# Ever After (1998)

### reviewed by
Kleszczewski, Nicholas

    Ever After

I love movies that can take me away. Not like any other medium, cinema has the power to take us jaded, p.c., smart-alecky and 90's chic individuals to a distant land where there are princes, dragons, fairies, magic, and honor. I am not hindered by time, occupation, nor status; my $7.50 will be my ticket for a brief interlude with somebody's imagination made vivid. Woodrow Wilson was correct when he saw that films were writing history with lightening.

So, somewhere up the studio ladder came the idea to remake Cinderella. Cinderella, as we all know, is a classic tale of a peasant girl with a horrible stepmother who falls for Prince Charming, and wishes to go to the costume ball, where she could get his attention. She is forbidden to go, but she does, and through magic, obtains a stunningly beautiful gown and glass slippers. She gets away before the prince could find her, leaving behind a slipper; but it is through this that the prince searches her out, and they fall in love. It is a story bound to rouse passions, as it did for generations before us; that is why it is a classic.

For the studio to agree, there has got to be a hook. What could make the film fresh and powerful for today's audience, that _The Slipper and the Rose_ didn't already do twenty years ago?

Why not remove the magic, and replace it with jaded, p.c., smart-alecky and 90's chic sensibilities?

It must have looked good on paper; but _Ever After_ takes it's Cinderella story too seriously, and its audience not seriously enough. Cinderella, a.k.a. Danielle, is brought to life by Drew Barrymore, and gives her character a gracious presence. But does she have to become a champion human-rights expert and philosopher as well? (She's shown throughout reading a _paperback edition_ of Sir Thomas More's _Utopia_. Funny, I don't remember paperbacks being invented yet).

Don't get me wrong: I don't have a problem with seeing films of strong women role models in the Middle Ages; I do have a problem when the filmmakers pander to the audience with historical women who are far too modern for their own times. I am still waiting for that big budget biopic of St. Theresa of Avila. I don't think Hollywood would green-light the screenplay.

Nonetheless Ms. Barrymore is soft on the eyes, and a wonder to watch. Is this the same person who grew up from kiddie roles to slutty adolescent roles, to now, dignified adult roles? Her transformation is vivid. Too bad it was with this film, where four of her co-stars overshadow her.

Anjelica Houston is vicious as Rodmilla, her stepmother, and we know she's wickedly good from scene one; but this is the kind of role that she can do in her sleep. Dougray Scott, as Prince Henry, is, well, charming. Patrick Godfrey, a well-renowned English thesp, brings great pep in his role as Leonardo da Vinci (!). But trumping the entire cast, and walking away with the picture is Megan Dodds, as Marguerite, stepsister number one. She steals the film every time she's on it, and so much so that I was convinced that I had seen her before, perhaps as Molly Ringwald's older obnoxious sister in _Sixteen Candles_. I was wrong.

The cast alone is game, and the screenplay has its witty moments. But face it, a fairy tale without magic is like a cookie without sugar. The direction, cinematography, set design, costumes, all fall a little flat, except for the scenes at the ball. Did I really pay to see a soap opera?

It's not impossible for there to be a modern, hip telling of a fairy tale; _The Princess Bride_ is still current for having been made over ten years ago. That film had more wit, style, and magic than this film will ever aspire to be. As an aside, my girlfriend loved it; so I'll show a little mercy.

    Nick Scale (1 to 10):  6.

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews