When it came to The Costume Drama Blogathon, I wanted to choose a movie that was already on my DVR. Out of the six movies that would have fit the requirements, I decided to review The Littlest Horse Thieves! This is a Disney film that I didn’t know existed until this year. Since I reviewed Swept from the Sea and Hallmark’s Hall of Fame’s In Love and War, I thought that I would change things up by selecting a children’s/family-friendly film. What made me want to watch the movie was the historical aspect of the story. Before even hearing about The Littlest Horse Thieves, I never knew that ponies were used in the mining industry. The only animal I knew that went into mines were small birds. I was looking forward to learning something new while being entertained.
The acting: When it comes to casting young actors in lead roles, those performances can be hit or miss. In The Littlest Horse Thieves, the performances of all three leads were really good! Chloe Franks, Andrew Harrison, and Benjie Bolgar portray the titular horse thieves. Throughout the film, their characters were endearing and likable. The emotions these actors displayed appeared very genuine, as if their characters were real people. It was really sweet to watch the characters’ friendship evolve over the course of the film. Because of these factors, it made it easy for me to root of Alice, Dave, and Tommy.
Historical accuracy: The Littlest Horse Thieves takes place in, I believe, the early 1900s. Every aspect of this movie reflected that particular time-period really well! The sets looked like the audience could step back in time, that this point in history was not too far away. Things like wardrobe, dialect, and even the artwork on the walls brought the early 1900s to life again. Even the issues surrounding mining and employee well-being seemed to come directly from that decade. What made the historical accuracy work in this film was the creative team’s attention to detail. It shows how much care was put into this project.
Not so perfect plans: In a lot of children’s/family-friendly films, the young protagonists’ plans always work out in their favor. This is not exactly the case for The Littlest Horse Thieves. I’m not going to spoil the movie in case you want to see it. But the children sometimes overlook important details relating to their plan to save the ponies. I liked how the protagonists’ efforts didn’t go according to plan. This made the characters and their situation seem realistic and relatable.
A drawn-out story: The Littlest Horse Thieves had a drawn-out story that seemed to last too long. The first half of the movie focused on the children finding out about the conflict and figuring out how to solve it. The act of rescuing/stealing the ponies didn’t happen until the film’s halfway point. It also only lasted for a few minutes. The second half of the movie shifted the focus from the children to the adults. The overall narrative talked about everything but the most exciting part of the movie.
The editing: During the first half of the film, I noticed how less-than-stellar the editing was. It made conversations feel cut-off and transitions between scenes less smooth. These two aspects made the overall flow of the film seem choppy.
The conflict between Dave and his stepdad: Within The Littlest Horse Thieves, there was a conflict between Dave and his stepdad. It’s not the conflict itself I didn’t like. How little time was devoted to it is my biggest issue. In the first half of the film, Dave and his stepdad dislike each other. While the stepdad’s reason is never explained, Dave feels his reasons can be justified. His dislike toward his stepdad also affects his younger brother, Tommy. After the ponies are rescued/stolen, Dave and Tommy’s stepdad automatically becomes supportive of the children and their cause. The aforementioned conflict was not fully explored and felt it was there for the sake of being there.
Every studio has those films that don’t always get talked about. Disney is no exception to this. That’s why I try to go out of my way to address these films on my blog. Some of them are better than others. But you never know what’s in store until you give the film a chance. For this particular blogathon, I chose to watch The Littlest Horse Thieves with an open mind. Now that I have seen it, I can honestly say that it was just ok. It’s not one of the worst things that the studio has ever made. But it’s not one of Disney’s strongest efforts. In fact, I could see children, especially younger ones, becoming bored by this movie. However, people who like British and/or historical fiction films will probably like it. Its historical accuracy is pretty satisfying and there are moments that I found educational. I could tell that the creative team behind this film tried their best to make something worthwhile. But it wasn’t as impressive as it could have been.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
Have you seen The Littlest Horse Thieves? Which film from a major studio do think is underrated? Please share your thoughts in the comment section!
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:
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
For The World War II Blogathon, I wanted to talk about a film that no one else had chosen. With this idea in mind, I figured that if anyone was going to review a Hallmark movie, I knew it was, highly likely, going to be me. More often than not, Hallmark Hall of Fame films have told cinematic stories surrounding World War II. Out of all the Hallmark Hall of Fame movies that would be eligible for this blogathon, In Love and War is one that I hadn’t seen. This particular film is based on a true story, using a memoir by Eric Newby as the basis for the cinematic narrative. Within the past five years, true stories are rarely found in Hallmark Hall of Fame presentations. Since this is the first Hallmark Hall of Fame movie I’ve reviewed that does feature a true story, I knew it would a treat for my readers and followers!
Yes, I purchased a copy of this film so I could write an honest review about it. Screenshot taken by me, Sally Silverscreen.Things I liked about the film:
The acting: More often than not, Hallmark Hall of Fame movies are known for having talented casts. In Love and War is no exception to this tradition! Callum Blue did a really good job portraying Eric Newby. With believability and versatility, his character was awestruck by the beauty within his surroundings, while not being fazed by reality. Callum effectively portrayed a soldier who hadn’t been too hardened by war and tragedy. I also enjoyed seeing Barbora Bobulova’s performance! She portrayed Wanda, the woman who stole Eric’s heart. Barbora had a very pleasant on-screen presence and flawlessly pulled off an Italian accent. She also used a wide range of emotions, making her character seem as realistic as possible. These are just some of the reasons why her performance was very memorable.
