Thursday, 30 August 2018
Update
You may have noticed I haven't posted for a while, which is partly because of being away last weekend and partly because of life being (temporarily) busier than usual. This state of affairs will be continuing for another week or so, although I hope to sneak out the odd blog post, but fret ye not: normal blogging service will then resume.
Friday, 24 August 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Potential
"You're not special. You're extraordinary."
Not all Buffy episodes can stand out. Yes, Buffy is an extraordinary series, but you can't fill 22 episodes a year without pausing for breath. This episode pretty much admits that, as Buffy tells us the First is in temporary, plot-convenient "remission" So we get a somewhat going-through-the motions in which Buffy teaches the potentials how to fight, Dawn thinks that for a moment she might be a potential, and Anya gets some cracking lines.
It's not an episode, in contrast to usual, which lingers in the memory or adds many memorable scenes, that wonderful moment at the end excepted where Xander and Dawn get this wonderful scene together about being the only two Scoobies without superpowers. It adds nothing to the arc either, really, although it's obvious that Andrew is gradually shifting as a character from threat to comic relief.
Still, even an eminently skippable episode is never actively bad, and certainly kept me entertained. I still worry that the presence of the potentials means we spend a bit less time with the characters we know and love, yes, but I'm very much warming to this season.
Not all Buffy episodes can stand out. Yes, Buffy is an extraordinary series, but you can't fill 22 episodes a year without pausing for breath. This episode pretty much admits that, as Buffy tells us the First is in temporary, plot-convenient "remission" So we get a somewhat going-through-the motions in which Buffy teaches the potentials how to fight, Dawn thinks that for a moment she might be a potential, and Anya gets some cracking lines.
It's not an episode, in contrast to usual, which lingers in the memory or adds many memorable scenes, that wonderful moment at the end excepted where Xander and Dawn get this wonderful scene together about being the only two Scoobies without superpowers. It adds nothing to the arc either, really, although it's obvious that Andrew is gradually shifting as a character from threat to comic relief.
Still, even an eminently skippable episode is never actively bad, and certainly kept me entertained. I still worry that the presence of the potentials means we spend a bit less time with the characters we know and love, yes, but I'm very much warming to this season.
Thursday, 23 August 2018
Angel: Soulless
“Boning your mom and trying to kill your dad? There should be a play...”
And suddenly things get brilliant. The season was looking a bit aimless for a while, I admit I spent a couple of episodes getting a bit worried, but this episode pays off a lot of the things that seemed aimless at the time and does so in a way that gives each and every character some real development. The “previously on” at the beginning makes it clear just how much of a build-up there’s been, with the Gunn/Fred/Wes triangle and the Cordy/Connor shagging.
Cleverly, the pre-credits scene is entirely devoted to bugging up Angelus and how devious and evil he is, how he will use his verbal dexterity to sow discord and weakness so he can kill everyone. And the episode sees this largely play out as Angelus picks at various scabs. The love triangle is an obvious one, quickly leading to Gunn catching Wes kissing Fred, fisticuffs between the two men and Gunn accidentally hitting Fred. Then there’s the outing of the Cordy/Connor comshocking and of course the easy e ploitation of the ever-snotty Connor who, revealingly, sees Angelus as his real father; Angel is “just something that you’re forced to wear”.
Worse, though, is the eexploitation of Cordy’s general ugliness; he will give them information to save the world and he can have her for whatever depraved purposes he wishes. Ouch. Of course, his information proves useless, but we get the definite sense that he’s going to be asserting his claim.
And he certainly can, as the cliffhanger shows: Angel’s soul is missing, and it looks as though he’ll be sticking around for a while...
And suddenly things get brilliant. The season was looking a bit aimless for a while, I admit I spent a couple of episodes getting a bit worried, but this episode pays off a lot of the things that seemed aimless at the time and does so in a way that gives each and every character some real development. The “previously on” at the beginning makes it clear just how much of a build-up there’s been, with the Gunn/Fred/Wes triangle and the Cordy/Connor shagging.
Cleverly, the pre-credits scene is entirely devoted to bugging up Angelus and how devious and evil he is, how he will use his verbal dexterity to sow discord and weakness so he can kill everyone. And the episode sees this largely play out as Angelus picks at various scabs. The love triangle is an obvious one, quickly leading to Gunn catching Wes kissing Fred, fisticuffs between the two men and Gunn accidentally hitting Fred. Then there’s the outing of the Cordy/Connor comshocking and of course the easy e ploitation of the ever-snotty Connor who, revealingly, sees Angelus as his real father; Angel is “just something that you’re forced to wear”.
Worse, though, is the eexploitation of Cordy’s general ugliness; he will give them information to save the world and he can have her for whatever depraved purposes he wishes. Ouch. Of course, his information proves useless, but we get the definite sense that he’s going to be asserting his claim.
And he certainly can, as the cliffhanger shows: Angel’s soul is missing, and it looks as though he’ll be sticking around for a while...
Sunday, 19 August 2018
Man of Steel (2013)
"What are you smiling about, Captain?"
"Nothing, Sir. I just think he's kind of hot."
Usually I'd write a review based on the general premise of the film in question being good, bad, or indifferent. That's a rather challenging thing to do here. I mean, yes, ok, the film is good. It works. It's a solid start to the DC universe. But there are flaws, real flaws. The film gets away with it, in no small measure because of a solid script by the ever-dependable David S. Goyer and, interestingly, Christopher Nolan and the inspired casting of (thankfully moustache-free) Henry Cavill. But...
Here's the thing. Zack Snyder is technically a superb director. The whole thing is well shot in the extreme, even if it's CGI'd to death. It looks amazing. But it all feels (Russell Crowe as Jor-El aside, oddly) not quite persnal enough. There's just enough charm to get away with, but no more. And the direction: yes, it's clever. But at the expense of the storytelling- not enough to damage the film, but I'd say Snyder needed to watch it if not for the fact that #MeToo seems to make any such advice irrelevant.
There's a lot to praise, though. Traditionally dull Krypton is given CGI alien beasts of burden, an internal politics and a genetically caste-based culture against which Kal-El's birth is a rebellion in the name of freedom. I like that. I also like the characterisation of Zod here; he isn't a moustache-twirling baddie but a general, with his fanatical followers, who only wants to save Krypton. At the expense of our little human species, naturaally.
Lois Lane is presented well here, as a tenacious journalist who figures out who Clark is early on, saving us an awful lot of tiresomeness. Perry White is a bit more nuanced. Jimmy Olsen, er, isn't in the film. But it's a well-done and thoughtful approach to Superman's origins and the ideal first film for the new DC Cinematic Universe. They need to run with it, so what next. Batman? The Dark Knight? No, those are both taken. So how about Batman: The Dark Knight? Yes. Colons are good. And the next film is in no way going to be a disaster. Right?
"Nothing, Sir. I just think he's kind of hot."
Here's the thing. Zack Snyder is technically a superb director. The whole thing is well shot in the extreme, even if it's CGI'd to death. It looks amazing. But it all feels (Russell Crowe as Jor-El aside, oddly) not quite persnal enough. There's just enough charm to get away with, but no more. And the direction: yes, it's clever. But at the expense of the storytelling- not enough to damage the film, but I'd say Snyder needed to watch it if not for the fact that #MeToo seems to make any such advice irrelevant.
There's a lot to praise, though. Traditionally dull Krypton is given CGI alien beasts of burden, an internal politics and a genetically caste-based culture against which Kal-El's birth is a rebellion in the name of freedom. I like that. I also like the characterisation of Zod here; he isn't a moustache-twirling baddie but a general, with his fanatical followers, who only wants to save Krypton. At the expense of our little human species, naturaally.
Lois Lane is presented well here, as a tenacious journalist who figures out who Clark is early on, saving us an awful lot of tiresomeness. Perry White is a bit more nuanced. Jimmy Olsen, er, isn't in the film. But it's a well-done and thoughtful approach to Superman's origins and the ideal first film for the new DC Cinematic Universe. They need to run with it, so what next. Batman? The Dark Knight? No, those are both taken. So how about Batman: The Dark Knight? Yes. Colons are good. And the next film is in no way going to be a disaster. Right?
Saturday, 18 August 2018
X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
“Humanity has always feared what is different,"
I've read a lot of Chris Claremont's run on X-Men (the comic book, of course) but not this seminal storyline although, of course I have a broad awareness of it. It’s a good choice of storyline for the next film and, course, offers a great opportunity for a bit of sneaky retconning; welcome back, Jean and Scott.
It’s all very much what we Doctor Who fans call “timey-wimey”, of course; Wolverine is sent back in time to 1973, with shades of Life on Mars, in order to prevent a Sentinel-riven hellish dystopia, and we follow the twists and turns as he does so. It’s an enjoyable concept and one not slavishly following the comics, as we find a disillusioned Charles who has clearly been taking hairstyle tips from me, while Magneto’s allegiances are again ambiguous and interesting. Michael Fassbender is, of course, superb, and it’s a shame we don’t see more of Ian McKellen but this film is crammed to the rafters with characters jostling for something to do.
The cast is superb, to the point that I’ve had to leave the likes of Elliot Page, Halle Berry and Famke Janssen off the tags through lack of space as the boys, alas, drive the plot and hog the screen time. There are some magnificent performances, though, the highlight being the interaction of James McAvoy and Patrick Stewart as the two Xaviers talk. Plus of course we have cameos from so many characters including an awesome-looking Bishop, Kitty Pryde and Colossus, and Peter Dinklage being superb as the villainous yet idealistic Bolivar Trask.
This may not be the greatest film of the series but it’s solidly entertaining, well-acted and full of surprises, so the Utopian ending comes as a surprise. The post-credits sequence suggests trouble to come, though...
It’s all very much what we Doctor Who fans call “timey-wimey”, of course; Wolverine is sent back in time to 1973, with shades of Life on Mars, in order to prevent a Sentinel-riven hellish dystopia, and we follow the twists and turns as he does so. It’s an enjoyable concept and one not slavishly following the comics, as we find a disillusioned Charles who has clearly been taking hairstyle tips from me, while Magneto’s allegiances are again ambiguous and interesting. Michael Fassbender is, of course, superb, and it’s a shame we don’t see more of Ian McKellen but this film is crammed to the rafters with characters jostling for something to do.
The cast is superb, to the point that I’ve had to leave the likes of Elliot Page, Halle Berry and Famke Janssen off the tags through lack of space as the boys, alas, drive the plot and hog the screen time. There are some magnificent performances, though, the highlight being the interaction of James McAvoy and Patrick Stewart as the two Xaviers talk. Plus of course we have cameos from so many characters including an awesome-looking Bishop, Kitty Pryde and Colossus, and Peter Dinklage being superb as the villainous yet idealistic Bolivar Trask.
This may not be the greatest film of the series but it’s solidly entertaining, well-acted and full of surprises, so the Utopian ending comes as a surprise. The post-credits sequence suggests trouble to come, though...
Thursday, 16 August 2018
The Night Caller (1965)
"And if that is an atom bomb, and you drop it, I'll 'ave you on a charge!"
Yes, the premise really is as said on the poster, if not quite as lurid. In truth, this is an odd conflation of Quatermass II and Alfie and very, very, mid-'60s. If that sounds like an extremely bizarre concoction, it is.
A very young John Saxon stars, and his acting is such that I'm not 100% sure whether he's trying to do a British accent or not. The predictable cast of British character actors add solid support, but the film feels oddly disjointed in spite of some good scenes- the dialogue between the parents of one of the missing girls is delightfully real and naturalistic, and the downbeat ending is deeply effective. Lots of the characters feel real yet, Saxon and Patricia Haines' characters aside, there's little continuity between the cast of the first part of the film in the scientific establishment and the police procedural which then ensues, and that means the film lacks a certain unity. It's also undeniable that, while this is certainly science fiction, for most of the film we see nothing of the alien but its claw, and the final reveal of its appearance is disappointing. It's all very odd, very interesting, but doesn't quite work.
It's also very much of its time, which adds to the interest. Everybody smokes, and Aubrey Morris plays a gay bookseller in those dark pre-1967 days, with his bitterly nuanced relations with the police. Worth seeing for those of us with a particular interest in these sorts of films although not, it must be said, for everyone.
A very young John Saxon stars, and his acting is such that I'm not 100% sure whether he's trying to do a British accent or not. The predictable cast of British character actors add solid support, but the film feels oddly disjointed in spite of some good scenes- the dialogue between the parents of one of the missing girls is delightfully real and naturalistic, and the downbeat ending is deeply effective. Lots of the characters feel real yet, Saxon and Patricia Haines' characters aside, there's little continuity between the cast of the first part of the film in the scientific establishment and the police procedural which then ensues, and that means the film lacks a certain unity. It's also undeniable that, while this is certainly science fiction, for most of the film we see nothing of the alien but its claw, and the final reveal of its appearance is disappointing. It's all very odd, very interesting, but doesn't quite work.
It's also very much of its time, which adds to the interest. Everybody smokes, and Aubrey Morris plays a gay bookseller in those dark pre-1967 days, with his bitterly nuanced relations with the police. Worth seeing for those of us with a particular interest in these sorts of films although not, it must be said, for everyone.
Wednesday, 15 August 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Showtime
“I’m the thing that monsters have nightmares about...”
The season is, I think, on an upswing, with a clear threat and big stuff happening. It’s just that, we’ll, can’t we cull a few potentials please?
Part two of an implicit two parter plays out this episode as Buffy finally defeats the Turok-Han, beheading it with the help of some handy CGI. It’s not just about the fighting, though; a clever flashback shows us that the point was also to raise some much-needed morale for the growing and increasingly annoying presence of loads and loads of “potentials”. It’s a well-crafted and strong episode, but are we going to have a house full of teenage girl redshirts for the rest of the final season?
Only one of the potentials- Kennedy- is getting fleshed out, and it’s clear that she, older than the others, is being developed as a love interest for Willow, as part of her gradual healing process. On a similar note Willow also gets to use a shielding spell, using magic in combat for the first time since all that unpleasantness.
Meanwhile Andrew is shifting into the role of comic relief, explaining to an unimpressed Dawn how Timothy Dalton is an underrated Bond. All this is very Buffy. Perhaps more pertinent is Giles’ and Anya’s little sideshow, where they consult a convenient oracle about the First’s weaknesses, only to find that it has none and cannot be defeated. Ouch. Even worse, the reason the First is only striking now is precisely because of the Scoobies’ decision to resurrect Buffy last season- will we be getting any more detail on this? Either way, it’s a bombshell; bringing Buffy back has potentially doomed the world. I’m sure there will be reverberations.
