died. This is not the reaction that Mary has in the book, as she wouldn’t care what happens to her parents because of her poor relationship with them. Speaking of relationships, Mary’s relationship with Ben Weatherstaff is quite different in the film. Mary, as well as Colin and Dickon, don’t like Ben. They not only keep their distance from him, but they also don’t allow him to enter their garden. In the book, however, Ben becomes the children’s ally. He provides them with plenty of information about the secret garden, such as why it’s closed off from the rest of the gardens. The children even invite him into the garden on a few occasions. Finally, how Mary and Dickon meet is also different in the movie. Mary meets Dickon before she’s even aware that a secret garden exists. In the book, Mary meets Dickon after she’s entered the secret garden. She meets him because he’s purchased some flower seeds for her.

 

1987: While watching this adaptation of The Secret Garden, I noticed fewer differences compared to the 1949 version. Like the 1949 film, the initial meeting of Mary and Dickon happens at a different part of the story. In this movie, Mary meets Dickon before she’s found the secret garden, yet she is aware that it exists. At the beginning and end of the movie, the audience sees that the story is told through the reflections of a grown-up Mary Lennox. Since the book only focused on Mary’s story from when she was a child, this was a creative choice that Hallmark Hall of Fame made. Unlike the book, Mary and Colin are not cousins. I’m not going to reveal the reason for this creative decision because I don’t want to spoil the movie for anyone who hasn’t seen this version. But this choice wasn’t as much of an issue as I thought it could be. Plus, it works within this particular story!

 

1993: Toward the beginning of the film, Mary loses her parents to an earthquake. This is different from the book, as she loses her parents to sickness. The location of the secret garden’s key is also different from the source material. In the movie, Mary finds this key in her aunt’s jewelry box instead of in the dirt. Another difference I noticed was the characteristics of Mrs. Medlock. This character, in the book, was stern but caring. Mrs. Medlock, in the movie, was much stricter. She’s not only against the idea of Mary and Colin spending time together, but she’s also mean to the other members of the staff. I’m not sure if this creative decision was made to include a conflict or to highlight the acting strengths of Maggie Smith.

 

  1. Did you find anything in the movie that you felt improved upon the material more than the book?

1949: While the majority of the film is presented in black-and-white, the only scenes that were featured in color were those that took place in the garden. Frances Hodgson Burnett was very descriptive when writing about the garden. But you can only describe so much without giving someone a visual. The way the garden is presented in this adaptation helps bring the text to life.

 

1987: In a few parts of the film, the element of suspense was incorporated. One good example was when Mary meets Colin for the first time. The build-up to that moment was staged really well, using as little lighting as possible and featuring things like lightening and scary looking statues. Because of these elements coming together, it was better executed in the movie than in the book.

 

1993: During the 1993 adaptation, a transition happens between winter and spring/summer. This transition isn’t just seen through the exterior background. The cinematography and color of wardrobe are other visuals that indicate the changing seasons. An explanation of how Mary and Colin are related is included in this script. According to this adaptation, Mary’s mother was the twin sister of Colin’s mother. No explanations to how Mary and Colin are related were given in the book. All that’s known is that they’re cousins and Mr. Craven is Mary’s uncle.

20190906_190444[1]
This is yet another Hallmark Hall of Fame movie that I purchased. However, I bought it because I wanted to give an honest opinion for this double feature. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
  1. Is there anything from the book that improved upon the material more than the movie?

1949: In the book, the garden itself is written as if it were its own character. Because of this, the garden creates a ripple effect on the characters and their lives. In the movie, however, the garden is treated like a Macguffin. It’s not featured in the film for very long and the progression of the characters happens pretty quickly. We also don’t see the process of the garden’s revival.

 

1987: When I was thinking about this Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation, I found it difficult to find anything that the book did better than the movie. This is because the adaptation was pretty close to the source material. It gives people who have read the book, like myself, a reason to find it satisfying.

 

1993: Even though she plays a really small role in the book, Susan Sowerby, Martha and Dickon’s mom, shares her wisdom and advice throughout the story. These things have a small, but significant influence over the events of the plot. Because Susan was nowhere to be found in this film, this part of the story was eliminated from the script.

 

  1. Because each adaptation was released in a different decade, do you feel that the movie itself was affected by the time period in which it was released? If so, how?

1949: MGM’s The Wizard of Oz was one of the first movies to experiment with color imaging. Since the movie was a success for the studio, they were more than willing to incorporate color imaging into their future films. The Secret Garden was released ten years after The Wizard of Oz, so it makes sense that they reserved the color imaging for the titular secret garden. What’s interesting is how little color imaging is included in the movie. It’s only seen on three occasions, after the garden has been fully revived.

