The Hound of the Baskervilles is probably the most filmed Sherlock Holmes story ever which means the plot is pretty well known so I assume that's why Mark Gatiss decided to ditch most of the plot in his adaptation for Sherlock.
Instead of a family curse and an escaped convict we got conspiracy theories and a hidden army base developing secret weapons. Not nearly as satisfying in my opinion. Especially as it robs us of the chance to see what Gatiss would have done with the scene when Holmes and Watson meet Henry Baskerville at a London hotel. Every screen version of Hound that I remember seeing always feels that the pace is starting to slacken at this point and so decides to jazz things up a bit. For example, in the Hammer version Sir Henry is attacked by a tarantula and in the Ian Richardson version Sir Henry is shot at by someone wielding a rifle disguised as a walking stick. Although this definitely makes things more exciting both these adaptations have forgotten that the whole point of the story is that Sir Henry is in fear for his life from a gigantic hound. The story isn't called The Tarantula of the Baskervilles or The Rifle Disguised as a Walking Stick of the Baskervilles.
But if Gatiss changed the plot then at least he kept the characters. Or their names at any rate. Dr Mortimer is now a therapist, Barrymore is an army major, Stapleton a government scientist -- I won't mention who Selden became because it's a bit of a plot twist. So the characters were all completely different in both role and personality despite keeping their original names. Except for Sir Henry Baskerville who became Henry Knight (perhaps the new surname was to make up for no longer having a knighthood.) The other change in name was for the Grimpen Mire which became the Grimpen Minefield which led to a scene which I'm guessing surprised absolutely nobody.
Actually, the Grimpen Mire/Minefield scene highlighted the fact that although Gatiss largely ignored the novel's plot he did occasionally retain certain ideas from the original story. So there was still a mysterious signal being flashed across the moors at night. And Holmes got to deliver his little speech about Watson not being luminous but rather he acts as a conductor of light, stimulating Holmes's genius. There's also a quick reminder (and subversion) of the fact that Holmes actually disappeared off-page for most of the original novel.
There were also various nods to other tales from the Holmes canon. Gatiss's explanation for the "gigantic hound" was inspired by 'The Devil's Foot.' And the idea of Holmes using a fictitious bet in order to get information out of an unwilling witness comes from 'The Blue Carbuncle.' (Gatiss even nicks the bit from the Jeremy Brett adaptation of this story where Holmes is forced to make good on his 'bet' with Watson.) There's a reference to the required "seven per cent" for Holmes's stimulants, although here they were not cocaine. Gatiss also used the famous quote about how eliminating the impossible means that whatever remains, no mater how improbable, must be the truth, although I can't remember which story this comes from offhand. And there's probably loads more references that I'm missing; my knowledge of Holmes trivia isn't as sharp as it used to be.
Anyway, I didn't find The Hounds of Baskerville as entertaining as last week's A Scandal in Belgravia. It wasn't necessarily bad but it wasn't particularly compelling either. The story was X-Files lite; the comedy bits too broad; firearms were as easy to acquire as peppermints; despite being a brilliant detective Sherlock somehow completely failed to find the cigarettes that Watson had hidden in the flat; the "mind palace" bit was just an excuse to use effects that were old hat about five minutes after the credits for Minority Report finished; the constant references to dogs scattered throughout the story (right down to casting Russell Tovey, best known for playing a werewolf in Being Human) became heavy-handed. And the idea of Holmes being shaken by the possibility of the demolition of his perfectly rational world-view after not being able to explain away his sighting of the hound would have been a lot more convincing if it wasn't totally obvious what had really happened. Even I figured it out and I'm an idiot.
But of course the worst thing about The Hounds of Baskerville was the final scene which promised the return of Moriarty next week. Hopefully that wasn't a prison he was released from but a drama school where he received some much needed acting lessons.
Another thing, which applies to Sherlock as a whole but which I keep forgetting to mention: I'm fed up with everyone mistakenly thinking Holmes and Watson are a gay couple and the way Watson chases anything in a skirt. I know this is an attempt to stop speculation among the viewers that the characters might be gay but it stopped being funny about halfway through episode one of the first series. Moffatt and Gatiss made their point about Holmes and Watson being straight ages ago; they really need to start exploring other aspects of the characters' personalities. And as far as I can recall the whole idea of Watson being a ladies man in the canonical stories comes from a single line in one of the later stories where Holmes says Watson is still married even though it had previously been stated that his wife passed away in an earlier story. For a start this could well be a continuity error of the kind Conan Doyle occasionally made -- exactly where is Watson's old army injury, Sir Arthur? -- and even if it isn't, all it shows is that Watson remarried after becoming a widower. That hardly makes him Russell Brand.
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Television. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Sherlock - A Scandal in Belgravia
The new episode of Sherlock -- 'A Scandal in Belgravia' -- was quite good fun. Yes, Sherlock will no doubt get up the noses of purists but when it comes to Holmes I'm a strange mixture of connoisseur and philistine. On the one hand I love the original Conan Doyle stories, think the Jeremy Brett TV series is the gold standard by which all other screen versions should be judged and will quite cheerfully unleash a swamp adder upon any writer foolish enough to have Holmes tangle with Dracula, Mr Hyde or any other supernatural foe. On the other hand I have a soft spot for Without a Clue and Young Sherlock Holmes and the Pyramid of Fear so obviously my judgement should be taken with a grain of salt. Sherlock tends to come down on both sides of the divide for me, depending on how well each individual episode is handled and whether I happen to feel connoisseurish or philistiney when I watch it. Consequently I shall be sticking the boot into Sherlock even as I praise it.
The opening scene, resolving the cliffhanger from series one, has divided viewers. Some found it hilariously inventive, others stupidly anti-climactic. Personally, I'm just glad they got rid of the rubbish actor playing Moriarty so quickly. Presumably he had to rush off to play the villain in the local panto. I actually found myself hoping that he was a flunky pretending to be Moriarty in order to leave the criminal mastermind out of harm's way in case his plan backfired. Unfortunately it looks like we're stuck with an actor who is less scary than the Jim Moriarty off The Goon Show. (To be fair I've not seen the actor in anything else so he may have given brilliant performances in every other role he's played. There's even a chance that his Moriarty will improve as he gets used to the part. Fingers crossed.)
