The end of the line for finally arrives for the staff of All Saints. After 7 seasons of ups and downs the show comes to a finale with a great episode. Together with the regulars there are some familiar faces returning to say goodbye in what is an excellent blend of laughter and drama, cheers and tears as the clock ticks down. Both writing and acting is spot on in every scene as the doctors and nurses smooth over the cracks of a turbulent few months in order to move on to their new lives. Of course it's not all plain sailing as the best laid plans cannot account for each and every personal drama, private or public, and certainly not unexpected waving of guns...but then its one ER where it seems no day is ever 'normal'. Maybe the final twist isn't totally out of the blue but it is perhaps the jigsaw of clues along the way that makes it more than just predictable and instead illicit cries of 'don't' at each step. Well never know the answer to what lies ahead - Life or Death? .... So its goodnight to Jackie, Zoey, Eddie, Gloria, Thor and the host of cracking support players. ..... Loved it - both the ups and the downs. A perfect 10/10
Reviews
25 Reviews
Little Voice
(1998)
British talent shines
18 July 2015
Having seen Little Voice when it was comparatively new I decided it was about time it was revisited with one of its rare TV showings - I honestly didn't realise it had been so long!
Undoubtedly many viewers, especially those from outside these shores, will find the acting and accents somewhat irksome, but don't let the decidedly downbeat, and grim vision of British Northerness put you off as you will be missing a a charming, perfectly acted movie.
The headline is of course Jane Horricks as the titular Little Voice. She brings the character to life with not only the perfect mimicry of the singing greats, but also her portrayal of the clinically shy woman-child living in the shadow of her dead fathers music collection.
The rest of the cast harness their talent to give equally great performances. Obviously most praise goes to Michael Caine's funny, manipulative and eventually quite slimy talent agent, or Brenda Blethyns foul mouthed mother, together with Jim Broadbent giving a solid portrayal as the nightclub owner where Caine trys to 'sell' LV.
Across the many reviews often very little is said of the equally excellent supporting cast. The pre-Star Wars Ewen McGregor, ever solid Philip Jackson, and even a Pre-'Stenders Annette Badland, provide quiet depth or stoicness to their characters - literally in Badlands case who speaks very few lines.
It's not a perfect movie with its less than flattering view of Scarborough, despite the rather nicer shots of the town at night. Also the background to the strained Mari/Laura (mother/LV) remains very much closed up until the very end, whereas I felt there was enough to warrant it being hinted at earlier.
Overall though it's so very deserving of a mere 97 minutes of your life and most definitely shows that a handful of talent can trounce megabucks of CGI any day of the week. .... So just a few niggles and a well deserved and underplayed 8/10
Undoubtedly many viewers, especially those from outside these shores, will find the acting and accents somewhat irksome, but don't let the decidedly downbeat, and grim vision of British Northerness put you off as you will be missing a a charming, perfectly acted movie.
The headline is of course Jane Horricks as the titular Little Voice. She brings the character to life with not only the perfect mimicry of the singing greats, but also her portrayal of the clinically shy woman-child living in the shadow of her dead fathers music collection.
The rest of the cast harness their talent to give equally great performances. Obviously most praise goes to Michael Caine's funny, manipulative and eventually quite slimy talent agent, or Brenda Blethyns foul mouthed mother, together with Jim Broadbent giving a solid portrayal as the nightclub owner where Caine trys to 'sell' LV.
Across the many reviews often very little is said of the equally excellent supporting cast. The pre-Star Wars Ewen McGregor, ever solid Philip Jackson, and even a Pre-'Stenders Annette Badland, provide quiet depth or stoicness to their characters - literally in Badlands case who speaks very few lines.
It's not a perfect movie with its less than flattering view of Scarborough, despite the rather nicer shots of the town at night. Also the background to the strained Mari/Laura (mother/LV) remains very much closed up until the very end, whereas I felt there was enough to warrant it being hinted at earlier.
Overall though it's so very deserving of a mere 97 minutes of your life and most definitely shows that a handful of talent can trounce megabucks of CGI any day of the week. .... So just a few niggles and a well deserved and underplayed 8/10
Losing the plot...losing the fan-base
7 July 2015
This episode unfortunately continues the hopeless start to season 3. It really does make watching more of a chore than an enjoyable hour of my life.
