Category Archives: Jim Carter

Wonka-2023

Wonka-2023

Director Paul King

Starring Timothée Chalamet, Calah Lane, Olivia Colman

Scott’s Review #1,414 

Reviewed January 3, 2024

Grade: B+

Wonka (2023) is only the third live-action film based on Roald Dahl’s iconic 1964 novel Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, following Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971) and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005).

The latter was an inadequate and unnecessarily dark film starring Johnny Depp that threatened to ruin the trademark fantasy of the original.

Fortunately, director Paul King mostly known for directing the Paddington films opts for a warm and even gooey experience that does perfect justice to the original starring Gene Wilder with many connections to that film, especially costumes, characters, and locale.

It’s saccharine sweet but not sickeningly sweet instead feeling both fresh and genuine.

The wonderful and familiar featured song ‘Pure Imagination’ appears instantly as the film begins which does wonders to capture and captivate the nostalgic audience—mixed with other new gems like ‘A World of Your Own’ hooks newer and younger viewers.

The effort works well as a kindly old friend dusted off the shelf for a new waltz across the dance floor and a dizzying chocolate delight crowd-pleaser is the result of Wonka.

Wonka is released in December amid the sugary Christmas holiday season. A marketing win what parents could refuse a delicious trip to the cinema?

The wondrous story of how the world’s greatest inventor, magician, and chocolate maker became the beloved Willy Wonka (Timothée Chalamet) we know today begins with the young actor brazenly wearing a similar garb as Wilder did in the 1971 effort.

I adore this feat and pointed display because it makes crystal clear the attempt to leverage history instead of upheaval.

Chalamet is perfectly cast as Willy in large part because he resembles Wilder with his wiry build and waifish face. There exists a kindness and trustworthiness that transfers well from the big screen to the audience member.

Throughout the film, there is light peril that Wonka faces like a crooked debt owed to the even more crooked Mrs. Scrubitt’s (Olivia Colman) boardinghouse or the vengeful competitor Arthur Slugworth (Paterson Joseph) but it’s nothing he can’t handle with a grin and shrug of the shoulders.

His feathers are not ruffled easily because he believes in the magic of chocolate. In a dear flashback scene featuring his mother, played by Sally Hawkins, she inspires him to always believe in himself and be a good person.

This is at the heart of the film.

Along for the ride are new friends orphan Noodle (Calah Lane), Abacus Crunch (Jim Carter), and others trapped within Scrubbit’s and henchman Bleacher, played by Tom Davis.

There’s even a connection with the fan favorite Oompa-Loompa’s led by Lofty (Hugh Grant) who becomes a close ally in the end. As historical viewers will know the pair reunites in business.

Despite all these terrific additions the main attraction is the chocolate naturally. Highlights are a lavish chocolate attempted drowning, a chocolate store, and more than enough chocolate colorful flowers to whet one’s appetite.

The film is weird and zany without being too far out there and retains its touchy-feely approach.

Wonka (2023) successfully builds a multi-generational bridge between audiences with a powerful human connection. Grandparents, parents, and children alike can all see the film together with a common love of chocolate and magic.

The dangers are light-hearted and the filmmakers keep age-appropriate sensibilities and the result is family-friendly material with a kindhearted approach.

We all need this sometimes.

The Rainbow-1989

The Rainbow-1989

Director Ken Russell

Starring Sammi Davis, Paul McGann, Amanda Donohoe

Scott’s Review #1,409

Reviewed November 5, 2023

Grade: A-

Continuing my exploration of more obscure films by the British director comes The Rainbow, a 1989 picture adapted from a 1915 D.H. Lawrence novel.

Russell fans will know that he also adapted 1970s Women in Love from Lawrence so there is a tie-in between films.

Even though The Rainbow was made nearly two decades after Women in Love, it’s a prequel. The antics of the Brangwen sisters are explored as they grow up in rural England specifically one sister’s burgeoning sexuality and desires.