The scenery: The Italian countryside is the only location featured in this film. Despite that fact, the movie’s creative team used this environment to their advantage, especially when it came to story-telling. Even though war had cast a shadow on Wanda’s town, it never lost its quaint charm on screen. This picturesque setting showed that restoring peace in the world could be possible. Seeing the fields and farmlands in the film showed a different perspective of this particular country. When the Italian countryside is incorporated into cinematic stories, it seems like it is, more often than not, romanticized. It also makes it feel like this location can never be touched by the harshness of reality. In Love and War’s scenery was pretty to look at, but it also shows that no space is safe from such a catastrophic event.
The on-screen chemistry: Even though Callum and Barbora were not on screen together for very long, they did have good on-screen chemistry. Eric and Wanda’s relationship was very sweet, containing the amount of sentimentality that makes sense for a Hallmark production. Whenever they spent time together, these characters seemed to truly care about one another. Despite coming from two different backgrounds, their love for each other was able to help them find a common ground. Through communication and understanding, Eric and Wanda were able to learn about the other person as well as about themselves. Because Callum and Barbora’s acting performances were good, they were successfully able to bring these elements to their characters.
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>.
What I didn’t like about the film:
Low stakes: Throughout the film, Eric becomes a Prisoner of War and tries to escape from the clutches of the Nazis. However, all of the stakes in this movie felt low. When Eric and his team become prisoners, their situation doesn’t appear or feel harsh. Even when Eric did experience a harsh condition, the effects were temporary. The clear and present danger, which were the Nazis, appeared in the film when it was convenient for the plot. It seemed like Eric wasn’t in as much danger as the movie wanted us, the audience, to think.
An imbalance between peace and conflict: Hallmark films are known for containing a good amount of positivity and making their audience feel good about the film they’re watching. But because In Love and War largely focused on the movie’s more peaceful moments, it made the moments involving conflict seem sparse. This flaw contributes to the previous problem that I just talked about: lower stakes. It also doesn’t create a healthy balance between the two ideas. The imbalance between peace and conflict made the “war” part of In Love and War seem like a distant aspect of the story.
No action: Everyone’s story from the time of World War II is going to be different. Since the film’s story is about a member of the military who entered enemy territory, having no action in the film makes it feel like something is missing. Not only were there no battles, but there was no fighting in sight. The only scene that involved any amount of military action was when an enemy plane flew over Eric and his comrades. However, this scene ended up being very brief.
The two most common cinematic stories surrounding World War II involve the American perspective and the Holocaust. While these stories are important, it can feel like other World War II related stories get overshadowed. In Love and War takes a unique approach to this subject, focusing on the British and Italian perspectives. Through these perspectives, interesting ideas get the chance to be expressed. Some examples are standing against group mentality, relying on the kindness of strangers, and changing a person’s way of thinking. As a film about this particular time-period, I liked In Love and War for what it was. At best, this is a decent movie that has its strengths. But, as a Hallmark Hall of Fame production, it didn’t leave as big of an emotional impact as other films from this collection have. I will say that this film is a good introduction to not only Hallmark Hall of Fame, but also to Hallmark movies in general. If someone likes a particular aspect of the movie, they will be able to find other Hallmark films that share similarities.
Overall score: 7 out of 10
What are your thoughts on World War II in film? Which Hallmark Hall of Fame movie do you like? Share your thoughts in the comment section!
Out of all the movies that I’ve chosen for the A Month Without the Code Blogathon, this film is the one that I’m the most excited to talk about! I had never heard of Swept from the Sea until I discovered it on Pinterest this year (by the way, Pinterest is a great place to discover movies). When I first saw the film’s poster, I immediately noticed that Vincent Perez not only starred in the movie, but he also was the film’s top-billed actor. For those of you who are not familiar with this particular actor, Vincent portrayed Marius in Queen of the Damned, which I reviewed last Halloween. Since I enjoyed his performance in Queen of the Damned, I wanted to see what his acting talents had to offer in other films. When I was about to read the movie’s synopsis, I decided to watch the movie knowing as little about it as possible. I did this when I reviewed Hush…Hush, Sweet Charlotte and I ended up having a really good movie-viewing experience. Will history repeat itself with Swept from the Sea? I’m glad you joined me for my last A Month Without the Code review because we’re about to find the answer to this question!
Swept from the Sea poster created TriStar Pictures, Phoenix Pictures, and Tapson Steel Films. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sftspost.jpg
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: Among all of the movies I’ve seen in my life and among all the movies I’ve reviewed on 18 Cinema Lane, Vincent Perez’s acting performance in Swept from the Sea is one of the best I’ve ever seen! Throughout the entire film, he gave a captivating performance that was both heart-warming and heart-breaking. There were even times where, through the use of emotion, he was able to say so much without saying anything at all. One example is when Amy, Rachel Weisz’s character, gives Yanko, Vincent’s character, some food after they officially meet for the first time. Even though Vincent was the one who stole the show, I enjoyed seeing the other acting performances in this film. Despite the fact that Kathy Bates appears in the movie for a limited amount of time, her portrayal of Miss Swaffer was excellent! Not only was her performance well-rounded, but she also did a really good job pulling off an English accent. Performances like these made the characters come across like they were real-life individuals!
