Rob Reiner still has it. This sort of movie is an incredible risk because there are so many ways that it can fail.
If you have not seen it, it is a simple Junior High romance taken very seriously. Some rather deep family issues apply; frailty and cowardice in the face of small challenges turned larger. Things could have slipped at many points. There is a wise grandfather who could have become the font of wisdom that makes all well. He is set up to do this, but then he falls away to other dynamics.
There are a number of crises, large ones to a child, involving issues that threaten adults. In a similar film, there would be just one of these and it would the occasion for a redemptive but false ending. There are secondary adults that are artificially comic, but they come and go so fast the silly tone they carry does not stick. This thing really does make you cry.
The main reason I think is that there is a special narrative device. Every scene is told first through the boy's eyes, narrated directly by him, then replayed. It uses the very same takes I think, but using different camera angles and extended differently.
It is set in 1963, which means that the speakers will have been married for decades and are recounting the early stages of their romance. This subtle device is profoundly effective. All the retrospective insights are not those of children, but adults with thankful wisdom. Yet another technique of narrative folding. You don't quite know if the romance will work out, but you do know it will end well.
The girl is another flatfaced, appealing talent. These actresses don't seem to do well as adults. We'll see.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
If you have not seen it, it is a simple Junior High romance taken very seriously. Some rather deep family issues apply; frailty and cowardice in the face of small challenges turned larger. Things could have slipped at many points. There is a wise grandfather who could have become the font of wisdom that makes all well. He is set up to do this, but then he falls away to other dynamics.
There are a number of crises, large ones to a child, involving issues that threaten adults. In a similar film, there would be just one of these and it would the occasion for a redemptive but false ending. There are secondary adults that are artificially comic, but they come and go so fast the silly tone they carry does not stick. This thing really does make you cry.
The main reason I think is that there is a special narrative device. Every scene is told first through the boy's eyes, narrated directly by him, then replayed. It uses the very same takes I think, but using different camera angles and extended differently.
It is set in 1963, which means that the speakers will have been married for decades and are recounting the early stages of their romance. This subtle device is profoundly effective. All the retrospective insights are not those of children, but adults with thankful wisdom. Yet another technique of narrative folding. You don't quite know if the romance will work out, but you do know it will end well.
The girl is another flatfaced, appealing talent. These actresses don't seem to do well as adults. We'll see.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.