 

1987: There’s three key things that I think had an influence on this version of The Secret Garden. The first is the 1949 movie. Because this particular film had an equal amount of similarities and differences, it encouraged the creative team behind the Hallmark Hall of Fame project to make a more faithful adaptation. The second key ingredient was the trend where content in ‘80s children’s/family-friendly entertainment was darker and “creepier”. Since Hallmark Hall of Fame’s The Secret Garden was released in 1987, it provided an alternative for those who wanted to move away from the aforementioned trend. The last thing is the concept of home entertainment and video rental stores. One of the most well-known video rental businesses, Blockbuster, opened its doors in 1985, just two years before Hallmark Hall of Fame’s adaptation was released. Since then, the idea of renting or purchasing films has played a huge role in the world of cinema. I’m not sure when Hallmark starting allowing their movies to be sold for home entertainment. But their version of The Secret Garden has been available on VHS and DVD.

 

1993: Two important aspects affected the creation of this specific adaptation. The first one is the previous adaptations of The Secret Garden. This particular version of the story was the first theatrical adaptation since the 1949 film. The Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation was close enough to the source material where readers would be satisfied. Taking these films into consideration, the creative team behind the 1993 movie tried to make a movie that felt cinematic and respected the source material. The second thing is the climate that existed in children’s/family-friendly entertainment in the early ‘90s. During this time, the Disney Renaissance was in the early stages. The box office was also receiving films with Don Bluth’s signature animation style. In the live-action department, films like My Girl and Beethoven were released from their respective studios. The early ‘90s provided variety to children’s/family-friendly entertainment. Since this version of The Secret Garden was released in 1993, the film contributed to the aforementioned climate.

 

  1. If an adaptation of The Secret Garden were made today, how would it be different from the other adaptations?

I think that if The Secret Garden received another adaptation, that film’s creative team would probably try to have the story take place in “modern” times. If this decision were made, the simplistic nature that comes from a historical fiction narrative would be taken away. Another possible change would be the incorporation of an environmental message. This would be unnecessary because the purpose of the secret garden has nothing to do the environment. The garden is included in the story to present the idea of becoming a better person when putting the needs of others before one’s own.

 

  1. What aspect from the movie or book do you think has stood the test of time?

The messages and themes within this story have been relatable and cherished for many years. As I already mentioned, one idea that can be found in both the source material and any adaptation is how putting the needs of others before one’s own can help someone become a better person. Because the protagonist of this story is a child, the narrative evokes reflection on a time when a person’s life could be care-free. It also reminds the audience of how anything is possible when we set our minds on something.

20190906_190452[1]
While I have seen this version of The Secret Garden before, this was my first time watching it as an adaptation. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen

An Introduction to My Bonus Double Feature

Back in May, my post called “A Bucky Fan’s Response to one of Looper’s Avengers: Endgame related videos” became my 200th published post! Whenever I publish a hundred posts, I coordinate a double feature where I try to answer a thought-provoking question through the viewing of two similar films. But, around the time when I published my aforementioned post, I discovered that I would soon reach the milestone of 100 published reviews. So, I postponed my Double Feature until that milestone was reached. It was achieved in July when I published my review of Christmas Camp! However, that post was published just before I embarked on an out-of-town trip. So, I postponed my Double Feature until after the trip. But August became my busiest month, as I participated in four blogathons. Because of that, the Double Feature had to be pushed back again. Now that I have set aside some time to coordinate my Double Feature, I can finally announce that it will be published this week! Since I’m celebrating two milestones, I will be writing about three films.

20190904_161300[1]
I am fully aware of the irony that comes with reading The Secret Garden from the Hallmark Gift Books collection before watching the Hallmark Hall of Fame adaptation. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.
If you ask anyone what the best adaptation of The Secret Garden is, most of them will tell you that it’s the Hallmark Hall of Fame version from 1987. For years, I have heard this statement from many people on the internet. In fact, when I asked a search engine which adaptation of The Secret Garden was the best one, the Hallmark Hall of Fame version was the film that came up as the answer. But is this movie really the best adaptation? That’s what I wanted to find out for myself! The most well-known versions of The Secret Garden that I will be watching are the 1949 release, the Hallmark Hall of Fame presentation, and the 1993 project. I read The Secret Garden prior to watching these films, so I could gain a better understanding of how similar or different each adaptation is from the source material. Because I’m going to talk about three versions of the same story, I will ask myself fewer questions than I did for my Halloween Double Feature. I will also not be giving these films any score ratings because I’m judging them as adaptations. There will be no pre-movie thoughts, questions, or predictions this time because I know what the movies are about before I’ve seen them.

 

Have fun at the movies!

Sally Silverscreen