The cinematography: Swept from the Sea had some interesting cinematography that I was not expecting to see. At one point in the movie, all of the dead bodies from a recent tragedy at sea are featured on screen. In this particular scene, the camera pans outward in order to show Dr. James Kennedy, Ian McKellen’s character, standing in the middle of the area where these dead bodies were placed. Because of the cinematography, this moment showed the magnitude of the tragedy. Another great use of cinematography was when Amy was running through a rain-storm. What I liked about this scene was how it was dark enough to create the feelings of fear and dread, but not dark enough where one could barely see what’s happening on screen. Swept from the Sea’s cinematography made the film visually engaging!
The scenery: The majority of this movie takes place in the English countryside. Everything about this location was beautiful to look at! From the never-ending fields to the titular sea, all of the countryside’s natural landscapes were captured very well on film. Even the snowy environment that is briefly shown during Yanko’s journey is visually appealing. Because of the care that was taken in recording these locations, especially the sea, it gave the impression that the scenery was its own character. It also helped to create a stunning picture!
The on-screen chemistry: Because this story puts a good amount of focus on a romance, it’s important for the actors portraying the characters in that relationship to have good on-screen chemistry. As I’ve already said in this review, Vincent Perez’s acting performance stole the show! I was also impressed with Rachel Weisz’s portrayal of Amy Foster. Not only were they talented individually, but they were also a very talented pair! Anytime Amy and Yanko interacted with one another, their relationship was brought to life in a very sweet and genuine way. Amy and Yanko were an adorable couple without trying too hard to be. While some of the credit goes to the screenwriter, the rest of it belongs to Vincent and Rachel. What helped them was how different their acting styles were. These differences ended up complimenting each other instead of competing against them.
The dialect: Swept from the Sea takes place in the late 1800s, so the dialect reflects that particular time-period. This aspect of the movie sounded authentic to that decade. However, because I’m not used to hearing it in films very often, I had difficulty, at times, understanding what the characters were saying. This is not the fault of the film, but the fault of me, as a viewer, for not being familiar with the dialect.
Have you ever seen a movie that was so great, that all you wanted to do was tell everyone you knew about it? Well, that is exactly how Swept from the Sea made me feel! So far, this is the best movie I’ve seen this year! It’s endearing and emotional, grabbing hold of my attention from start to finish. So many components came together to make this film as entertaining as it was. From the acting to the scenery, there were so many things I liked about this movie. It is truly a hidden gem that I’m thankful to have discovered. Like I said about The Nun’s Story, Swept from the Sea is one of the “cleaner” films out of the ones I’ve chosen for A Month Without the Code. I found this to be pretty surprising, considering the fact that this is the only PG-13 rated movie in this roster. Despite this, I think the movie could be “breenable” with a few changes. These are the following:
There were about three times when characters were heard swearing and one time where Christ’s name was used in vain. These words would need to be omitted from the script.
Toward the beginning of the film, Miss Swaffer has a bloody wound on her leg and is having it taken care of by Dr. James Kennedy. While the scene itself is fine, the wound would have to be hidden on screen.
In one scene, a man is making an unflattering joke about Amy. While Amy and Yanko express their disgust over this joke, the joke itself would have to meet the standards of the Breen Code.
On the ship, at the beginning of the storm, Yanko is seen throwing up. To fit within the qualifications of the Breen Code, this image would have to be removed.
Because there is a tragedy at sea, there are several dead bodies that are shown on screen. There is one other part of the film that features a dead body as well. These scenes would need to be revised to fit with the Breen Code.
Yanko and Amy’s kisses are more passionate and last longer than kisses from the Breen Code era’s films. These kisses would have to be shorter in time-length.
There are two scenes that heavily imply that Yanko and Amy are having sex. Even though these scenes take place after they become married, these scenes would need to rewritten to make the implication more subtle.
Overall score: 9.6 out of 10
How do you feel about A Month Without the Code? Which review from this blogathon has been your favorite? Please tell me in the comment section!
It seems fitting that my last review for the Summer Under the Stars Blogathon would be published at the end of the month. While looking through the marathon roster for Turner Classic Movies’ (TCM’s) marathon, I came across a film titled, Return to Peyton Place. Despite the fact that I was not familiar with who Mary Astor is, as an actress, I found the film’s description to be interesting. When I was learning more about this film, I discovered that it was the sequel to Peyton Place. So, I decided to watch the 1957 production in order to educate myself on the movie I was about to watch. To me, Peyton Place was just ok. The run-time was too long and the story felt like it belonged on a television show. How will the sequel compare to the first movie? Read my review of 1961’s Return to Peyton Place to find out!
Return to Peyton Place poster created by 20th Century Fox. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ReturnToPeytonPlaceFilm.JPG
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: Some of the cast members from the first film didn’t return to reprise their roles. Two of them are Diane Varsi, who portrayed Allison MacKenzie, and Hope Lange, who portrayed Selena Cross. Taking their places in the sequel are Carol Lynley and Tuesday Weld. The great thing about their performances is how they were able to bring a sense of continuity to their characters. Just like in the first movie, Allison is a head-strong woman who is determined to make a name for herself. Meanwhile, Selena is trying her best to move forward from her traumatic past. While returning faces made their appearances in Return to Peyton Place, new characters were also introduced. One character is Mrs. Roberta Carter, who is the mother of Ted Carter. Portrayed by Mary Astor, Roberta was one of the most memorable characters in this movie! Mary effectively brought the unlikeable qualities that Roberta contains. With her demeanor, facial expressions, and reactions, Mary gave the audience a reason to dislike Roberta.
