Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Taken (2002)
1/10
Short hair bad, long hair good
4 January 2005
Fortunately my copy of Taken was a Christmas present and therefore cost me nothing. So I haven't lost anything but the time it took me to see four episodes, after which I threw in the towel.

When characters start to narrate on screen, regardless of the circumstances, you know it's the old film industry mafia, pressuring the writer either to save time or to fill it. The continual Shirley Temple voice-over was irritating enough (and often incomprehensible, so lush was the American accent), but in episode four, the action actually stopped at least three times, while one of the characters launched into a long monologue, as they tried to explain the inexplicable plot.

Based on episodes 1 -4, this isn't a very entertaining mini-series, in fact it's very tedious most of the time.
3 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Unconvincing film following an excellent documentary
10 October 2004
This film is a love story, loosely based on the real-life heroism of WWII. Those who enjoy such films would not have been disappointed by Charlotte Gray.

Unfortunately, Channel 4 decided to precede the film with the transmission of a documentary about the real-life heroines, whose personal sacrifices, pragmatic courage and strength of character shone out of my TV in a way that had me close to tears. The film, which followed, showed none of the iron self-discipline, the de-sensitising effect of war nor the constant fear of discovery these people lived with, but concerned itself with emotional story lines that would have been at home in any modern love story, loosely based on any social environment you care to choose. Far from blending into the background, along with the oppressed French population, Cate Blanchett was often portrayed parading in high heels and flattering autumnal colours, looking like a million francs

Too frequently for this viewer, it dipped into the downright absurd, e.g. having a) the male lead exposing himself to danger in an astonishing, barking tirade at German troops, b) the collaborationist French schoolteacher volunteering to the goodies that he was a snitch for the Germans and c) Charlotte herself somehow persuading a gendarme not to reveal her whereabouts to his search party colleagues, even when safely out of range of her pistol.

What a wonderful piece of history it was. And what a wonderful film could have been made of it (with the same cast too; the individual performances were all perfectly OK, especially in the minor roles).
28 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cuts some of Dickens's best dialogue
10 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
My copy of this version is treasured part of my video library, with solid performances from the cast and a Bradley Headstone suicide scene that chills me to the bone. But I long to see again the version made in 1976, which launched the careers of Warren Clarke, Jane Seymour, besides polishing the reputations of more established actors, like the great Leo McKern, Kathleen Harrison and Ronald Lacey - and cast expressions like "anatomical pursuits" and "mellering to the organ" into our family's private jargon for 25 years.

What I could not understand about this production was the removal of some choice Dickens dialogue, particularly between Messrs Boffin & Wegg. Peter Vaughan and Kenneth Cranham had to make do with a very cut down version of the "Weal & Hammer Pie" conversation, which Leo McKern and Alfie Bass made so hilarious I nearly climbed inside my telly.

But this is minor carping and should not put off the prospective viewer from a beautifully filmed production, one of the best period drama versions in recent decades. I'll watch it once a year until my tape wears out.

If I could only get hold of a copy of the 1976 version though. Now that WOULD be mellering to the organ!
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed