Ballet Shoes

It is obvious that this film was made for a younger audience, and as such it is a perfectly good film with a good story and interesting characters that were well acted. Although not being in the targeted age group I enjoyed the film very much too, and it reminded me of the sort of children's drama I enjoyed as a child, it has an innocence and charm which unfortunately could be lost on a modern audience. It was good to see Emma Watson in a film other than the Potter films and I feel it is certain that her career as an actress will give her great success for decades to come. I always find that Emilia Fox gives a credible performance and with the inclusion of Richard Griffiths ,Marc Warren, Lucy Coho and Victoria Wood I would recommend this film to all.

"Ballet Shoes," released in 2007 and directed by Sandra Goldbacher, is a heartwarming tale based on the novel of the same name by Noel Streatfeild. Set in 1930s London, the film follows the lives of three adopted sisters - Pauline, Petrova, and Posy Fossil - as they navigate the challenges and opportunities that come with pursuing their dreams of becoming performers.

The story begins with the three sisters living in poverty with their guardian, Sylvia Brown, who struggles to make ends meet. When Sylvia leaves to travel the world, she entrusts the care of the girls to her friend, Gum, who runs a boarding house. Despite their modest upbringing, the sisters share a deep love for the arts, each possessing unique talents and aspirations.

Pauline dreams of becoming an actress and eagerly embraces the opportunity to audition for the prestigious Children's Academy of Dramatic Arts. Petrova, on the other hand, is more interested in machines and dreams of becoming an aviator. Posy, the youngest sister, is a gifted dancer with a passion for ballet.

As the sisters pursue their respective passions, they encounter various challenges and setbacks along the way. From financial struggles to the pressures of the competitive performing arts world, each girl must find the strength and determination to overcome obstacles and follow her dreams.

One of the film's greatest strengths is its portrayal of the bond between the sisters. Despite their differences in personality and interests, Pauline, Petrova, and Posy share a deep love and loyalty to each other. Their unwavering support and encouragement serve as a source of inspiration throughout their journey.

The performances in "Ballet Shoes" are top-notch, with Emma Watson, Yasmin Paige, and Lucy Boynton delivering standout performances as Pauline, Petrova, and Posy, respectively. Their chemistry on screen is palpable, bringing depth and authenticity to their characters' relationships.

Beyond its charming characters and engaging storyline, "Ballet Shoes" also offers valuable lessons about perseverance, resilience, and the importance of following one's passion. Through the trials and triumphs of the Fossil sisters, viewers are reminded of the power of determination and the fulfillment that comes from pursuing one's dreams.

In conclusion, "Ballet Shoes" is a delightful and uplifting film that celebrates the bonds of sisterhood and the pursuit of artistic expression. With its compelling performances, heartfelt storytelling, and timeless themes, it is sure to captivate audiences of all ages. Whether you're a fan of dance, drama, or simply heartwarming tales of triumph, "Ballet Shoes" is a must-watch film that will leave you feeling inspired and uplifted.

This reminded me of the Sunday afternoon dramas that the BBC used to show when I was young. There was nothing to dislike about this; it had charm, an improbable story, over-the-top characters and a real feel of the period it was set in - the thirties.

There were lots of familiar faces; it was good to see Peter Bowles back on TV and anything with Victoria Wood has to be good. Emma Watston sustained the reputation she built up in the Harry Potter films - she is definitely going to be a big-name actress in the future. My personal accolade of Best Actress, however, went to Yasmin Paige who played Petrova, the girl who wants to be the aviator. You heard it here first folks - she is going to be a famous actress - and I'm not even her mother!

Noel Streatfeild's book 'Ballet Shoes' was read by nearly every English girl who is now a woman over fifty. It was filmed in 1975 and here it is again. If you don't mind the fact that the plot will not stand a close examination (one character disappears for twelve years without explanation, before returning, but no one finds that odd), and if you are willing to watch a film for its fairtytale qualities and sparkle, then you will find this most enjoyable and well done. Most viewers will be female, either women delightfully reminiscing, or young girls still innocent enough to dream (if there are any left who are not already binge-drinking and having sex at the age of ten). Heidi Thomas's script doesn't even try to make sense of the implausible plot, but just gets on with the fun. The film has been very well directed by Sandra Goldbacher, now we hope rescued from the world of television advertising. The story concerns three orphan girls living in a big house whose owner is absent. They are played with tremendous youthful energy and verve by Emma Watson, Yasmin Paige, and Lucy Boynton. They are 'running out of money' and cannot afford dresses, despite the fact that they live in a huge mansion (see page 94), but let's not worry about that inconsistency. One wants to act, one wants to be a ballet dancer, and one wants to be an airplane pilot. Well, why not? They struggle and have vicissitudes, as one must do to succeed, and manage to earn enough money to keep the bailiffs from the door. They are looked after by Emilia Fox, who coughs and becomes increasingly frail and wan but never quite gets the TB that is hinted at, and she falls in love, and is broken-hearted and desolate, but ... well, I ain't sayin' what happens there. Comedienne Victoria Wood is a kind of super-nanny to all, showing her warm heart straight off the AGA, Richard Griffiths is as jolly as ever when he is around, and that is very jolly indeed. Everybody has a great time, and so do we.

The reason why I actually saw this movie is cause a girlfriend of mine is a die-hard Harry Potter fan, loves the movies and will look every movie the cast of HP has a part in. So watching this one with her, I had no expectations cause I didn't know what this film was about and to be honest, when it was over I still had no clue whatsoever what this was supposed to be. A drama, a comedy, a vehicle to boost some young talents careers? I had no clue. So after 90 minutes of twists and turns, unlikely coincidences and a kind of rushed happy end I was sitting there uttering the words "now this is bogus!". It's not that it was a bad movie per se, we have a very unlikely story, a very good but also very very stereotypically cast set of actors that act over the top, a weird storyline and lots of dancing. So I didn't have the feeling that it was a bad movie, but I still had no idea what this was supposed to be. The only thing I really took from it was that whoever is to direct the next film starring Emma Watson has to botox her forehead back to the stoneage cause her eyebrows have to stop moving when she is acting. I mean I ended up staring at them cause even though there is lots of dancing in the film her eyebrows are the things that move the most. On the other hand, it has been worse in the HP movies. However, it wasn't until I spoke with another friend of mine - another Harry Potter fan and mom of 4 kids - and complained about this film that I was told that this is an adaption of a child book classic. I suppose this was the godmother of all "duuuuh" moments someone can have, especially after I was lectured for a solid 15 minutes about how great the book is how her kids love it how much they can learn about the importance of hard work and taking care of each other and yadda yadda yadda plus just cause I'm a guy and not into the Harry Potter stuff I still have no right to badmouth the girl playing Hermione cause it's her fave character in the books. So, knowing that it's a kids book the stereotypical characters make sense and with that in mind the actors casted for the roles actually fit perfect. Richard Griffiths is befuddled and funny as always, Marc Warren can be the shy guy once more just to name a few. And so finally, the twist and turns and the happy end make sense too, so does the fact that I couldn't understand the story, cause it's made for little girls in the 1930s. I guess I really dodged a bullet there, for a few days I thought I was just stupid.