kindtxgal Reviews

Man in the Wilderness (1971)

Unnecessary Gore

[3/10 · 1 June 2021]

For the life of me, I cannot understand or believe that no animal suffered or was mistreated in this film.

The scene where the "wolves" are eating a LIVE buffalo was too painful and jarring to watch, and completely unnecessary. I've also now learned that horses that "fell" during battle scenes often had to be put down for leg injuries ... there is no "right" or "humane" way to replicate animal situations like this.

As in the case of the "live" feasting on the poor buffalo --- completely unnecessary and horrid.

The Spaghetti West (2005 Video)

Easily Could Have Been a 4- or 5-star Documentary, but...

[8/10 · 19 July 2019]

Yeah, but! Fantastic material about the birth of Spaghetti Westerns. .. lots of great film footage, and excellent commentators.

So what goes "wrong"?

Heavily European, fast paced dialogue from the interviewees minus English subtitles makes it very, very hard to followl.

Otherwise, my-eh! It's really quite good. Just couldn't understand most of it without multiple rewinds.

The Fabulous Fraud (1948)

Speaking of Frauds....

[5/10 · 22 April 2019]

I always watch these short documentaries with a great deal of interest because it typically rouses enough curiosity in me to do my own research afterwards.

Such was this case.

I also found the documentary to be non-conclusive,though one might gather, from the title, that it is in the negative.

The most glaring error, however,in material is that the narrator and documentary has a grim, misty picture of an "unmarked" gravesite or obscure one at best, while after my research, discovered,though banished to Switzerland, Mesmer had a brisk practice there until his death.

Additionally, Germany has erected a huge sculpture honoring him in Meersburg, Germany where he died.

Sensationalistic claims not based in fact are a waste of time for me,although, as I said before the initial appeal of most documentaries myself is prompting me to do my own research.

The Red Stallion (1947)

Too Many Technical Stinkers to Overlook

[2/10 · 24 November 2018]

Sweet story. No doubt about that... but the technical stinkers threaded in the film, particularly having to do with bears just has to be addressed.

Bears are typically herbivores, and occasionally feast on carcasses left behind by other predators, save for the polar bears species.

Bears attacking a horse to satisfy a penchant for horseflesh is next to nil in reality. A horse, who is gaga crazy afraid of bears because of past "killling by a bear" of his mother ---pursuing an attacking bear is pretty much inconceivable. So that violence was completely unnecessary and did little to improve the story.

Had they either a) made it realistic; b) filled out more of the animosity angle between horse and bear instead of pops of action between the two; or c) left it out altogether, the reel time could have focused on the plot ... a boy and his horse trying to save his home, ya da yada...

Too shallow. Nothing really hangs together. It's a sloppily thrown together film that will entrance some, but not the serious movie goer of any era.

Noah's Ark (1999)

Ditto That Title: Sink It! In Other Words, Don't Waste Your Time

[2/10 · 15 January 2018]

Complete waste of four hours of time I'll never regrettably get back. I wish our local library would take it off the shelves. Their "poetic license" goes way beyond the boundaries of that definition. Complete travesty and pile of junk. For starters, Noah's sons AND THEIR WIVES entered the ark. Secondly, mankind remaining and the poor remaining animals were destroyed immediately by this epic point in history. Pirates?? Pirates such as depicted in this film didn't appear until circa 1700s or so.

Most of this four hour travesty is spent adding bunk such as Lot gleefully breaking off his wife's salt-pillared finger to show off later in the film; a much too long pirate fight scene, and the mysterious Peddlar for whose presence in the film remains a complete unnecessary sporadic figure. The arguing, shrewish details cast upon Lot's wife, while completely ignoring or barely referencing the Rainbow's first appearance to mankind as a symbol of a covenant between God and Noah. The stupid, manic depictions of the survivors on the boat, which by the way, was SEALED by God until they landed. Ugh. Terrible, terrible movies. Bunk.

How the great Jon Voight and Mary Steenburgen managed to get suckered into this adaptation of a beautiful Biblical story pummelled by the idiocy of modern screenwriters is beyond me.

Loving (2016)

Simply Didn't Rise Up to the Greatness It Could Have

[7/10 · 8 November 2017]

Scene after scene leaves me as the viewer feeling helplessly wanting....every time. The movie as a whole lacks cohesiveness and most of all PASSION for such a monumental decision by the US Supreme Court. So much more energy could have been added to the characterizations from the couple themselves to the children or their families, the attorneys on either side, the law enforcement folks...dang, the nation as a whole.

Missing are crowds of protesters on either side of the issue, and there are multiple false starts without any completion whatsoever.

Example: There's the "buildup" of neighbor resistance to the Loving's marriage, specifically in Virginia when they go to live in VIrginia .... finalizing in that scene with a truck ominously following him home one night ... build up, build up ... and the final "dramatic" point is the installation of a telephone by a white installer ...

That said, there's logistical points that are failed to be explained ... If a white man realizes that there is a white and black woman co- habituating AGAIN in Virginia .. how is it the law never returns to jail both Richard and "Bean"? Ever. Yet they are still under the thumb of the 25 year suspension...

A bar scene with Richard and some black friends and family dramatically focuses on the question of Richard "just divorcing her", but then fizzles into never never land ....

The scene with the reporter and cameraman in their living room, surely to have brought attention to their living situation .. .yet NOBODY in Virginia is depicted of knowing much less DOING anything to enforce the sentence ...

Attorney scene in front of the Supreme Court ... again ... no passionate opening or closing arguments ... just .... nothing really.

There's simply NO climax, no passion, no connection....

Overall, a disappointing movie. I left the film WANTING MORE from almost every single scene, and most certainly some conclusions to the attempted build ups of probable drama.

A big ol' pile of mush which is so sad because this ruling by our Supremem Court is the cornerstone upon which current marriages are gauged.

Biography: Jane Austen Season Unknown, Episode Unknown

Jane Austen

[28 May 2017]

Interesting biography of Jane Austen, author of six books that have stood the test of time. Some interesting facts about her life emerge, however, the episode tends to dwell on a book discussion of all six novels, and not much other than birth, a brief romance, being an author (which is already known), and death. Fairly dull actually.

Moonlight (I) (2016)

Mega Bad Movie...And That's Not in a Good Way

[1/10 · 4 March 2017]

Clearly one of the WORST movies I've seen in quite awhile. I'd be surprised if a thousand words were spoken the entire film. Chopped up scenarios, a bit like "Boyhood" but with black folks and MUCH LESS spirit or meaning.

Typical, type-casting film about a young boy's tough life in the "hood", bullying, and troubled adult. Uh huh. And....... that's it. As if THAT card hasn't been played a million times over and over.

Dead and soulless film. Waste of celluloid, and most definitely a waste of time and a rental. Academy Awards folks -- you should be ashamed for even RECOGNIZING this film. What a farce you are proving yourselves to have become. Complete putty in one social group's hands. Disgusting.

I will say though, the LGBT and black folks should be satisfied though now. Even if most will agree its win is out of political, boo hoo whining of previous years' minority community.

The nomination, much less the WINNING of "Best Picture" and "Best Supporting Actor" are clear proof that the Academy has no backbone and societal conscience to the viewers who patronize them. Complete "bone to the dog" decision by them headed by none other than oh (!), shocker a "minority" President.

Sickening cowardice on their part. This movie SUCKS in bold faced, all cap letters! Nothing to be proud of AT ALL. What a true bummer.

The Swan (1956)

The Swan

[8/10 · 24 September 2016]

Absolutely completely well done film by the future Princess Grace of Monaco, Grace Kelly and supporting staff including dreamy Louis Jordan, staunch Alec Guiness, and a surprise entry as Queen, Agnes Moorehead.

