Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ucsbcsl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!houxm!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!ucsbcsl!iltis
From: iltis@ucsbcsl.UUCP ( )
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: _Return_of_the_Soldier_
Message-ID: <310@ucsbcsl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 12:48:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsbcsl.310
Posted: Wed Jun 12 12:48:00 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Jun-85 03:14:35 EDT
References: <2073@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. Santa Barbara
Lines: 24

Here Here.  I haven't seen Return of the Soldier, because I assumed
it would be exactly the sort of movie this review indicates it to be.

However, I don't think that the problem with this film is that the
central characters are wealthy,aristocratic Englishmen. Rather, the
problem might lie with the utter pretentiousness of this kind of
movie, and the arrogant demeanour of the actors (Glenda Jackson, ughhh!
if you think this movie sounds bad, watch for "The Romantic Englishwoman")

There is nothing inherently bad about the plot or theme of this film, as
a matter of fact, it sounds like a ripoff of "Random Harvest" with Ronald
Coleman and Greer Garson, which also concerned a soldier returning from
World War I with "shell shock" and amnesia.  The plot of "Random Harvest"
was certainly not as "sophisticated" as that of return of the soldier, but
with Ronald Coleman in the leading role, who cares.  The problem with
"Return" lies not with an unworthy theme or unsympathetic characters, but
probably with a director who's attended film school and actors who've been
on the Merv Griffin show too often.  

-- 
All opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily
those of my employer
Ronald A. Iltis
UCSB Dept. ECE