Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
17 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Thought-provoking, 8 Sep 2007
This is a movie which I would recommend to anyone. despite its flaws, adequately enumerated by other reviewers here, the message(s) of the movie are unusual and the whole so well acted, particularly by Ms Winslet, that this is really a must-see. It is very unusual to show the life of a paedophile in such detail and the point here, in relation to all the main characters, is that it is appropriate to have empathy, sympathy even, for anyone - i.e. there's something worthwhile in all. Also, regarding the title, it struck me afterwards that the writer was postulating that none of us is really mature - each of the key characters take decisions/actions at some point here that are not those of so-called mature sensible grown-ups, but which are plausible nonetheless. A difficult to categorise movie because of the various plots and the occasional disturbing scenes (the paedophile on his date was particularly tragic), but one that is ultimately a rewarding and enjoyable watch, despite the slow pace.
|
|
|
22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
american beauty meets desparate housewives, 2 Feb 2007
This film explores the hidden lives of surburbia in a similar way that American Beauty did before it, only from a more broader perspective - both in terms of protagonists and also, perhaps, the social context. Characters are well constructed and the storyline credible. In essence, the film is a dig as life in the suburbs - extra-marital affairs, pressure to do well in work, set against the fear of paedophilia / child abduction (hence the film's name). The film's title is also probably referential not only to the children who are being so vehemently watched under the threat of a known child molester living in the vicinity, but also in the naivity of their own hopes and dreams, which are in reality, only short-lived whims. So we go on to see, that despite the thrill of the notion of change, in surburbia, plus ca change. Well acted, well shot, this film isn't predictable right to the end, making it a compelling watch. Worth the investment of your time to see.
|
|
|
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Aims high, falls short, 21 Jul 2007
This isn't a bad film at all - in fact it has moments of genius. But ultimately Little Children yearns to be something it isn't. The source novel by Tom Perrotta is great in a breezy, colloquial way, with occasional moments of real insight that strike home all the harder for being less expected. Todd Field's cinematic take on it, however, has pretensions all of its own. Once in a while I'll watch a film that could really use a voice-over (The Handmaid's Tale for instance) because there's simply no other way of getting across the true beauty or the impact of the original novel. But in the case of Little Children the booming narrator is basically just an affectation. Something to give it an artier edge, maybe, a quirkiness or a gravitas that Field thought the film might otherwise be lacking? Gimmicks like these are a popular technique when the story alone isn't quite cohesive enough. Whereas the novel segues smoothly from inside the mind of one character to another this is less well achieved on screen, and it does seem bitty occasionally. Not to mention long-winded. The film really plods sometimes, whereas the novel moves at a cracking pace for the most part. And Todd Field is the DH Lawrence of the film world - a man without a humorous bone in his body. Little Children has 'take me seriously' emblazoned across it in neon sky-high letters. Yawn.
As for the cast, Patrick Wilson is kind of good as the bewildered-looking former jock led astray by boredom and testosterone. Kate Winslet is the one everyone raves about, but there's something annoyingly mannered about her performance, including that smooth American drawl perfected to within an inch of its life. She definitely looks less ravishing than usual, but physically she and Wilson aren't quite as mismatched as they're meant to be. Jennifer Connelly's perfectly fine as documentary-maker Kathy, but she must have been twiddling her thumbs a lot on set. Her wafer-thin role mostly involves demonstrating how much longer her legs are than Kate Winslet's.
The film comes alive in its less comfortable moments, nothing to do with the starrier cast members at all. Another plot follows convicted paedophile Ronnie McGorvey, released into an increasingly hostile community and hounded by the slightly-unhinged Larry, himself a defrocked cop. A scene at the town pool is so skillfully handled that your major feeling for McGorvey is sympathy, while a shocking episode involving a blind date turns everything on its head again. It's a complex portrayal, and brilliantly acted, although Field suddenly goes for the jugular with a melodramatic ending (not in the book) that smacks of shock tactics. The fate of the other characters gets sewn up in an equally unrealistic way. Hence the three stars, when it should really have been four.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|