After the 'non-surprise' of ep1 I found i almost couldn't engage with the story on a decent level anymore - but somehow I persevered. Unfortunately it wasn't great.
We are still in the present/past/future and in/out the dome/town/world and the real/imagined/fake lives...and telling them apart doesn't help the viewer decide which scene relates to which segment.
It's a mess and although thankfully better than ep1 I can say its still a huge drop in quality from what made the shows beginning so great.
I'm hoping I stayed awake long enough and didn't dream that the we will be getting back to the singular storyline again now the townsfolk have been released - or at least a favorite few. Whilst the show may not have lived up to its early promise it certainly didn't deserve the kiss of death thats been presented in more recent times.
I may not be clairvoyant but I see little future for the show...season 4 is a long way off, and I fear even the mid-season may bring dark news of this continues.
Please, please, please let it return to a decent, respectable storyline, even if it does grate at times thanks to to many implausible and irritating characters. Judging by the finale it may be heading back that way...on can only hope. .... An improvement - 4/10...yes indeed a 4 is an improvement, just shows how far it sank.
After the 'non-surprise' of ep1 I found i almost couldn't engage with the story on a decent level anymore - but somehow I persevered. Unfortunately it wasn't great.
We are still in the present/past/future and in/out the dome/town/world and the real/imagined/fake lives...and telling them apart doesn't help the viewer decide which scene relates to which segment.
It's a mess and although thankfully better than ep1 I can say its still a huge drop in quality from what made the shows beginning so great.
I'm hoping I stayed awake long enough and didn't dream that the we will be getting back to the singular storyline again now the townsfolk have been released - or at least a favorite few. Whilst the show may not have lived up to its early promise it certainly didn't deserve the kiss of death thats been presented in more recent times.
I may not be clairvoyant but I see little future for the show...season 4 is a long way off, and I fear even the mid-season may bring dark news of this continues.
Please, please, please let it return to a decent, respectable storyline, even if it does grate at times thanks to to many implausible and irritating characters. Judging by the finale it may be heading back that way...on can only hope. .... An improvement - 4/10...yes indeed a 4 is an improvement, just shows how far it sank.
A lively start is now a slow (and increasingly unenjoyable) slog towards the end...
30 June 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This show went from being a 'must see' to a 'if there's nothing better on' half way through the first series when I got fed up with the way the very unlikable Big Jim and Junior could seemingly get away with anything under the noses of the whole town and bounce back to herodom regardless of the nastiness they indulged in. Whatever bonus marks for the initial few episodes soon got struck off as it became less SciFi drama and suspended and more stupid sleepy silliness.
Unfortunately the 3rd series doesn't seem to have gotten off to a good start.
Its a confused mess with flash backs/forwards, confusing scenes and symbolism, and still too many boring characters and performances - will writers/directors/producers never learn that if you want to include such things do it sparsely or in blocks and not every 60 seconds in a random mishmash of forward/back/real/imagined...
What really bugs me thought is that this is supposedly taking place at approximately a week per series and already the dome has been forgotten by the outside world. Surely the external walls would be crawling with military and scientific equipment but instead the town is all alone after a just a few days - well apart from the obvious first attempt of throwing a MOABs at it...
Half way through Ss03e01 and so far its gone nowhere. It's a complete mess and I do wonder if I'll be awake at the end - and will I make time for ep02????? ....
...well actually I did make it to the end, and the surprise was anything but.
Boring, confused, waste of a good idea, ruining of a good series.
The few likable points and characters are simply overwhelmed by the inane and stupid. A polished look is not the same as looking good!
I give this a 3/10...and I think that's generous considering its a mess from first to last.
Unfortunately the 3rd series doesn't seem to have gotten off to a good start.
Its a confused mess with flash backs/forwards, confusing scenes and symbolism, and still too many boring characters and performances - will writers/directors/producers never learn that if you want to include such things do it sparsely or in blocks and not every 60 seconds in a random mishmash of forward/back/real/imagined...
What really bugs me thought is that this is supposedly taking place at approximately a week per series and already the dome has been forgotten by the outside world. Surely the external walls would be crawling with military and scientific equipment but instead the town is all alone after a just a few days - well apart from the obvious first attempt of throwing a MOABs at it...
Half way through Ss03e01 and so far its gone nowhere. It's a complete mess and I do wonder if I'll be awake at the end - and will I make time for ep02????? ....
