MonsterPerfect Good idea lost in the noise

Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Irishchatter I swear to god, this is meant to be a family film but we see babies in bags,not buggies or even baby appropriate to carry the child! Seriously I am god smacked and extremely annoyed that they let this be filmed, this is considered child abuse!Also, the acting wasn't the best at all. It may not have been a Hollywood sort movie but they should've at least given this movie a bit of a kick! It just looks so depressing and fake, it doesn't give you enough enlightenment to know that's it's a good movie! Emma Watson and Richard Griffiths(RIP) shouldn't have gotten involved in the film, it would probably be better off if they just stuck with Harry Potter that time.I wouldn't recommend this to kids especially the younger ones!

annevejb Notice Emma Hermione in the first two Harry Potter features and I found that she stood out. The first four novels underlined that. Princess, could there be any other like that one of the railway carriage of HP 1? Music. Dance. I now rate Emma for the Hermione of the novels? Here she is, as Emma Pauline, and in part, for me, this continues in those footsteps. Later episodes of HP features mostly made Emma's role unrecognisable, I am grateful to this Ballet Shoes for re-kindling a spark. Two special bits when she has to perform. Her acting changing from a low key natural style to overdrive, showing raw power. So truly awesome. And it helps me to appreciate the low key more. I have to rate this feature higher than HP 4, 5, 6 and 8, though she does carry over some of the gritty persona that she learned for 4 and 5 and to me that is overdoing the grit that Pauline of the novel has. * Look at the DVD box cover pics and there was something recognisable there that did not click, but when it did this feature became extra special. There was Yasmin tooth fairy by Emma's side. Here my first two versions of the comment go askew. Tooth is no stranger to machines or flying, and here she is in what would otherwise be a standard nerd role. But it is on stage she is prone to appear to be a nerd. She is expected to act. The biggest low is when she is expected to pretend that she is a fairy. The biggest low for me is when she is scripted to have a geographer / developer motivation rather than a mech. engineering motivation. Tooth even manages to share a bath with Emma. Dream of dreams. So much better than the novel. True there will have been a film crew there, too high a price. True, they were both in tears. My biggest flaw in commenting on this feature related to this part. In the 30's some would have considered a cuddle bath to be mandatory, given the tears, but not as many as today? I had been hoping to start looking for DVDs of mid teens Drew Barrymore. Ballet Shoes told me that I needed to hold off from that for a while, concentrate on Tooth, and there were some Tooth around that I still did not have. All I got around to with Drew was a naughty girl Drew, Ivy, which is not fun sort of naughty. * Lucy Posy Boy n Ton as a problem for me. In this role she needs to be highs and lows and the highs are way more magnificent than the others, for me she does those well, but the lows are way more the opposite of magnificent and as with Emma in later HP she does that way too well. Her reaction to Madame's illness compares to UK problems with situational ethics over the past thirty years. The highs include her dance. I accept that she does not dance as an expert in ballet might, but there is still something special about her approach. The biggest flaw in this feature is how the stunt double linked in, it was the only part of this feature that was visually false, looking like Posy at the very end of the story. Elizabeth Bernard's 1987 novel, Satin Slippers 3: Stars In Her Eyes. This centres on the question of how should a dancer chose if needing to chose between her child and her dance. I did need this novel for that aspect in Ballet Shoes to be clear. * For these to stand out, it helped that the other performances were so okay. Except this is a BBC television adaptation that was made for them by the ITV? Has the world really gone so weird? Something about this story makes one cuckoo?

sweet_ophelia16 Having loved the book growing up, I was bound to see this. I had bought the 1975 BBC version and found it to be absolutely terrible, as it completely mishandled the adaptation. What is surprising is that the 1975 version ran longer and could be argued as being more faithful to the book. Having said that, this version of Ballet Shoes captures the spirit of the story much better. I loved Emilia Fox's Sylvia and the entire cast did very well. I had been a little apprehensive of Emma Watson as Pauline since I'd never seen her as anything but Hermione from the Harry Potter series, but I was pretty happy with the performance after all. I won't recap the story here, but basically; I love the book, and the movie brought out the reasons why I loved it, so that's good enough for me. I hope you all enjoy it too.

robert-temple-1 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.