Each actor worked so well together and yet in each one's style. Complete delight to watch the story unfold, ebb & flow, and then glide just like a swan to a restful ending. A fantastic use of comedy for interjections into a plot line that could easily been bogged down in monarchical dribble.

What an orchestra of a movie. I was put off a bit by the overly flowery love declarations from Jourdan to Kelly, but outside of that, everything was a delight to watch.

What clinched this movie for me is Guiness's description of a swan: gliding and graceful in water, but cumbersome and put off as a goose on land. The need for them to shine forever on the water in order for their beauty to be appreciated. Ahhhh.... wonderful.

Personal Property (1937)

Wit, Wit, and More Wit...Completely, Total Fun!

[8/10 · 14 August 2016]

Female Dinner Guest: "What is your line, Mr. Dabney?" Mr. Dabney: "I'm in lady's underwear." Dabney's Father: "...We're both in ladies' underwear." and further discussions about (ahem) BVDs (boys' ventilated drawers).

But a few excerpts (no spoilers) of the kind of witticism threading throughout this very delightful film starring Jean Harlow, Robert Taylor, and a fantastic supporting British cast.

Harlow plays an American girl who marries an alleged wealthy Englishman and gets stuck with the bill so to speak. Robert Taylor is a prodigal son type that is denounced by his well-to-do family. Taylor and Harlow meet and sparks of wit pour over the silver screen from opening to closing credit.

Truly a delightful, fun, completely whimsical, happy encounter with a wide range of comedic actors and star performances by Taylor and Harlow, particularly, in my opinion, Robert Taylor.

Enjoy!

When Father Was Away on Business (1985)

Compelling, Humorous, Thought-Provoking, Timeless Human Story

[8/10 · 13 August 2016]

Compelling, humorous, thought-provoking, realistic, timeless. All the ingredients of a great film. No wonder that it was nominated as a Best Foreign Film Oscar.

The film is narrated through the thoughts and words of six-year-old Malik whose father Mesha has been sent to mine coal for a wayward remark made about a newspaper cartoon...and fooling' around (ahem). His innocence translates the often difficult issues for viewers into what could easily have been difficult to watch at times.

I appreciate the film because it is NOT the usual war-ravaged, bloody story of Bosnia/Yugoslavia but a human study on the strengths and weaknesses of each family member capsuled into this fantastic film. The quiet observations compel viewers to see and almost experience the joys & sadness of each character.

Elie Wiesel: First Person Singular (2002 TV Movie)

Could Have Benn Astounding .... With Captions

[9/10 · 5 August 2016]

Some films require captions for American audiences. This is one of those. Mr. Wiesel's narrative was very, very hard to understand resulting in frequent rewinds so that the profundity of his statements could be fully appreciated. There are times PBS needs to step up to the plate and provide 'captions' for guests who have heavy European or Middle Eastern accents, etc. Otherwise, the whole point of the program is lost. What I could eventually understand is the wisdom, tenacity, and spirit of Mr. Wiesel. Sadly, he's recently passed, so yet another great voice in our trouble times has disappeared except for special films such as this one.

The Petrified Forest (1936)

Soon to be Star Discoveries in Melodrama Overload

[8/10 · 22 July 2016]

Considering this film was made just a few years after motion pictures started "talking", it's a great movie thanks to budding talents of Leslie Howard, Bette Davis, and Humphrey Bogart. Clearly, their soon-to-be discovered star power propels the somewhat melodramatic story line. Within a few three years, all three would be superstars.

Davis flits dreamily from scene to scene as a dreamy-eyed but tired, somewhat life-edgy waitress at a dump of a 'gas stop' in the middle of nowhere. Soon her life will be propelled into her dreamed-of destiny by the conflicting characters of Leslie Howard, who exudes line after line of platitudes, whimsy, and advise one can almost gag on it after awhile..thankfully Humphrey Bogart thrusts himself angrily and menacingly as a gangster on the lam running for Mexico with his cronies. The three decidedly different characters whirl around each other while the remaining cast drifts around them almost listlessly in contrast.