...well actually I did make it to the end, and the surprise was anything but.
Boring, confused, waste of a good idea, ruining of a good series.
The few likable points and characters are simply overwhelmed by the inane and stupid. A polished look is not the same as looking good!
I give this a 3/10...and I think that's generous considering its a mess from first to last.
Changes often mean great pain - and some annoying moments too!
29 June 2015
Following the recent issues surrounding the unit, and notably his personal loss, Jason Gideons whereabouts and future remain a mystery to the rest of the team. In the fallout Aaron Hotchner is contemplating transferring to another unit, whilst Emily Prentiss quits the FBI. Whilst I'll miss Mandy Patinkins Gideon as a character I always thought he was somewhat light weight as a team member, although to be fair the whole group is a collection of oddballs and brains with a little common sense thrown in just to make it plausible.
Meanwhile life must continue and Director Erin 'I hate the team so why am I in this job?' Strauss steps up to lead the team but fails to make a good impression, especially in the field when called in to investigate a serial killer in Milwaukee.
When it become clear that the killer is using his young son to lure in the victims, and in response to the obvious team dynamic and trust issues both Aaron and Emily join the team, possibly for the last time, in order to see up the investigation and hopefully reach the final victim whilst she is still alive. .... The changes in team dynamic were somewhat grating, though admittedly some of this is deliberate on the behalf of the writers in showing that the upheavals do have consequences especially with the disruptive influence of the new director who is obviously not cut out for BAU case work. .... I don't feel this was a great episode but it was also quite workmanlike and did the necessary moves towards the post-Gideon era. I don't like the Director and whilst I feel the team really needs to be less 'Jet Setting' it seems to be too much of a 'administrative' new face.
A solid if unimpressive - 7
Meanwhile life must continue and Director Erin 'I hate the team so why am I in this job?' Strauss steps up to lead the team but fails to make a good impression, especially in the field when called in to investigate a serial killer in Milwaukee.
When it become clear that the killer is using his young son to lure in the victims, and in response to the obvious team dynamic and trust issues both Aaron and Emily join the team, possibly for the last time, in order to see up the investigation and hopefully reach the final victim whilst she is still alive. .... The changes in team dynamic were somewhat grating, though admittedly some of this is deliberate on the behalf of the writers in showing that the upheavals do have consequences especially with the disruptive influence of the new director who is obviously not cut out for BAU case work. .... I don't feel this was a great episode but it was also quite workmanlike and did the necessary moves towards the post-Gideon era. I don't like the Director and whilst I feel the team really needs to be less 'Jet Setting' it seems to be too much of a 'administrative' new face.
A solid if unimpressive - 7
The slow path to humanity
29 June 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The detective and science work begins as Booth (David Boreanaz) delivers a fridge to the team complete with a well decomposed body. Meanwhile Brennan (Emily Deschanel) is surprised by the arrival in the lab of her old professor, who is also her old flame.
The relationship is quickly rekindled, however Brennan unwittingly discloses key details of the investigation to to her beau only to find he is the expert for the defence in the same case.
The story itself is a little bit of a slow burner and fails to really hit home until the court scenes where Brennan as predicted comes over very much as a knowledgeable but very cold and analytical technogeek, whereas the defence expert wins over the jury with his smile.
It is only with Booths intervention with the lawyers who are pursuaded to question Brennan's motivations to find out the truth that finally win the day, an act that initially appears to cross an unwritten line but helps with the opening up of her public emotions.
As noted this is a bit of a slow burning episode that really only gets hot in the last 10 minutes when Brennan is forced to open up on public. It may not rank highly in the list of top Bones episodes but it is an important moment.
Unfortunately because the main action is less than engrossing its difficult to award top marks despite there being nothing majorly wrong (other than the obviously slimy (ex)lover). Still it does work well overall and the ending moves the characters and their relationships forwards a step.
So not great, but we'll worth an 8¡
The relationship is quickly rekindled, however Brennan unwittingly discloses key details of the investigation to to her beau only to find he is the expert for the defence in the same case.
The story itself is a little bit of a slow burner and fails to really hit home until the court scenes where Brennan as predicted comes over very much as a knowledgeable but very cold and analytical technogeek, whereas the defence expert wins over the jury with his smile.
It is only with Booths intervention with the lawyers who are pursuaded to question Brennan's motivations to find out the truth that finally win the day, an act that initially appears to cross an unwritten line but helps with the opening up of her public emotions.
As noted this is a bit of a slow burning episode that really only gets hot in the last 10 minutes when Brennan is forced to open up on public. It may not rank highly in the list of top Bones episodes but it is an important moment.
Unfortunately because the main action is less than engrossing its difficult to award top marks despite there being nothing majorly wrong (other than the obviously slimy (ex)lover). Still it does work well overall and the ending moves the characters and their relationships forwards a step.
So not great, but we'll worth an 8¡
Disappointingly less than the sum of its parts...
13 June 2015
There are so many things to love about this movie...and yet i feel so very disappointed having sat and watched it.
Let's pick out a few good points:
The source material can not really be faulted, although I will admit it's been a long while since I read the book so maybe there are some trifling errors, omissions or holes that I fail to remember. The cast is great, both by name and ability, and more importantly the acting is good (but only when seen in context). The scenery is spectacular, as are the more obviously visual effects. The sound is effective, and the soundtrack combines well with the visuals.
But still, to me at least, its far from a classic.
For starters the introduction is far, far too long. I had watched 50 minutes yet felt like it had 15 minutes of relevant story, and sadly the slow pace and insistence on using filler scenes had only just began.
Many scenes seem to exist solely to stretch out the story and justify the dubious decision to split the book in to not just 2 but 3 films - all from a book of 300 pages (Penguins re-release is 320 but that includes numerous extras to support the actual novel).
So where did Peter Jackson get all those extra screen minutes?...I believe it's not only the method of writing whole scenes based on mere snippets of book lines, but also the over insistence on slow panning shots of landscapes intermixed with slow motion battle scenes, that overlong introduction...it all adds up. The result is 3 movies from a book which when stood alongside The Lord Of The Rings actually comes out shorter than any of the 3 novellas that make up the LOTR tome.
I've already said the film looks great...and it also looks very,very fake! This may be a fantasy land with fantastical peoples and beasts but even the live action segments appear airbrushed to within an inch of a cartoon adventure. There really is a point where worse is better because realism can help you feel immersed in the action. Sadly I wasn't and couldn't help but feel distant from the characters. In LOTR the CGI added the depth , here too often it distracts.
Because is looks so perfect it makes a big impact on the dramatic tension. You begin to feel that characters will prevail in their action and return home unharmed before the movie even gets up to steam. Every time you see someone in peril you don't want to jump in and help them, or sit back and watch how they overcome, instead you just sit and wait. So in a film that is far too long you now have a lack of true drama.
But what of the characters? For a start so many are completely redundant. Right from the get go (I would say beginning but it was probably a fair while afterwards considering the slow pace) I couldn't get attached to any of the dwarfs because there were simply too many to count. This wasn't a party it was a small army, and one consisting of too many nobodies amongst their number.
What characters did actually have enough screen time were played admirably by the cast (although I still hate Gollum who has never come across as having a real identity even taking in to account his being twisted by his 'Precious'). If anything the cast is wasted because too many of the scenes are dominated by the sweeping scenery and slow pacing - the Elves have always been a thoughtful race but here they come across as merely slow.
But its not just the Elves and Dwarfs that disappoint. Here you have Wizards who do little Wizardry, Orcs and Trolls who look and sound like comedic characters as opposed to life threatening monsters. I think I saw a couple of Mountain Giants throwing rocks at each other and endangering the party passing unseen below...I say I think because it was a few minutes of grey boring screen time and I may have dreamt it...and a Dragon who apparently could only turn up for filming the beginning and end despite supposedly being the centre of the story!
Like many I loved the book and felt this film had real potential, and yet I also feel like it has been wasted. Whos fault is it...Jackson? The studio? Tolkein? Who ever it may be it is simply too long, too slow, too full of nothing moments.
I've heard it said that no movies should ever be longer than 120 minutes otherwise it risks becoming a bore...and if it cant be compressed then best split than shorten too far. Maybe it could be argued that to display the depth of a whole world was beyond the scope of a mere 2hrs in which case could not it fit in to 4?...instead we get 169 minutes (or 182 in the extended cut) and a further 161 & 144 minutes to come. If you have this much time on your hands please just read the book! ... I knew it was long, I knew it was slow, but I also knew its beautifully shot. What I didn't expect was it to be less than enthralling.
