Reviews

I've lost count of how many times I've been grateful for YouTube. Today a friend sent me the link to this short and within seconds I knew it was special.

Validation is truly a gem.

There are so many superlatives I could use about Kurt Kuenne's short. The acting, direction, writing, etc., are all superb. But what really stands out is the movie's heart and simplicity. The story (a parable, really) is subtle, uplifting, inspirational--it even surprised me. And after 50+ years of movie watching, I don't surprise easily. This is not your typical Hollywood movie. It has a French feel to it; in fact, it reminded me a bit of Amelie. It is uniquely American, though. I can't wait to see more of Kuenne's work.

It's rare that I get a link I can forward to everyone on my email list. You'll see what I mean. Don't miss this one--and pass it along!

(It's an hour since I saw it and I'm still smiling!)

Since I am a big movie fan and enjoy the occasional musical, I have caught bits of Seven all my life. It never did anything for me. When I heard Robert Osborne speaking so highly of it, I finally made myself sit through most of the whole thing. ?? Normally I don't have feminist reactions to movies, but I actually found the "goodnatured" kidnapping scenes highly offensive. They made abducting women look like fun, and the abducted women came off looking like Kewpie doll dopes, Barbie airheads who deserved to be maltreated. Even though the dancing and singing and choreography was wonderful, I can't remember when I've been so turned off by a movie.

Watching this movie was like looking through a beautiful, whimsical kaleidoscope. So many facets are perfect: Loy at her peak of gorgeous, wry sophistication; the Deco sets; Powell's gentle irony; the relationships of various characters and the consistency of dialog; even the physical pranks were great--and I don't like slapstick all that much! This film reminded me of Shop Around the Corner. It wasn't as good, that's a tall order, but there was something bigger going on in this movie than just the usual romantic farce. I have to admire the writer's and director's ability to pull off a romantic comedy between two such diametrically opposed people. The heroine is the quintessential control freak; the hero, as laid back and tolerant as a hippie of the sixties. No one apologizes for their quirks, which is refreshing, and neither of them had to change all that much to make the ending work. And as far as acting goes, Loy and Powell don't hold back any punches (literally!) whenever the two characters collide. It is amazing to watch them knowing how they were reacting to Harlow's death during shooting. I love finding old movies, and this one is buried treasure.

The original Miracle Worker with Bancroft and Duke is one of my all-time favorite movies. However, I did not care for the '79 remake, so when I saw this movie begin on cable, I expected more of the same.

What a great surprise! Somehow the movie manages to capture the magic of people connecting, overcoming, living. The acting is subtle and solid, the writing lyrical and vibrant. While it does not have the drama of the original Miracle Worker, its steady pace, cinematography and selective focus on Sullivan's and Keller's life make it an astonishingly good movie. I highly recommend it for anyone in the mood to be inspired.

I guess if a film has magic, I don't need it to be fluid or seamless. It can skip background information, go too fast in some places, too slow in others, etc. Magic in this film: the scene in the library. There are many minor flaws in Stanley & Iris, yet they don't detract from the overall positive impact of watching people help each other in areas of life that seem the most incomprehensible, the hardest to fix. Both characters are smart. Yet Stanley can't understand enough to function because he can't read; he can't read because he's had too much adventure in his childhood. Iris, although well-educated, hasn't had enough adventure and so can't understand how to move past the U-turn her life took. In both their faults and strengths, the characters compliment each other. It may be a bit of a stretch to accept that an Iris would wind up working year after year in a factory, or that a Stanley never hid his illiteracy enough to work in construction or some other better-paying job. And while these "mysteries" are explained in the course of the story, their unfolding seems somewhat contrived. I assume no one took the time to rethink the script. Even so, it's a good movie—just imagine what De Niro, Fonda and Plimpton would have done on screen if someone had!

There is a good deal of decent dialogue in this movie, and Goldie Hawn and Susan Sarandon know how to make the most of it. As a fan of old movies, I could never fault a script for being "formulaic." Let's face it, if you've seen a thousand movies, you've seen it all. As long as the writer gets it right, a movie can, at the very least, be admired. In this case, it can be appreciated. This movie is fun, it doesn't take itself too seriously, and there are some important messages: remember the importance of being supremely sure of yourself, of having a best friend, and of hearing Led Zeppelin in concert. It shouldn't be relegated to the category "chick flick." It is about a person who seems to drift aimlessly through life, and winds up portraying someone who makes a positive impact on many peoples' lives. Watching Goldie's/Suzette's face as she and Susan/Vinnie start to dance for the first time in 20 years also made me remember something important: when women friends dance together, it's different than men and women dancing. They enter into a partnership that says, for the next few minutes, we will do something cool together, and, sometimes, that's an important thing to do.

This critique is based on familiarity with the movie and knowing the era in which it was produced. "Guess Who's..." provides a passive perspective on the most perfect Black man marrying the most perfect White woman in American society in the late 60s. As such, it's painful to watch the characters' superficial angst. Don't misunderstand: I've always liked this movie. It's just that lines that avow there would be no real marriage without children bother me, especially when only 30 years hence, many women will discover that bearing children won't be so easy; that 10 years hence, women supporting their husbands' career won't be considered good enough for Gloria, Bella, and their ilk; that a couple of years after this movie came out, women were expected to make their own individual mark and forget about any teamwork involved in making a difference with whomever. This perspective can be painful for those of us who did not achieve mainstream "success." And certain fundamental beliefs of this movie--e.g., kids should expect their parents to be loving and supportive and provide them with every advantage--may not be realistic. Sigh. On a happier note: This movie reminds me of campaigning in the town of Princeton, NJ, for Hubert Humphrey at the age of 12. Hmm, come to think of it, that just about sums it up.

I understood why Hanks thought his ego had gone overboard when I first saw it. However, I liked it then and appreciate its subtleties as it passes by all these years later on cable. It has quite a few elements I missed the first time around because the song and the attention to '60s detail had me reliving my childhood. There is something irrepressibly elating about the affect the meteoric rise of the song has on young people from a somewhat remote town in PA. I wonder how many people my age daydreamed about something like that happening to them? And the scene when they first hear their song over the radio evokes memories of soaring joy on those rare occasions when something came out so right. The warning from Del Paxton to Guy about bands was nice scripting. I can't imagine it working as well if it had a more in-depth message.