Anyway, on to the main story. I'm not entirely convinced that turning Irene Adler into a morally ambiguous femme fatale was a good idea -- if memory serves she was a lot more sympathetic in the original short story -- but as this allowed Lara Pulver to strut around naked I'm not complaining. Although it did bug me that Sherlock found it impossible to make any deductions about Adler just because she was naked. Surely he could still have made deductions about her hairstyle, make up and the building she was living in. Not to mention the most obvious clue of all -- "Only one beauty salon in the whole of Europe uses that distinctive style of Brazilian!" After all, canonical stories such as 'The Blue Carbuncle' show that Holmes is able to make deductions based upon fashion and grooming. Perhaps one of the cases for which Watson feels the world is not ready is 'The Adventure of the Primped Pussy.'
Still, I was chuffed that Moffatt managed to keep so much of the original 'A Scandal in Bohemia' plot in his adaptation although he did jettison at least one key scene in order to explore the possibility of romance between Holmes and Adler -- an idea which I thought I would hate but which Moffatt managed to handle without compromising Holmes' analytical personality. (I'm not really up on Holmes pastiches but I guess that most writers ignore this scene from 'Bohemia' when they have Adler turn up in their stories as it reminds people that not only did Adler not fancy Holmes but she actually married someone else which rather gets in the way of developing romantic storylines for the two of them.)
Meanwhile, the Holmes geek in me enjoyed the references to other Holmes stories: 'The Greek Interpreter', 'The Speckled Band' and 'The Illustrious Client' (and possibly a whole bunch of others that I missed). Unfortunately the plot got a little bit carried away with its twists and turns and the ending was pretty ludicrous. Also, although Adler got a lot more to do than in the original story she actually came across as less capable -- in 'Bohemia' she scored a decisive victory against Holmes whilst acting completely by herself but in 'Belgravia' she had outside assistance yet still had trouble landing an intellectual KO. And it seemed a bit of a shame for her to end up as a damsel in distress in need of rescue.
Another thing -- and there's a good chance that I've misunderstood all the twists and turns of the plot here -- but Adler seemed willing to sacrifice national security in order to save her own skin. This basically means that she doesn't care if innocent people die so long as she survives. As I say, I may be wrong, she may have been unaware of what she was getting into and was an innocent dupe but such a lack of intelligence just makes her seem less worthy of the title the woman.
Still, overall the episode was enjoyable, appealing more to my inner philistine than my connoisseur.
The opening scene, resolving the cliffhanger from series one, has divided viewers. Some found it hilariously inventive, others stupidly anti-climactic. Personally, I'm just glad they got rid of the rubbish actor playing Moriarty so quickly. Presumably he had to rush off to play the villain in the local panto. I actually found myself hoping that he was a flunky pretending to be Moriarty in order to leave the criminal mastermind out of harm's way in case his plan backfired. Unfortunately it looks like we're stuck with an actor who is less scary than the Jim Moriarty off The Goon Show. (To be fair I've not seen the actor in anything else so he may have given brilliant performances in every other role he's played. There's even a chance that his Moriarty will improve as he gets used to the part. Fingers crossed.)
Anyway, on to the main story. I'm not entirely convinced that turning Irene Adler into a morally ambiguous femme fatale was a good idea -- if memory serves she was a lot more sympathetic in the original short story -- but as this allowed Lara Pulver to strut around naked I'm not complaining. Although it did bug me that Sherlock found it impossible to make any deductions about Adler just because she was naked. Surely he could still have made deductions about her hairstyle, make up and the building she was living in. Not to mention the most obvious clue of all -- "Only one beauty salon in the whole of Europe uses that distinctive style of Brazilian!" After all, canonical stories such as 'The Blue Carbuncle' show that Holmes is able to make deductions based upon fashion and grooming. Perhaps one of the cases for which Watson feels the world is not ready is 'The Adventure of the Primped Pussy.'
Still, I was chuffed that Moffatt managed to keep so much of the original 'A Scandal in Bohemia' plot in his adaptation although he did jettison at least one key scene in order to explore the possibility of romance between Holmes and Adler -- an idea which I thought I would hate but which Moffatt managed to handle without compromising Holmes' analytical personality. (I'm not really up on Holmes pastiches but I guess that most writers ignore this scene from 'Bohemia' when they have Adler turn up in their stories as it reminds people that not only did Adler not fancy Holmes but she actually married someone else which rather gets in the way of developing romantic storylines for the two of them.)
Meanwhile, the Holmes geek in me enjoyed the references to other Holmes stories: 'The Greek Interpreter', 'The Speckled Band' and 'The Illustrious Client' (and possibly a whole bunch of others that I missed). Unfortunately the plot got a little bit carried away with its twists and turns and the ending was pretty ludicrous. Also, although Adler got a lot more to do than in the original story she actually came across as less capable -- in 'Bohemia' she scored a decisive victory against Holmes whilst acting completely by herself but in 'Belgravia' she had outside assistance yet still had trouble landing an intellectual KO. And it seemed a bit of a shame for her to end up as a damsel in distress in need of rescue.
Another thing -- and there's a good chance that I've misunderstood all the twists and turns of the plot here -- but Adler seemed willing to sacrifice national security in order to save her own skin. This basically means that she doesn't care if innocent people die so long as she survives. As I say, I may be wrong, she may have been unaware of what she was getting into and was an innocent dupe but such a lack of intelligence just makes her seem less worthy of the title the woman.
Still, overall the episode was enjoyable, appealing more to my inner philistine than my connoisseur.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Macho Macho Man
Apparently portly funnyman James Corden used to get teased at school 'cos his middle name is Kimberly.
Doesn't he realise that his girlish name is actually a chance for him to channel his masculinity with industrial strength levels of testosterone? Let's just look at the precedent:
John Wayne. Real name Marion Morrison. Went on to define Hollywood masculinity for several decades. Even if he did wear a pink shirt in Rio Bravo. And kiss Walter Brennan.
Bruce Lee. Real name Lee Jun Fan. Given a girl's name by superstitious parents in order to confuse the demons they thought would kill him. I don't know if this is what drove him to learn kung fu but I wouldn't be surprised. Of course the style he majored in, wing chun, was devised by a woman so even after all that training he still hit like a girl.
In fact the easiest way to defeat Lee in combat was to question his manliness.
Lee Van Cleef. Despite his unisex name Van Cleef was a hard bastard in umpteen westerns not least of which was The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Not to mention portraying a geriatric ninja in trash TV classic The Master.
Mel Gibson. Now I can't say for certain that Mel stands for Melanie but that would help explain why he gets sozzled and tries to reinforce his masculinity by calling female police officers "sugar tits." It also explains the intensity of his performance in the Lethal Weapon films. He wasn't acting, he really was crazy -- about the fact that he had been given a girl's haircut.
