Franklin-2

This quota quickie actually made me laugh a few times, thanks particularly to the charm of Anne Crawford -- in her first billed role, as a neglected wife trying to get her businessman husband to notice her -- and William Hartnell, the future Dr. Who, demonstrating his expertise at physical comedy. During a Latin American vacation, Crawford tries to make her husband think she's meeting a lover at a local jewelry store. When he follows her there, they get mixed up with a gentleman jewel thief and his assistant.

If you've only seen Hartnell in Dr. Who, which he made toward the end of his career, you'll be surprised by his physical grace. As the thief's assistant, he steals most of his scenes and does some great work in a chase sequence trying to keep some stolen diamonds from a police detective.

Crawford was only in her twenties and looks quite lovely. She has a good way with a comic reaction, but also keeps it all serious enough to make the rather thin material look better than it is.

This was one of Warner Bros.' low-budget British productions shot at Teddington Studio. It was made to satisfy government demands that a percentage of films shown in the country be made in Great Britain with British talent. The film looks much better than that might lead you to expect, re-creating a Latin town entirely on sound stages. It's a pleasant way to pass 90 minutes.

Despite Gwyneth Paltrow and Daniel Craig's solid performances, this film

suffers from a sketchy script that rushes past the important elements of the

relationship between Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes to reinforce a set of cliches. According to the film, Plath becomes a good writer when she and her husband

split, even though the pain of their shattered relationship ultimately causes her suicidal tendencies to resurface. There is little emphasis given to the positive side of their relationship early on -- the way it helped both grow as writers and start to find an audience for their work. As a result, as hard as Paltrow tries to bring this fascinating woman to life, she's stuck performing big scenes out of context.

There's a lot of good stuff in this movie:

The dialogue is really strong and surprisingly literate. Grace Zabriskie, acting god. Glenn Quinn, the best of the strong young cast. Some great camera work and good use of music.

Then there's the bad:

It drags in places. Oddly, I wonder if the deleted subplot would

have made it work better. The suspense doesn't really hold up well. It's pretty easy to guess

who's going to be left standing at the end, so the rest of the killings

are fairly predictable. If you compare it to the original "Rope," it says a lot about changes

in filmmaking, not all of them good. (Hitchcock and Arthur

Laurents only needed one murder to generate lots more suspense). Grace Zabriskie isn't in the film nearly long enough. Glenn Quinn died young. A terrible loss. After awhile, the other characters become so obnoxious you may

be rooting for them to bite the dust.

And the interesting: Among the cast, I noticed a "Get me a Katie Holmes" type and a

"Get me a Matthew McCaunneghey" type. When do we start

seeing younger versions of these two? In the former case, not for

a while, I hope.

Overall: A good rental for a slow night.