The season is, I think, on an upswing, with a clear threat and big stuff happening. It’s just that, we’ll, can’t we cull a few potentials please?
Sunday, 12 August 2018
Final Destination (2000)
“In death, there are no accidents, no coincidences, no mishaps, no escape."
I was a little wary to see a "horror" film with so many cast members and so many signifiers from all those godawful teen "comedy" movies that so blighted the turn of the millennium: if there's one film I can assure you I will never, ever blog, it's There's Something About Mary, the worst film I've ever seen. And yet this film, by not trying to be funny, manages to simultaneously be pretty decent, if not great, and feature Seann William Scott. I never imagined such a thing would be possible.
The concept is excellent, though; seven survivors of a plane crash have dodged their appointment with the Grim Reaper, but death s after them, inexorably, suspensefully and, on occasion, hilariously. My favourite death is Mrs Lewton's, delightfully thorough though it is. Yours may differ. But there's plenty of thrills suspense, just about enough of it to justify the inclusion of a character called "Billy Hitchcock".And I wouldn't particularly expect to see this as an in-flight movie.
For a film with no real stars and with a pretty obscure director this film did pretty well and, although it has no real stars and no great budget, it holds up passably well today. Death itself is certainly a pretty good horror villain, and the whole concept is sufficient excuse to give us a parade of deaths the like of which we hadn't seen since The Omen. This is a solid and entertaining horror which doesn't quite fully ex[loit a great concept but makes a decent stab.
The concept is excellent, though; seven survivors of a plane crash have dodged their appointment with the Grim Reaper, but death s after them, inexorably, suspensefully and, on occasion, hilariously. My favourite death is Mrs Lewton's, delightfully thorough though it is. Yours may differ. But there's plenty of thrills suspense, just about enough of it to justify the inclusion of a character called "Billy Hitchcock".And I wouldn't particularly expect to see this as an in-flight movie.
For a film with no real stars and with a pretty obscure director this film did pretty well and, although it has no real stars and no great budget, it holds up passably well today. Death itself is certainly a pretty good horror villain, and the whole concept is sufficient excuse to give us a parade of deaths the like of which we hadn't seen since The Omen. This is a solid and entertaining horror which doesn't quite fully ex[loit a great concept but makes a decent stab.
Bend It Like Beckham (2002)
"Even these mosquito bites will look like juicy, juicy mangoes..”
I used to follow football a bit. At least international. Then the 2010 World Cup happened and I stopped watching football in disgust at England’s shameful display. The only football match I’ve watched since 2010 was the recent World Cup semi-final, and even that was only because it happened to be on. And I Never was anything more than a casual follower.
So the nice little fourth wall breaking bit at the start, for me, was a nice but if nostalgia for the days when I recognised the days of players and pundits- whatever happened to Alan Hansen? It’s a strong, fun start to a fun little film.
Yes, the film is formulaic to a large extent. A girl from a traditional Punjabi family struggles to get her traditional Sikh parents to accept what she wants to do with her life, football; it’s all a melodrama, albeit at the more restrained end; and there are lots of little references to culture clashes, racism, and sexism within the Indian and gora communities. It’s all done so well though, and the cast is superb, even if you do wish that Keira Knightley would just bloody have something to eat. All this to a soundtrack of Basement Jaxx and Mel C; you can certainly tell this is 2002. Such innocent days, long before Brexit, and when we all thought US presidents couldn’t get any worse than Bush. Hah.
Also, it’s about fathers and daughters, which I like. This film may not be my usual fare but Mrs Llamastrangler and I very much enjoyed it.
So the nice little fourth wall breaking bit at the start, for me, was a nice but if nostalgia for the days when I recognised the days of players and pundits- whatever happened to Alan Hansen? It’s a strong, fun start to a fun little film.
Yes, the film is formulaic to a large extent. A girl from a traditional Punjabi family struggles to get her traditional Sikh parents to accept what she wants to do with her life, football; it’s all a melodrama, albeit at the more restrained end; and there are lots of little references to culture clashes, racism, and sexism within the Indian and gora communities. It’s all done so well though, and the cast is superb, even if you do wish that Keira Knightley would just bloody have something to eat. All this to a soundtrack of Basement Jaxx and Mel C; you can certainly tell this is 2002. Such innocent days, long before Brexit, and when we all thought US presidents couldn’t get any worse than Bush. Hah.
Also, it’s about fathers and daughters, which I like. This film may not be my usual fare but Mrs Llamastrangler and I very much enjoyed it.
Saturday, 11 August 2018
The Flintstones (1994)
“Yabba dabba doo!”
This film may be technically set in the Stone Age, vaguely defined, but we all know it's actually set in those early years of the '60s that were very much still the '50s. It's to the credit of this '90s adaptation that, seen today, it’s very Mad Men in its ‘50s social mores, although in this case without the racism.
This is a very faithful adaptation, right up to the point of recreating variations of the original cartoon title sequence several times. It’s perfectly cast with John Goodman and a just pre-retirement Rick Moranis. It’s so well-realised, with copious dinosaur animatronics from the school of Jim Henson, that this is a rare example of a film with a rubbish script being worth seeing. It’s rare that it’s worth polishing a turd, but here the polishing is truly magnificent.
The plot is ok- Free gets promoted, betraying Barney in the process, living a life of luxury until it turns out that he’s being set up by the villainous Cliff, a splendidly and surprisingly villainous Kyle MacLachlan. Oh, and Halle Berry is the early 1960s sexy secretary, done with just enough of a nod and a wink.
Yes, the script is pants. It really is. And this may be a rare example of an adaptation being too faithful to the source material. But the whole thing looks amazing, the casting is inspired, and the whole thing just feels right.
It’s worth watching, honest. You won’t laugh much, but you’ll feel a nice nostalgic glow.
This is a very faithful adaptation, right up to the point of recreating variations of the original cartoon title sequence several times. It’s perfectly cast with John Goodman and a just pre-retirement Rick Moranis. It’s so well-realised, with copious dinosaur animatronics from the school of Jim Henson, that this is a rare example of a film with a rubbish script being worth seeing. It’s rare that it’s worth polishing a turd, but here the polishing is truly magnificent.
The plot is ok- Free gets promoted, betraying Barney in the process, living a life of luxury until it turns out that he’s being set up by the villainous Cliff, a splendidly and surprisingly villainous Kyle MacLachlan. Oh, and Halle Berry is the early 1960s sexy secretary, done with just enough of a nod and a wink.
Yes, the script is pants. It really is. And this may be a rare example of an adaptation being too faithful to the source material. But the whole thing looks amazing, the casting is inspired, and the whole thing just feels right.
It’s worth watching, honest. You won’t laugh much, but you’ll feel a nice nostalgic glow.
Friday, 10 August 2018
Angel: Awakening
“What is it about evil that jacks up the IQ points?”
Ah, I begin to see where this season may be going...
The whole episode is a splendid piece of misdirection; first Angelus is coming back, then he isn't, then he is. And it's happening because Angel and Cordy finally get their moment of perfect happiness is perfect. Shame it was (mostly) all a dream, though; not sure how I feel about that. Still, putting that Dallas moment to one side, it's a good episode. And even the dream has a twist in Angelus returning precisely when he's no longer needed.
Interesting that the episode starts with Wes as only semi-part of the gang. And Connor has never been such an obtuse, annoying and unlikeable brat. But the episode oozes camaraderie, mainly because of Angel's charisma and will to keep the gang together- precisely the things that they've just lost.
It;s ironic, I suppose; this episode has one job, to turn Angel int Angelus at the end. But in order to get there it trolls us, manipulates us, just like Angelus himself. It's effectively done, if evil. And I'm getting the distinct impression that the Beast may not be the season big bad after all...
Ah, I begin to see where this season may be going...
The whole episode is a splendid piece of misdirection; first Angelus is coming back, then he isn't, then he is. And it's happening because Angel and Cordy finally get their moment of perfect happiness is perfect. Shame it was (mostly) all a dream, though; not sure how I feel about that. Still, putting that Dallas moment to one side, it's a good episode. And even the dream has a twist in Angelus returning precisely when he's no longer needed.
Interesting that the episode starts with Wes as only semi-part of the gang. And Connor has never been such an obtuse, annoying and unlikeable brat. But the episode oozes camaraderie, mainly because of Angel's charisma and will to keep the gang together- precisely the things that they've just lost.
It;s ironic, I suppose; this episode has one job, to turn Angel int Angelus at the end. But in order to get there it trolls us, manipulates us, just like Angelus himself. It's effectively done, if evil. And I'm getting the distinct impression that the Beast may not be the season big bad after all...
Monday, 6 August 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Bring on the Night
“Sorry to barge in. Afraid we have a slight... apocalypse.”
This is, there's no doubt about it, an Important Episode. In fact, it's quite bewilderingly eventful and changes the status quo quite dramatically. I know it's just pre-Christmas (with the briefest of nods to the season) and there would have been a wait of a couple of weeks until the next episode, but so much happens, it ends in Buffy doing a big speech, it's all rather well done but still trying to squeeze in an awful lot, and feels awfully like more of a mid-season break is about to happen.
Still, stuff happens, and while episodes with loads to do are never amongst the greatest they seldom disappoint. This episode certainly doesn’t, and is something of an assault on the senses. Giles’ Return is somewhat overshadowed by the fact he brought with him two “potential” slayers- Kennedy and the British and somewhat anonymous Annabelle and Molly. It seems the First is out to destroy the entire infrastructure of slayerdom, destroying the Watchers’ Council (so what were Travis and co up to when we last saw them?) and all the potential slayers, hence all those scenes of running girls being pursued by monks. One has to ask why no previous Big Bad has though of doing this over the last several centuries. Still, for now, there are four extra people in Buffy’s crowded house and the whole dynamic is suddenly very different.
Oh, and the First is busy pretending to be Joyce. Drusilla and all sorts as it tortures Spike, Who is a is to endure because of Buffy’s faith in him; corny but it works.
And that ancient creature resurrected last episode was a Turok-Han, a kind of Neanderthal Vampire which so far seems unbeatable, although if it’s extinct there must be a reason why? Still, Buffy doesn’t win, and is badly hurt. Cue an episode ending with a big inspiring speech then. It all dies the trick, but things suddenly feel rather odd.
This is, there's no doubt about it, an Important Episode. In fact, it's quite bewilderingly eventful and changes the status quo quite dramatically. I know it's just pre-Christmas (with the briefest of nods to the season) and there would have been a wait of a couple of weeks until the next episode, but so much happens, it ends in Buffy doing a big speech, it's all rather well done but still trying to squeeze in an awful lot, and feels awfully like more of a mid-season break is about to happen.
Still, stuff happens, and while episodes with loads to do are never amongst the greatest they seldom disappoint. This episode certainly doesn’t, and is something of an assault on the senses. Giles’ Return is somewhat overshadowed by the fact he brought with him two “potential” slayers- Kennedy and the British and somewhat anonymous Annabelle and Molly. It seems the First is out to destroy the entire infrastructure of slayerdom, destroying the Watchers’ Council (so what were Travis and co up to when we last saw them?) and all the potential slayers, hence all those scenes of running girls being pursued by monks. One has to ask why no previous Big Bad has though of doing this over the last several centuries. Still, for now, there are four extra people in Buffy’s crowded house and the whole dynamic is suddenly very different.
Oh, and the First is busy pretending to be Joyce. Drusilla and all sorts as it tortures Spike, Who is a is to endure because of Buffy’s faith in him; corny but it works.
And that ancient creature resurrected last episode was a Turok-Han, a kind of Neanderthal Vampire which so far seems unbeatable, although if it’s extinct there must be a reason why? Still, Buffy doesn’t win, and is badly hurt. Cue an episode ending with a big inspiring speech then. It all dies the trick, but things suddenly feel rather odd.
Sunday, 5 August 2018
The Wicker Man (1973)
“We’re a deeply religious people...”
This is the second time I've seen this film, and the subtext truly grows with reviewing. The tale of Sergeant Howie (decent Scottish accent from Edwood Woodwood, says the Englishman), policeman, virgin and devout Christian who investigates a young girl’s disappearance on a Pagan island in the Highlands of Scotland that turns out to be a terrifying trap.
We all know the simple plot, I’m sure; what matters is how it unfolds until the iconic ending, with Howie slowly finding how very different this island is. But this is also a film about, to use a contemporary phrase, the “permissive society”; Howie stands for 1950s Christian values and is horrified by the free love and young people’s music he finds everywhere. Interestingly, the film presents neither side with much positivity- Howie may be a prig, and the islanders a lot more fun, but there’s a very dark practice at the heart of their beliefs.
Interest to declare; I’m an atheist, but one with no particular beef with Christianity, itself a huge range of beliefs. But I’m happy to see this film not falling into the lazy thinking that Christianity is bad and vaguely remembered Paganism was much cuddlier and more tolerant; that’s a very shaky notion. Pagans may have sometimes (not always) been more relaxed about sex, and less keen to police the beliefs of others, but there were some very dark rituals and, sadly unaddressed here, just as much institutional sexism. None of which means that a singing, naked Britt Ella d is not, er, pleasant to behold.
Christopher Lee’s role in this, his favourite of his own films, is surprisingly modest but essential for the backstory, and his charismatic presence is central to everything. But Edward Woodward gives a less likeable but superbly convincing performance which makes him the true hero of the film. One of this country’s greatest cinematic achievements, then, and certainly a film which rewards repeated viewings.
We all know the simple plot, I’m sure; what matters is how it unfolds until the iconic ending, with Howie slowly finding how very different this island is. But this is also a film about, to use a contemporary phrase, the “permissive society”; Howie stands for 1950s Christian values and is horrified by the free love and young people’s music he finds everywhere. Interestingly, the film presents neither side with much positivity- Howie may be a prig, and the islanders a lot more fun, but there’s a very dark practice at the heart of their beliefs.
Interest to declare; I’m an atheist, but one with no particular beef with Christianity, itself a huge range of beliefs. But I’m happy to see this film not falling into the lazy thinking that Christianity is bad and vaguely remembered Paganism was much cuddlier and more tolerant; that’s a very shaky notion. Pagans may have sometimes (not always) been more relaxed about sex, and less keen to police the beliefs of others, but there were some very dark rituals and, sadly unaddressed here, just as much institutional sexism. None of which means that a singing, naked Britt Ella d is not, er, pleasant to behold.
Christopher Lee’s role in this, his favourite of his own films, is surprisingly modest but essential for the backstory, and his charismatic presence is central to everything. But Edward Woodward gives a less likeable but superbly convincing performance which makes him the true hero of the film. One of this country’s greatest cinematic achievements, then, and certainly a film which rewards repeated viewings.
Saturday, 4 August 2018
Justice League (2017)
“What are your superpowers again?”
“I’m rich.”
I'd intended to start this blog with a quip about that notorious moustache. After all, I mentioned it to Mrs Llamastrangler and she was amused to find the CGI on Henry Cavill’s upper lip so very obvious. But sadly I can’t continue along those lines as this film is an utter mess. It’s a turf, a stinker, a mind-bogglingly bad film. What went wrong?
D.C. can make good films. I enjoyed Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman. But they simply have no Kevin Fiege. There no quality control, no consistency of tone, no building up the characters in their individual films first. So we get these big epic films about iterations we don’t really know of characters who have barely been introduced to us in this version of the D.C. Universe. The pacing is atrocious and the script is lacking in sparkle. And the odd wittty line, presumably late additions by Joss Whedon after Zack Snyder was sacked, just jars with the po-faced and dull tone. This is a film about superheroes that fails to be fun. That’s quite an achievement.
Oh, some of the cast are good. Henry Cavill is well cast, and Ezra Miller is an inspired choice as an awkward young Flash. But Ben Affleck is both bad and wrong as Batman, Jeremy Irons is good but miscast as Alfred, and Ciaran Hinds gives us a generic and forgettable villain. And Jason Momoa’s Aquaman, incredibly, gets most of the best lines. And the amount of exposition just beggars belief. And don’t get me started on the sheer quantity of poor CGI.
This is, hands down, the worst superhero film I’ve ever seen.
“I’m rich.”
D.C. can make good films. I enjoyed Suicide Squad and Wonder Woman. But they simply have no Kevin Fiege. There no quality control, no consistency of tone, no building up the characters in their individual films first. So we get these big epic films about iterations we don’t really know of characters who have barely been introduced to us in this version of the D.C. Universe. The pacing is atrocious and the script is lacking in sparkle. And the odd wittty line, presumably late additions by Joss Whedon after Zack Snyder was sacked, just jars with the po-faced and dull tone. This is a film about superheroes that fails to be fun. That’s quite an achievement.
Oh, some of the cast are good. Henry Cavill is well cast, and Ezra Miller is an inspired choice as an awkward young Flash. But Ben Affleck is both bad and wrong as Batman, Jeremy Irons is good but miscast as Alfred, and Ciaran Hinds gives us a generic and forgettable villain. And Jason Momoa’s Aquaman, incredibly, gets most of the best lines. And the amount of exposition just beggars belief. And don’t get me started on the sheer quantity of poor CGI.
This is, hands down, the worst superhero film I’ve ever seen.
Thursday, 2 August 2018
Angel: Long Day’s Journey
“We need Angelus..."
Obviously there's a lot of plot here- this big, apocalyptic demon is still loose in LA and up to stuff, rather fortunately giving our heroes room to mope and have character stuff happen, making this a good episode. It's unclear where all this is heading, though; it's done with skill and wit, but at this point the season arc feels a little... aimless.
Character-wise, though, a lot happens, not least a load of awkward but unavoidable conversations between Angel and Cordy. As predicted, Wes is now part of the gang again, smoothed over by a subtle comment by Lorne, and the verbal sparring between him and Gunn is toned down accordingly. Instead, Gunn feels very uncomfortable with Fred and Wes spending so much time researching together.
Oh, and our electric friend Gwen is back; it seems she wasn’t just a one-of character after all. I bet she dies next episode as her plot function seems to be for Angel to ostentatiously spend time with her to make Cordelia jealous.
Deliciously, though, all these little arguments between the characters add extra frisson to the probability that one of the gang is a fifth columnist working with the Beast, currently very busy murdering a bunch of typically Buffyverse eccentric yet powerful cultists of the god Ra, so he can blot out the Sun and make a more demon-friendly LA, as you do. And he succeeds completely, with a little help from his friend. Who is, it seems... Angelus. That explains Angel’s blackouts and gives us s better inkling of exactly where this season is going. We finish with Wes proposing a rather daring plan. Good stuff, but I have no idea what the season arc is going to look like at nearly the halfway point. Is good characterisation of scriptwriting hiding a cobbled together arc or are they being clever?
Obviously there's a lot of plot here- this big, apocalyptic demon is still loose in LA and up to stuff, rather fortunately giving our heroes room to mope and have character stuff happen, making this a good episode. It's unclear where all this is heading, though; it's done with skill and wit, but at this point the season arc feels a little... aimless.
Character-wise, though, a lot happens, not least a load of awkward but unavoidable conversations between Angel and Cordy. As predicted, Wes is now part of the gang again, smoothed over by a subtle comment by Lorne, and the verbal sparring between him and Gunn is toned down accordingly. Instead, Gunn feels very uncomfortable with Fred and Wes spending so much time researching together.
Oh, and our electric friend Gwen is back; it seems she wasn’t just a one-of character after all. I bet she dies next episode as her plot function seems to be for Angel to ostentatiously spend time with her to make Cordelia jealous.
Deliciously, though, all these little arguments between the characters add extra frisson to the probability that one of the gang is a fifth columnist working with the Beast, currently very busy murdering a bunch of typically Buffyverse eccentric yet powerful cultists of the god Ra, so he can blot out the Sun and make a more demon-friendly LA, as you do. And he succeeds completely, with a little help from his friend. Who is, it seems... Angelus. That explains Angel’s blackouts and gives us s better inkling of exactly where this season is going. We finish with Wes proposing a rather daring plan. Good stuff, but I have no idea what the season arc is going to look like at nearly the halfway point. Is good characterisation of scriptwriting hiding a cobbled together arc or are they being clever?
Wednesday, 1 August 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Never Leave Me
"That.s the worst attempt at pig slaughtering I've ever seen..."
So the big bad gets a name: the First, a one off baddie from way back in Season Two, which I blogged many years ago when I was single and childless. Something tells me this time round that snow and Christmas miracles may be in short supply.
This is a big arc episode with a job to do in moving the arc plot forward- the Scoobies need to learn who they’re up against, Andrew needs to become a comic relief prisoner of theirs (love the interrogations) and Spike needs to be captured by those monks for his blood to be used to resurrect that ancient vampire thing. All of this is achieved with some witty dialogue, a top comedy scene where Willow totally owns Andrew, and a lot of deep and superb dialogue between Buffy and Spike, who now knows self-loathing.
The cliffhanger with Giles isn’t resolved; we’re left hanging a while longer. But Quentin Travers and the WTchers’ Council appear, they’re hiding stuff from Buffy, and they’re off to Sunnydale to face the First. They all wear extremely old-fashioned, tweedy clothes that were last popular, pheasant-shooting types aside, with my grandparents’ generation, the ones who fought in the war. As late as 2003 this is a stereotype Americans have of the British, arguably much less so now.
Meanwhile, we get to see the Principal being cool but also see him discovering the body of The unsuccessfully sacrificed Jonathan, whom he buries. We now know there’s more to him than it seems... but what?
A very functional episode on what it has to do, then. But Buffy does functional with aplomb.
So the big bad gets a name: the First, a one off baddie from way back in Season Two, which I blogged many years ago when I was single and childless. Something tells me this time round that snow and Christmas miracles may be in short supply.
This is a big arc episode with a job to do in moving the arc plot forward- the Scoobies need to learn who they’re up against, Andrew needs to become a comic relief prisoner of theirs (love the interrogations) and Spike needs to be captured by those monks for his blood to be used to resurrect that ancient vampire thing. All of this is achieved with some witty dialogue, a top comedy scene where Willow totally owns Andrew, and a lot of deep and superb dialogue between Buffy and Spike, who now knows self-loathing.
The cliffhanger with Giles isn’t resolved; we’re left hanging a while longer. But Quentin Travers and the WTchers’ Council appear, they’re hiding stuff from Buffy, and they’re off to Sunnydale to face the First. They all wear extremely old-fashioned, tweedy clothes that were last popular, pheasant-shooting types aside, with my grandparents’ generation, the ones who fought in the war. As late as 2003 this is a stereotype Americans have of the British, arguably much less so now.
Meanwhile, we get to see the Principal being cool but also see him discovering the body of The unsuccessfully sacrificed Jonathan, whom he buries. We now know there’s more to him than it seems... but what?
A very functional episode on what it has to do, then. But Buffy does functional with aplomb.
Tuesday, 31 July 2018
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
"I'm asking for safe passage through the Anus..."
Time for another Marvel film, methinks. I'm determined to get through them all.
This is an MCU film, so you won’t be surprised to read that I enjoyed it hugely. It’s not the very best effort from the increasingly indomitable fiefdom of Kevin Fiege, but it may well be the most fun. The whole thing is pitched as a comedy, and good comedy at that. It’s a departure for Thor, yes, but it works. And there’s something about Thor and his world that lends itself to this sort of thing. I hope Taika Waititi does more.
It’s good to see the post-Avengers Hulk too, with another excellent performance from Mark Ruffalo. The Hulk, rightly in my opinion, hasn’t been considered sufficiently popular as to warrant his own film since 2008, but remains a strong supporting character. It’s good as well as inevitable to see Loki, too, although the relationship between the brothers is so predictable by now that fourth wall-breaking humour is the only possible approach.
It’s brave, but absolutely right, to not only do Ragnarok and do it properly (while evacuating the population), to do it with humour rather than be bleakly depressing, and to mix it up with post-Guardians of the Galaxy cosmic hi-jinks. And Marvel, for once, give us a first class baddie with Cate Blanchett’s Hela, appearing just after Odin dies and revealing that his and Asgard's past has all been a lie; Odin was not always a wise and benevolent ruler. A less serious but highly entertaining baddie, though, is Jeff Goldblum playing superbly against his maverick scientist typecasting as Grandmaster. We even get an Doctor Strange cameo.
I realise not all Marvel films can be like this. But... can we have some more please?
This is an MCU film, so you won’t be surprised to read that I enjoyed it hugely. It’s not the very best effort from the increasingly indomitable fiefdom of Kevin Fiege, but it may well be the most fun. The whole thing is pitched as a comedy, and good comedy at that. It’s a departure for Thor, yes, but it works. And there’s something about Thor and his world that lends itself to this sort of thing. I hope Taika Waititi does more.
It’s good to see the post-Avengers Hulk too, with another excellent performance from Mark Ruffalo. The Hulk, rightly in my opinion, hasn’t been considered sufficiently popular as to warrant his own film since 2008, but remains a strong supporting character. It’s good as well as inevitable to see Loki, too, although the relationship between the brothers is so predictable by now that fourth wall-breaking humour is the only possible approach.
It’s brave, but absolutely right, to not only do Ragnarok and do it properly (while evacuating the population), to do it with humour rather than be bleakly depressing, and to mix it up with post-Guardians of the Galaxy cosmic hi-jinks. And Marvel, for once, give us a first class baddie with Cate Blanchett’s Hela, appearing just after Odin dies and revealing that his and Asgard's past has all been a lie; Odin was not always a wise and benevolent ruler. A less serious but highly entertaining baddie, though, is Jeff Goldblum playing superbly against his maverick scientist typecasting as Grandmaster. We even get an Doctor Strange cameo.
I realise not all Marvel films can be like this. But... can we have some more please?
Monday, 30 July 2018
Don’t Breathe (2016)
“You have to be made accountable...”
I know I’m on a mission to watch all the Marvel and DC related movies, plus all the big horror franchises, as well as all the classic movies I haven’t blogged yet, which is a rather large number of films. But I still need to intersperse that with modern-ish films that ain’t part of no franchise. Such as this one. It’s a thriller that’s been compared with Hitchcock (yes, I need to watch more of his stuff), is full of suspense and is helmed by the director of the new Evil Dead. Which I haven’t seen. So many films I haven’t seen but should have done, and this is the 489th film in this blog. It feels like being Sisyphus, except it’s a lot more fun. So, er, not like Sisyphus at all then. Anyway...
Let's briefly acknowledge that the film is bloody good and establish that I'll return to that theme very shortly, shall we? Because this film, like Saw and so many others, is a thriller, and an excellent one at that, but marketed as a horror film when it blatantly isn't. I wish they wouldn't do that.
With that little whinge out of the way, though, this is a proper tense little thriller about three burglars- two of whom are humanised and given reasons (if not excuses) for what they do and one (he dies first, of course) who is just a twat. There’s a real sense of place in this film, set in the extraordinary city of Detroit, the poster child for urban decline and public squalor. Here we have the house which is the target of the heist, the only inhabited premises in the neighbourhood with all the plot convenience that implies. This area is barely inhabited and so plausibly lawless. Hence we can have a thriller in which three amateur burglars attempt to rob an "old" man (yes, a Gulf War veteran described as "old", and that war was only in '91...) but he's more than a match for them. And has a big secret.
It's not about the plot, though. It's about the superb camerawork and the Hitchcockian suspense, and the nice little twists at the end. This film has no stars, it has a tiny budget, but it does exactly what a good film should: gets the basics very, very right.
You probably haven't seen this film. That's a shame- it's getting a lot of well-deserved word of mouth and is well worth seeing. Just think Hitchcock, not horror.
Let's briefly acknowledge that the film is bloody good and establish that I'll return to that theme very shortly, shall we? Because this film, like Saw and so many others, is a thriller, and an excellent one at that, but marketed as a horror film when it blatantly isn't. I wish they wouldn't do that.
With that little whinge out of the way, though, this is a proper tense little thriller about three burglars- two of whom are humanised and given reasons (if not excuses) for what they do and one (he dies first, of course) who is just a twat. There’s a real sense of place in this film, set in the extraordinary city of Detroit, the poster child for urban decline and public squalor. Here we have the house which is the target of the heist, the only inhabited premises in the neighbourhood with all the plot convenience that implies. This area is barely inhabited and so plausibly lawless. Hence we can have a thriller in which three amateur burglars attempt to rob an "old" man (yes, a Gulf War veteran described as "old", and that war was only in '91...) but he's more than a match for them. And has a big secret.
It's not about the plot, though. It's about the superb camerawork and the Hitchcockian suspense, and the nice little twists at the end. This film has no stars, it has a tiny budget, but it does exactly what a good film should: gets the basics very, very right.
You probably haven't seen this film. That's a shame- it's getting a lot of well-deserved word of mouth and is well worth seeing. Just think Hitchcock, not horror.
Sunday, 29 July 2018
Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994)
“The first was the best."
Phew. The franchise doesn't end with a whimper after all, but with a typically clever and well-directed instalment from the esteemed Mr Craven himself. This last film redeems the whole thing somewhat. Still, it's far from perfect in that it's somewhat slow and there's not enough Freddy screen time.