It probably didn't help that he even got to play a character with a unisex name when he portrayed Brett Maverick. And Brett was a coward who couldn't fight and who flounced around in lacy shirts. And even Maverick's surname is associated with homosexuality due to it being used so prominently in Top Gun , a film which Quentin Tarantino famously suggested to have a gay subtext.
Well, at least Tom Cruise could feel secure playing Maverick in Top Gun as there have never been any doubts about his sexuality.
Robin Hood. I don't remember Mel Brooks picking up on the unisex nature of Robin's first name in Men in Tights; instead he chose to ridicule the legendary outlaw's outfits. Hollywood duly noted this and scratched their heads over how to avoid any more sniggering over Robin's choice of attire. Fortunately they got round this by dressing him in skintight leather trousers.
Darth Vader. Real name Anakin "Annie" Skywalker. Okay, so you've got the most powerful Jedi ever known and you're worried that he's going to turn evil if he doesn't learn to control his emotions. So you constantly refer to him by a girl's name? You make him wear a stupid little pigtail? And then you act all surprised when he turns to the Dark Side. Jedi Knights really haven't got a clue, have they?
So we should all we very careful about teasing James Corden over his middle name because like the others mentioned in this post he could snap and unleash death and destruction upon us all.
And if we really piss him off he might make another series of Horne and Corden.
Doesn't he realise that his girlish name is actually a chance for him to channel his masculinity with industrial strength levels of testosterone? Let's just look at the precedent:
John Wayne. Real name Marion Morrison. Went on to define Hollywood masculinity for several decades. Even if he did wear a pink shirt in Rio Bravo. And kiss Walter Brennan.
Bruce Lee. Real name Lee Jun Fan. Given a girl's name by superstitious parents in order to confuse the demons they thought would kill him. I don't know if this is what drove him to learn kung fu but I wouldn't be surprised. Of course the style he majored in, wing chun, was devised by a woman so even after all that training he still hit like a girl.
In fact the easiest way to defeat Lee in combat was to question his manliness.
Lee Van Cleef. Despite his unisex name Van Cleef was a hard bastard in umpteen westerns not least of which was The Good, the Bad and the Ugly. Not to mention portraying a geriatric ninja in trash TV classic The Master.
Mel Gibson. Now I can't say for certain that Mel stands for Melanie but that would help explain why he gets sozzled and tries to reinforce his masculinity by calling female police officers "sugar tits." It also explains the intensity of his performance in the Lethal Weapon films. He wasn't acting, he really was crazy -- about the fact that he had been given a girl's haircut.
It probably didn't help that he even got to play a character with a unisex name when he portrayed Brett Maverick. And Brett was a coward who couldn't fight and who flounced around in lacy shirts. And even Maverick's surname is associated with homosexuality due to it being used so prominently in Top Gun , a film which Quentin Tarantino famously suggested to have a gay subtext.
Well, at least Tom Cruise could feel secure playing Maverick in Top Gun as there have never been any doubts about his sexuality.
Robin Hood. I don't remember Mel Brooks picking up on the unisex nature of Robin's first name in Men in Tights; instead he chose to ridicule the legendary outlaw's outfits. Hollywood duly noted this and scratched their heads over how to avoid any more sniggering over Robin's choice of attire. Fortunately they got round this by dressing him in skintight leather trousers.
Darth Vader. Real name Anakin "Annie" Skywalker. Okay, so you've got the most powerful Jedi ever known and you're worried that he's going to turn evil if he doesn't learn to control his emotions. So you constantly refer to him by a girl's name? You make him wear a stupid little pigtail? And then you act all surprised when he turns to the Dark Side. Jedi Knights really haven't got a clue, have they?
So we should all we very careful about teasing James Corden over his middle name because like the others mentioned in this post he could snap and unleash death and destruction upon us all.
And if we really piss him off he might make another series of Horne and Corden.
Monday, November 30, 2009
TV or not TV
"We Have Books About TV" -- Sign outside Springfield Library, The Simpsons
Televison gets a bad rep for encouraging illiteracy and turning anyone who watches a programme for more than thirty seconds into a braindead, dribbling moron but I'm not sure that's entirely deserved. Yeah, there's lot of rubbish programmes that people watch when they could be reading but there's lots of TV adaptations of books and also lots of TV programmes that get novelised.
Personally a lot of my early reading came from finding out about books and characters from TV. Paddington Bear, Just William, Swallows and Amazons, Sherlock Holmes, Dr Who and The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. Not to mention Jackonary which led to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Wind in the Willows and The Otterbury Incident (written by a future Poet Laureate no less). While you could argue the literary merit of some of these stories they helped develop my love of reading.
Even as an adult I find myself sampling authors due to the influence of TV adaptations. Books such as Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels, P.G. Wodehouse, Agatha Christie's Miss Marple. Even the Simon Nye novel which he later developed into his hit sitcom Men Behaving Badly (fortunately when he adapted it for TV he decided it might be an idea to include some jokes.)
And it's not just me. One of my friends happily admits that he's not a big reader but thanks to TV he's had a crack at C.S. Forester's Hornblower novels, Jeff Lindsay's Dexter novels and P.G. Wodehouse's Jeeves and Wooster stories.
Now I appreciate it's not just the influence of television that brought me to read some of these books. Stacy Keach's Mike Hammer isn't really a factor in me wanting to try Mickey Spillane and I don't remember Spenser: For Hire well enough for it to sway me one way or another when it comes to reading Robert B Parker. And I'll admit that even when I thoroughly enjoy a TV adaptation it won't necessarily spur me on to read the source material. At least not straight away. Decades passed between my seeing Joan Hickson portraying Miss Marple and my deciding that perhaps I should give the books a go. And although I tried a P.G. Wodehouse novel at the time of Fry and Laurie's Jeeves and Wooster it took many years and several nudges from various quarters (including repeats of the TV series) to remind me that it was high time to read some more of his stuff.
Sometimes the TV connection can be quite unexpected. A while back Garth Ennis mentioned that he enjoyed the novels of Derek Robinson, an author with whom I was totally unfamiliar. Recently I stumbled upon one of Mr Robinson's books only to discover it was the basis for a TV series I saw as a child.
UK TV has a long history of adapting books to screen and otherwise appropriating literary characters. Rumpole of the Bailey, The Darling Buds of May, Bodies, Tales of the Unexpected, A Bit of a Do. Crime novels seem to be particularly popular TV fodder -- Wire in the Blood, A Touch of Frost, Dalziel and Pascoe, Inspector Morse, Sharman, Jemima Shore Investigates, An Unsuitable Job For A Woman. Not to mention period dramas. British TV does like to dress up actors in frockcoats and breeches and actresses in bonnets and corsets. Although to be fair quite a few of these programmes seem equally keen to get the actors and actresses out of these costumes at the earliest opportunity.
Judging by the imports we get over here US TV isn't quite so keen on adapting books but in the last few years there seems to have been an upswing -- Homicide: Life on the Street, True Blood, The Wire, Generation Kill, Dexter and FlashForward.
So it's not all bad news as far as TV is concerned. It can actually inspire people to read more than just those annoying messages that flash up on the screen to tell you what the next programme will be, totally ruining the ending of the programme that you're currently watching. Occasionally, just occasionally, television can inspire viewers to seek out the wonders of literature.
Now excuse me, I'm off to watch I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here.
Televison gets a bad rep for encouraging illiteracy and turning anyone who watches a programme for more than thirty seconds into a braindead, dribbling moron but I'm not sure that's entirely deserved. Yeah, there's lot of rubbish programmes that people watch when they could be reading but there's lots of TV adaptations of books and also lots of TV programmes that get novelised.
Personally a lot of my early reading came from finding out about books and characters from TV. Paddington Bear, Just William, Swallows and Amazons, Sherlock Holmes, Dr Who and The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe. Not to mention Jackonary which led to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Wind in the Willows and The Otterbury Incident (written by a future Poet Laureate no less). While you could argue the literary merit of some of these stories they helped develop my love of reading.
Even as an adult I find myself sampling authors due to the influence of TV adaptations. Books such as Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe novels, P.G. Wodehouse, Agatha Christie's Miss Marple. Even the Simon Nye novel which he later developed into his hit sitcom Men Behaving Badly (fortunately when he adapted it for TV he decided it might be an idea to include some jokes.)
And it's not just me. One of my friends happily admits that he's not a big reader but thanks to TV he's had a crack at C.S. Forester's Hornblower novels, Jeff Lindsay's Dexter novels and P.G. Wodehouse's Jeeves and Wooster stories.
Now I appreciate it's not just the influence of television that brought me to read some of these books. Stacy Keach's Mike Hammer isn't really a factor in me wanting to try Mickey Spillane and I don't remember Spenser: For Hire well enough for it to sway me one way or another when it comes to reading Robert B Parker. And I'll admit that even when I thoroughly enjoy a TV adaptation it won't necessarily spur me on to read the source material. At least not straight away. Decades passed between my seeing Joan Hickson portraying Miss Marple and my deciding that perhaps I should give the books a go. And although I tried a P.G. Wodehouse novel at the time of Fry and Laurie's Jeeves and Wooster it took many years and several nudges from various quarters (including repeats of the TV series) to remind me that it was high time to read some more of his stuff.
Sometimes the TV connection can be quite unexpected. A while back Garth Ennis mentioned that he enjoyed the novels of Derek Robinson, an author with whom I was totally unfamiliar. Recently I stumbled upon one of Mr Robinson's books only to discover it was the basis for a TV series I saw as a child.
UK TV has a long history of adapting books to screen and otherwise appropriating literary characters. Rumpole of the Bailey, The Darling Buds of May, Bodies, Tales of the Unexpected, A Bit of a Do. Crime novels seem to be particularly popular TV fodder -- Wire in the Blood, A Touch of Frost, Dalziel and Pascoe, Inspector Morse, Sharman, Jemima Shore Investigates, An Unsuitable Job For A Woman. Not to mention period dramas. British TV does like to dress up actors in frockcoats and breeches and actresses in bonnets and corsets. Although to be fair quite a few of these programmes seem equally keen to get the actors and actresses out of these costumes at the earliest opportunity.
Judging by the imports we get over here US TV isn't quite so keen on adapting books but in the last few years there seems to have been an upswing -- Homicide: Life on the Street, True Blood, The Wire, Generation Kill, Dexter and FlashForward.
So it's not all bad news as far as TV is concerned. It can actually inspire people to read more than just those annoying messages that flash up on the screen to tell you what the next programme will be, totally ruining the ending of the programme that you're currently watching. Occasionally, just occasionally, television can inspire viewers to seek out the wonders of literature.
Now excuse me, I'm off to watch I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
FantasyCon Bebop
Went to FantasyCon over the weekend. Caught up with friends, went for a curry, visited Nottingham Castle and its excellent art gallery. Jolly good fun.
And in a totally unrelated matter here's the Cowboy Bebop theme 'cos I'm in the mood for some anime-inspired Japanese jazz. Trust me, it's actually pretty good.
And in a totally unrelated matter here's the Cowboy Bebop theme 'cos I'm in the mood for some anime-inspired Japanese jazz. Trust me, it's actually pretty good.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Everybody Knows Everything
Bit disappointed with The South Bank Show profile of William Goldman. Yeah, they showed great clips from Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid ("Guns or knives, Butch?") and some of his other films but they skipped A Bridge Too Far and The Princess Bride.
Not to mention the fact that any Goldman fan will have heard all the anecdotes he trotted out about a million times before. I was sitting there guessing which bit of gossip he was going to supply about each clip before he even opened his mouth.
Still an enjoyable programme of course. I just wish it hadn't been so predictable.
Not to mention the fact that any Goldman fan will have heard all the anecdotes he trotted out about a million times before. I was sitting there guessing which bit of gossip he was going to supply about each clip before he even opened his mouth.
Still an enjoyable programme of course. I just wish it hadn't been so predictable.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Wire We Waiting?
So I've finally bought the last two seasons of The Wire after finding them discounted to a price that I can actually afford. I was absolutely ecstactic ... until I discovered that the series is finally coming to British TV so I didn't need to buy them after all.
Typical.
Typical.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Michael Davis
When I was a kid I thought Michael Davis was one of the funniest performers I'd ever seen.
There's another comic in this first video, skip ahead to 3:30 if you want just see Davis.
This video shows a great trick with a pingpong ball. (If Chris Teague is reading this, don't get excited Chris, it's not the trick you usually pay to see done with a pingpong ball.)
This clip features a crappy framing device for the comedy and uses some of the same gags from the previous videos but still contains some other funny lines.
There's another comic in this first video, skip ahead to 3:30 if you want just see Davis.
