During my break, C and I had the chance to grab lunch and a movie during the middle of the day. It seemed very decadent, and we certainly had a good time. I was actually doubly happy for the chance because the movie, "Miss Potter," was gone from cinemas once, and had returned to just one Eastside theater. This seemed like my one and only chance to see it before it went away entirely.
This movie was not easy to catch because it played almost no where for only a few weeks. Rotten Tomatoes did not even give it a score until it had been out for quite a while. I guess the life of Beatrix Potter just doesn't grab the attention of many Americans, even if it does feature Renee Zellweger and Ewan McGregor. No matter what critics or audiences thought, I enjoyed the movie.
I remember having seen or read the biography of Potter sometime during my teens, so as I watched the story unfold it did seem vaguely familiar. The portrayal of Miss Potter as a bored and sheltered young woman who uses art to entertain herself made a lot of sense. What did not work well at all, though, was the use of animation. Every so often, one of her drawings or something around her would come to life in a strange way. There was probably a total of about two minutes of animation in the whole movie, but it was jarring and silly instead of being endearing. I think this, more than anything, may have killed the movie's chances for a bigger splash at the box office.
Nevertheless, it is, as I said, a sweet little biopic. It's worth the charm of the two main characters, it's worth the beautiful scenes of the Lake District, and it's definitely worth the reminders of those odd, charming little stories we all read as children. Who could forget Peter Rabbit, Jemima Puddle Duck, Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle, or The Fierce Bad Rabbit? In the end, I think women will like this movie well enough, but I would suggest that most men take a pass and see something with explosions instead.
No comments:
Post a Comment