It’s clever, though; the franchise so far has just been a series of movies and Wes Craven, various actors and even producers appear as themselves. There’s lot of wry commentary on the tiresome idea of horror movies having a bad effect on society (yawn) and a lot of fourth wall-breaking fun- the ending, with Heather reading the script of the very film she’s in to her son, is perfect and, what’s more, believable. The concept is a good one- an Evil From The Dawn Of Time draws strength from monsters in scary stories and this time it’s taken on the form of Freddie from it’s new favourite horrror franchise. It’s a superb idea and very well realised, although the threat never quite feels like Freddy. In fact, much of the film evokes cinematic horror more widely- especially, in the excellent scenes with little Dylan, The Exorcist. And it’s clever to contrast the new “Freddy” make-up with Robert Englund wearing his old costume for the fans.
It’s very well done. It’s very witty. Stylistically, at times it feels very much like the precursor to Scream that it clearly is. But I can’t help feeling that it takes too long for things to start happening, Freddy doesn’t get enough screen time and, well, Freddy isn’t really Freddy, great though the effects are in the final showdown scene. This is an interesting case of a great concept, very well made, which perhaps suffers from not satisfying our expectations of the sort of film it’s supppsed to be.
And that, folks, is the end of Nightmare on Elm Street for a while. I have another franchise to devour before I get to Freddy vs. Jason, and I’ll be watching other stuff in-between. So many other horror franchises, too...
It’s clever, though; the franchise so far has just been a series of movies and Wes Craven, various actors and even producers appear as themselves. There’s lot of wry commentary on the tiresome idea of horror movies having a bad effect on society (yawn) and a lot of fourth wall-breaking fun- the ending, with Heather reading the script of the very film she’s in to her son, is perfect and, what’s more, believable. The concept is a good one- an Evil From The Dawn Of Time draws strength from monsters in scary stories and this time it’s taken on the form of Freddie from it’s new favourite horrror franchise. It’s a superb idea and very well realised, although the threat never quite feels like Freddy. In fact, much of the film evokes cinematic horror more widely- especially, in the excellent scenes with little Dylan, The Exorcist. And it’s clever to contrast the new “Freddy” make-up with Robert Englund wearing his old costume for the fans.
It’s very well done. It’s very witty. Stylistically, at times it feels very much like the precursor to Scream that it clearly is. But I can’t help feeling that it takes too long for things to start happening, Freddy doesn’t get enough screen time and, well, Freddy isn’t really Freddy, great though the effects are in the final showdown scene. This is an interesting case of a great concept, very well made, which perhaps suffers from not satisfying our expectations of the sort of film it’s supppsed to be.
And that, folks, is the end of Nightmare on Elm Street for a while. I have another franchise to devour before I get to Freddy vs. Jason, and I’ll be watching other stuff in-between. So many other horror franchises, too...
Saturday, 28 July 2018
Freddy’s Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991)
“We’re in Twin Peaks here...”
Well, it had to happen at some point in a long-running franchise like this. This is bloody awful. Yes, it's a nice poster. But beyond that I'm struggling to think of anything positive.
What went wrong? After all, the film is directed (and scripted) by a young Rachel Talalay, a respected and successful Doctor Who director in recent years, and at this time a veteran of the franchise who was finally getting to helm an instalment. Yet, it must be said, she doesn’t do a good job and it’s hard to square this with her excellent later work.
Partly, I suppose, it’s the times. It’s 1991 and early CGI is beginning to rear its head, something which dates a film far more than the physical effects of earlier instalments. Perhaps it’s that the plot isn’t very coherent or clearly told. Perhaps it’s the amazement over the fact that an actor like Yaphet Kotto is lowering himself to such drivel. But, if this was truly intended as the final film in the franchise, it’s a shocking way to end. There are no scares. There’s no suspense. Freddy Krueger is reduced to a silly Daffy Duck-style figure with no remaining menace. What were they thinking? And the characterisation? Well, there’s Carlos, whose sole personality trait is “wears hearing aids”, and the others are even more generic. The whole thing is incoherent, and even the set pieces are just silly- the first one is a pastiche of The Wizard of Oz and they don’t get much better, although the hearing aid scene had a certain ghoulish fascination for me. It’s also quite nostalgic to be reminded of what they were like back then.
Meh. It doesn’t get more disappointing than this. It’s a crying shame after a surprisingly quality franchise up to now, but we are now leaping headlong over the proverbial predatory fish.
What went wrong? After all, the film is directed (and scripted) by a young Rachel Talalay, a respected and successful Doctor Who director in recent years, and at this time a veteran of the franchise who was finally getting to helm an instalment. Yet, it must be said, she doesn’t do a good job and it’s hard to square this with her excellent later work.
Partly, I suppose, it’s the times. It’s 1991 and early CGI is beginning to rear its head, something which dates a film far more than the physical effects of earlier instalments. Perhaps it’s that the plot isn’t very coherent or clearly told. Perhaps it’s the amazement over the fact that an actor like Yaphet Kotto is lowering himself to such drivel. But, if this was truly intended as the final film in the franchise, it’s a shocking way to end. There are no scares. There’s no suspense. Freddy Krueger is reduced to a silly Daffy Duck-style figure with no remaining menace. What were they thinking? And the characterisation? Well, there’s Carlos, whose sole personality trait is “wears hearing aids”, and the others are even more generic. The whole thing is incoherent, and even the set pieces are just silly- the first one is a pastiche of The Wizard of Oz and they don’t get much better, although the hearing aid scene had a certain ghoulish fascination for me. It’s also quite nostalgic to be reminded of what they were like back then.
Meh. It doesn’t get more disappointing than this. It’s a crying shame after a surprisingly quality franchise up to now, but we are now leaping headlong over the proverbial predatory fish.
Thursday, 26 July 2018
A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)
“Nine, ten, he’s back again...”
This is the fifth film in the series and, you know, it’s not at all bad. Oh, there are diminishing returns and there’s an awful lot more time spent on drama than on big set pieces, but the film is pretty good and even, in terms of the direction, design and effects, the best so far. Well, if you ignore one very obvious and very prominent matte painting.
This is the third consecutive film with continuing elements, with Alice as the hero, this time pregnant with a baby whose dreams allow Freddy to return- a nice thematic link to Freddy’s own birth and his mother Amanda. To an extent it’s a similar format to the previous film, with various teenagers (including boyfriend Dan) being girlie killed one by one, except this isn’t quite as dramatic as previous films with the focus on the pregnancy and Yvonne’s scepticism, and the set pieces not being quite as good. Still, I enjoyed Mark’s comic book death, and not only because I recognised a couple of those 1989 vintage Marvel comics littering his floor. The death may be lacking in blood but is gloriously creative and well done, even if I do suspect the influence of the video to A-Ha’s “Tale on Me”. On the other hand, the foetus scene may be an influence on the video to Massive Attack’s “Teardrop”...
Mrs Llamastrangler loves this and I found it visually brilliant- the M.C. Escher stuff at the climax was superb- but perhaps the script was a little more pedestrian than the realisation. Still, the franchise is still looking pretty healthy as the decade ends.
This is the third consecutive film with continuing elements, with Alice as the hero, this time pregnant with a baby whose dreams allow Freddy to return- a nice thematic link to Freddy’s own birth and his mother Amanda. To an extent it’s a similar format to the previous film, with various teenagers (including boyfriend Dan) being girlie killed one by one, except this isn’t quite as dramatic as previous films with the focus on the pregnancy and Yvonne’s scepticism, and the set pieces not being quite as good. Still, I enjoyed Mark’s comic book death, and not only because I recognised a couple of those 1989 vintage Marvel comics littering his floor. The death may be lacking in blood but is gloriously creative and well done, even if I do suspect the influence of the video to A-Ha’s “Tale on Me”. On the other hand, the foetus scene may be an influence on the video to Massive Attack’s “Teardrop”...
Mrs Llamastrangler loves this and I found it visually brilliant- the M.C. Escher stuff at the climax was superb- but perhaps the script was a little more pedestrian than the realisation. Still, the franchise is still looking pretty healthy as the decade ends.
Wednesday, 25 July 2018
Angel: Habeas Corpses
”Zombies are slow moving, dim witted and crave human flesh.”
“Like you?”
“No!”
Plot-wise this is quite straightforward; Connor wants to know about his connections to the Beast, so he goes to Wolfram and Hart for some answers. Unfortunately he ends up trapped as the beast attacks and the staff (except Lilah but very much including the now-late Gavin) are all killed and turned into zombies, and needs to be rescued by the gang. Awkward.
As it happens this doesn’t work quite that well- much of the episode is dark and chaotic- but, as ever, it’s the character stuff that counts. After sleeping with Connor, Cordy makes it clear that, despite his “happy puppy look” there won’t be any repeat, which makes her look rather like one of those “lads” who gets a girl to have sex with him and then disappears, especially as he’s so young and naive. Angel certainly doesn’t approve, as he makes very clear at the end.
Wesley also finally dumps Lilah who, oddly, in spite of being evil is far more into him than vice versa, and seems to be subtly back with the gang again. It’s clear that the love triangle with Fred and Gunn is back on, hence bickering between him and Gunn that will no doubt come to an end in a couple of episodes as Wes redeems himself in Gunn’s eyes. Such is TV drama.
More immediately worrying, arc-wise, is that the Beast has reached the White Room and apparently killed the little girl who runs (or ran?) W&H. That one act proves Wes right when he emphasised just how powerful this creature is and how it seems to be above the pay grade of Angel Onvestigations to stop it. The episode itself is an odd beast; the concept doesn’t really come across well but the characterisation, dialogue and arc stuff largely carries it through.
“Like you?”
“No!”
Plot-wise this is quite straightforward; Connor wants to know about his connections to the Beast, so he goes to Wolfram and Hart for some answers. Unfortunately he ends up trapped as the beast attacks and the staff (except Lilah but very much including the now-late Gavin) are all killed and turned into zombies, and needs to be rescued by the gang. Awkward.
As it happens this doesn’t work quite that well- much of the episode is dark and chaotic- but, as ever, it’s the character stuff that counts. After sleeping with Connor, Cordy makes it clear that, despite his “happy puppy look” there won’t be any repeat, which makes her look rather like one of those “lads” who gets a girl to have sex with him and then disappears, especially as he’s so young and naive. Angel certainly doesn’t approve, as he makes very clear at the end.
Wesley also finally dumps Lilah who, oddly, in spite of being evil is far more into him than vice versa, and seems to be subtly back with the gang again. It’s clear that the love triangle with Fred and Gunn is back on, hence bickering between him and Gunn that will no doubt come to an end in a couple of episodes as Wes redeems himself in Gunn’s eyes. Such is TV drama.
More immediately worrying, arc-wise, is that the Beast has reached the White Room and apparently killed the little girl who runs (or ran?) W&H. That one act proves Wes right when he emphasised just how powerful this creature is and how it seems to be above the pay grade of Angel Onvestigations to stop it. The episode itself is an odd beast; the concept doesn’t really come across well but the characterisation, dialogue and arc stuff largely carries it through.
Sunday, 22 July 2018
The Wolverine (2013)
"A man who has nightmares every night of his life is in pain.”
I know my 1980s Marvel, more or less. But I admit I never read the Chris Claremont limited series (we true Marvel zombies never use that awful phrase “miniseries; that’s for the Disgruntled Competition) on which this film is based. It makes no difference to how unexpectedly bloody good this film is, though.
The plot is intricate, exciting, James Bond-like and am excuse for loads of great Japanese set pieces, the highlight being a fight atop a bullet train. The direction is superb, with flashbacks of Jean Grey constantly beckoning a weakened Logan towards easeful death. And no cool Japanese trope is left unused. We even get a convincing romance between Logan and Mariko, although no one is getting married on this occasion.
There are continuity questions, of course; how come Logan remembers Nagasaki in 1945 if his memory was wiped at the end of X-Men Origins: Wolverine? It’s also odd to see Viper as the villain in a Fox film where, of course, they can’t make any mention of HYDRA. And the use of Silver Samurai is certainly unexpected. But the film isn’t really about any of that. It’s a superb action film about family and mortality. With ninjas. And possibly the finest film in the X-Men franchise up to this point. This franchise may lack the central quality control and planning of the MCU, but its individual films can sometimes be just as good. And now, it seems, it has the post credits sequences too...
The plot is intricate, exciting, James Bond-like and am excuse for loads of great Japanese set pieces, the highlight being a fight atop a bullet train. The direction is superb, with flashbacks of Jean Grey constantly beckoning a weakened Logan towards easeful death. And no cool Japanese trope is left unused. We even get a convincing romance between Logan and Mariko, although no one is getting married on this occasion.
There are continuity questions, of course; how come Logan remembers Nagasaki in 1945 if his memory was wiped at the end of X-Men Origins: Wolverine? It’s also odd to see Viper as the villain in a Fox film where, of course, they can’t make any mention of HYDRA. And the use of Silver Samurai is certainly unexpected. But the film isn’t really about any of that. It’s a superb action film about family and mortality. With ninjas. And possibly the finest film in the X-Men franchise up to this point. This franchise may lack the central quality control and planning of the MCU, but its individual films can sometimes be just as good. And now, it seems, it has the post credits sequences too...
Saturday, 21 July 2018
Yellow Submarine (1968)
“How was it, Ringo?"
"Arrowing?"
Wow. What to say about this after the experience of seeing it again after upwards of twenty years?
It's brilliant, obviously. It's gloriously, trippily weird and also both witty and weirdly erudite for good measure. The animation may be simple, the Beatles may only appear at the end and not even do their own voices- songs excepted, obviously- but, my God, this is good.
The songs are great, obviously, and its instructive to be reminded how many of them, including such classics as "Hey Bulldog" and "All Together Now", were new for the film. It's also instructive that John, Paul, George and Ringo are shown here in full-on late Sixties psychedelia mode, whereas Revolver was only the year before last.
The sheer surreality of not only the animation but also the plot- snapping Turks?- is at once druggy, psychedelic and the very essence of the period. Bizarre, then, that Dick Emery of all people plays such a large role. But the Fab Four always did have one foot in light entertainment.
It's short, it's bonkers, the music is great. This is probably the greatest rock 'n' roll film ever made because, well, come on. I can't help noticing there's not a single speaking role for a woman in the whole thing, mind!
"Arrowing?"
It's brilliant, obviously. It's gloriously, trippily weird and also both witty and weirdly erudite for good measure. The animation may be simple, the Beatles may only appear at the end and not even do their own voices- songs excepted, obviously- but, my God, this is good.
The songs are great, obviously, and its instructive to be reminded how many of them, including such classics as "Hey Bulldog" and "All Together Now", were new for the film. It's also instructive that John, Paul, George and Ringo are shown here in full-on late Sixties psychedelia mode, whereas Revolver was only the year before last.
