Charming the Hearts of Men

I have heard about CHARMING THE HEARTS OF MEN through all of 2021 because it has Sean Astin (an actor I follow and usually like) in the cast but actually hadn't a chance of seeing it until last January, and didn't have that many expectations for it. When I saw it last January I simply liked it, nothing more.

The movie is set in 1964 during the Civil Rights movement when Grace Gordon (Anna Friel) returns in her home town in the South and discovers that while her options are limited, discrimination towards black people is plentiful and with the help of a congressman (Kelsey Grammer) she ends up inspiring historic legislation that allows opportunities and protections that were never given to women.

While the plot was a bit hard to understand and it was saved by the last 30 minutes, the acting is generally good and the settings nice. It was also nice seeing the Southern black people's lifestyle, with their singing and dancing moments and the like. Not certainly a must see but just a time passer and nothing more (well, not all movies are meant to be masterpieces, right?)

It's 1963. Grace Gordon (Anna Friel) has come home to the deep south after the death of her powerful judge father. She finds that the family fortune had all been spent on her. With no money left, her only option is to remarry to someone rich. Her sights eventually settles on the Congressman (Kelsey Grammer). Meanwhile, the hated civil rights movement has come to the southern community.

The movie starts with the hammer blow "useless female" declaration. The next move should be showing Grace as a smart modern woman. Instead, the movie only re-enforces the useless female idea by having her ignore her bills and being completely clueless about her finances. She is utterly flighty and every bit the useless female. It is probably the exact opposite of what this movie needs. It's a bad start.

Over time, the movie does put in little bits of the civil rights movement. The general concept changes from a rom-com movie to a social justice movie. It functions better as such especially since the romance between Grace and the Congressman is never going to take off. That's another issue. The Congressman has no name. It seems like a fictional movie which is too scared to put in a real name. I don't know why they couldn't put in a fictional name.

This movie is set in an unspecified state in the deep south (filmed in Athens, Georgia) in 1963 and 1964. It includes the Civil Rights movement and President Johnson's Equal Rights push. What was being ignored, at least at first, was the issue of women's rights. The attitude was mostly, things are working well, let's not change things.

While this particular movie is fiction it certainly was inspired by real people and real events. I was graduating from high school and starting college in Louisiana then, my wife was about to finish middle school in New Orleans, we remember the times well.

This is a good movie of a significant subject, entertaining but also with a meaningful theme. My wife and I watched it streaming on Amazom Prime. The two key characters are British actress Anna Friel, doing an authentic accent as Southerner Grace Gordon, motivated to find something better after her father died and she found it hard to do business as a woman. And Kelsey Grammer as the US Congressman who was sweet on Grace and was to have a voice in including rights of women in the law.

...between Kelsey Grammer and Anna Friel. But the acting overall is strong. Some of the supporting cast are particularly interesting and would have liked to have more on screen time. These characters would probably work well in a series or sequel.

Always nice to see Sean Astin pop up in a movie. He and his counterpart in the pawn shop would make a hilarious duo in a longer series. Also the chemistry between the driver and the maid is great. Sassy and sweet.

I am a huge fan of Kelsey Grammer, and watched it for that reason. Then the story about how a first time writer/director, and the owner of the OK Cafe (which is very, very good in Atlanta) was intriguing. The making of it is far more interesting than the film however.

I have a hard time with films that pretend to be historical, but don't actually use the factual history to tell the story, like this one. Additionally, it is slow, dry in many spots, an 'off' view of how black folks operate. Its an updated new of Gone with the Wind, that should have been left alone. It is in some ways, just as insulting, though you can tell it is trying very hard not to be, and yet, still . . .

There is so much emotional confusion in the main character for too long, and her clarity has no hard defining moments but is as namely pam-by as she is. The script is very weak, though the acting is strong. The Director has a 'type' in casting black women, so two key characters look too much alike, when in fact black people come in a range of appearances. The conflict between the people of all colors, within their own race and class is incredibly superficial and shallow, so it loses any power it might have had if handled better. The lack of understanding about the power of the script sinks this film into humdrum land, and just makes the view wait for the end.

The Writer/Director gets an A for effort, and perhaps her next film will be better, if she hires a real scriptwriter. Her directing was passable though.