....
I expected an 8...I gave it a 4!
Let's pick out a few good points:
The source material can not really be faulted, although I will admit it's been a long while since I read the book so maybe there are some trifling errors, omissions or holes that I fail to remember. The cast is great, both by name and ability, and more importantly the acting is good (but only when seen in context). The scenery is spectacular, as are the more obviously visual effects. The sound is effective, and the soundtrack combines well with the visuals.
But still, to me at least, its far from a classic.
For starters the introduction is far, far too long. I had watched 50 minutes yet felt like it had 15 minutes of relevant story, and sadly the slow pace and insistence on using filler scenes had only just began.
Many scenes seem to exist solely to stretch out the story and justify the dubious decision to split the book in to not just 2 but 3 films - all from a book of 300 pages (Penguins re-release is 320 but that includes numerous extras to support the actual novel).
So where did Peter Jackson get all those extra screen minutes?...I believe it's not only the method of writing whole scenes based on mere snippets of book lines, but also the over insistence on slow panning shots of landscapes intermixed with slow motion battle scenes, that overlong introduction...it all adds up. The result is 3 movies from a book which when stood alongside The Lord Of The Rings actually comes out shorter than any of the 3 novellas that make up the LOTR tome.
I've already said the film looks great...and it also looks very,very fake! This may be a fantasy land with fantastical peoples and beasts but even the live action segments appear airbrushed to within an inch of a cartoon adventure. There really is a point where worse is better because realism can help you feel immersed in the action. Sadly I wasn't and couldn't help but feel distant from the characters. In LOTR the CGI added the depth , here too often it distracts.
Because is looks so perfect it makes a big impact on the dramatic tension. You begin to feel that characters will prevail in their action and return home unharmed before the movie even gets up to steam. Every time you see someone in peril you don't want to jump in and help them, or sit back and watch how they overcome, instead you just sit and wait. So in a film that is far too long you now have a lack of true drama.
But what of the characters? For a start so many are completely redundant. Right from the get go (I would say beginning but it was probably a fair while afterwards considering the slow pace) I couldn't get attached to any of the dwarfs because there were simply too many to count. This wasn't a party it was a small army, and one consisting of too many nobodies amongst their number.
What characters did actually have enough screen time were played admirably by the cast (although I still hate Gollum who has never come across as having a real identity even taking in to account his being twisted by his 'Precious'). If anything the cast is wasted because too many of the scenes are dominated by the sweeping scenery and slow pacing - the Elves have always been a thoughtful race but here they come across as merely slow.
But its not just the Elves and Dwarfs that disappoint. Here you have Wizards who do little Wizardry, Orcs and Trolls who look and sound like comedic characters as opposed to life threatening monsters. I think I saw a couple of Mountain Giants throwing rocks at each other and endangering the party passing unseen below...I say I think because it was a few minutes of grey boring screen time and I may have dreamt it...and a Dragon who apparently could only turn up for filming the beginning and end despite supposedly being the centre of the story!
Like many I loved the book and felt this film had real potential, and yet I also feel like it has been wasted. Whos fault is it...Jackson? The studio? Tolkein? Who ever it may be it is simply too long, too slow, too full of nothing moments.
I've heard it said that no movies should ever be longer than 120 minutes otherwise it risks becoming a bore...and if it cant be compressed then best split than shorten too far. Maybe it could be argued that to display the depth of a whole world was beyond the scope of a mere 2hrs in which case could not it fit in to 4?...instead we get 169 minutes (or 182 in the extended cut) and a further 161 & 144 minutes to come. If you have this much time on your hands please just read the book! ... I knew it was long, I knew it was slow, but I also knew its beautifully shot. What I didn't expect was it to be less than enthralling.
....
I expected an 8...I gave it a 4!
Irish departs (forever?)...but not before it hurts my ears more!
11 June 2015
This show insists on trying to break itself....it used to be so great but now it has become a odd mix of terrific & terrible.
With the introduction of the 'Irish' Nash I suddenly found myself losing interest in any scene he appeared, and unfortunately he is a central figure in this episode...
...but even worse is the surprise arrival of his mother, probably the only actor out there who could do an even worse job of their 'Irish' accent - I'm not kidding when i say its truly terrible!!!!!!