The sheer surreality of not only the animation but also the plot- snapping Turks?- is at once druggy, psychedelic and the very essence of the period. Bizarre, then, that Dick Emery of all people plays such a large role. But the Fab Four always did have one foot in light entertainment.
It's short, it's bonkers, the music is great. This is probably the greatest rock 'n' roll film ever made because, well, come on. I can't help noticing there's not a single speaking role for a woman in the whole thing, mind!
Sunday, 15 July 2018
Blade (1998)
“You may wake up one day and find yourself extinct."
It's strange to think that this is such an early Marvel film. In fact, prior to this the only feature films had been the bizarrely underrated Howard the Duck, The Punisher and the low budget, no star straight-to-video '90s films Captain America and Fantastic Four, both rather obscure. And that was it. Until Blade came along, failed to wow the critics but was a huge success. Not long after came X-Men and Marvel films were everywhere, many of them sadly at Fox.
So how does it stand up, twenty years on? Pretty well, actually. Yes, wooden Wesley Snipes is phoning it in with a character that could have offered a lot of potential to a good actor, and has no charisma. Yet the script- by no less than David S. Goyer- is superb, and the film looks great, even if the cinematography has inevitably dated; from the perspective of 2018 there's more than a little of the late '90s music video vibe. It looks great, though, with impressive CGI.
We begin with a great set piece at a vampire rave that dates the film enormously, yes, but also shows us what Blade can do and his mission in a visually exciting way. N'Bushe Wright convinces as the doctor who is unwittingly drawn into this vampire fighting world, and Kris Kristofferson is superb as the grizzly and gnarled mentor figure.
This is not like the comics; Blade has been made into a kind of half-vampire for some reason, and the vampire mythos here is not quite the same, but it's nice to see Marv Wolfman and Gene Colan being credited.It's an entertaining two hours, though, and perhaps the real start of our current Marvel cinematic age.
So how does it stand up, twenty years on? Pretty well, actually. Yes, wooden Wesley Snipes is phoning it in with a character that could have offered a lot of potential to a good actor, and has no charisma. Yet the script- by no less than David S. Goyer- is superb, and the film looks great, even if the cinematography has inevitably dated; from the perspective of 2018 there's more than a little of the late '90s music video vibe. It looks great, though, with impressive CGI.
We begin with a great set piece at a vampire rave that dates the film enormously, yes, but also shows us what Blade can do and his mission in a visually exciting way. N'Bushe Wright convinces as the doctor who is unwittingly drawn into this vampire fighting world, and Kris Kristofferson is superb as the grizzly and gnarled mentor figure.
This is not like the comics; Blade has been made into a kind of half-vampire for some reason, and the vampire mythos here is not quite the same, but it's nice to see Marv Wolfman and Gene Colan being credited.It's an entertaining two hours, though, and perhaps the real start of our current Marvel cinematic age.
Saturday, 14 July 2018
Tales from the Crypt (1972)
"Who's next? Perhaps... you?"
At last I get to see a proper Amicus portmanteau film; I’ve been meaning to for ages. And this one certainly doesn’t disappoint. The format means the film never flags, and the top notch cast and direction make for a superbly unsettling experience.
I’ve never read any of the EC comics upon this was based (although I certainly do know that Dr Fredric Wertham smelled of poo, and was a quack to boot) but I get a distinct impression of the lurid style here, and highly entertaining here. The framing device is simple; a bunch of tourists get lost in a crypt and accosted by a sinister monk, who speaks with the actorly tones of none other than Ralph Richardson, who is having enormous fun here. We hear their sinister stories one by one until the conclusion gives us a delightful twist.
All of the stories are compelling, although some more than others, and there are standout performances from the likes of Peter Cushing in one of his best roles, but the segments are carried well by the likes of Joan Collins, Ian Hendry and an unrecognisable Richard Greene, too old for Sherwood Forest. There are powerful moments- the Balentine’s Card scene is heartbreaking- and the comeuppance of the mean major by the blind men he’s been mistreating is glorious. I’m not sure it’s an obvious leap from EC Comics to a film directed by Freddie Francis and crammed with British character actors, but it really works.
I’ve never read any of the EC comics upon this was based (although I certainly do know that Dr Fredric Wertham smelled of poo, and was a quack to boot) but I get a distinct impression of the lurid style here, and highly entertaining here. The framing device is simple; a bunch of tourists get lost in a crypt and accosted by a sinister monk, who speaks with the actorly tones of none other than Ralph Richardson, who is having enormous fun here. We hear their sinister stories one by one until the conclusion gives us a delightful twist.
All of the stories are compelling, although some more than others, and there are standout performances from the likes of Peter Cushing in one of his best roles, but the segments are carried well by the likes of Joan Collins, Ian Hendry and an unrecognisable Richard Greene, too old for Sherwood Forest. There are powerful moments- the Balentine’s Card scene is heartbreaking- and the comeuppance of the mean major by the blind men he’s been mistreating is glorious. I’m not sure it’s an obvious leap from EC Comics to a film directed by Freddie Francis and crammed with British character actors, but it really works.
Wednesday, 11 July 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Sleeper
"Man, I hate playing vampire towns..."
Wow. The first misfire of the season, really. And just after Angel appears to have done the same.
So what's wrong with this episode which, after all, develops the season arc a fair bit? I think it's simply that the premise doesn't work dramatically. The whole episode revolves around the whole gang trying to ascertain whether the newly ensouled "Billy Idol" in their midst is killing again, yet we sort of know the answer from the start. Yes, it's all the fault of that nasty, psychologically cruel Big Bad who spent last episode being so mean but, again, we knew that. There isn't really any dramatic tension, yet the whole episode is structured around it anyway. It simply doesn't work and the episode succeeds only in the sense of getting the arc plot from A to B, with Buffy using a rather broken Spike as bait.
We also get scenes set in London- hence black taxi cabs and red phone boxes- where a hooded figure is killing people presumably linked to the Watchers' Council, as none other than Giles discovers, and stars in his own axe-related cliffhanger to boot. Otherwise the episode is fairly meh, unusually devoid of sparkle with the dialogue and not really developing much, character-wise. Was something rushed with the writing? Is this the first sign of Joss Whedon taking on too much with the addition of Firefly, or, well, the other thing that was going on? I'm hoping this is just one duff episode. Things have been great up until now.
Still, the arc is humming nicely and Giles is clearly back soon. Let's hope this is indeed a one-off.
Wow. The first misfire of the season, really. And just after Angel appears to have done the same.
So what's wrong with this episode which, after all, develops the season arc a fair bit? I think it's simply that the premise doesn't work dramatically. The whole episode revolves around the whole gang trying to ascertain whether the newly ensouled "Billy Idol" in their midst is killing again, yet we sort of know the answer from the start. Yes, it's all the fault of that nasty, psychologically cruel Big Bad who spent last episode being so mean but, again, we knew that. There isn't really any dramatic tension, yet the whole episode is structured around it anyway. It simply doesn't work and the episode succeeds only in the sense of getting the arc plot from A to B, with Buffy using a rather broken Spike as bait.
We also get scenes set in London- hence black taxi cabs and red phone boxes- where a hooded figure is killing people presumably linked to the Watchers' Council, as none other than Giles discovers, and stars in his own axe-related cliffhanger to boot. Otherwise the episode is fairly meh, unusually devoid of sparkle with the dialogue and not really developing much, character-wise. Was something rushed with the writing? Is this the first sign of Joss Whedon taking on too much with the addition of Firefly, or, well, the other thing that was going on? I'm hoping this is just one duff episode. Things have been great up until now.
Still, the arc is humming nicely and Giles is clearly back soon. Let's hope this is indeed a one-off.
Tuesday, 10 July 2018
A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)
“You shouldn't have buried me. I'm not dead!"
After the huge disappointment of the second film it's pleasant to find that I've rather enjoyed both subsequent sequels. This fourth film is, if anything, a more straightforward use of the basic premise than the third and is, as a result, probably the best instalment since the first. The franchise seems to be in rude health at this point.
Partly this is down to the solid central premise, but also the excellent script and superb use of the camera, as well as the first class pre-CGI effects; the early resurrection of Freddy's body looks so much more convincing than the parallel scene in the previous year's Hellraiser, and all those big effects shots mean so much more when you know it's not CGI.
But essentially it's all about Freddy's truly scary presence, the solid plot based simply around Freddy killing various kids one by one in entertaining ways, and the fact that all the prospective victims are likeable in their own way. We actually care about what happens to the characters and thus are invested in being scared, something many horror films forget.
But ultimately it's about the set pieces- death by waterbed, Debbie being turned into a cockroach in a way which is proper Cronenberg, a set piece for every character. And through it all the clothes, hair, cars and music are all gloriously '80s, as is Alice's montage at the end, where she Super-Skrulls all of her dead mates' attributes. We even get a character, Rick, whose main trait beyond "loving boyfriend" seems to be that he's seen The Karate Kid.
We get scares, we get likeable and nuanced characters, we get a genuinely good film and we even get nostalgia. What's not to like?
Partly this is down to the solid central premise, but also the excellent script and superb use of the camera, as well as the first class pre-CGI effects; the early resurrection of Freddy's body looks so much more convincing than the parallel scene in the previous year's Hellraiser, and all those big effects shots mean so much more when you know it's not CGI.
But essentially it's all about Freddy's truly scary presence, the solid plot based simply around Freddy killing various kids one by one in entertaining ways, and the fact that all the prospective victims are likeable in their own way. We actually care about what happens to the characters and thus are invested in being scared, something many horror films forget.
But ultimately it's about the set pieces- death by waterbed, Debbie being turned into a cockroach in a way which is proper Cronenberg, a set piece for every character. And through it all the clothes, hair, cars and music are all gloriously '80s, as is Alice's montage at the end, where she Super-Skrulls all of her dead mates' attributes. We even get a character, Rick, whose main trait beyond "loving boyfriend" seems to be that he's seen The Karate Kid.
We get scares, we get likeable and nuanced characters, we get a genuinely good film and we even get nostalgia. What's not to like?
Angel: Apocalypse Nowish
"It's not like the world's gonna end right this second!"
Well, that was sudden. It's all looking very apocalyptic in the space of one episode, with a big red devil beast thingy, rain of fire and the phones ringing off the hook at Angel Investigations. Is it only Los Angeles, though? None of this is happening in Buffy, and Sunnydale is not even in a different state.
Before this started, of course, we get two thirds of the episode full of foreboding, with Cordy having some scarily accurate dreams and Wolfram & Hart being quite aware that things are not going as expected. But it all feels rather fast and, unusually for the Buffyverse, unearned.
The uneasy atmosphere leads to some interesting character stuff, of course. Fred and Gunn haven't touched each other since Gunn took it upon himself to send that nasty professor tomPylea and, worse, Fred seems unhappy with the possibility of settling down with him. From no sex, though, there's weird sex; Wesley finds Lilah waiting for him mockingly dressed as Fred, but turns the tables on her by insisting she stays that way during sex. Ouch!
More awkward, though, in more senses than one, is the virgin missionary sex between Cordy and Connor. Cordy has already told Angel that she still loves him but, as a Power That, er, Bees, she saw what he did as Angelus. She knew before, but now she knows. Also, things are perilous and they all might die. All the same, deflowering Connor like that feels out of character and is really jarring, which is not something you'll often find me saying about either of the Buffyverse shows.
Still, clever Angel runs rings around Lilah to ensure her cooperation, tying up Gavin to boot. And it seems Wesley won't be seeing much more of her as plot expediency has him shackled up with Angel's crw for the time being- a subtle forced reconciliation? The whole episode feels a bit forced and awkward. On the other hand I'm genuinely enjoying the no-status-quo, Chris Claremont X-Men vibe. We'll see where this goes.
Well, that was sudden. It's all looking very apocalyptic in the space of one episode, with a big red devil beast thingy, rain of fire and the phones ringing off the hook at Angel Investigations. Is it only Los Angeles, though? None of this is happening in Buffy, and Sunnydale is not even in a different state.
Before this started, of course, we get two thirds of the episode full of foreboding, with Cordy having some scarily accurate dreams and Wolfram & Hart being quite aware that things are not going as expected. But it all feels rather fast and, unusually for the Buffyverse, unearned.
The uneasy atmosphere leads to some interesting character stuff, of course. Fred and Gunn haven't touched each other since Gunn took it upon himself to send that nasty professor tomPylea and, worse, Fred seems unhappy with the possibility of settling down with him. From no sex, though, there's weird sex; Wesley finds Lilah waiting for him mockingly dressed as Fred, but turns the tables on her by insisting she stays that way during sex. Ouch!
More awkward, though, in more senses than one, is the virgin missionary sex between Cordy and Connor. Cordy has already told Angel that she still loves him but, as a Power That, er, Bees, she saw what he did as Angelus. She knew before, but now she knows. Also, things are perilous and they all might die. All the same, deflowering Connor like that feels out of character and is really jarring, which is not something you'll often find me saying about either of the Buffyverse shows.
Still, clever Angel runs rings around Lilah to ensure her cooperation, tying up Gavin to boot. And it seems Wesley won't be seeing much more of her as plot expediency has him shackled up with Angel's crw for the time being- a subtle forced reconciliation? The whole episode feels a bit forced and awkward. On the other hand I'm genuinely enjoying the no-status-quo, Chris Claremont X-Men vibe. We'll see where this goes.
Monday, 9 July 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Conversations with Dead People
“I mean, I was afraid to talk to you in high school. And now we’re, like, mortal enemies.”
Here we have it, then; a proper arc episode, which develops the mysterious Big Bad. Oddly, there’s no Xander, one of the main trio of characters (behind the scenes issues?) or Anya. But the focus on Buffy, Dawn and Willow all individually, their paths crossing only thematically, makes them all the more emotionally vulnerable for being alone.
Dawn and Willow both get visitations from the dead which seem designed to undermine themabd the team for the upcoming hi-jinks. Fortunately Willow realises she isn’t talking to Tara when the suggestion to never do magic again is extended to a suggestion of suicide, puncturing the illusion. Dawn has no such epiphany, enduring an episode of poltergeisty weirdness only to be told by “Joyce” that Buffy will turn against her. Oh, and Andrew and Jonathan return to Sunnyvale, with Andrew being encouraged by “Adam” to kill an unsuspecting Jonathan, who dies serene.
Buffy’s story is cleverer, as a recently resurrected vampire turns out to be an old acquaintance and psych major, which leads to reminiscing and psychoanalysis; I love the scene where Buffy uses a tomb as a psychiatrist’s couch. These are great character scenes, establishing both Buffy’s inevitable superiority complex and the guilt she feels about it. And, just to add extra dramatic spice, Spike is killing and siring people again. Some monsters are unexpectedly people, but those we think of as people can also turn out to be monsters.