This video shows a great trick with a pingpong ball. (If Chris Teague is reading this, don't get excited Chris, it's not the trick you usually pay to see done with a pingpong ball.)
This clip features a crappy framing device for the comedy and uses some of the same gags from the previous videos but still contains some other funny lines.
Monday, March 03, 2008
NSFW
Thanks to Elizabeth for sending me this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lcmNaXmjvs
NSFW (Unless your boss has a sense of humour.)
NSFW (Unless your boss has a sense of humour.)
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Korgoth of Barbaria
Bob Covington pointed me towards a cartoon called Korgoth of Barbaria which spoofs the old Robert E Howard Conan stories. Funny and violent with lots of monsters and buxom wenches but there's only been one episode so far. Quick clip at www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPXH12h-K-M if anyone's interested.
Friday, January 11, 2008
Random Ramblings
Watched the beginning of Shadow Man starring Steven Seagal the other day. Just one of those masochistic things I do every now and again just to see how bad his films are these days. His current fare makes his old films look like cinematic masterpieces. Especially the fight scenes.
At least in the old days he used to do all the fights himself now he just waves his arms around while the camera does a closeup of his face and then the person he's fighting will fall down for no reason. Or more likely Seagal will just use a stunt double for the fights. Because the more bloated he becomes the more OTT his fights are. Full of dodgy wire-fu performed by stunt doubles. Except Seagal really expects people to believe that it's him doing all the stunts. Come on, look at the size of him, there isn't a wire in the world strong enough to lift that amount of blubber.
But bizarrely the fights weren't actually the funniest thing about Shadow Man. 'Cos believe it or not one of the other stars was Imelda Staunton. That's right, Vera Drake was co-starrring in a Seagal film! I didn't watch the film all the way through but I'm hoping she had a fight scene with Seagal and gave him a right good slapping.
And the surreal casting didn't stop there. Also appearing was Eva Pope from Waterloo Road (you know, that school drama with Neil Morrisey; basically it's the BBC trying to fob us off with Grange Hill as primetime telly 'cos it's got a different name and has proper "stars"). And there was also Trevor from Eastenders who used to beat up Little Mo. Unfortunately Seagal didn't pay homage to this by beating him up with an iron but I like to think this idea was put forward in an earlier draft of the script.
Of course the really exciting thing about this is that now Seagal has a potential "in" with Eastenders. The soap has a fascination with gangsters and ex-coppers (which probably explains why they have an exchange scheme going on with the cast of The Bill) so Seagal would be perfect. He could play an ex-NYPD detective who's trying to trace his East End heritage. He could even run the aikido school that used to get mentioned in every single bloody episode until the writers realised they didn't actually have any ideas how to work stories around it and quietly dropped it.
And the best thing woud be that Seagal could go up against Phil Mitchell. Just think about it, they make perfect foils for each other: they're both fat, bald has-beens trying to act like hard men.
If Seagal can't persuade any of his Hollywood stunt doubles to do the fight scenes for Eastenders I have the perfect solution. Westlife. Now this isn't just 'cos I want to see the Irish crooners get beaten to death (although that does hold a certain appeal). It comes from seeing their dancing in the video for their cover of 'Home'. Whenever they get all emotional during the song they start pulling faces and clenching their fists. One of them even stands on one leg and wobbles about wildly as he tries to maintain his balance. It looks like he's tried to walk off only to discover that someone has superglued one of his feet to the floor. Or that he's doing an un-PC impression of a special needs kid playing hopscotch. Whatever, he still obviously has greater athletic ability than Seagal.
The problem with Westlife is that these days the blonde one is a dead ringer for Boris Johnson. I keep expecting him to campaign to become the Mayor of London. But that's not as big as the other problem Westlife have. That they're shit.
Out of all the 90s pop comebacks the only group that have managed to impress me is Take That. Not that I like their music but at least they seem to have a suitably humble attitude. They appear genuinely grateful that people are buying their new records. To be honest they probably can't believe their luck. They know it's a miracle that anyone bought their stuff the first time round so having a successful comeback is something to be grateful for. Such humility is refreshing. Plus, their success will hopefully piss off Robbie Williams.
At least in the old days he used to do all the fights himself now he just waves his arms around while the camera does a closeup of his face and then the person he's fighting will fall down for no reason. Or more likely Seagal will just use a stunt double for the fights. Because the more bloated he becomes the more OTT his fights are. Full of dodgy wire-fu performed by stunt doubles. Except Seagal really expects people to believe that it's him doing all the stunts. Come on, look at the size of him, there isn't a wire in the world strong enough to lift that amount of blubber.
But bizarrely the fights weren't actually the funniest thing about Shadow Man. 'Cos believe it or not one of the other stars was Imelda Staunton. That's right, Vera Drake was co-starrring in a Seagal film! I didn't watch the film all the way through but I'm hoping she had a fight scene with Seagal and gave him a right good slapping.
And the surreal casting didn't stop there. Also appearing was Eva Pope from Waterloo Road (you know, that school drama with Neil Morrisey; basically it's the BBC trying to fob us off with Grange Hill as primetime telly 'cos it's got a different name and has proper "stars"). And there was also Trevor from Eastenders who used to beat up Little Mo. Unfortunately Seagal didn't pay homage to this by beating him up with an iron but I like to think this idea was put forward in an earlier draft of the script.
Of course the really exciting thing about this is that now Seagal has a potential "in" with Eastenders. The soap has a fascination with gangsters and ex-coppers (which probably explains why they have an exchange scheme going on with the cast of The Bill) so Seagal would be perfect. He could play an ex-NYPD detective who's trying to trace his East End heritage. He could even run the aikido school that used to get mentioned in every single bloody episode until the writers realised they didn't actually have any ideas how to work stories around it and quietly dropped it.
And the best thing woud be that Seagal could go up against Phil Mitchell. Just think about it, they make perfect foils for each other: they're both fat, bald has-beens trying to act like hard men.
If Seagal can't persuade any of his Hollywood stunt doubles to do the fight scenes for Eastenders I have the perfect solution. Westlife. Now this isn't just 'cos I want to see the Irish crooners get beaten to death (although that does hold a certain appeal). It comes from seeing their dancing in the video for their cover of 'Home'. Whenever they get all emotional during the song they start pulling faces and clenching their fists. One of them even stands on one leg and wobbles about wildly as he tries to maintain his balance. It looks like he's tried to walk off only to discover that someone has superglued one of his feet to the floor. Or that he's doing an un-PC impression of a special needs kid playing hopscotch. Whatever, he still obviously has greater athletic ability than Seagal.
