Reviews

With a stellar cast and a brilliant script this is one of Ron Howard's best films. He's generally good at making characters believable, but with a sparkling script he captures so many of the archetypes of family life. There's no denying that this is a depiction of American life - highly competitive, driven and full of aspiration and disappointment, but because it taps into so many archetypes, it really doesn't matter, the import and complexity really comes across. If you haven't seen it, it's an absolute gem. If you've o my seen it once, watch it again, there's so much in the spoken and unspoken script and the cast - Jason Robards, Dianne Weist, Mary Steenburgen, Martha Plympton, Steve Martin - a wonderful mix of whimsy, slapstick humour and drama, a real opportunity to act. Everyone acts their socks off and the fact that they have the chance comes back to the strong script and able direction. Enough, just watch it and listen to the script - it speaks for itself.

It's hard to find fault with Lionel Jeffries' film. Considering it's almost 50 years old, the execution is pretty much flawless and the casting is superb. There are of course one or two minor gaffs, but at the time a slightly amateur 'small town theatre' approach was the norm, there is an attention to detail which is extraordinarily high. The balance of humour, drama and pathos is just right and although it's a very sentimental story, and a somewhat reverential view of the Victorian era, there are enough nuances to the performances (especially Iain Cuthbertson and Dinah Sheridan, who manage to intimate the strains of presenting the proper public face in difficult times and some of the hypocracies of class distinctions of the time) to add depth to characters who could easily have been rather shallow. All in all a delight I've enjoyed watching periodically ever since it first came out.

Firstly, ignore those who've left a review before seeing the whole thing - why would you do that?! The series was, I felt, really good. The plot isn't slow as some have said, but if you're looking for an action thriller this may not be for you. The plot is mostly about people's motivations and outlook, rather than concentrating on events, though the plot is well thought out. The script is good and there a lot of laugh-out-loud moments and, without giving anything away, the last episode has a quite wonderful interlude. The only criticism is that the series could as well have ended with that sequence and dispensed with the (I thought) rather pointless 'epilogue'. Nevertheless, overall a really entertaining drama.

From the perspective of the reboot with Daniel Craig, this film does seem a bit dated now, though it's not as cringe-worthy as the later Roger Moore, or (even worse) Pierce Brosnan efforts. However, it was ahead of its time in terms of a much harder, more aggressive story line. It wasn't until Craig arrived that the stunts and violence stepped up to the darker depictions of the Bond character. Robert Davi is also worth a mention. Most Bond villains are cliched, but Davi manages to deliver the lines and remain believably dangerous - a man capable of destroying everything around him and take pleasure in causing pain and seeking vengeance. Dalton lifted the franchise from the farcical pantomime that Bond had become, to an edgier, darker and more driven character.

Not a case of identity, but how we deal with grief, remorse, anger... One or two of the confrontations seemed a little theatrical (lone meetings in remote spots etc.), but this aside a thoughtful, harrowing, and relentless exploration of the aftermath of a terrible personal tragedy. Well done to all involved.

Saw this at the cinema having enjoyed Gladiator. Was disappointed as the story seemed to ramble and I didn't have much sympathy with the characters. There was a lot of hype too, which isn't always a good thing... When it came in on Film 4 I thought I'd give it another go and actually it's grown on me to the extent I've seen and enjoyed it several times since. The problem at the cinema I think was that the characters need more time to come to life - they're fairly simply depicted, in some ways too subtly for a 'blockbuster' and the characters are well played by all the main actors especially good I think are Kate Blanchet, Max Von Sydow and Mark Addy, though Mr Crowe is good too.

So many 'self-build' programmes are frustrating in their complete disregard for budget that they should be seen purely as explorations of domestic architecture, not serious self-build. In program after program the client blithely goes over their £500k+ 'budget', often doubling or more in cost without any kind of discipline. This isn't just an envious look at the enormous resources others have, but often the missed opportunity that having a lot of money can afford; namely the failure to really engage with the design and execution of the build by putting a lot of glass and fancy fittings. Not so this show. The people featured have a genuinely finite amount of money and consequently have to engage in a real battle to contain the cost and design in effective solutions to create homes which express their individual needs and wants. Sometimes the reliance on the use of zany materials and finishes can stretch credulity, but after watching all 3 series currently available, I've come away with the sense that the real theme of the show is that good, innovative and thoughtful design, rather than what seems to me the lazier 'throwing money at the problem' approach actually focusses the viewer on good design rather than opulence. I hope their will be more. Piers and Kieran can sometimes, to me at least, occur as a bit overbearing or patronising, but their continual return to the central themes of good design and innovative practical solutions, communicates their passion and drive to remember what's important about self-build to self-builders; creating practical and pleasing living spaces.

I really enjoyed this when I watched a few months ago. I've revisited it recently and if anything have found it even better. Some have said it was slow, but I think this isn't justified. What is true is that the plot and characters are given time to develop and if one is looking for more action and less depth then this may not be for you. I'm a big fan of Hinterland (which is more dark & brooding) and there are similarities, though Keeping Faith is full of lighter we'll-observed family intimacy and the moments of madness which are natural in a busy working life with young children! I felt the way the plot is developed works well - by the end of the series one is left punch-drunk with all the twists and turns but, remarkably, I felt that it was quite believable. I hope (provided it's as good as the first) that we may hear more from Faith...?

Warwick Davis is great as a Willow, an Everyman thrown into a world rather bigger than he feels able to cope with. Great fun with a clever script and Ron Howard's ability to give characters depth and plausibility, even small cameos. I've seen the film many times and the whole family still love this tale of a little guy in a big world. Some people slate the film, I think just because of its naive charm, but I think it's a gem.