One could take The Rainbow as a feminist film that centers mainly on the eldest sister.

Born to a rich landowner, played by Christopher Gable, in the final days of the Victorian era (the late 1800s), Ursula (Sammi Davis) blossoms into a beautiful young woman full of imagination and promise.

She is quite free-spirited and begins to feel trapped by her surroundings. Still, her life changes when she has an erotic experience with Winifred (Amanda Donohoe), an adventurous and bisexual teacher.

From that point on, Ursula puts all of her passion and creativity into the pursuit of sexual fulfillment. She prefers men and develops a relationship with the dashing Anton (Paul McGann).

But she is constantly frustrated and continues to suffer from anguish and under-fulfillment as her development years go by.

Davis is delightful and mesmerizing as the lead character. Her flowing blonde locks which she eventually cuts give her a wholesome schoolteacher persona. But she is peppered with sassiness and experimentation which Davis flawlessly executes.

Donohoe, who starred in another Russell film, the bizarre The Lair of the White Worm (1988) smolders with sophistication and sensuality. Winifred easily takes Ursula under her wing and teaches her the pleasures of sex.

Eventually marrying Ursula’s wealthy Uncle Henry she doesn’t decline into dull matrimony but remains a mentor and source of temptation to Ursula.

McGann, as Anton brings a boyish yet masculine flavor to the film and succeeds as the main love interest for Ursula. Becoming a soldier, he smolders most during his plentiful nude scenes running around forests and up mountains with Ursula in tow.

These scenes are the zestiest as Russell plugs his all-too-familiar bizarre sequences of lust and bare flesh into the film.

There are many nude scenes to salivate over turning the prim and proper Victorian upper-crust characters into horny animalistic creatures.

The dynamics between Ursula, Anton, and Winifred are my favorite because it’s not played as a traditional love triangle with one pair to root for. It’s more sexual and interesting than that.

Not everything in The Rainbow works, however.

Even though I’m very familiar with Women in Love the connection to that film is tough to capture. Gudrun (the other sister) is the main focus in Women in Love but only has a small role in The Rainbow. To make matters more confusing, Ursula (in The Rainbow) is more similar to the character of Gudrun (in Women in Love).

Also, Glenda Jackson (who plays Gudrun in Women in Love) is cast as the mother in The Rainbow. The role is unspectacular especially compared to the brilliant portrayal Jackson did in Women in Love.

She doesn’t have much to play except being their mother.

I finally decided to stop thinking about Women in Love and enjoy The Rainbow on its own merits.

Admittedly, the final sequence does satisfy as Ursula forges ahead to a new life which brings us back to the start of Women in Love.

Reminiscent of E.M. Forster’s adaptations like A Room with a View (1985), Maurice (1987), or Howards End (1992), the quaint English cottages, landscapes, and villages are wonderful and capture a specific time capsule.

The Rainbow (1989) transported me to another time and offered a character study meshed in sexuality, coming of age, and feminist power.

Downton Abbey: A New Era-2022

Downton Abbey: A New Era-2022

Director Simon Curtis

Starring Hugh Bonneville, Michelle Dockery, Maggie Smith

Scott’s Review #1,261

Reviewed May 30, 2022

Grade: B+

Following the success of the 2019 film adaptation of the television series Downton Abbey, which aired on PBS from 2010 to 2015, a sequel was produced. This was unsurprising, given that the fan-favorite was both critically and commercially well-received.

Downton Abbey: A New Era (2022) will undoubtedly please fans of the series and may even attract new audiences who have not yet been exposed to it.

The trials and tribulations of the Crawleys, their friends, and staff are a treat as new situations and drama arise for the group to navigate, discussed over tea and crumpets.

The film is like visiting a cherished friend after a long absence.

Award-winning creator Julian Fellowes is thankfully still involved and was given screenwriting credit. This means that the formula is still the same, and nobody has tried to reinvent the wheel or veer the characters off course.

The year is 1928.