The problem with Westlife is that these days the blonde one is a dead ringer for Boris Johnson. I keep expecting him to campaign to become the Mayor of London. But that's not as big as the other problem Westlife have. That they're shit.
Out of all the 90s pop comebacks the only group that have managed to impress me is Take That. Not that I like their music but at least they seem to have a suitably humble attitude. They appear genuinely grateful that people are buying their new records. To be honest they probably can't believe their luck. They know it's a miracle that anyone bought their stuff the first time round so having a successful comeback is something to be grateful for. Such humility is refreshing. Plus, their success will hopefully piss off Robbie Williams.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Dollhouse
Not heard much about this proposed new TV series but Joss Whedon and Eliza Dushku are supposed to be involved so I'm quietly excited.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
What a Blunt
Are you one of those people who thinks James Blunt lacks street cred? Then you obviously haven't seen this.
Friday, July 06, 2007
Deja Vu
Weird thing happened whilst I was watching House last night. The episode revolved around House treating someone he had been dreaming about despite House never having previously met the person. Fair enough, but about halfway through the episode I found I could predict what was going to happen in each scene.
This was a little strange. This was a new episode so I couldn't have seen it before. And why could I only predict the second half of the story? Even if I had somehow managed to see the episode prior to this I would have remembered the whole thing due to its interesting premise and the cool opening scene. Plus the geek part of my brain would have remembered that the patient was played by Marc Blucas who was Riley in Buffy.
Puzzled, I continued to watch the episode.
Eventually I realised what had happened. A couple of months back I was thrown when a scene dealing with a subplot felt jarringly out of place with House's continuity. That same scene was in last night's episode but now it felt right at home continuity-wise. Okay, Five had obviously screwed up and shown the episode ahead of schedule and now they were showing it in its correct place. But why couldn't I remember the first half of the episode? I don't have a definite answer for that but the simplest solution is that I just missed the first half when it was previously aired. That would also explain why I didn't remember the Buffy connection; for the portion of the show that I remembered Blucas only made a brief appearance and had a shaved head due to aborted brain surgery.
Mystery solved.
Apart from the freaky coincidence of my experiencing deja vu due to a vague memory whilst watching a TV show where the main character experiences deja vu due to a vague memory. *Twilight Zone theme plays in background*
This was a little strange. This was a new episode so I couldn't have seen it before. And why could I only predict the second half of the story? Even if I had somehow managed to see the episode prior to this I would have remembered the whole thing due to its interesting premise and the cool opening scene. Plus the geek part of my brain would have remembered that the patient was played by Marc Blucas who was Riley in Buffy.
Puzzled, I continued to watch the episode.
Eventually I realised what had happened. A couple of months back I was thrown when a scene dealing with a subplot felt jarringly out of place with House's continuity. That same scene was in last night's episode but now it felt right at home continuity-wise. Okay, Five had obviously screwed up and shown the episode ahead of schedule and now they were showing it in its correct place. But why couldn't I remember the first half of the episode? I don't have a definite answer for that but the simplest solution is that I just missed the first half when it was previously aired. That would also explain why I didn't remember the Buffy connection; for the portion of the show that I remembered Blucas only made a brief appearance and had a shaved head due to aborted brain surgery.
Mystery solved.
Apart from the freaky coincidence of my experiencing deja vu due to a vague memory whilst watching a TV show where the main character experiences deja vu due to a vague memory. *Twilight Zone theme plays in background*
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Don't I know you from somewhere?
Caught a repeat of Sharpe's Justice the other day. Surprised to see how many of the cast went on to star in SF/F/H fare.
Obviously Sean Bean played Boromir in LotR. But you also had a pre-Life on Mars Philip Glenister, a pre-Primeval Douglas Henshall and a pre-Buffy and Angel Alexis Denisof.
And then last night I watched Sharpe's Challenge which had Bean fighting Toby Stephens. Both men had previously played Bond villains.
A less interesting version of this game can be played with Dr Who, trying to spot which programme the actors playing the supporting characters had appeared in before Who. Eastenders, Eastenders, Eastenders, Casualty, Eastenders, Eastenders ...
Obviously Sean Bean played Boromir in LotR. But you also had a pre-Life on Mars Philip Glenister, a pre-Primeval Douglas Henshall and a pre-Buffy and Angel Alexis Denisof.
And then last night I watched Sharpe's Challenge which had Bean fighting Toby Stephens. Both men had previously played Bond villains.
A less interesting version of this game can be played with Dr Who, trying to spot which programme the actors playing the supporting characters had appeared in before Who. Eastenders, Eastenders, Eastenders, Casualty, Eastenders, Eastenders ...
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Hard Bastards
Was chatting to one of my mates about actors who don't mind being unsympathetic when playing heroes. The ones who don't need to have at least one key scene where their character is shown to be a wonderful, sensitive human being. The ones who are prepared to play hard, unlikeable, even misanthropic characters. The ones who are prepared to play real bastards.
Obviously John Wayne came up. As Ethan Edwards in The Searchers -- possibly his most famous role -- he is a bitter, racist, vengeance-driven bastard. In fact I would argue that he's not even the hero of the film. Yes, he gets the most screentime and has his name over the credits but the real hero of the story is Jeffrey Hunter. Even if you don't agree that Hunter is the film's hero he is at least its conscience. He is the moral centre of the film, Wayne is just there to act hard. The same is true of Red River. Wayne starts off in his typical firm but fair persona but about halfway through the film he crosses the line and it becomes clear that he is the villain of the piece and Montgomery Clift is the real hero. Perhaps not coincidentally The Searchers and Red River are considered to contain two of Wayne's best performances.
And James Cagney. Yes, he played heroes. He even played jolly romantic leads when he was in song and dance mode. But he is best remembered for playing villains. White Heat, The Public Enemy -- he was '30s cinema's favourite psychotic gangster. Even later on in his career he could still play bastards. His portrayal of Captain Morton in Mister Roberts is hissably evil and the film's a comedy!
Humphrey Bogart also played his fair share of villains before getting a shot at a heroic role. And then he played Sam Spade; a hard, cynical, virtually amoral bastard. Not exactly role model material. Yes, he played softer roles such as in The African Queen but he still retained his hard edge. The Caine Mutiny shows him going into meltdown, his portrayal of Captain Queeg the dramtic flipside to Cagney's comedic martinet in Mr Roberts.