The subplots: Like Peyton Place, the sequel featured several subplots that come together to create one larger plot. What’s different about the subplots in this movie is they were much more interesting than those from the first movie. Return to Peyton Place features three subplots; Allison becoming a best-selling author, Roberta dealing with her son and his new wife, and Selena rebuilding her life after the events of the first film. These subplots led to the main plot, which revolved around the controversy of Allison’s book. These stories not only propelled the narrative from the predecessor forward, but also added depth to the returning characters. It gave new characters a reason to participate as well, providing some interesting interactions and conversations.
The ideas expressed: What I liked about Peyton Place was the ideas that were expressed in the story. A few examples are honesty, the effects of gossip, and reaching out to those in need. This was also a highlight in Return to Peyton Place! Through each story, realistic and relatable ideas were presented. For example, during the main plot, where the town is deciding what to do about Allison’s book, the subjects of censorship and which version of the truth should be respected are brought up. The way they were incorporated into the overall narrative felt natural and made sense within the movie. It also gives the audience the ability to connect with the characters as well as the world they reside in.
The run-time: Return to Peyton Place is a little over two hours. While it is shorter than the first film, I still think this story didn’t need to be that long. Personally, I believe that Return to Peyton Place should have had a run-time of about one hour and thirty minutes. This would allow the narrative to get to the point sooner.
Overshadowed subplots: As I previously mentioned, Return to Peyton Place is told through several subplots. However, some of these subplots received less screen-time than others. Because Allison is the film’s protagonist, her subplot is focused on the most. While this creative decision made sense, it put the other subplots at a disadvantage. Ted and Raffaella’s subplot is a good example of this. Since their story was explored for a limited amount of time, it didn’t receive a satisfying conclusion. I also felt the same way about Selena and Nils’ subplot.
No explanation provided: When Allison published her book, some of the people in Peyton Place had a problem with the novel’s content. While they complained about how the book was “vulgar” and “lewd”, an explanation for why the book was bad was never given. This frustrated me because, as a viewer, I wanted to understand both perspectives on the issue. Because the book’s content was barely referenced in the movie, it made the argument against the book seem weak. This part of the movie reminded me of Chesapeake Shores’ third season, where the O’Brien family had an issue with Bree’s book, but never shared what exactly was in the book.
As a movie, I thought Return to Peyton Place was decent. But as a sequel, I liked it more than the first movie! With more interesting stories, a smaller cast, and a tighter script, this movie was entertaining and enjoyable. Like its predecessor, Return to Peyton Place is a film that has something to say, providing ideas that are thought-provoking and relatable. While it does have its flaws, it also has its merits. There are things this movie does that improves upon the first one. One example is featuring a collective story that feels more cinematic. I’m really glad that I watched Peyton Place before watching Return to Peyton Place because I would have been so confused if I hadn’t. While there is less problematic content in Return to Peyton Place, some things would need to change if it were released in the Breen Code era. These things are:
There were several instances where unpleasant or questionable statements and phrases were spoken by the characters. One example is when Lewis says to Allison, “It takes two to make a love affair”. Statements like this would need to be rewritten.
On two separate occasions, Selena’s traumatic past is talked about by Selena herself. Because it involves dark subjects, this part of the story would have to be revised in order to meet Breen Code standards.
There is one scene where Ted and Raffaella are seen passionately kissing while laying on a bed. Even though these characters are married to each other and this act never leads to sex, this scene would have to be changed. The kiss itself would be shorter and would not take place on the bed.
Kisses in this movie are more passionate and last longer than kisses in Breen Code films. If Return to Peyton Place premiered during the years of 1934 to 1954, the kisses would be shorter in time length.
Some of the female characters wear outfits that have low necklines. These outfits would need to be changed to reflect more modesty.
There are two times when Allison is seen disrobing on screen. Even though she is shown wearing a full-body slip, these moments would end up being removed from the film.
Overall score: 7.1 out of 10
What are your thoughts on Turner Classic Movies’ Summer Under the Stars marathon? Which review from this blogathon has been your favorite? Share your thoughts in the comment section!
My blog received 130 followers last week! To all of my followers, thank you for helping 18 Cinema Lane become this successful! This review would not be possible without you! For this blog follower dedication review, I have chosen a movie that was released in August of 1946. By looking at the title, you would know that the film I selected is The Big Sleep! I’m going to be honest; I don’t watch films from the film-noir genre often. It’s just not a genre that I purposefully go out of my way to watch. However, because I, as a movie blogger, try to go out of my cinematic comfort zone, I still chose to watch The Big Sleep. I also discovered that this movie is labeled as a mystery. Since I review mystery films from time to time, I figured this would be something that I might enjoy. Choosing this particular movie for this review makes sense, especially since the last time I reviewed a mystery film for a blog follower dedication review was when I wrote about The Moon-Spinners back in January.
