aplantage
Joined Aug 2009
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews2
aplantage's rating
I saw this when it came out on TV, but didn't tape it then, and always wanted to see it again. I finally did only recently. I found that it held up very well, and now I would love to have it on DVD. It certainly has its flaws, for example, the made-for-TV budget is obvious, but the story is interesting, and the actors, first and foremost John Hurt, are engaging enough to make it stand out.
Who cares if the idea isn't completely new - which story is? LITTLE SWEETHEART is much more modern and suspenseful than BAD SEED (for example, the adult characters contribute more to the plot, and there is less analysis and moralism). Furthermore, I find the comparisons with LOLITA highly problematic: in contrast to Humbert Humbert, there is no reason to assume that Robert Burger (Hurt's character) has any paedophilic notions. If some people find the film fascinating in this way, I wonder how much is due to the film's portrayal of the girls, whether deliberate or not, and how much in the eye of the beholder. In any case, this is putting the film in the wrong category, at least in terms of subject matter.
Who cares if the idea isn't completely new - which story is? LITTLE SWEETHEART is much more modern and suspenseful than BAD SEED (for example, the adult characters contribute more to the plot, and there is less analysis and moralism). Furthermore, I find the comparisons with LOLITA highly problematic: in contrast to Humbert Humbert, there is no reason to assume that Robert Burger (Hurt's character) has any paedophilic notions. If some people find the film fascinating in this way, I wonder how much is due to the film's portrayal of the girls, whether deliberate or not, and how much in the eye of the beholder. In any case, this is putting the film in the wrong category, at least in terms of subject matter.
According to Bryan Forbes' autobiography as well as David Nathan's biography of John Hurt, the story behind this film is as interesting as the film itself.
When the producers saw the finished material, it was decided that the opening in London should be completely re-shot, with a different director - Roy Boulting instead of Alfred Viola - and a different leading lady - Hayley Mills (Boulting's wife at the time), instead of an unnamed RADA actress who reportedly did not photograph well. According to Boulting, the reason was that "It presented a ridiculous picture of a character who lived in a swinging London that never ever existed and who was totally artificial, totally unreal and totally unsympathetic." Even though Hurt seems to have agreed at least in part, he was very unhappy about the prospect - understandably so, after the ordeal of the long and difficult location shooting in the Antarctica. Producer Bryan Forbes persuaded him not to quit.
Hurt's feelings about the animals were quite different from his character's. "The penguins were a real pain in the arse. They have all the faults of the human race without the redeeming gift of occasional intelligence. I preferred the predators, greatly admired the skuas. They farm the penguins, taking only a certain percentage of the eggs. The other skuas fish and battle for existence on the mountains in extreme conditions. If you killed off the predators the penguin colonies would become so huge they would probably become extinct. That would be a bad thing for the skuas. There's only one good thing to say about penguins and that is that they taste delicious - fishy, but nice." The film team actually had a few penguins for dinner - with HP sauce.
Several years later, Richard Burton happened to see this film, and it motivated him to suggest Hurt for 1984.
I enjoyed the film more than I expected. I am not a sentimental animal lover, and for scientific subjects, I prefer to watch a documentary or read a book. What I enjoyed about this film is Hurt's tour de force performance, the great location footage (by Arne Sucksdorff), but also the humour and style of the opening (as a fan of British swinging sixties films in general). The machine Forbush builds for his futile fight against the skuas reminded me of the Acme contraptions in the COYOTE AND ROADRUNNER cartoons.
I find it interesting that - probably male - commentators write that Hurt is not convincing as a ladies' man. Judging from the number of - probably female - commentators who fell in love with him in this film (and others such as IN SEARCH OF GREGORY), Hurt's quirky sex appeal seems to have been underused. Pity, but typical, because most of the decision makers in the industry are male.
When the producers saw the finished material, it was decided that the opening in London should be completely re-shot, with a different director - Roy Boulting instead of Alfred Viola - and a different leading lady - Hayley Mills (Boulting's wife at the time), instead of an unnamed RADA actress who reportedly did not photograph well. According to Boulting, the reason was that "It presented a ridiculous picture of a character who lived in a swinging London that never ever existed and who was totally artificial, totally unreal and totally unsympathetic." Even though Hurt seems to have agreed at least in part, he was very unhappy about the prospect - understandably so, after the ordeal of the long and difficult location shooting in the Antarctica. Producer Bryan Forbes persuaded him not to quit.
Hurt's feelings about the animals were quite different from his character's. "The penguins were a real pain in the arse. They have all the faults of the human race without the redeeming gift of occasional intelligence. I preferred the predators, greatly admired the skuas. They farm the penguins, taking only a certain percentage of the eggs. The other skuas fish and battle for existence on the mountains in extreme conditions. If you killed off the predators the penguin colonies would become so huge they would probably become extinct. That would be a bad thing for the skuas. There's only one good thing to say about penguins and that is that they taste delicious - fishy, but nice." The film team actually had a few penguins for dinner - with HP sauce.
Several years later, Richard Burton happened to see this film, and it motivated him to suggest Hurt for 1984.
I enjoyed the film more than I expected. I am not a sentimental animal lover, and for scientific subjects, I prefer to watch a documentary or read a book. What I enjoyed about this film is Hurt's tour de force performance, the great location footage (by Arne Sucksdorff), but also the humour and style of the opening (as a fan of British swinging sixties films in general). The machine Forbush builds for his futile fight against the skuas reminded me of the Acme contraptions in the COYOTE AND ROADRUNNER cartoons.
I find it interesting that - probably male - commentators write that Hurt is not convincing as a ladies' man. Judging from the number of - probably female - commentators who fell in love with him in this film (and others such as IN SEARCH OF GREGORY), Hurt's quirky sex appeal seems to have been underused. Pity, but typical, because most of the decision makers in the industry are male.