Other actors come to mind. Michael Caine in Get Carter. Clint Eastwood in White Hunter, Black Heart or High Plains Drifter or the original Dirty Harry.
Wayne. Cagney. Bogart. Caine. Eastwood. And then we added another name to this illustrious list ...
Richard Briers.
Yes, I know he was the voice of Roobarb and Custard. And I know he was Tom Good in The Good Life. But let's face it, Tom was a bit of a bastard. He jacked in his job and decided to basically start a farm in his Surbiton home, subjecting his wife Barbara to a life of hardship and toil and financial destituiton and he expects her to happily go along with it. And while he continually takes potshots at his next door neighbour Jerry for continuing to take part in the rat race Jerry's the one Tom goes crawling to when he needs money. Plus there's the fact that Tom obviously fancies his chances with Jerry's wife, Margo. He sees how worked up she gets when he teases her and he suspects that this passion extends to other areas.
And in Ever Decreasing Circles Briers's character Martin is basically a little Hitler. His obsession with rules and regulations and always doing everything by the book is annoying enough but he has hardly any warmth to him, any humanity. Yes, the occasional episode would show the softer side to his character but mainly he was there to be unlikeable, his desperation to cling to his ordered little world no matter what sometimes shifting from comedy to darker, more unsettling territory.
So here's to Richard Briers. One of acting's best bastards!
Obviously John Wayne came up. As Ethan Edwards in The Searchers -- possibly his most famous role -- he is a bitter, racist, vengeance-driven bastard. In fact I would argue that he's not even the hero of the film. Yes, he gets the most screentime and has his name over the credits but the real hero of the story is Jeffrey Hunter. Even if you don't agree that Hunter is the film's hero he is at least its conscience. He is the moral centre of the film, Wayne is just there to act hard. The same is true of Red River. Wayne starts off in his typical firm but fair persona but about halfway through the film he crosses the line and it becomes clear that he is the villain of the piece and Montgomery Clift is the real hero. Perhaps not coincidentally The Searchers and Red River are considered to contain two of Wayne's best performances.
And James Cagney. Yes, he played heroes. He even played jolly romantic leads when he was in song and dance mode. But he is best remembered for playing villains. White Heat, The Public Enemy -- he was '30s cinema's favourite psychotic gangster. Even later on in his career he could still play bastards. His portrayal of Captain Morton in Mister Roberts is hissably evil and the film's a comedy!
Humphrey Bogart also played his fair share of villains before getting a shot at a heroic role. And then he played Sam Spade; a hard, cynical, virtually amoral bastard. Not exactly role model material. Yes, he played softer roles such as in The African Queen but he still retained his hard edge. The Caine Mutiny shows him going into meltdown, his portrayal of Captain Queeg the dramtic flipside to Cagney's comedic martinet in Mr Roberts.
Other actors come to mind. Michael Caine in Get Carter. Clint Eastwood in White Hunter, Black Heart or High Plains Drifter or the original Dirty Harry.
Wayne. Cagney. Bogart. Caine. Eastwood. And then we added another name to this illustrious list ...
Richard Briers.
Yes, I know he was the voice of Roobarb and Custard. And I know he was Tom Good in The Good Life. But let's face it, Tom was a bit of a bastard. He jacked in his job and decided to basically start a farm in his Surbiton home, subjecting his wife Barbara to a life of hardship and toil and financial destituiton and he expects her to happily go along with it. And while he continually takes potshots at his next door neighbour Jerry for continuing to take part in the rat race Jerry's the one Tom goes crawling to when he needs money. Plus there's the fact that Tom obviously fancies his chances with Jerry's wife, Margo. He sees how worked up she gets when he teases her and he suspects that this passion extends to other areas.
And in Ever Decreasing Circles Briers's character Martin is basically a little Hitler. His obsession with rules and regulations and always doing everything by the book is annoying enough but he has hardly any warmth to him, any humanity. Yes, the occasional episode would show the softer side to his character but mainly he was there to be unlikeable, his desperation to cling to his ordered little world no matter what sometimes shifting from comedy to darker, more unsettling territory.
So here's to Richard Briers. One of acting's best bastards!
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Terrance Dicks
One of the cheap DVDs I picked up over Xmas was Dr Who and the Horror of Fang Rock. I remember being absolutely terrified of the monster in this story when I saw it as a kid. I was pretty sure I wouldn't have the same reaction to it now but my curiosity got the better of me. So I bought the DVD, stuck it in the player and waited to have the bejeesus scared out of me.
Of course the monster turned out to as scary as a little kitten. A cute fluffy little kitten. A cute fluffy little kitten staring up at you lovingly with its big wide eyes.
In my defence when I first saw the story I would have only been four. I know kids who are older than that who are scared of Father Christmas for God's sake.
Anyway, the DVD wasn't a complete loss. The story wasn't actually that bad although funnily enough I couldn't help thinking that it would've been better if it had been played as a straight horror story without the Dr Who touches. (And with a decent monster.)
The DVD also had a feature on the story's writer, Terrance Dicks. Most of my memories of Dr Who come from reading his novelizations of the stories. In book form the dodgy acting and shoddy SFX of the TV programme disappear and you're left with tight plots, sharp dialogue, scary monsters and cosmic chills. I used to love them.
And that led me to read the other children's novels Dicks wrote. His Star Quest trilogy of SF novels. His Baker Street Irregulars series about a gang of crime solving kids. His horror novels including Cry Vampire! (Pretty much the only horror I read as a kid.)
He was a huge influence on my writing as a kid. Without him I might not be the writer I am today.
So now you know who to blame.
Of course the monster turned out to as scary as a little kitten. A cute fluffy little kitten. A cute fluffy little kitten staring up at you lovingly with its big wide eyes.
In my defence when I first saw the story I would have only been four. I know kids who are older than that who are scared of Father Christmas for God's sake.
Anyway, the DVD wasn't a complete loss. The story wasn't actually that bad although funnily enough I couldn't help thinking that it would've been better if it had been played as a straight horror story without the Dr Who touches. (And with a decent monster.)
The DVD also had a feature on the story's writer, Terrance Dicks. Most of my memories of Dr Who come from reading his novelizations of the stories. In book form the dodgy acting and shoddy SFX of the TV programme disappear and you're left with tight plots, sharp dialogue, scary monsters and cosmic chills. I used to love them.
And that led me to read the other children's novels Dicks wrote. His Star Quest trilogy of SF novels. His Baker Street Irregulars series about a gang of crime solving kids. His horror novels including Cry Vampire! (Pretty much the only horror I read as a kid.)