The main action centers around the sudden news that grand dame Violet Crawley, Dowager Countess of Grantham (Maggie Smith), has inherited a villa in the south of France from a former suitor who has just died. Some of the family must travel to France and figure out the mystery.

Secondly, A film production company requests to use Downton for a silent film. Robert (Hugh Bonneville) and retired butler Mr. Carson (Jim Carter) disapprove. Still, Robert’s eldest daughter and estate manager, Lady Mary Talbot (Michelle Dockery), says the income would cover the cost of replacing Downton’s leaking roof.

The household staff is eager to see the film stars and scrambles to make things as lovely as possible for the incoming actors.

The terrific thing about Downton Abbey: A New Era is that nearly all of the almost thirty principal characters are given some storyline.

Plus, there are a handful of new characters to give screen time to.

Surprisingly, as in Downton Abbey (2019), the main ‘super couple’, servants Anna (Joanne Froggatt) and Bates (Brendan Coyle) are given almost nothing to do. They are seen, but their child is not, and some drama would have been nice. Perhaps a mysterious illness or a malady for the couple to endure?

Maybe next time.

Still, everyone else is represented, and the feeling for viewers is warm and fuzzy.

Below are some highlights.

Robert frets at the possibility that he may be half French and his birth a result of a tryst between Violet and the villa owner. Mary’s absent husband allows for a flirtation to develop between her and a member of the film.

Gay butler Thomas (Robert James-Collier) finds himself pursued by the film’s big star.

Cora (Elizabeth McGovern) keeps a health secret, while a bedridden Violet’s health declines in bed. Newlywed servants Daisy (Sophie McShera) and Andy (Michael Fox) scheme to unite his lonely father with the cook, Mrs. Patmore (Lesley Nicol).

Finally, Miss Baxter (Raquel Cassidy) eagerly awaits a marriage proposal from nervous Mr. Molesley (Kevin Doyle).

In addition, new characters, such as actors Guy Dexter (Dominic West), Myrna Dalgleish (Laura Haddock), and director Jack Barber (Hugh Dancy), are instant fan favorites, immediately connecting with the mainstay characters.

This is ingenious writing that can serve as a valuable lesson for any soap opera writer. Always write new characters by sharing stories with existing ones rather than writing in silos. It works wonders.

The historical relevance of approaching the 1930s is not missed, as ‘talkies’ taking over the film industry meant the kiss of death for most silent film stars.

The popular LGBTQ+ storyline is wonderfully written. A gay man in 1928 was doomed to either a life of hiding or one of loneliness, and one character wisely references a ‘cruel world’ regarding the viewpoint of the lifestyle.

Times were not changing just yet.

I am crossing my fingers that a third Downton Abbey film will be made. The characters and storylines remain vibrant, especially as the timeline progresses into the 1930s and the dire 1940s, when World War II breaks out.

Downton Abbey: A New Era (2022) proves that in the COVID-19 era, a trusted old friend is needed tremendously, even on the silver screen.

The Good Liar-2019

The Good Liar-2019

Director Bill Condon

Starring Ian McKellen, Helen Mirren

Scott’s Review #1,201

Reviewed November 26, 2021

Grade: B+

The Good Liar (2019) is a well-acted film, but by the numbers, the thriller is made as well as it can be, thanks to superior acting. Casting British heavyweights Ian McKellen and Helen Mirren automatically provides enough star power and credibility to save any lame plot.

This is the first time the actors have appeared in a film together, though they have appeared on stage together.

The film moves briskly, and there is never a moment of boredom. While the main storyline at first is intriguing, the inevitable twist at the end is satisfying. Suspension of disbelief is required, and a portion of the backstory is unnecessary.

Nothing is as it seems.

Roy Courtnay (McKellen) is a dashing career con man. He is suave and used to getting what he wants out of people, to their advantage and disadvantage. He cagily dips into the online dating pool and stumbles upon an older woman named Betty McLeish (Mirren) ripe for the picking.

She is rich, divorced, and lonely.

