The Butcher’s Wife (1991)

Rating: 15
Length: 1h 47
Release: 3.7.1992
Dir: Terry Hughes
About: Upon meeting a butcher, a psychic believes she has met her future husband because she has previously seen him in her dreams. She ends up marrying him and eventually meets the real man of her dreams.

The Good

  • This is Splash meets Midsummer Night’s Dream by way of High Spirits and Enchanted. Its just a sweet, quirky story and perfect for Sunday night viewing.
  • Jeff Daniels makes for an ideal Tom Hanks replacement. What’s better is that Daniels is not an annoying twat when he shouts. He also works well against Demi Moore.
  • There’s an openly gay character and the word ‘gay’ is not used. She just is. It’s not established in an overt way, its just casual and conversational. I find that brilliant and progressive for the time in which its made.

The Bad

  • While Demi Moore suits being blonde, I’m not sold on her accent. It’s patchy, at best and there are times where she drops it completely. It’s a massive pet hat of mine and i just wish she hadn’t attempted it at all.
  • I was a little thrown at the beginning as the film is promoted as a Demi Moore, Jeff Daniels romance. So to have the opening act be about her marrying someone else made me feel like I’d missed something.

The Ugly

  • Mary Steenbugen is a singer, Stella, with stage fright. Because of Demi Moore’s Marina, she goes to a bar to sing. While preparing to play Stella laments “I wish I was black, they have it so easy.”
    Jesus! There is so much wrong with the statement and it really disappointed me because of how progressive it was regarding LGBTQ. So, while I get the context and I know she’s talking about the stereotype that people of colour have amazing singing voices. However, that is me knowing this stereotype. Take that away and its a sweeping statement that is grossly incorrect, especially in the current climate.

Final Thoughts

It is a cute, quirky and wonderful film for a fun evening watch when you don’t want to think too much.

The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

Rating 18

Length 1Hr 58

Release 31.5.1991

About Jodie Foster stars as Clarice Starling, a top student at the FBI’s training academy. Jack Crawford (Scott Glenn) wants Clarice to interview Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins), a brilliant psychiatrist who is also a violent psychopath, serving life behind bars for various acts of murder and cannibalism. Crawford believes that Lecter may have insight into a case and that Starling, as an attractive young woman, may be just the bait to draw him out.


  • This filled in some blanks in terms of films that reference this movie. Not the obvious, but the subtle.

  • Dr Lecter is an interesting character and Hopkins embodies him well. His escape sequence is the best part of the film. If the film had continued with this camera work and pacing it would have been a much more engaging movie.


  • I found the close-up, almost but not quite, POV shots too stagnant and caused me to disengage from the film. I’m sure it was intended to give a sense of intimacy but for me it does the exact opposite. It feels like a documentary and rather clinical.
  • Clarice feels a little like a ‘Mary Sue’. She’s a trainee left to do so much on her own that it’s baffling. What was told to her at the beginning seemed like smoke being blown up her cootch. Whether that be because of the camera angles, Jody Foster’s portrayal or the writing I can’t quite tell. The flash-backs did nothing for me and in a film that feels overly long, it’s the first thing I’d edit.
  • The score, for me, doesn’t fit the film. It’s too melancholy, morose and more suited to a drama than a killer thriller.

Final Thoughts

Lacking any connection with the characters it makes for a boring watch.