A change of direction, then, getting the arc back on track. And a bloody good episode.
Here we have it, then; a proper arc episode, which develops the mysterious Big Bad. Oddly, there’s no Xander, one of the main trio of characters (behind the scenes issues?) or Anya. But the focus on Buffy, Dawn and Willow all individually, their paths crossing only thematically, makes them all the more emotionally vulnerable for being alone.
Dawn and Willow both get visitations from the dead which seem designed to undermine themabd the team for the upcoming hi-jinks. Fortunately Willow realises she isn’t talking to Tara when the suggestion to never do magic again is extended to a suggestion of suicide, puncturing the illusion. Dawn has no such epiphany, enduring an episode of poltergeisty weirdness only to be told by “Joyce” that Buffy will turn against her. Oh, and Andrew and Jonathan return to Sunnyvale, with Andrew being encouraged by “Adam” to kill an unsuspecting Jonathan, who dies serene.
Buffy’s story is cleverer, as a recently resurrected vampire turns out to be an old acquaintance and psych major, which leads to reminiscing and psychoanalysis; I love the scene where Buffy uses a tomb as a psychiatrist’s couch. These are great character scenes, establishing both Buffy’s inevitable superiority complex and the guilt she feels about it. And, just to add extra dramatic spice, Spike is killing and siring people again. Some monsters are unexpectedly people, but those we think of as people can also turn out to be monsters.
A change of direction, then, getting the arc back on track. And a bloody good episode.
Sunday, 8 July 2018
Thor: The Dark World (2013)
"I'd rather been a good man than a great king."
I've pretty much decided that I need to get a move on with watching all Marvel films, especially MCU ones, and probably DC ones too. Without being anal about it I'm going to try and make half of the films I watch Marvel or Disgruntled Competition ones until I'm caught up. After all, I've certainly already blogged a fair proportion of them.
Anyway, let's talk about Thor: The Dark World. I liked it. A lot. It's not one of the most talked-about Marvel films over the five years since its release, but the MCU films never step below a certain level of quality. This being the second film, we already know both all the Asgardians and the whole gang of Jane, Eric and the wonderful Darcy, whom we fall in love with all over again. It's great to enjoy characters we already know rather than having them introduced to us. Highlights are the perfect reunion between Thor and Jane and the scene with Eric in the mental home, complete with Stan cameo. The film has wit, heart and excitement, and lots of each. You can tell it's Marvel. It also has, unexpectedly, Chris O'Dowd of all people in a moderately large part.
The baddie is Malekith, back from the Walt Simonson days, played by Christopher Eccleston who, despite the unpleasantly snooty things he's since said about the part, does a perfectly good job. We also get Kurse, although with a very different, Beyonder-free backstory. And CGI trolls. Lots of them. Tom Hiddleston playing Loki with an extraordinary range of emotion, Frigga dying, a touching father/son scene in which Thor refuses the throne from Odin on the grounds that the decisions of kingship would mean he can no longer be a good man. It's fun to see London, too, and amusing that the convergence of the Nine Worlds should happen at, of all places, Greenwich. And, as ever, the MCU version of Asgard is great; powerful alien beings with 5,000 year lifespans whose advanced tech is always described in gracefully magical language, the perfect expression of Arthur C. Clarke's adage about sufficiently advanced tech being indistinguishable from magic.
If that wasn't good enough, we get Thor coming back to Jane at the end, and an intriguing post-credits scene involving the Collector and more plot-heavy talk about Infinity Stones. A brilliant film, the perfect blockbuster- well, it's MCU.
Anyway, let's talk about Thor: The Dark World. I liked it. A lot. It's not one of the most talked-about Marvel films over the five years since its release, but the MCU films never step below a certain level of quality. This being the second film, we already know both all the Asgardians and the whole gang of Jane, Eric and the wonderful Darcy, whom we fall in love with all over again. It's great to enjoy characters we already know rather than having them introduced to us. Highlights are the perfect reunion between Thor and Jane and the scene with Eric in the mental home, complete with Stan cameo. The film has wit, heart and excitement, and lots of each. You can tell it's Marvel. It also has, unexpectedly, Chris O'Dowd of all people in a moderately large part.
The baddie is Malekith, back from the Walt Simonson days, played by Christopher Eccleston who, despite the unpleasantly snooty things he's since said about the part, does a perfectly good job. We also get Kurse, although with a very different, Beyonder-free backstory. And CGI trolls. Lots of them. Tom Hiddleston playing Loki with an extraordinary range of emotion, Frigga dying, a touching father/son scene in which Thor refuses the throne from Odin on the grounds that the decisions of kingship would mean he can no longer be a good man. It's fun to see London, too, and amusing that the convergence of the Nine Worlds should happen at, of all places, Greenwich. And, as ever, the MCU version of Asgard is great; powerful alien beings with 5,000 year lifespans whose advanced tech is always described in gracefully magical language, the perfect expression of Arthur C. Clarke's adage about sufficiently advanced tech being indistinguishable from magic.
If that wasn't good enough, we get Thor coming back to Jane at the end, and an intriguing post-credits scene involving the Collector and more plot-heavy talk about Infinity Stones. A brilliant film, the perfect blockbuster- well, it's MCU.
Humans: Season 3, Episode 8
“I created life once before...”
Well, that was epic and eventful. This last episode had a lot to squeeze into its forty-odd minutes and just about explained any loose ends, although not without a massive cliffhanger pointing towards what looks like a fascinating next season.
There are two strands to what’s going on; the horrors of Operation Basswood being carried out and Niska’s quest, “a pilgrimage of faith, of belief” to the Synth Who Sleeps, which finally pays off and (hooray!) integrates with the rest of the plot.
This rather mystical subplot may seem out of sync with everything else, but something like this not only pays off the ongoing theme of faith but, more importantly, adds a modest and justified amount of deus ex machina which prevents the whole thing becoming overly dark, bleak and depressing. It provides balance.
Hence the object of Niska’s quest may look like Odi but is in fact V (remember V?) who took over the body of a suicidal Odi and has been pulling strings. Niska’s personal journey makes her the perfect person, apparently, to get purple eyes like V and intervene in order to nudge history in its proper direction, Hari Seldon-like.
Because things are otherwise very bleak indeed- Mia ensures that the synths at the Railyard survive the early parts of Basswood, but the mob still attacks and the horror escalated slowly, and then things happen which made Mrs Llamastrangler cry. Mia, who has been very Christlike all season, dies a pacifist, on camera, and incites spontaneous marches of support which seem to partly ruin the Government’s plans. But the Government enters proper dictatorship mode here, to Neha’s horror. And, for revealing the details of Basswood on telly, it seems that Laura is to be charged with treason for so embarrassing the powers that be, and we see the enormous effects of this on the family. But, to paraphrase Mattie, what matters is doing the right thing. Whatever injustice follows, you still did what was right.
As for Mattie, she points the way to next season which, given past practice, is likely not to be for a long time; having all but decided not to keep the baby, and with Leo out of the picture, it looks as though herbonly choice is whether to face prison and opprobrium on her own terms or not, but it’s here that Niska’s re-enters the main plot, sprinkles a little light deus ex machina and drops the big reveal: Mattie’s baby is a synth human hybrid, and the reproductive future of synths is linked with humanity. That’ll be another season then...
Masterfully constricted and emotionally devastating stuff. Top class telly. I’m just glad that not all telly is this intense..
Well, that was epic and eventful. This last episode had a lot to squeeze into its forty-odd minutes and just about explained any loose ends, although not without a massive cliffhanger pointing towards what looks like a fascinating next season.
There are two strands to what’s going on; the horrors of Operation Basswood being carried out and Niska’s quest, “a pilgrimage of faith, of belief” to the Synth Who Sleeps, which finally pays off and (hooray!) integrates with the rest of the plot.
This rather mystical subplot may seem out of sync with everything else, but something like this not only pays off the ongoing theme of faith but, more importantly, adds a modest and justified amount of deus ex machina which prevents the whole thing becoming overly dark, bleak and depressing. It provides balance.
Hence the object of Niska’s quest may look like Odi but is in fact V (remember V?) who took over the body of a suicidal Odi and has been pulling strings. Niska’s personal journey makes her the perfect person, apparently, to get purple eyes like V and intervene in order to nudge history in its proper direction, Hari Seldon-like.
Because things are otherwise very bleak indeed- Mia ensures that the synths at the Railyard survive the early parts of Basswood, but the mob still attacks and the horror escalated slowly, and then things happen which made Mrs Llamastrangler cry. Mia, who has been very Christlike all season, dies a pacifist, on camera, and incites spontaneous marches of support which seem to partly ruin the Government’s plans. But the Government enters proper dictatorship mode here, to Neha’s horror. And, for revealing the details of Basswood on telly, it seems that Laura is to be charged with treason for so embarrassing the powers that be, and we see the enormous effects of this on the family. But, to paraphrase Mattie, what matters is doing the right thing. Whatever injustice follows, you still did what was right.
As for Mattie, she points the way to next season which, given past practice, is likely not to be for a long time; having all but decided not to keep the baby, and with Leo out of the picture, it looks as though herbonly choice is whether to face prison and opprobrium on her own terms or not, but it’s here that Niska’s re-enters the main plot, sprinkles a little light deus ex machina and drops the big reveal: Mattie’s baby is a synth human hybrid, and the reproductive future of synths is linked with humanity. That’ll be another season then...
Masterfully constricted and emotionally devastating stuff. Top class telly. I’m just glad that not all telly is this intense..
Wednesday, 4 July 2018
Humans: Season 3, Episode 7
“It’s genocide!”
It’s the penultimate episode, full of foreboding for the finale, expertly constructed as ever, and the pieces are in place for what doesn’t look like a happy ending. On the other hand, though, there seems to be a theme of faith which may offer a little hope. Or not.
Leo, with daddy issues of his own, doesn’t react well to news of his impending fatherhood, and we also see him denouncing his own father to Anatole as far from a god. There are also serious questions s about what kind of future such a baby can have, as Mattie has a 24 hour ultimatum to be outed by that slimy journalist. At least this leads to a reconciliatory father/daughter hug between her and Joe, which makes me even more sure that Joe, who hasn’t generally handled himself well, is going to sacrifice himself for the greater good next episode. All the tropes point that way.
We get the surprisingly quick downfall of Anatole, at the hands of Max, his last words being that Max should have been open from the start. The threat from bad synths seems to be over before the finale; it’s human bigotry that always was the big bad. The most horrible moment is how Ne reveals to Laura the full horrific details of the oncoming synth genocide, a genocide that has already started.
Potential hope comes with Niska’s lonely and increasingly weird sub-plot, which is mystical and seems to present a more positive ideal of faith than that presented by Anatole, the religious terrorist fanatic who denies the facts in front of him. This sub-or is looking more and more like a potential source of a miracle, which I hope is handled carefully.
That ending, though- Odi? Apparently not quite. But things are set up for a very revelatory final episode. Humans is still the best thing on telly.
It’s the penultimate episode, full of foreboding for the finale, expertly constructed as ever, and the pieces are in place for what doesn’t look like a happy ending. On the other hand, though, there seems to be a theme of faith which may offer a little hope. Or not.
Leo, with daddy issues of his own, doesn’t react well to news of his impending fatherhood, and we also see him denouncing his own father to Anatole as far from a god. There are also serious questions s about what kind of future such a baby can have, as Mattie has a 24 hour ultimatum to be outed by that slimy journalist. At least this leads to a reconciliatory father/daughter hug between her and Joe, which makes me even more sure that Joe, who hasn’t generally handled himself well, is going to sacrifice himself for the greater good next episode. All the tropes point that way.
We get the surprisingly quick downfall of Anatole, at the hands of Max, his last words being that Max should have been open from the start. The threat from bad synths seems to be over before the finale; it’s human bigotry that always was the big bad. The most horrible moment is how Ne reveals to Laura the full horrific details of the oncoming synth genocide, a genocide that has already started.
Potential hope comes with Niska’s lonely and increasingly weird sub-plot, which is mystical and seems to present a more positive ideal of faith than that presented by Anatole, the religious terrorist fanatic who denies the facts in front of him. This sub-or is looking more and more like a potential source of a miracle, which I hope is handled carefully.
That ending, though- Odi? Apparently not quite. But things are set up for a very revelatory final episode. Humans is still the best thing on telly.
Tuesday, 3 July 2018
Angel: Spin the Bottle
"I know who's president. And that I sort of wish I didn't."
Oh, Cordy. Yes, I know. Back then we all thought George W. Bush was as bad as it could get, didn't we?
“We already know this episode is going to be both quirky and special when we see the words "written and directed by Joss Whedon" appear on the screen. And it doesn't disappoint on either score, being at once beautiful, witty, emotional and not entirely linear. It isn’t Whedon’s best, but it doesn’t have to be.
Oh, the episode has an obvious function to fulfil in returning Cordy’s memory and ambiguously wakening that demon thing that may or not have infected her, but it’s all about character. It’s about the pathos of Angel and Cordy’s last words to each other- “We’re we in love?” “We were.” It’s about the tension between Gunn and Wesley, leading Gunn to ask “What happened to you, man?” and Wesley to cuttingly reply “I had my throat cut and all my friends abandoned me.” And, yes, it’s about Angel being told “You don’t sound Irish”. Whedon really, really knows these people and makes their dialogue sing.
There are other nice touches- the framing device with Lorne, for one- but the important bits are about the conceit of reverting all the characters’ memories to their seventeen year old selves, so that Angel and Connor can bond over sanctimonious fathers and Fred can espouse conspiracy theories and keep asking for weed. Interestingly, we get scenes of Wesley being all badass before the spell reverts him to his older, klutzier, gentler self- is this a subtle precursor to a reconciliation?
All this and we get the scene where Fred tells Wesley all about being vulnerable and naked, and his stiff weapon extends, a lovely, subtle Whedon moment but if a slightly naughtier persuasion. Whedon doesn’t seem to have custody of his second child very much, but we certainly appreciate it when he does.
Oh, Cordy. Yes, I know. Back then we all thought George W. Bush was as bad as it could get, didn't we?
“We already know this episode is going to be both quirky and special when we see the words "written and directed by Joss Whedon" appear on the screen. And it doesn't disappoint on either score, being at once beautiful, witty, emotional and not entirely linear. It isn’t Whedon’s best, but it doesn’t have to be.