What could go wrong?

As Betty opens her life and home to him, Roy is surprised to find himself caring about her, turning what should be a cut-and-dry swindle into the most treacherous tightrope walk of his life.

Betty’s grandson, Steven (Russell Tovey), constantly annoys Roy when he questions Roy’s intentions and urges his grandmother to be wary of the man.

As the plot began, I kept thinking that there was no way Betty could be so gullible, lonely, or not. This kept me engaged until the big reveal that filled the final thirty minutes or so. If The Good Liar did not contain something more than the banal plot, it would have been a real dud.

To continue with the storyline element, Betty’s ultimate motivations, while clever, are hard to believe. Not to ruin any plot points, but the whole Nazi component from the 1940s feels superfluous and easy. The revenge motives feel extremely plot-driven and are meant as a thrown-in explanation.

From a timeline perspective, it also doesn’t make much sense. If events take place during present times, it would put Roy and Betty in their 90s! The characters are assumed to be in their mid-70s.

Despite Roy being the villain, I fell in love with him. His shenanigans appealed to me despite my better judgment. His trickery when he feigns a knee injury to manipulate Betty while dashing into a corporate meeting minutes later was enamoring instead of mortifying.

The chemistry between McKellen and Mirren is tremendous. Both actors know how to carry a film and are confident in their abilities. This comes across onscreen, and the romantic element works.

The Good Liar also gets respect from me for featuring actors in their golden years in leading roles.

Bill Condon has directed various films, including Chicago (2002) and Dreamgirls (2006). The Good Liar is hardly on this level or one of his finest, but the director adds enough seasoning to assure a compelling experience.

The locales of London and later Berlin, Germany, are robust and a treat for any viewer who is partial to international filming—I am! Plenty of busy London streets and German architecture appear during the film.

McKellen and Mirren’s slickness and excellent acting save The Good Liar (2019) from the drivel it might have been with lesser actors and inferior direction. Instead, it’s a clever film that toys with its viewers, keeping them engaged until the end.

Downton Abbey-2019

Downton Abbey-2019

Director Michael Engler

Starring Hugh Bonneville, Michelle Dockery, Maggie Smith

Scott’s Review #947

Reviewed October 16, 2019

Grade: B+

Capitalizing on the tremendous success of the television series, which ended in 2015, Downton Abbey (2019) is a British historical period drama film written by Julian Fellowes, creator and writer of the series.

Beloved fans will devour the film, as the familiar formula and characters are brought to the big screen, giving it an even grander feel.

The film plays more like a two-hour episode arc over reinventing the wheel, but the result is a resounding crowd-pleasing affair with drama, scandals, and a good dose of nostalgia.

The Crawleys and their servants reside in the lavish fictional estate of Downton Abbey during the year 1927, a year and a half after the series ended.

Little has changed, and most of the characters are in similar situations, enjoying their daily lives.

Robert (Hugh Bonneville) and Cora Crawley (Elizabeth McGovern), the Earl and Countess of Grantham, are notified that King George V and Queen Mary will visit their home as part of a royal tour throughout the country.

The family and staff are excited yet skittish as they prepare to ensure the lavish event goes off without a hitch.

Situations arise such as the Downton Abbey servants feuding with the Buckingham Palace staff, Violet Crawley’s (Maggie Smith) dismay at Robert’s cousin Maud (Imelda Staunton) being in attendance, and attempted plot to kill the King which is thwarted by Tom (Allen Leach).

A new job offer for Edith’s (Laura Carmichael) husband, Mary’s (Michelle Dockery) frustration with maintaining the vast estate, and potential romances for several characters, including a scandalous same-sex relationship.

A few contemporary issues are created – among them, women’s rights and the plight of gay men. And though welcome, neither changes the overall blueprint of what the series is about, which is just what the series fans ordered.

Smith is the main attraction as she chews up the scenery with her insults, sarcasm, and blunt honesty. But the best scene, coming late in the film, gives Smith a chance to burst with sentimentality and limit the hamminess for at least one treasured scene.

