Sunday 13 November 2011

Thought of The Day 41

I’ve been thinking.

ABOUT TIME! - You know, some of our readers were beginning to doubt.

You mean they were loosing faith that these Sunday-only-thought-of-the-day-specials-that-are sometimes-film-reviews-sometimes-insightful-musings would EVER answer their prayers?

I like the way we’ve managed to use doubt, faith and prayer already and we’re only four lines into the eulogy.

I second that and rejoice along side you.

Together in spirit!

And unity!

Amen! So – what were you thinking?

Well, more of a questioning really, but one, which I hope, will provoke a bit of thinking.

Fire away.

We’ve given up on the religious imagery then? You could have said fire and brimstone away.

I could have, but I didn’t.

Probably wise, one can overdo these things.

You were saying?

Yes, you know when someone releases a film and then in another country they show it with a different title?

I do.

Who decides the other title? It can’t be the director can it? Is there a committee? Or is it just someone’s aunt’s best friend’s cousin’s mate?

I detect a certain cynicism here, why do you ask?

Because I went to the cinema this week.

Ah! What did you see?

Well, there’s the rub - did I see The Help, because that was the title when the film was originally released, or did I see La Couleur des Sentiments because, although it was the original version, I saw it in France?

La Couleur des Sentiments? What’s that got to do with The Help?

That’s what I thought. Maybe they wanted to try and get a play on words in the title?

Is there a play on words in The Help?

Well, the story is about hired helps but there is also a woman who isn’t, that helps.

Can we quote you on that if we are asked for an insightful review?

Do you think it will do?


Ah, you were being sarcastic.

A tad.

A tad?

A tad.

Who says “a tad” in 2011?

I do. Ok…. Changing the subject – as one can do when one has written the first flurry of words, gone off, had a cup of tea, a run, chopped some wood, eaten a pizza, slept, and woken up on a new morning – didn’t Saffron specifically tell you NOT to see the film until you had read the book?

I was desperate.


I had to go to the cinema; it had been so long, I needed to sit in a darkened room among strangers, my bum in a comfortable seat and my hand in a packet of maltesers.

She will be disappointed in you.

Because of the maltesers?

I think not. So – what did you think?

I was disappointed.

The acting? The story? Costumes?

The maltesers. There simply are never enough in a packet.

Coming back to the title – as one can do in an unstructured ramble like the one we are offering today – was there a play on words in the French title, La Coloeur des Sentiments?

Well, maybe the word colour; the film does depict black/white colour issues during the late fifties early sixties.

And the sentiments?

I liked the dresses.

More than the maltesers?

A perfect combination - mouth candy meets eye candy.

I’m not sure anyone reading this is going to think our review occupies the intellectual high ground.

Are you sure anyone IS reading this?

We will certainly find out if Saffron is – she’ll marmalise you for seeing the film before reading the book.

Marmalise? Where did that come from?

The Clithero Kid.

The Clithero Kid?

The Clithero Kid.

Who’s he?

A BBC comedy radio show of the late fifties and sixties.

You are showing your age!

Maybe, but tell me, is the film worth going to see? And try and say something pithy.



Who uses pithy in 2011?

I do.

YOU ARE showing age sunshine!

Whatever – was it?

Was it?

Worth it?

If you like Mad Men, the TV series, you’ll love it – because of the dresses, and you will admire the sets and the make up and the hair and if you like a film with good acting you won’t be disappointed – though to be honest what is the point of making a film with bad acting?

You were disappointed though?

Yes. The film looked good but it didn’t linger, I enjoyed the moment but ultimately I felt unfulfilled, maybe even cheated.


Well in the story the white woman helps the black women to write their history and the book is published and everything is presented as a coming out, emancipation moment. Except of course none of that really happened like that because the book was published in 2010 not in the 60’s.

Does that matter?

To a purist, yes – because the film isn’t presented as fiction, the tone is social realism. It’s as if someone is saying “wouldn’t it be great if this had happened” but then pretends that it did.

You’re a purist? Don’t make me laugh!

And I didn’t like the end.

The end?


What happened?

The main character walked into the sunset.

What’s wrong with that? I thought you liked sunsets?

I do, but this was a metaphorical sunset and for me it was ruined by two things – one, when she turned left at the crossroads instead of continuing straight ahead and two, there was no sunset.

No sunset?

No, it was morning I think, but there was no future because what she was walking towards metaphorically didn’t exist because the past that it was built on hadn’t either.

I think you missed the point.

I think not - a darkened room among strangers, my bum in a comfortable seat and my hand in a packet of maltesers!!

Let’s hope Saffron can put you straight.


Vicki said...

I still say a tad in 2011. I fear my English might be dated?

popps said...