The acting: What helped bring this story to life was the acting performances! I’ve seen Humphrey Bogart in Casablanca, so I was familiar with his acting style. His performance in The Big Sleep embodied the tone and attitude of the film. Humphrey’s character, Philip, could either be mysterious and serious or charming and suave. That’s because he was able to effectively portray those emotions and personas when he needed to. Before watching The Big Sleep, I was more familiar with Lauren Bacall’s voice-acting work than her on-screen performances. However, I was very impressed by her portrayal of Vivian Rutledge! Her acting style is similar to Humphrey’s, in that her performance is more subtle in presentation. Her on-screen personality ranged from serious and head-strong to flirty and charismatic. With each scene and scenario, Lauren brought believability to her role.
The mystery: If you’ve ever visited my blog, you’d know that I watch and review a lot of the programming on Hallmark Movies & Mysteries. What makes The Big Sleep different from those movies is how the mystery is written. As the mystery plays out on screen, the audience gets to experience the events alongside the characters. This allows the surprises and twists to catch viewers off-guard. The way this mystery is written also gives the audience the feeling that they are sharing moments with the characters. It helps them connect with the protagonist and the people around him.
The tone: Because The Big Sleep is a part of the film-noir genre, the tone is darker and more serious. A strength this movie has is how consistent it was. Throughout the film, the subjects and ideas that were expressed belonged to the real world. This kept the story grounded and the characters realistic. Since there were stakes in The Big Sleep, everything was handled with seriousness and reverence. These things made the story mature without becoming too dark or unpleasant. All of the aforementioned components helped maintain this tone’s consistency.
Vintage detective desk photo created by Olivier Bourgeois at freeimages.com. Photo by <a href=”/photographer/ornicar69-54520″>Olivier Bourgeois</a> from <a href=”https://freeimages.com/”>FreeImages</a> Image found at freeimages.com.
What I didn’t like about the film:
A limited amount of suspense: In some mystery stories, the suspense is consistent throughout the film. Unfortunately, The Big Sleep was not one of those films. The suspense in this movie was very limited. It almost seemed like it was utilized for the sake of plot convenience. This made some parts of the movie more interesting than others.
So many characters: Mystery movies usually have a larger cast of characters. Some of them serve as suspects for the mystery. In The Big Sleep, I felt like there were too many characters. Sometimes, it was difficult to remember who was who and their connection to the mystery. What didn’t help was having some characters appear on screen for a short amount of time. Not every character was introduced toward the beginning of the film, like most of the films on Hallmark Movie & Mysteries. This felt like the characters could come and go whenever they pleased.
Lack of lighting: There were some scenes in The Big Sleep that featured very little lighting. Because of this, I had a difficult time trying to see what was happening on screen. One example is the scene where the person who shot Arthur Gwynne Geiger was being arrested. I understand that this movie is classified as film-noir. But just because a film’s tone is dark, that doesn’t mean the scenes have to be dark in presentation.
As I said in my introduction, film-noir is a genre that I don’t watch often. But, because this review is meant to thank my followers, I was willing to go out of my cinematic comfort zone and share my thoughts on films that I think are worth my followers’ time. The Big Sleep is a movie that I ended up liking. The mystery was interesting and I enjoyed seeing the acting performances. However, this film does have its flaws, such as having too many characters and lack of lighting. For someone, like me, who doesn’t watch a lot of movies from the film-noir genre, I’m glad I gave this film a chance! Something that I mentioned in my review was how I watch a lot of content from Hallmark Movies & Mysteries. When I talk about films like The Big Sleep, it helps me expand my cinematic horizons when it comes to mystery films. For my blog follower dedication reviews, I will continue to share films that are different from the last.
Overall score: 7.5 out of 10
Do you watch films from the film-noir genre? If so, which one is your favorite? Let me know in the comment section!
It could be seen through the window of a local video store. It’s VHS cover had a whitish-bluish tint, a sign that the Sun had stolen its colors. After entering the store, the video was located on the right-hand side of an incoming customer’s view. When they made that turn and walked through the first aisle, it could be seen front and center on the shelf. For someone who has never heard of this movie, but had seen its predecessor, they will have so many questions flooding their mind. Why is Dorothy wearing whitish-silvery shoes instead her iconic ruby-red slippers? Why has Toto been replaced with a chicken? Why do the pictures on the back of the VHS cover appear so creepy? These questions may be so overpowering, that the movie could be passed over for another, less odd-looking film. Long after the video store closed its doors, the movie in our discussion has gained a notorious reputation. Whether or not that’s a good thing is open for debate. What reputation has this film garnered? It has been known as one of the creepiest children’s/family-friendly films of all time. If you haven’t guessed already, that film is none other than Return to Oz.
The acting: When an actor or actress accepts a role that was made famous by another actor or actress, there’s a good chance that comparisons in acting performances will be made. However, that actor or actress could end up portraying that character so well, that they may bring something new to the role. This is the case for Fairuza Balk, who took on the role of Dorothy. What’s so great about her performance is how it wasn’t an impersonation of Judy Garland’s performance. Instead, Fairuza captured the essence of Dorothy’s child-like innocence and demeanor, while bringing a haunted nature to the character. Because Return to Oz takes place six months after the tornado sent Dorothy to Oz, this character is now tainted with trauma. The beginning of the movie presents a good example of this portrayal. Even though Dorothy gets excited when talking about her “friends” from Oz, there are times when she can be seen staring at nothing in particular, like the world around her has disappeared.