Stellar directing clearly at work weaving the contrasting roles seamlessly. Each primary actor could easily hold court by their own talent power.

Very entertaining, engaging with a titular splash of thought-stuff humming beneath the lines.

Marihuana (I) (1936)

All I Can Think of After Watching Film is ... Wow.

[6/10 · 18 July 2016]

One of several anti-marijuana/drug propaganda films of the 1930's with over- reactive screen narratives, over-dramatized screen-writing and acting...that is completely inaccurate in the depiction of marijuana usage.

Over-excessive to the point, in light of what is known about marijuana today and effects upon the average marijuana user, it's almost comedic by today's standards and realistic knowledge of this drug.

Burma, an 'innocent' but unhappy youth clashes at home and hangs out with a 'wild' crowd..to the point the laughing makes my head ache with high- pitched, giggling, silly girls. Solely because of using marijuana, according to the film, she indulges in a series of immoral acts, becomes pregnant out of wedlock, and two friends are killed (as if one was not enough in a one- hour film). Her response is to become a hotshot dealer herself....leading to deeper crime (with an ironic twist to boot) & yes, another tragedy.

Way over-the-top, inaccurate, but entertaining to watch and thus what is known as a 'cult classic' in today's world. One of a series of anti-drug, specifically anti-marijuana films aimed to exaggerate & allegedly decry the horrors of marijuana usage.

Reefer Madness (1936)

Good Intentions, Bad but Fun Form

[6/10 · 18 July 2016]

This film, along with other anti-drug offerings of the time, such as "Marihuana", attempts to warn against a multiple of probable scenarios that result from its usage. The name of the film is a forewarning of content, with an over-dramatization (to the point of silliness) of marijuana effects on the youth of the day.

Similar to drinking and driving films of that time, this film focuses on the lives of a handful of high school students, shiny with possibility preyed upon by smartly dressed, sinister adults. Stealthily they are lured into all manner of deprivation and poor choices resulting in tragedy while the dealers cash in and skulk in their silken rat holes.

Over the top, and in light of modern knowledge of marijuana usage by even the medical field, this film borders on the side of hilarity due to excessiveness of the stupidity of the victims and iciness of the dealers while hapless parents & teachers scramble for a solution.

I recommend it for all to see, if anything as a time capsule view of the norms of the 1930s era of criminal, parent, educator, law enforcement and youth scramble around madly due to lowly reefer as the prime target of propaganda.

It's Love I'm After (1937)

The Butler Saves the Movie

[9/10 · 15 July 2016]

Fairly comedic cinema flick starring Leslie Howard and Bette Davis as a sparring couple who just happen to be stage actors as well, which lends itself therefore to an excessive amount of dramatics. A VERY young Olivia de Haviland is a starry-eyed patron of the arts stuck on Howard. Refereeing all of the inevitable triangle is hilarious Eric Blore, Howard's "gentleman's gentleman", who in my opinion, pushes the movie's ratings out of an otherwise tiresome back & forth verbal battle between Davis, Howard, and de Haviland's cooing.

His 'killer' scene plays out when asked to warn Howard of going overboard who's wants to dissuade de Haviland's annoying infatuation that threatens to upend his and Davis's romantic posturing through a series of bird calls. Bore is so intense on this um....note or notes, he starts flapping about as the bird sounds emitting from him, creating a side-bending performance bursting through the monotony of the threesome. I say threesome, because de Haviland's "fiancee" (Patrick Knowles) pretty much only struts around making irritable noises over de Haviland's star-struck shenanigans.

Without Bore's free-for-all, this movie would have plummeted into a head- splitting, boring, common romantic shrillfest. Thankfully, it was written in the script.