Oh, the episode has an obvious function to fulfil in returning Cordy’s memory and ambiguously wakening that demon thing that may or not have infected her, but it’s all about character. It’s about the pathos of Angel and Cordy’s last words to each other- “We’re we in love?” “We were.” It’s about the tension between Gunn and Wesley, leading Gunn to ask “What happened to you, man?” and Wesley to cuttingly reply “I had my throat cut and all my friends abandoned me.” And, yes, it’s about Angel being told “You don’t sound Irish”. Whedon really, really knows these people and makes their dialogue sing.
There are other nice touches- the framing device with Lorne, for one- but the important bits are about the conceit of reverting all the characters’ memories to their seventeen year old selves, so that Angel and Connor can bond over sanctimonious fathers and Fred can espouse conspiracy theories and keep asking for weed. Interestingly, we get scenes of Wesley being all badass before the spell reverts him to his older, klutzier, gentler self- is this a subtle precursor to a reconciliation?
All this and we get the scene where Fred tells Wesley all about being vulnerable and naked, and his stiff weapon extends, a lovely, subtle Whedon moment but if a slightly naughtier persuasion. Whedon doesn’t seem to have custody of his second child very much, but we certainly appreciate it when he does.
Sunday, 1 July 2018
Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Him
"Bollocks to the whole thing..."
I've made allowances for the fact I'm not hugely into teen relationship drama, and this is a poor episode. Sorry. But this is where I do that thing I often do with poor episodes of Buffy in pointing out how the dialogue, characterisation, acting and wit are nevertheless top notch as ever. Even a superior show like Buffy, with 22 episodes per season, has its turds. But, my God, it polishes them well.
This episode is all about Dawn getting an enormous teenage crush on a boy at school with a magic sports jacket thingy, the type that badly dressed American "jocks" always wear and somehow get the girls in spite of the fact that it's a truly awful look. So, yeah, the metaphor is a bit blunt here, and the whole thing is a bit of a clumsy flashback to the high school metaphors of old, using the convenient fact that Dawn is a convenient peg on which to hang such things. Nothing arc-wise happens either, so it's an eminently skippable episode. At least it's a Dawn episode in which Michelle Trachtenberg gets to genuinely shine.
So, anything to notice here? Well, firstly,once again we get one of the things I most dislike about late period Buffy; acting as though Willow is just straightforwardly gay. I know sexual orientation on telly was in a more basic phase 15 years ago, but retconning her past like this just erases bisexuality and treats sexual orientation as a binary thing. Secondly, we get the Breeders- yes, THE BREEDERS, playing at the Bronze, and no one even worships at their feet or anything, which is deeply wrong, as Kim and Kelley are goddesses.
So, yeah, worth it for the Breeders. The other scenes? Not so much. But a bad episode like this doesn't take away from Buffy being a truly great show; it simply means that 22 episodes a season is too bleeding many.
I've made allowances for the fact I'm not hugely into teen relationship drama, and this is a poor episode. Sorry. But this is where I do that thing I often do with poor episodes of Buffy in pointing out how the dialogue, characterisation, acting and wit are nevertheless top notch as ever. Even a superior show like Buffy, with 22 episodes per season, has its turds. But, my God, it polishes them well.
This episode is all about Dawn getting an enormous teenage crush on a boy at school with a magic sports jacket thingy, the type that badly dressed American "jocks" always wear and somehow get the girls in spite of the fact that it's a truly awful look. So, yeah, the metaphor is a bit blunt here, and the whole thing is a bit of a clumsy flashback to the high school metaphors of old, using the convenient fact that Dawn is a convenient peg on which to hang such things. Nothing arc-wise happens either, so it's an eminently skippable episode. At least it's a Dawn episode in which Michelle Trachtenberg gets to genuinely shine.
So, anything to notice here? Well, firstly,once again we get one of the things I most dislike about late period Buffy; acting as though Willow is just straightforwardly gay. I know sexual orientation on telly was in a more basic phase 15 years ago, but retconning her past like this just erases bisexuality and treats sexual orientation as a binary thing. Secondly, we get the Breeders- yes, THE BREEDERS, playing at the Bronze, and no one even worships at their feet or anything, which is deeply wrong, as Kim and Kelley are goddesses.
So, yeah, worth it for the Breeders. The other scenes? Not so much. But a bad episode like this doesn't take away from Buffy being a truly great show; it simply means that 22 episodes a season is too bleeding many.
Monty Python's Life of Brian (1979)
"He wanks as high as any man in Wome!"
This is, surely, the greatest comedy film ever made. By miles. I suspect that’s an uncontroversial comment. It’s also not at all about religion. That one needs a bit more explaining.
Life of Brian is about how ideas, such as Jesus’ rather excellent views on how to live one’s life, are always taken over and twisted into something else by those who want to use them to gain power and status. Hence the central part of the film, where Brian is followed by professional disciples (“I should know- I’ve followed a few”) who argue amongst themselves and split into various denominations over a dropped shoe on day one, killing their first heretic for good measure. The main example of the film’s central message is in that context. But it isn’t only applied to religion- aren’t Reg’s People’s Front of Judea and all the other “splitters” am example of exactly the same thing? Yet again, principles are subordinated to power, status and meaningless bureaucracy, exactly the same as per every organised religion that has ever existed. That’s how humanity always twists religion but also, I’m afraid, politics. Principles don’t stand a chance. That’s the film’s message, beneath the inspired humour. It’s very bleak, very Adam Curtis, and every bit as dark as the gleefully dark humour.
It’s bloody funny, though. We all have our favourite lines; mine is when Brian convinced the crowd that “we’re all individuals” and “we’re all different”, and one bloke shouts “I’m not”. The performances are superb, the Pythons being geniuses, and the script is the best comedy script ever. The filming in Tunisia looks lush and expensive- thank you, George Harrison, for paying for such things as this and Shirley Bloody Bassey. If you haven’t seen this then just bloody watch it now.
Life of Brian is about how ideas, such as Jesus’ rather excellent views on how to live one’s life, are always taken over and twisted into something else by those who want to use them to gain power and status. Hence the central part of the film, where Brian is followed by professional disciples (“I should know- I’ve followed a few”) who argue amongst themselves and split into various denominations over a dropped shoe on day one, killing their first heretic for good measure. The main example of the film’s central message is in that context. But it isn’t only applied to religion- aren’t Reg’s People’s Front of Judea and all the other “splitters” am example of exactly the same thing? Yet again, principles are subordinated to power, status and meaningless bureaucracy, exactly the same as per every organised religion that has ever existed. That’s how humanity always twists religion but also, I’m afraid, politics. Principles don’t stand a chance. That’s the film’s message, beneath the inspired humour. It’s very bleak, very Adam Curtis, and every bit as dark as the gleefully dark humour.
It’s bloody funny, though. We all have our favourite lines; mine is when Brian convinced the crowd that “we’re all individuals” and “we’re all different”, and one bloke shouts “I’m not”. The performances are superb, the Pythons being geniuses, and the script is the best comedy script ever. The filming in Tunisia looks lush and expensive- thank you, George Harrison, for paying for such things as this and Shirley Bloody Bassey. If you haven’t seen this then just bloody watch it now.
Saturday, 30 June 2018
Mad Max 2 (1981)
"You're living off the corpse of the old world."
They say this is the greatest action film ever made. It's hard to disagree.
Sequels are seldom better than originals. It's a truism. Yet here it isn't true, and on many levels. We get a Western style of plot, with Max as a mysterious and bitter stranger who slowly learns to care once more as he saves an oppressed community from bandits. And it's all done very well, with an assured and charismatic performance from Mel Gibson but with even relatively minor characters feeling nuanced and human. It's well-shot. It is, at its basics, simply a very well-made Western, only set in the outback of New South Wales in the post-apocalyptic future.
And it's this latter thing, more than the nuts and bolts, that makes the film so influential- a post-apocalyptic future where civilisation has broken down and only isolated communities exist, fighting over what remains of food, petrol and what is left of advanced technology. This is made cooler by a punk aesthetic, with the baddies wearing mohicans, masks and other cool accoutrements. All this, along with the desert landscape and cannibalised vehicles, makes for a deeply cool aesthetic. And yet... the first Mad Max wasn't like this, was it? Yes, there had been some sort of event and yes, things were a bit Wild West. But there were things such as a police force, property rights, a legal system. Not here. Indeed, the opening scene retcons the first film even as it shows clips from it, narrating a nuclear apocalypse and showing us a far wilder world.
This adds pathos; civilisation has gone, and so much knowledge, culture and tech will die with this generation. It's a rather emotional moment where Max shows a simple music box to a feral kid who represents a generation which will not remember such things, will not remember so many things. This is a fine, fine film- a superior action film that functions brilliantly in that capacity yet which, with only broad strokes of world building, hints at so much more.
Sequels are seldom better than originals. It's a truism. Yet here it isn't true, and on many levels. We get a Western style of plot, with Max as a mysterious and bitter stranger who slowly learns to care once more as he saves an oppressed community from bandits. And it's all done very well, with an assured and charismatic performance from Mel Gibson but with even relatively minor characters feeling nuanced and human. It's well-shot. It is, at its basics, simply a very well-made Western, only set in the outback of New South Wales in the post-apocalyptic future.
And it's this latter thing, more than the nuts and bolts, that makes the film so influential- a post-apocalyptic future where civilisation has broken down and only isolated communities exist, fighting over what remains of food, petrol and what is left of advanced technology. This is made cooler by a punk aesthetic, with the baddies wearing mohicans, masks and other cool accoutrements. All this, along with the desert landscape and cannibalised vehicles, makes for a deeply cool aesthetic. And yet... the first Mad Max wasn't like this, was it? Yes, there had been some sort of event and yes, things were a bit Wild West. But there were things such as a police force, property rights, a legal system. Not here. Indeed, the opening scene retcons the first film even as it shows clips from it, narrating a nuclear apocalypse and showing us a far wilder world.
This adds pathos; civilisation has gone, and so much knowledge, culture and tech will die with this generation. It's a rather emotional moment where Max shows a simple music box to a feral kid who represents a generation which will not remember such things, will not remember so many things. This is a fine, fine film- a superior action film that functions brilliantly in that capacity yet which, with only broad strokes of world building, hints at so much more.
Tuesday, 26 June 2018
Cyborg (1989)
“I like the misery!”
The hero of this glorious late '80s Cannon Films, er, , played by the esteemed M. Van Damme himself, is called Gibson Rickenbacker. The baddie is called Fender. Really. That is a thing that happened.
The film is a hugely entertaining time capsule from the late '80s heyday of Cannon films, written in order to make use of sets made for a Masters of the Universe sequel and a Spider-Man film, neither of which would ultimately materialise. It's 1989, so we have a post-apocalyptic, post-plague and vaguely gothy future, no doubt influenced by those Mad Max sequels I haven't seen yet. The delightfully scenery-chewing B-movie baddie wears shades, for that is the zeitgeist, and there's a cyborg lady who's vaguely relevant to the plot, because everybody's read Neuromancer. If only there were some mention of cyberspace we'd have reached peak late '80s sci-fi zeitgeist in B-movie form. I mean, the baddies are called the Flesh Pirates. What's not to love about that?
Anyway, this is an entertaining and visually impressive little melodrama, with a gruff, post-apocalyptic who is persuaded by, you guessed it, an attractive young lady to stop just brooding about revenge and actually save the world for once. There are some rather good set pieces, including a crucifixion, no less. And the film dosn't outstay its welcome. The music is trying very hard to be Vangelis, just to borrow a bit of Blade Runner street cred, but is actually surprisingly good, even if the visuals do seem to cry out for something much gothier- Sisters of Mercy perhaps?
Anyway, a delightfully silly load of old tosh that I enjoyed muchly. Highly recommended to those, like myself, who enjoy this sort of thing.
The film is a hugely entertaining time capsule from the late '80s heyday of Cannon films, written in order to make use of sets made for a Masters of the Universe sequel and a Spider-Man film, neither of which would ultimately materialise. It's 1989, so we have a post-apocalyptic, post-plague and vaguely gothy future, no doubt influenced by those Mad Max sequels I haven't seen yet. The delightfully scenery-chewing B-movie baddie wears shades, for that is the zeitgeist, and there's a cyborg lady who's vaguely relevant to the plot, because everybody's read Neuromancer. If only there were some mention of cyberspace we'd have reached peak late '80s sci-fi zeitgeist in B-movie form. I mean, the baddies are called the Flesh Pirates. What's not to love about that?
Anyway, this is an entertaining and visually impressive little melodrama, with a gruff, post-apocalyptic who is persuaded by, you guessed it, an attractive young lady to stop just brooding about revenge and actually save the world for once. There are some rather good set pieces, including a crucifixion, no less. And the film dosn't outstay its welcome. The music is trying very hard to be Vangelis, just to borrow a bit of Blade Runner street cred, but is actually surprisingly good, even if the visuals do seem to cry out for something much gothier- Sisters of Mercy perhaps?
Anyway, a delightfully silly load of old tosh that I enjoyed muchly. Highly recommended to those, like myself, who enjoy this sort of thing.
Saturday, 23 June 2018
Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
"Your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!"
I'm obviously not blogging the telly series; it’s brilliant and revolutionary, of course, and any kind of “best of” will always be hilarious, but a sketch show with thirteen episodes to fill will inevitably be, to use the hackneyed phrase, hit and miss. And it’s not an appetising thought to attempt to review individual episodes of a series that is, deliberately, rather stream-of-consciousness. But I’ll have a go at the films. And yes, I know And Now For Something Completely Different is technically the first Python film, but I think we’re safe to treat that as a stand-alone compilation.
So, what of the film? Well, it's utterly hilarious, obviously, a serious contender for funniest film ever made. The Python style and humour translates perfectly to the big screen, in spite of the obviously low budget. The great locations and bloody good direction by Terry Jones (not Terry Gilliam, but they didn't know at the time that he would go on to be a big Hollywood director) really help here.
It's interesting to see, though, how coherent the sketches more or less are as a longer narrative, the perfect fruition of what Michael Palin and Terry Jones were trying to do increasingly during that final, truncated series. But the many iconic scenes, which we all know so well, are an absolute triumph. Forget the gleefully dodgy history; this is comedy gold. Even Elvis thought so.
I'm obviously not blogging the telly series; it’s brilliant and revolutionary, of course, and any kind of “best of” will always be hilarious, but a sketch show with thirteen episodes to fill will inevitably be, to use the hackneyed phrase, hit and miss. And it’s not an appetising thought to attempt to review individual episodes of a series that is, deliberately, rather stream-of-consciousness. But I’ll have a go at the films. And yes, I know And Now For Something Completely Different is technically the first Python film, but I think we’re safe to treat that as a stand-alone compilation.So, what of the film? Well, it's utterly hilarious, obviously, a serious contender for funniest film ever made. The Python style and humour translates perfectly to the big screen, in spite of the obviously low budget. The great locations and bloody good direction by Terry Jones (not Terry Gilliam, but they didn't know at the time that he would go on to be a big Hollywood director) really help here.