The sets: This movie has some of the most magnificent sets I’ve ever seen on film! One that easily comes to mind is Princess Mombi’s castle. The room featuring mirrors wrapped in gold was just exquisite, making the scenes featuring this location appear photogenic. Other scenes were atmospheric, giving the audience the impression that the world on screen had truly come to life. When Dorothy discovers that the Yellow Brick Road has been demolished, that moment created a sense of dread about the fate of Oz. I’d also like to point out that the sets featured outside of Oz looked like an accurate replica of the story’s time-period. From the antique furniture to the machinery, everything reflected the world that The Wizard of Oz had previously established.
The use of Claymation: Claymation isn’t often incorporated into films. When it is, this can lend itself to some interesting film-making. In Return to Oz, Claymation was primarily used for rocks, the Nome King, and his mountain. This creative decision was a unique way to compensate for the limited use and quality of the special effects of the ‘80s. This particular art form did provide some unsettling moments for the protagonists. In some scenes, a face on a red stone background can be seen talking to the Nome King, who is off-screen. When Dorothy and her friends arrive at the Nome King’s mountain, the environment is dark and grey. Little color and light can be seen when the Nome King is around. These examples prove that Claymation can help enhance a film’s tone and a scene’s mood.
References to the predecessor: Return to Oz is the sequel to The Wizard of Oz. I was pleasantly surprised to see that this story made an effort to reference the movie that came before it. For one thing, the tornado that was featured in the previous film is the cause of Dorothy’s trauma. Characters from the predecessor make their appearances, such as Toto and the Cowardly Lion. Familiar places are visited, like the Emerald City and even Dorothy’s house that fell in Oz. Whenever a new place, person, or situation was introduced in the story, Dorothy would admit that she doesn’t remember them or hasn’t heard of them before. All of these things helped the story keep a sense of continuity.
Limited or no screen-time for beloved characters: As I just mentioned, characters from the previous film make an appearance in Return to Oz. However, they’re only on screen for a limited amount of time. Because the Nome King turned the Tin Man and Cowardly Lion into stone, they are frozen in place for most of the film. Since the Scarecrow was kidnapped by the Nome King himself, he didn’t appear in the movie until the climax. As for Glinda, the Munchkins, and the Flying Monkeys, they are nowhere to be found. This decision was probably made to let new characters shine and find their own place in the story. But I don’t think this should have been done at the expense of the previous film’s characters.
Some damaging messages: Another thing that I’ve talked about was Dorothy becoming traumatized by the tornado from the previous film. In an effort to help her move forward from the trauma, Auntie Em and Uncle Henry think it’s a good idea to take Dorothy to a psychiatric hospital where she is scheduled to receive electroshock therapy. I understand that this part of the story represents a belief from the late 1800s to early 1900s. However, presenting this idea to an audience in the mid ‘80s or today could give people the wrong message. This message could be interpreted as how not utilizing the power of imagination and make-believe to help traumatized individuals, especially traumatized children, is a good idea. Another scene where the message could be misinterpreted happens at the end of the movie. Princess Ozma tells Dorothy that she can go back to Oz whenever she wants, as long as she keeps it a secret. Messages like holding back on creativity will help one become “normal” and bottling up ideas and feelings is accepted could also be damaging. Prior to the release of Return to Oz, Disney has been known for promoting creativity. They also have incorporated important themes into their stories, such as honesty and respect. I think that the creative team behind this film should have taken a stance on how imagination and make-believe should be a complimentary component of someone’s journey through healing from a traumatic situation.
The story from this review’s introduction is my story of how this movie came into my life. Because of something so simple as a VHS cover, I passed on the opportunity to watch this film. Fortunately, because of the Wizard of Oz Blogathon, I was granted that second chance to experience what this movie had to offer. Prior to watching Return to Oz, I had heard about its reputation on countless occasions. Curious enough to find out the truth for myself, I volunteered to review the film for the Blogathon. While there are unsettling moments, they never overshadowed my enjoyment of the movie. In fact, this film was a better sequel than I ever expected! Now that I have finally seen Return to Oz, I feel that, over the years, it has been judged unfairly, to a certain extent. I’m not denying that this movie has things about it that could frighten children. But let’s not forget that Disney films and even the original, The Wizard of Oz, had scary elements to them as well. The idea of someone’s house easily falling on anyone is a terrifying thought. The Wicked Witch of the West had a very unsettling presence throughout The Wizard of Oz. The first Disney animated film, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, was so terrifying for some young audience members, that employees at Radio City Music Hall had to change the upholstery on the chairs because of how the children reacted to the scene where Snow White is alone in the forest. My experience of watching Return to Oz shows that you never know what’s in store until you look past the VHS cover.
Overall score: 8.2 out of 10
Have you ever seen Return to Oz? What’s the creepiest children’s/family-friendly film you’ve ever watched? Please tell me in the comment section!