He was a huge influence on my writing as a kid. Without him I might not be the writer I am today.
So now you know who to blame.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
Star Trekkin'
Caught a few minutes of an early episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation yesterday. It had not aged well. Fake-looking sets, unconvincing SFX, stilted dialogue -- it looked as corny as the original Star Trek must have looked when TNG first aired. Except without the novelty of being the first series to boldy go where no one has gone before.
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Salem's Lot
Watched Salem's Lot the other day -- the David Soul version. Bit disappointed. The main plot takes forever to get going and even when it does the old school vampirism looks pretty corny these days. Plus, I thought the town ended up overrun with vamps but in this version there's only about half a dozen of the fangy fiends.
On the plus side James Mason as Straker is classy as ever.
On the plus side James Mason as Straker is classy as ever.
Sunday, May 21, 2006
Who Cares?
I'm not entirely sure I can explain what it is about the new Dr Who that irritates me so much. Still, I'll have a stab at it.
1) First Christopher Eccleston and now David Tennant play The Doctor in an annoying "I'm mad, me!" fashion.
2) Billie Piper's acting ranged seems limited to either smiling at inappropriate moments or else crying whenever she thinks her mum/dad/Mickey are dead or are about to leave her.
3) The attempt to sex up the series by having nearly all the female characters fancy The Doctor feels forced. And his relationship with Rose feels kind of creepy.
4) Trying to make The Doctor cool by making him a fan of the Sex Pistols and dressing him in designer clothes is just plain embarrassing.
5) The incidental music is always completely OTT in a desperate attempt to convince the viewer that what they're watching is really dramatic, honest.
6) Every damn story is set on Earth. Even Jon Pertwee's Earth-imprisoned Doctor got to travel the cosmos more than this.
7) The emotional climax at the end of each episode drags on forever. Nearly every week the threat has been dealt with, all that's left is for Rose and The Doctor to hop in the TARDIS and the end credits to roll. Instead you get five or ten minutes of soap opera style hand-wringing. "Oh, I'm really upset that so-and-so died! Sob!" "Oh, I'm going to have to leave behind the person I love. Sniff!' Emotional payoffs should either be tied into the dramatic climax of the main plot or else handled quickly in a brief epilogue before Rose and The Doctor go traipsing off around the universe once more.
8) By trying to round out the supporting characters (a good thing) the writers reduce The Doctor to a deus ex machina (a bad thing). Often he only seems to be there to supply info-dumps and to wave his sonic screwdriver about whenever Russell T Davies has written himself into a corner. Otherwise I get the impression that Rose would be saving the universe by herself each week. Even when The Doctor does get something to do it tends to either be a badly choreagraphed action scene or else an embarrassing emotional scene.
9) The humour is too broad. Even when the basic jokes are funny the execution lacks wit and sparkle.
10) Most of the stories have plot-holes you could drive a truck through.
I could go on but I've probably already got every Dr Who fan in the UK baying for my blood. I suppose if I had to sum up my problems with the new Dr Who it's that too often it feels like a soap opera -- Eastenders with a couple of sci-fi flourishes added on.
Obviously I'm not saying the old Dr Who was flawless. I could probably make a list of its faults that would be just as long as the one above. (Actually it would probably be rather easy to stick the boot in to the old series as about 80% of my childhood nostalgia for Dr Who comes from reading the Target novelizations rather than watching the TV series.)
And the new version is obviously very popular, pulling in loads of viewers and even convincing the BBC that maybe they should make other sci-fi series. Hell, even I find myself enjoying bits of it. But as the new version is so popular -- winning BAFTAs and everyone saying how wonderful it is -- I felt it was worth pointing out that in certain respects it's actually pretty crappy.
1) First Christopher Eccleston and now David Tennant play The Doctor in an annoying "I'm mad, me!" fashion.
2) Billie Piper's acting ranged seems limited to either smiling at inappropriate moments or else crying whenever she thinks her mum/dad/Mickey are dead or are about to leave her.
3) The attempt to sex up the series by having nearly all the female characters fancy The Doctor feels forced. And his relationship with Rose feels kind of creepy.
4) Trying to make The Doctor cool by making him a fan of the Sex Pistols and dressing him in designer clothes is just plain embarrassing.
5) The incidental music is always completely OTT in a desperate attempt to convince the viewer that what they're watching is really dramatic, honest.
6) Every damn story is set on Earth. Even Jon Pertwee's Earth-imprisoned Doctor got to travel the cosmos more than this.
7) The emotional climax at the end of each episode drags on forever. Nearly every week the threat has been dealt with, all that's left is for Rose and The Doctor to hop in the TARDIS and the end credits to roll. Instead you get five or ten minutes of soap opera style hand-wringing. "Oh, I'm really upset that so-and-so died! Sob!" "Oh, I'm going to have to leave behind the person I love. Sniff!' Emotional payoffs should either be tied into the dramatic climax of the main plot or else handled quickly in a brief epilogue before Rose and The Doctor go traipsing off around the universe once more.
8) By trying to round out the supporting characters (a good thing) the writers reduce The Doctor to a deus ex machina (a bad thing). Often he only seems to be there to supply info-dumps and to wave his sonic screwdriver about whenever Russell T Davies has written himself into a corner. Otherwise I get the impression that Rose would be saving the universe by herself each week. Even when The Doctor does get something to do it tends to either be a badly choreagraphed action scene or else an embarrassing emotional scene.
9) The humour is too broad. Even when the basic jokes are funny the execution lacks wit and sparkle.
10) Most of the stories have plot-holes you could drive a truck through.
I could go on but I've probably already got every Dr Who fan in the UK baying for my blood. I suppose if I had to sum up my problems with the new Dr Who it's that too often it feels like a soap opera -- Eastenders with a couple of sci-fi flourishes added on.
Obviously I'm not saying the old Dr Who was flawless. I could probably make a list of its faults that would be just as long as the one above. (Actually it would probably be rather easy to stick the boot in to the old series as about 80% of my childhood nostalgia for Dr Who comes from reading the Target novelizations rather than watching the TV series.)
And the new version is obviously very popular, pulling in loads of viewers and even convincing the BBC that maybe they should make other sci-fi series. Hell, even I find myself enjoying bits of it. But as the new version is so popular -- winning BAFTAs and everyone saying how wonderful it is -- I felt it was worth pointing out that in certain respects it's actually pretty crappy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