The costumes and art direction are lovely, with luscious gowns, tuxedos, suits, jackets, hats, and shoes found in every scene.

The sprawling grounds of Downton Abbey and the ravishing interiors are front and center.

The film ventures to the neighboring city of York to offer a more progressive and metropolitan vibe, but each scene looks perfect, which is what fans have come to expect.

Not every character is front and center, but with an unwieldy cast of close to thirty principals, some are destined to accept back-burner status.

Surprisingly, yet agreeably, is the toned-down story for “super-couple” Bates (Brendan Coyle) and Anna (Joanne Froggatt), having enjoyed their share of trials and tribulations during the original run.

Wonderful moments feature supporting characters like Carson (Jim Carter), Thomas (Robert James-Collier), and Molesley (Kevin Doyle), who nearly steals the show with his hysterical fascination with royalty.

The balance and pace of the film are nearly perfect, and every character has at least something to do.

This characteristic has always helped huge ensemble casts succeed, and Fellowes wisely balances humor with drama but avoids tragedy or dark situations, hoping for mainstream success with his move to the big screen, opting to play it safe.

The attempt succeeds as the film adopts the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” approach.

Downton Abbey (2019) is a splendid winner, primarily due to its impressive production values and costumes.

For fans of the television series, the film is a must-see and offers no more or no less than expected, providing more than enough to please those who want what the popular stories initially offered.

Despite the drama, the film does not feel “soapy” or contrived, and the tender moments may evoke a need for a hankie.

If the writing can remain fresh, I see no reason for another offering not to be green-lit, primarily due to the significant box-office returns.

The Witches-1990

The Witches-1990

Director Nicolas Roeg

Starring Angelica Huston

Scott’s Review #483

20282991

Reviewed September 20, 2016

Grade: B-

The Witches (1990) is a G-rated family film with a slightly dark tone that is done softly as the film is targeted at children. However, it is a film that adults may love too.

I found the film to be entertaining, with impressive special effects, and a dazzling comedic performance by Angelica Huston, but ultimately The Witches has a silly quality, though admittedly not trite, that does not completely make it a success in my book.

The film is based on a Roald Dahl children’s book – with predictably a child as the central character- similar to other Dahl novels that became films like James and the Giant Peach and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

I cannot help but wonder if my mediocre rating of The Witches has to do with the fact that I have not read the novel, as I have the other aforementioned novels in his collection.

Our hero in the story is Luke- a  kindly, innocent young boy living in Norway with his parents and grandmother- Helga. When his folks are tragically killed, his grandmother takes him to London to begin a new life for themselves.

When Helga falls ill, they stay at a seaside resort where they stumble upon a convention of witches disguised as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children.

Luke and his plump friend Bruno become victims of the witch’s plot to turn children into mice. The witch group is led by the Grand High Witch (Huston), whom the other witches fawn over with grandiose praise.

Huston is fantastic as she overacts the part she plays- this is not a bad thing but makes the role quite fun and energetic.

When she transforms from a glamorous woman to a shriveled monster, the transformation is interesting to watch and an impressive part of the film.

Furthermore, the way that Luke and Bruno interact when they are mice is also cute and a positive to the film.

I enjoyed the aspect that, if watched closely, can be seen involving the reveal that numerous witches are men with female wigs on. This successfully gives the witches a grotesque, obviously mannish quality and emits a chuckle of pleasure at the same time.

Still, there is something slightly childish or juvenile about the offering- while the film appears dark on the surface. The subject is rather played for laughs instead of going full steam ahead as a dark film.

Undoubtedly this is due to the target audience that the film is going for. For instance, the hotel manager and his affair with a hotel maid seem slightly unnecessary.

The Witches (1990) is a decent offering due to respect for the creative aspects that it elicits- I just felt the story might have been done a bit more seriously.

Additionally, the ending feels slightly forced and abrupt- a Hollywood-intended ending perhaps?