It's interesting to see, though, how coherent the sketches more or less are as a longer narrative, the perfect fruition of what Michael Palin and Terry Jones were trying to do increasingly during that final, truncated series. But the many iconic scenes, which we all know so well, are an absolute triumph. Forget the gleefully dodgy history; this is comedy gold. Even Elvis thought so.
Humans: Season 3, Episode 6
"Social cohesion is our only hope..."
After having our hopes raised, this is where we start to see them dashed. We can tell right from the pre-credits sequence, with Laura narrating, which reminds us how precarious everything is. And then, after Mia’s positive speech to the commission, everything is destroyed by Agnes’ senseless suicide bombing, in one instant, in a superbly directed sequence full of juxtapositions.
So much happens. Mattie is pregnant! Unwitting father-to-be Leo discovers that his own father regretted saving him. Niska’s separate and rather plodding plot thread, the series’ only real misstep, continues to plod along. And there’s a terrifying sequence in which Laura discovers that “Stanley” is not what he seems. He’s creepy and terrifying; a superb performance. Yet Laura manages to persuade him not to massacre the Dryden Commission. For now, anyway.
But the truly devastating scene comes at the end, as Anatole enters the Hawkins residence to bring Stanley back, and cruelly proves that even Laura would instinctly save a random human over even little Sam. Devastatingly, this brings not only Stanley but also Sam to Anatole’s side. It’s a powerful scene.
It’s a tribute to the script that an episode such as this, largely functional and quite visibly putting all the ducks in a row for the end game, can nevertheless be so dramatic, emotive and devastating. More please.
After having our hopes raised, this is where we start to see them dashed. We can tell right from the pre-credits sequence, with Laura narrating, which reminds us how precarious everything is. And then, after Mia’s positive speech to the commission, everything is destroyed by Agnes’ senseless suicide bombing, in one instant, in a superbly directed sequence full of juxtapositions.
So much happens. Mattie is pregnant! Unwitting father-to-be Leo discovers that his own father regretted saving him. Niska’s separate and rather plodding plot thread, the series’ only real misstep, continues to plod along. And there’s a terrifying sequence in which Laura discovers that “Stanley” is not what he seems. He’s creepy and terrifying; a superb performance. Yet Laura manages to persuade him not to massacre the Dryden Commission. For now, anyway.
But the truly devastating scene comes at the end, as Anatole enters the Hawkins residence to bring Stanley back, and cruelly proves that even Laura would instinctly save a random human over even little Sam. Devastatingly, this brings not only Stanley but also Sam to Anatole’s side. It’s a powerful scene.
It’s a tribute to the script that an episode such as this, largely functional and quite visibly putting all the ducks in a row for the end game, can nevertheless be so dramatic, emotive and devastating. More please.
Friday, 22 June 2018
The Wizard of Oz (1939)
"I have a feeling we're not in Kansas any more!"
This is one weird film. Brilliant, extraordinary, but, well... I'm 41 and, probably unlike yourself, had never seen it before. You probably grew up with it, so you don't realise how odd, trippy and downright bizarre this film is.
Mrs Llamastrangler forced- er, suggested that I bring this film forward from “soon” to “now” as it is admittedly pretty much the most ridiculous film not to have seen. But sometimes it’s advantageous coming to a film late, without childhood memories or bias. As ever, there were lots of moments I knew from the pop culture zeitgeist. But I enjoyed it; the film fully deserves its popularity. It’s brilliantly made- extraordinary special effects, superb design and a laudable determination to eschew realism. The script is delightfully witty and Judy Garland is perfect.
Stil... something this trippy was made in 1939? Based on an old children’s novel, half-forgotten, which was largely an allegory for US politicians of the William McKinley era? Bizarre. It’s also hard not to be constantly reminded of the dreadful sexual abuse suffered by Ms Garland, and how depressingly little has changed on that front. But any intended allegories are no longer contemporary by 1939; you can pretty much stamp whatever meaning on it that you want to. I can’t help noticing, though, that the “good” witch Glinda seems to get Dorothy and her friends to risk their lives removing all her potential rivals to absolute power. Hmm.
The film looks amazing, with the special effects surrounding the tornado unsurpassed in 79 years. The contrast between sepia Kansas and colourful, theatrical Oz with its rejection of realism is brilliantly done, especially as Dorothy opens the farmhouse door and sees colour. The songs and dialogue are gloriously and unexpectedly witty. And there’s a suspiciously druggy use of poppies to send our heroes to sleep. Hmm.
One side effect of Oz is probably unintended, though; doesn’t turn of the century Kansas look stultifyingly dull?
Mrs Llamastrangler forced- er, suggested that I bring this film forward from “soon” to “now” as it is admittedly pretty much the most ridiculous film not to have seen. But sometimes it’s advantageous coming to a film late, without childhood memories or bias. As ever, there were lots of moments I knew from the pop culture zeitgeist. But I enjoyed it; the film fully deserves its popularity. It’s brilliantly made- extraordinary special effects, superb design and a laudable determination to eschew realism. The script is delightfully witty and Judy Garland is perfect.
Stil... something this trippy was made in 1939? Based on an old children’s novel, half-forgotten, which was largely an allegory for US politicians of the William McKinley era? Bizarre. It’s also hard not to be constantly reminded of the dreadful sexual abuse suffered by Ms Garland, and how depressingly little has changed on that front. But any intended allegories are no longer contemporary by 1939; you can pretty much stamp whatever meaning on it that you want to. I can’t help noticing, though, that the “good” witch Glinda seems to get Dorothy and her friends to risk their lives removing all her potential rivals to absolute power. Hmm.
The film looks amazing, with the special effects surrounding the tornado unsurpassed in 79 years. The contrast between sepia Kansas and colourful, theatrical Oz with its rejection of realism is brilliantly done, especially as Dorothy opens the farmhouse door and sees colour. The songs and dialogue are gloriously and unexpectedly witty. And there’s a suspiciously druggy use of poppies to send our heroes to sleep. Hmm.
One side effect of Oz is probably unintended, though; doesn’t turn of the century Kansas look stultifyingly dull?
Thursday, 21 June 2018
A Very English Scandal: Episode 3
“I was rude, I was vile, I was queer, I was myself!"
After a peerless couple of episodes, themselves a bloody good example of quality telly, this final episode simply knocks both of them into a cocked hat. Extraordinary.
We see the evidence pieced together, inexorably, until the shocking moment of Thorpe's arrest arrives. The storytelling beats are perfect, the mix of humour and pathos just as in real life, the structure of the whole thing an absolute triumph of both writing and direction, the dialogue simply magnificent, the ending deeply satisfying.
There is of course a harsh light, leavened necessarily by humour, into the shocking levels of homophobia, police brutality, hypocrisy and rank snobbery- the way Thorpe blanks his old friend David, who happens to be northern and common, in the courtroom. But there is also a nod to the other side of the '70s- the clothes, the disco, the famous Peter Cook ribbing of the summing up with the line about "player of the pink oboe". There is injustice; there is inequality; these things are not ok and must be fought, but still there is life, and there is laughter, and there is joy. It's all wonderfully RTD and, after the sadly under-viewed Cucumber, reminds us that RTD is one of the best writers we have. That domestic, semi-confession scene with semi-confession, cod in parsley sauce, love, forgiveness and very understated English emotion, is alone worthy of a BAFTA.
Hugh Grant, of course, also triumphs here, finding even more nuance within this complicated, genuinely progressive man who, in the end, reflexively abuses his privilege to do terrible things, yet is also a victim of the prejudices of his generation. Adrian Scarborough excels too, though, enjoying himself hugely stealing the show as the larger-than-life George Carman. Yet Ben Whishaw perhaps lingers in the mind as Norman finally gets his day in court and finally becomes the gay icon he was destined to be.
A truly historic piece of telly, then, and it bloody well better get that shedload of BAFTAs. Perhaps, also, this is posterity's verdict on Thorpe, a complex man but not a good one. But, er, let's not be dissuaded from voting Lib Dem anyway. I'm fairly sure that Vince has never had any bloody huge Great Danes shot to cover up a murky past, and I wouldn't put it past either May or Corbyn...
After a peerless couple of episodes, themselves a bloody good example of quality telly, this final episode simply knocks both of them into a cocked hat. Extraordinary.
We see the evidence pieced together, inexorably, until the shocking moment of Thorpe's arrest arrives. The storytelling beats are perfect, the mix of humour and pathos just as in real life, the structure of the whole thing an absolute triumph of both writing and direction, the dialogue simply magnificent, the ending deeply satisfying.
There is of course a harsh light, leavened necessarily by humour, into the shocking levels of homophobia, police brutality, hypocrisy and rank snobbery- the way Thorpe blanks his old friend David, who happens to be northern and common, in the courtroom. But there is also a nod to the other side of the '70s- the clothes, the disco, the famous Peter Cook ribbing of the summing up with the line about "player of the pink oboe". There is injustice; there is inequality; these things are not ok and must be fought, but still there is life, and there is laughter, and there is joy. It's all wonderfully RTD and, after the sadly under-viewed Cucumber, reminds us that RTD is one of the best writers we have. That domestic, semi-confession scene with semi-confession, cod in parsley sauce, love, forgiveness and very understated English emotion, is alone worthy of a BAFTA.
Hugh Grant, of course, also triumphs here, finding even more nuance within this complicated, genuinely progressive man who, in the end, reflexively abuses his privilege to do terrible things, yet is also a victim of the prejudices of his generation. Adrian Scarborough excels too, though, enjoying himself hugely stealing the show as the larger-than-life George Carman. Yet Ben Whishaw perhaps lingers in the mind as Norman finally gets his day in court and finally becomes the gay icon he was destined to be.
A truly historic piece of telly, then, and it bloody well better get that shedload of BAFTAs. Perhaps, also, this is posterity's verdict on Thorpe, a complex man but not a good one. But, er, let's not be dissuaded from voting Lib Dem anyway. I'm fairly sure that Vince has never had any bloody huge Great Danes shot to cover up a murky past, and I wouldn't put it past either May or Corbyn...
Wednesday, 20 June 2018
A Very English Scandal: Episode 2
"She's the love of my life."
"Don't be ridiculous!"
Another utterly compelling hour of telly, then, as things move towards their inexorable conclusion. Russell T. Davies, Stephen Frears and an utterly revelatory Hugh Grant are all spellbinding in this artfully crafted bit of telly, and we get to see along the way just how much human devastation is left behind by self-centred posh boy Jeremy Thorpe. And this from a series that has yet to even mention his probable cover-up of the vile Cyril Smith. And yet, as the opening scene reminds me, Thorpe was very much the sort of man of whose politics I tend to approve. I would have voted Liberal back then. Yet progressive politics do not necessarily stop one from being a complete and utter bastard.
Thorpe's desire to see Norman Scott is thrust in our face from the beginning, but we are allowed, at first, to wonder whether it all might perhaps be a joke; Grant plays this ambiguity well. Yet Ben Whishaw is equally excellent in what is, perhaps even more so than the first episode, a double character study heavily reliant on the abundant skills of both actors. Whishaw truly captures both Scott’s odd innocence and his quietly dignified insistence in a homophobic world (the wedding speech is deliberately both funny and undercutting that with horror at the sheer bigotry, very RTD) that his relationship with Thorpe was real and deserving of recognition, whatever the tragedies that befall him, from his abandonment by his wife (and the taking away of his child, the worst thing that can happen to anyone) to the tragic suicide of poor Gwen- why isn’t the fantastic Eve Myles on telly more often?
Much of the episode sees the possibility of scandal slowly simmering, with an attempt to raise the temperature by Emlyn Hooson here (Jason Watkins is bloody good) and a quiet word to the police by Reginald Maudling there. But there is real pathos as Thorpe genuinely mourns the sudden death of his first wife, and shares real affection with his second. Thorpe may be gay, and closeted, but the women in his life are more than just beards. People are complicated.
The whole business of the 1974 election is handled with admirable economy of storytelling, and then the final stretch running up to the attempted assassination is rightly played as the comedy of errors that it seemingly was, with a delightful appearance from Betty Spencer herself, looking perhaps just a little different. The whole thing is a gripping piece of telly, with script, direction and acting all first class. Er, but I have to say that’s an interesting choice of actor to play John Le Mesurier...
"Don't be ridiculous!"
Another utterly compelling hour of telly, then, as things move towards their inexorable conclusion. Russell T. Davies, Stephen Frears and an utterly revelatory Hugh Grant are all spellbinding in this artfully crafted bit of telly, and we get to see along the way just how much human devastation is left behind by self-centred posh boy Jeremy Thorpe. And this from a series that has yet to even mention his probable cover-up of the vile Cyril Smith. And yet, as the opening scene reminds me, Thorpe was very much the sort of man of whose politics I tend to approve. I would have voted Liberal back then. Yet progressive politics do not necessarily stop one from being a complete and utter bastard.
Thorpe's desire to see Norman Scott is thrust in our face from the beginning, but we are allowed, at first, to wonder whether it all might perhaps be a joke; Grant plays this ambiguity well. Yet Ben Whishaw is equally excellent in what is, perhaps even more so than the first episode, a double character study heavily reliant on the abundant skills of both actors. Whishaw truly captures both Scott’s odd innocence and his quietly dignified insistence in a homophobic world (the wedding speech is deliberately both funny and undercutting that with horror at the sheer bigotry, very RTD) that his relationship with Thorpe was real and deserving of recognition, whatever the tragedies that befall him, from his abandonment by his wife (and the taking away of his child, the worst thing that can happen to anyone) to the tragic suicide of poor Gwen- why isn’t the fantastic Eve Myles on telly more often?
Much of the episode sees the possibility of scandal slowly simmering, with an attempt to raise the temperature by Emlyn Hooson here (Jason Watkins is bloody good) and a quiet word to the police by Reginald Maudling there. But there is real pathos as Thorpe genuinely mourns the sudden death of his first wife, and shares real affection with his second. Thorpe may be gay, and closeted, but the women in his life are more than just beards. People are complicated.
The whole business of the 1974 election is handled with admirable economy of storytelling, and then the final stretch running up to the attempted assassination is rightly played as the comedy of errors that it seemingly was, with a delightful appearance from Betty Spencer herself, looking perhaps just a little different. The whole thing is a gripping piece of telly, with script, direction and acting all first class. Er, but I have to say that’s an interesting choice of actor to play John Le Mesurier...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)