Sullivan's Travels (1941)

Tripping Into Real Reality

[8/10 · 14 July 2016]

"Classic" line of the film: Officer asks Sullivan (Joel McCrea), "What are you (an alleged Hollywood director) doing in those clothes (tattered suit) ?" His answer? "I just paid my income taxes." In fact, income taxes, unemployment, poverty, isolation are some of the things Sullivan desires to "experience" on a hopped up, publicized slumming to the masses of poverty of the Depression Era as background to a proposed movie. Along with a girl (Veronica Lake) the first part of the film focuses on their semi-sheltered stumbling about hobo camps, train box cars, and diners. At the end of each round, however, he has a cushion of his hidden wealth.

The latter part of the film shows Sullivan inadvertently thrust into reality as an unknown hobo hoodwinks him into believed death, when in fact he's been imprisoned.... and the rest of the matter, the ending will be for you the viewer to find out. Masterfully written, if not a tad lightly w/a tongue in cheek method of showcasing the plight of Depression Era poverty masses.

Virginia City (1940)

Stellar Performance by Flynn & Scott

[8/10 · 11 July 2016]

Very unique "western" film based on two men on opposite sides of the Civil War. The movie movies through several locations beginning with a Confederate prison camp where Kerry (Errol Flynn) and his usual film sidekicks (Alan Hale and Guinn Williams) are attempting to escape the prison where Lance (Scott) oversees. After an escape, Kerry & his friends are sent to intercept a plot led by Vance (Scott) in Viriginia to smuggle millions of gold. Bitter Southern woman (Miriam Hopkins) is aiding Vance although Kerry is initially duped to think otherwise.

Lance wiles the gold away with Kerry & cavalry hot on his heels. Another character tossed into the mix is (in a very strange role almost laughable role with Humphry Bogart as Mexican bandit Murrel.

What seals this movie into four stars is a one-liner delivered by Flynn in response to Scott's observations of his gun skills: Funny because of our current relationship with a certain country in the Middle East today. Flynn replies, "In Afghanistan the kids do it (shoot well)." This made the film for me. Too ironic for description.

Scott & Flynn are great in their roles as is Alan Hale, but Miriam Hopkins (as usual) falls flat as Southern belle / saloon girl spy and love interest to both Flynn & Scott's characters. I just never have believed Hopkins is any special talent or beauty. Someone must have paid her way into Hollywood.

Overall, however, the film is unique in its delivery, storyline, and fast paced locale/event changes. Solid stuff from Flynn & Scott. Hale the usual bumbling, faithful pal. Hopkins.. well, she's just sorta annoying there throughout the film.

Infinitely Polar Bear (2014)

Infinite Bear Hug of a Film!

[10/10 · 8 July 2016]

I agree with one of the reviewers, this film rates 10 stars...hands down. It IS also, one of Mark Ruffalo's better performances as well .. when is this guy going to get a very well-deserving Oscar?

Mark Ruffalo plays a manic depressive husband asked to care for two daughters so that his wife (Zoe Saldana) can get her master's degree in business to support a better life for them.

The film has heart, passion, spirit, warmth, and realism .... all bundled & balanced expertly into a fantastic drama/comedy with just the right balance of the rigors of mental illness on the individual and those that they love and are loved by them. It expertly tangos around sensitive issues not only of mental illness, but interracial marriages, parenthood, and a hatful of stereotypes all levels of society face.

This hidden treasure will wrap you up in its own special "bear hug". :

Action in the North Atlantic (1943)

Worthy of the Oscar Nod for Best Writing

[9/10 · 6 July 2016]

I was happy to discover the writing for this film earned an Oscar nod. It's well deserving.

Brisk, exciting action explodes across the screen for the first 30 minutes before seguing into quieter character sketches on the primary actors for the World War II film highlighting the Merchant Marines' role in aiding convoy supply ships headed for Russia.

Exremely well-written and edited to create a really great film and overview of the primary focus of the film, the Merchant Marines. I enjoyed the film's character sketches as well.

Fantastically shot battle scenes between ships, submarines, and airplanes hurl the story to a patriotic, flag-waving conclusion and keep viewers glued to it to see what is next.