Two weeks ago, 18 Cinema Lane received a hundred and twenty-five followers! However, because my blogging schedule revolved around the four blogathons that are scheduled for August, I haven’t found the time to publish this review. I knew I wanted to post this review before the end of the month, so I made some room in my schedule for this review to become a reality. For this post, I chose a movie that was released in August of 2016. I had the option of two Hallmark Channel films and Kubo and the Two Strings. Since I reviewed a Hallmark Channel movie for my previous blog follower dedication review (that film was Desolation Canyon) and since the last time I reviewed an animated film was back in February (the movie I talked about was All Dogs Go to Heaven 2), I decided to talk about the latter. Kubo and the Two Strings is a movie that I had not seen, but definitely had heard about. Mostly positive things were said about it, with the animation itself being a highlight. I don’t watch stop-motion animation often, so that means this is the first film of this kind to be reviewed on my blog! Even after reviewing over a hundred films, there’s still a “first for everything”.
Kubo and the Two Strings poster created by Laika and Focus Features. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kubo_and_the_Two_Strings_poster.png
Things I liked about the film:
The animation: Stop-motion animation can be hit or miss. You can either get something that looks whimsical, like The Nightmare Before Christmas or off-putting, like Coraline. Kubo and the Two Strings, however, falls more on the whimsical and imaginative side of the genre. The use of colors is what makes this movie stand out, as the balance between bright and dark palettes was complimentary. A good portion of the landscapes looked very realistic. Water, cliffs, and snow are just a few examples. I also liked how each character had a unique design. No two characters looked alike and their personalities were different from one another. All of these factors made for a truly stunning visual!
The humor: Family-friendly/children’s films sometimes try to incorporate humor by telling the same types of jokes. These jokes can be so overdone that they fall flat or become offensive. The humor in Kubo and the Two Strings was witty and clever. Funny moments felt like they were naturally extracted from the situation, instead of having the characters say or do something hilarious for the sake of it. Kubo and the Two Strings’ humor was well spaced out. It was mostly placed in the quieter scenes of the film, where there was less action and suspense. These moments never overshadowed or took away from the movie’s dramatic and serious parts.
The messages and themes: Kubo and the Two Strings contains several messages and themes that not only compliment the narrative, but help create an enriching story. An overarching theme is family, which plays a huge role on more than one occasion. It provided a moral compass for the characters and even put a new take on a familiar trope from family-friendly/children’s films. The message of how powerful story-telling is was impactful, changing the way certain things are presented. Something as simple as a piece of paper or the sounds of a bird as just two examples. Kubo and the Two Strings is a movie that gives the audience valuable words of wisdom!
The pacing: As I previously stated, the film’s humor was placed in the quieter scenes that featured less action and suspense. I should also add that the humor played a role in assisting the movie’s pace. Kubo and the Two Strings’ pace felt like the ebb and flow of an ocean’s waves. When an action scene came into the story, calmer scenes soon followed. These scenes were used to provide character development and feature interesting character interactions. Because of this balance between action-heavy and dialogue-focused scenes, it never made the movie feel drawn out or longer than its run-time. It made the movie-viewing experience that much more enjoyable!
Choppy movements: Whenever characters moved, it was always in a fluid motion. Some examples include walking and putting up objects. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same for the motion of human characters’ mouths. Any time a human character spoke, the movements of their mouth appeared choppy and they didn’t flow with the rest of the animation. The only character I didn’t feel this way about was Monkey. I’m not sure if this is a production issue or if it’s because I don’t watch stop-motion animated films often. But it got to the point where these choppy movements were distracting.
When it comes to my blog follower dedication reviews, I always try to choose films that are worth my followers’ time. Because they helped my blog reach the milestones that it has, I feel they deserve a good, quality movie as well as review. Well, I can honestly say that Kubo and the Two Strings is that film! This movie has everything I could ever want or ask for in a cinematic story, holding on to my attention from start to finish. While we’ve seen the “hero’s journey” narrative before, this film takes that template and breaths new life into it. It’s a story with so much heart, that it feels like the creative team behind this film truly cared about the movie they were making. With relatable and inspirational messages and themes, Kubo and the Two Strings makes me want to be a better person. Speaking of people, thank you to all of my one hundred and twenty-five followers, as well as my readers, for helping me get to this point. You have and will always play a vital role in this blogging journey.
Overall score: 9.1 out of 10
Do you like that I review animated films? Which movie from this genre would you like to see me talk about? Let me know in the comment section!
I was introduced to the book, I Never Promised You a Rose Garden, over five years ago. When I heard what it was about, I became intrigued with the premise. Since then, the book has been added to my TBR (to be read) list. While I haven’t read I Never Promised You a Rose Garden yet, I wasn’t going to miss the opportunity to see the film. So, I recorded it on my DVR when it was airing on television. Out of all the movies in my roster of films for A Month Without the Code, this is the only movie that’s rated R. It’ll be interesting to see if it could be “breened”. I also wanted to see if the movie would encourage me to read the book. Film adaptations can be better or worse than its source material. While comparing them is fine, judging them on their own merit is also important.
I Never Promised You a Rose Garden poster created by New World Pictures. Image found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Film_Poster_for_I_Never_Promised_You_a_Rose_Garden.jpg
Things I liked about the film:
The acting: For films that deal with serious subject material, you need a lead actor or actress that will give it their all, talent wise. Personally, I feel that Kathleen Quinlan did just that in her role of Deborah! Seeing this character experience trials and triumphs shows just how seriously Kathleen took this role. Her performance was so well-rounded, emotional, and powerful, that her on-screen presence was captivating. What surprised me about Kathleen’s portrayal was that Deborah seemed like a young woman who was beyond her years. Because I haven’t read the book yet, I don’t know if the character is like this in the book. However, Kathleen brought this aspect of the character to life with such realism.
