|
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A beautiful childrens' film., 11 Jun 2003
Some of the criticisms that have been made of this film in other reviews are that it is mushy and sentimental. I can hardly disagree with that - only say that I don't think it is TOO sentimental. The other criticism is that the plot is changed, and once again, while I can't deny this, I want to defend it.On the change of setting: I'm British, and do occasionally get irritated with Americanisation, but in this film the changed setting really didn't annoy me (partly, I suppose, because I knew from experience what a dog's dinner American productions make of English settings). The plot was changed, and it can be seen as a sanitising - the ending is happier in the film than in the book. Ordinarily this would have irritated me, but I found the ending handled so well that I didn't care. It may verge on the sentimental, but the moment when Sarah and her father are reunited is genuinely moving. Other things have clearly changed since the original in line with changing times. The Indian characters are looked at completely differently; Becky, the serving-girl, is black. These things do not interfere - in fact, I really liked the Indian themes throughout the film. I also preferred Sarah's relationship with Becky in the film. While in the book the author insists the girls are on the same level, and as good as each other, that doesn't seem half so true as in the film. The film is well structured and paced, nicely shot and has satisfying dialogue and human characters (Sarah's saintliness and Miss. Minchin's wickedness are toned down a bit) I think the thing that sets this film apart from me is the beautifully handled juxtaposition of the exotic and the dreary - the sumptuous Indian colours of Sarah's former life among the New York streets.
|