The balance between battles, the human condition of the characters, and strategy are phenomenal. I would have liked to rate the film five stars, but became distracted by a great deal of film time focused on the German UBoats and planes, without any captioning. All of the German dialogue simply wasted the film timing & created a feeling of frustration just because SO MUCH time is given them. Had captioning been done, it would have served the story very well.

Look for small bit parts played by familiar faces Dane Clark and Sam Levene, and the ever-gregarious Alan Hale just enough comic relief.

The Good Dinosaur (2015)

Silly for Adults and Too Jarring for Younger Minds.. Use Discretion in Showing This to Very Young Children

[6/10 · 30 June 2016]

It is clear within 30 minutes of the film why it has a PG rating. Bugs are having their heads ripped off and a cutesy animal that is rescued is devoured (on screen) by carnivorous birds. Not exactly the type of viewing a child, particularly younger ones, are prepared to see amidst a "good" dinosaur that's fearful of just about everything in his young life. Arlo, the star character is a runt dinosaur afraid of everything who has yet taken the opportunity to do something outstanding so he can leave his mark on the family silo. He is cute as a button, as are many of the characters, but I simply don't think it's appropriate for youngsters to be subjected to heads being ripped off bugs and a Furbie-like looking mammal, newly rescued after Arlo helps save him, to be then jolted into its demise. Cartoons, particularly Pixar and Disney are meant to be child-friendly, not delve their spirits into death and devouring in full animated glory. That's my biggest complaint. I really can't wrap my brain around the concept of dinosaur "farmers" and dog-like humans. There's nothing in our culture or collective knowledge to help make these "gags" palpable and cute or clever. The animation artwork is quite stunning however, but I would not recommend this video for a very young child under seven as they're sure to be upset with the in-their-face animated demise of a cute, cuddly mammal. It's just too harsh for them in a cartoon setting which are historically comforting, safe-feeling, and innocent. I would not be able to show this film to an elementary class below the age of fourth grade and that's a stretch. Deeply disappointed & surprised Pixar chose the path of sensationalism & death in at least three scenes in the film. And what was the first five minutes supposed to be saying? It easily could have been left at as it doesn't seem to connect with any of the following scenes.

Independence Day: Resurgence (2016)

Independence Day Regurgitated

[30 June 2016]

I clearly remembered the depth of excitement, chemistry, and story of the original Independence Day film --- this one has no chemistry, a sloppy plot, and as one reviewer stated, a feeling of needing a scorecard to keep up with the characters and who they related to in the original installment. Jeff Goldblum, Bill Pullman provide solid performances, but the younger generation actors have as much passion, talent, and finesse as cardboard cutouts.

IDR opens up with a Stars War pizazz of a rebellious star fighter doing his own thing with a quadrillion dollar piece of machinery. The film quickly segues into the conflict of the day culminating with the righteous courage of a lady President ordering the destruction of an alien aircraft BEFORE making contact with them. Hmmm....the righteous indignation of a world leader destroying life before any attempt of communication. Sound familiar?

Thankfully, Jeff Goldblum's character breezes onto the film just in time to save the day. Bill Pullman (former President of USA) rampages for awhile like Chicken Little, and Brent Spiner gasps back to life from a 20 year coma. Riiiiight. I also loved Goldblum's screen daddy role, although again, busing a load of kids into the target area is a bit mind boggling in it's logic as well.

I think I've noted enough of only a few of the flaws in the logic of this film that the younger set actors stumble around one to the other. I was comatose myself about 20 minutes into the film and "checked out" as in dozed off not soon after. It's one redeeming factor is that I am so confused by the plethora of character offspring from the initial installment of this movie, that I'm willing to revisit the original to try and glue this mess together.