The realistic depiction of mental health: When incorporating a real-life topic like mental health into a film, it’s better to depict it as realistically as possible. In I Never Promised You a Rose Garden, the portrayals of mental health appeared realistic. For Deborah’s schizophrenia, audience members can hear the “voices” in her head and see her imagined world come to life. Something that I noticed was how the patients had a sense of humanity to them. Some of them seemed to be lost in their own worlds more than others. But, at the end of the day, they had something important to say and a mind of their own.
The discussion of abuse toward patients: I’ve seen several films that talk about mental health, especially where the main setting is a psychiatric hospital. Usually, the treatments themselves end up being abusive toward the patients. In this film, some of the patients are abused because of a cruel employee. I’m glad the movie didn’t shy away from addressing this particular subject. In the films that I’ve seen about mental health, I don’t recall this topic ever being brought up. The fact that a movie from the ’70s that takes place in the ’50s would incorporate this issue in their film is pretty interesting.
A weaker plot: Like I’ve said before, I haven’t read I Never Promised You a Rose Garden. But, I know what the general premise is about from reading the book’s synopsis. After doing that, I believed that the story would be an insightful and thought-provoking tale of someone’s experience with schizophrenia. The movie’s plot, however, wasn’t as interesting as I had thought it would be. The story was very straight-forward, leaving little room for interpretation. While there were interesting ideas and concepts featured throughout the film, they weren’t thoroughly explored. Personally, I thought the movie was driven by a premise and not a plot.
The randomness of the “dream sequences”, To represent the imagined world inside Deborah’s mind, a series of “dream sequences” would appear at various moments in the movie. I think these “dream sequences” were important to the character of Deborah. But how these sequences were incorporated into the film was very random. Sometimes, they would suddenly appear without any warning or build-up. While the imagined world was addressed, it was never explored and dissected. I understand that this was meant to give audience members an idea of what living with schizophrenia is like. But the suddenness of these “dream sequences” was somewhat off-putting.
Very little character development: Because this story revolves around Deborah, she is going to receive the most character development. While this is true, she ends up becoming the only character the audience gets to really know. There’s about two or three other characters that also receive character development. However, the audience doesn’t get to know them as well as Deborah. For the rest of the characters, members of the audience just become familiar with them. This is very different from something like One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, where the audience gets to know each of the characters in the story. Because of I Never Promised You a Rose Garden’s nature, most of the characters felt like they were there just for the sake of moving the plot forward.
Rushing the recovery process: In I Never Promised You a Rose Garden, the story was about Deborah’s experience in a psychiatric hospital. For most of the movie, it seems like whenever she took one step forward in her treatment, she would then take five steps backward. It wasn’t until about the last twenty minutes when Deborah experienced a break-through in her recovery process. Because Deborah’s end result happened way too quickly, it felt like it was achieved too easily. This reminded me of The Three Faces of Eve, where it seemed like everything was wrapped up in a neat little package. It’s understandable that, in a film, there’s only so much time to tell a novel long story. But maybe this is where the book succeeds more than the movie.
I Never Promised You a Rose Garden is the only rated R movie in my A Month Without the Code roster. I figured this was because of how the subject of mental health was realistically depicted. While this is one of the reasons for the film’s rating, it was also rated R for content related reasons. As for the quality of the movie, I thought it was just ok. It’s not the worst thing to be put on film, but it didn’t impress me either. The story wasn’t as intriguing as I hoped it would be. However, there were things about the film that I did like. One of them is Kathleen Quinlan’s performance, which was one of the highlights of the movie! Despite how I feel about the film, I still want to read the book. Who knows? Maybe the book will be better than the adaptation. Speaking of the adaptation, we need to talk about the film’s content. Sure, I Never Promised You a Rose Garden could be “breened”. But only if several aspects of the movie were to change. These aspects are:
Language: There were several times when characters either swore or spoke unpleasant words. The words themselves would need to be omitted and replaced with better choices.
Blood: In the film, there were a few instances when blood was shown on screen. This would need to be reduced by a significant amount.
Violence: Some violent moments are featured in the movie. They would need to be significantly reduced.
Unpleasant imagery: In one of the “dream sequences”, there is a dead body featured on screen. This part of the film would have to be omitted.
Nudity: There are two scenes with brief nudity. These scenes would need to be removed.
Sexual references: At the psychiatric hospital, there was one character that constantly made sexual references. Their lines would be rewritten before production begins. In a “dream sequence”, it is heavily implied that Deborah has sex with a male from her imagined world. This part of that scene would either be completely eliminated or rewritten.
Overall score: 6 out of 10
What are your thoughts on this review? Do you think this film could be “breenable”? Share your thoughts in the comment section!
![20190906_190444[1]](https://18cinemalane.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/20190906_1904441-e1567813868962.jpg?w=443)
![20190906_190452[1]](https://18cinemalane.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/20190906_1904521-e1567814077703.jpg?w=441&h=597)
![20190904_161300[1]](https://18cinemalane.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/20190904_1613001-e1567629333829.jpg?w=406&h=641)
![20190901_174811[1]](https://18cinemalane.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/20190901_1748111-e1567388026567.jpg?w=474&h=675)
18 Cinema Lane 