45 Years (2015)

Great Acting. Less than Great Storyline

[6/10 · 27 June 2016]

45 Years feels like 45 years to me, not just 45 minutes doubled. It tells of a childless English couple approaching the grand celebration of their 45 years together as man and wife when a message tells the news of the husband's former girlfriend/fiancée/lover/want to be love ... who knows for sure .. certainly someone special in his life ... body being found encapsulated in an ice glacier 50 years prior.

The problem is that the hubby apparently didn't tell the now wife of 45 years of the true relationship between him and the love of his life girl, making the wife rather put out, angry, and unfathomable feelings. Unfathomable, because there are precious few words stated to describe either person's turmoil.

To state that the news is "shattering" and may disengage their relationship as suggested in the description is excessive. Now, if the hubby had been a Nazi in the past and didn't tell her, THAT's shattering. I just don't "get" why at the end of 45 years, it matters whether or not the wife knew of his true relationship with the now dead girl. Couldn't she have possibly guessed initially anyway when or if Katya was discussed in their early days?

I don't buy the storyline. I don't buy the "shattered" emotions. After a lifetime of childlessness and other bits, it seems small. But that's just me.

Now, I love independent films, I really do, but one of the more irritating aspects of many independent films is they cheat the viewers out of a concrete explanations, finale, or climax of any type. This is one of those. There is so much innuendo laid on thickly without very small amount of explanation or discussion or confrontation...or ANYTHING, it falls flat for me into a frustrating heap. Particularly, the ending when after a romantic dance, the wife stands there with a myriad of emotions crossing her face without any words to clarify them or foretell the future of this couple. Will she leave him? Will he leave her? Will he go to see the body? There are dozens of unfulfilled bits that leave me well, unfulfilled feeling. Or maybe THAT's the point. Alas, it's likely one will never know. I suppose we're not supposed to. One will likely never know. And I find that very unsatisfying emotionally as apparently this couple may be. Or not.

I Died a Thousand Times (1955)

Someone Stayed in Prison Too Long

[7/10 · 25 June 2016]

Okay, so Roy (Jack Palance) gets out of prison (pardoned), heads right back into a life of crime and plans a heist with two dumb bunny hoods along with a moll (Shelley Winters) who he really doesn't want around. There's so many reasons NOT to pull the heist, it's ludicrous to believe they would. In the middle of the heist planning, Roy falls for a "good girl", a cripple who does not return his affections. Then Roy, a well-known, recently freed criminal pulls a heist in full daylight without any disguise or efforts to conceal his identity. Then everyone runs off and Roy runs around in full daylight most of the time planning his escape. Remember, he didn't disguise himself at the robbery! Let's not forget the pooch that is inevitably going to interfere with the plans for either a successful heist or escape? Seriously?

All This, and Heaven Too (1940)

All Innocence and Heaven Too

[8/10 · 23 June 2016]

Bette Davis drips innocence and pathos in this romantic period piece as governess of four French children in an already unhappy household set in mid-1800's. Granted the acting is superb, the music swells back & forth with each (and many) unhappy moment, and the cinematography outstanding as well. Davis' takes a job as governess in an already unhappy household. Her innocent, loving presence brings a breath of fresh air & happiness to all except the wife who grows more convinced of shenanigans between Davis & Boyer who love one another without acknowledging it bound by their mutual love of the children. The wife is SO bad, the governess is SO good, the husband is SO honorable, the children are really only able to be truly the innocents amidst it all -- and ultimately they pay for it. Davis is supposed to be the true victim, as is Boyer, but it is the children ultimately lose their home -- father, r mother (albeit faulty), and doting governess... yet that is not the focus. Perhaps the film wants to prove how ugly gossip and innuendo can destroy purest of intentions, but well, hubby & governess ARE a bit too naive especially for that period. I found myself more dissatisfied than sympathetic w/those two clinging to their glaring naivete. If you're wondering what in the world I'm blabbing about, please do watch this film! Because it is so splendidly written, directed, acted, and overall packaged, I can give it at minimum four stars. One thing is for sure, it is quite entertaining and absorbing! I just don't buy the message I think it wanted to convey is all.