Elsewhere in Broke World the show seems to have lost its sparkle too, although whether it really has or if its because the good moments are being overshadowed by the bad (and some very bad!) may be up for debate.
Meanwhile away from the ear-ache scenes Max and Caroline are offered a promotion and a chance to run their own 'The High' and I must say its location does not come as a surprise to the viewer as rarely have things been signposted to the viewers so clearly (I won't spoil the surprise)
And the rest of the characters that make up the ensemble and add so many witty lines? Were they even present, or was it simply they didn't make an impact this week? ....
I miss the early days of this show and every kind light chuckle, an ironic groan, of even laugh out loud moment. Unfortunately I dropped the series rating by a point because its become harder to match an overall 9 when the last few episodes have struggled to but 6 (or rather knocks down to 6 because of the new characters).
6/10...needs a revival (and a culling - which it seems we may have gotten. Have the writers listened to the negative review of late?)
With the introduction of the 'Irish' Nash I suddenly found myself losing interest in any scene he appeared, and unfortunately he is a central figure in this episode...
...but even worse is the surprise arrival of his mother, probably the only actor out there who could do an even worse job of their 'Irish' accent - I'm not kidding when i say its truly terrible!!!!!!
Elsewhere in Broke World the show seems to have lost its sparkle too, although whether it really has or if its because the good moments are being overshadowed by the bad (and some very bad!) may be up for debate.
Meanwhile away from the ear-ache scenes Max and Caroline are offered a promotion and a chance to run their own 'The High' and I must say its location does not come as a surprise to the viewer as rarely have things been signposted to the viewers so clearly (I won't spoil the surprise)
And the rest of the characters that make up the ensemble and add so many witty lines? Were they even present, or was it simply they didn't make an impact this week? ....
I miss the early days of this show and every kind light chuckle, an ironic groan, of even laugh out loud moment. Unfortunately I dropped the series rating by a point because its become harder to match an overall 9 when the last few episodes have struggled to but 6 (or rather knocks down to 6 because of the new characters).
6/10...needs a revival (and a culling - which it seems we may have gotten. Have the writers listened to the negative review of late?)
2012: Ice Age
(2011 Video)
A cold movie, a cold review.
8 June 2015
There are some bad movies out there...and this is one of them!
You expect some dodgy science in the low-budget movies, and also some not-so-great effects. And here you get it in spades and in fact 'poor' would be overstating the quality!
So can you rely on the basic story, writing and screenplay?..well unfortunately not as these too are below par with some real cringe worthy moments throughout.
And to make it so much worse the continuity people must have been on holiday during filming and post production because errors abound. If you are even slightly interested in military hardware or procedures please please please do not watch this farcical presentation - and the rest isn't much better! (Ive never seen a movie page with so many goofs and so little trivia!)
The only reason this isn't a flat 1 score is that iv e seen worse acting. Let me clarify that I don't feel the acting is good, merely mostly adequate. At least I only want to cover my eyes and not my ears as well! ... So there's no denying this is a bad movie and I don't think k I will set the alarm to rewatch in a hurry....
**2/10**
You expect some dodgy science in the low-budget movies, and also some not-so-great effects. And here you get it in spades and in fact 'poor' would be overstating the quality!
So can you rely on the basic story, writing and screenplay?..well unfortunately not as these too are below par with some real cringe worthy moments throughout.
And to make it so much worse the continuity people must have been on holiday during filming and post production because errors abound. If you are even slightly interested in military hardware or procedures please please please do not watch this farcical presentation - and the rest isn't much better! (Ive never seen a movie page with so many goofs and so little trivia!)
The only reason this isn't a flat 1 score is that iv e seen worse acting. Let me clarify that I don't feel the acting is good, merely mostly adequate. At least I only want to cover my eyes and not my ears as well! ... So there's no denying this is a bad movie and I don't think k I will set the alarm to rewatch in a hurry....
**2/10**
Miami Magma
(2011 TV Movie)
Non exactly erupting with excitement about this movie!
7 June 2015
Miami Magma, or whichever of the apparently numerous titles this film goes by, isn't a particularly bad movie in itself however it has flaws that simply can't be overlooked.
OK so it's a somewhat generic low budget disaster movie but that should really only be an excuse for few or ineffectual special effects. In contrast it certainly doesn't mean you can automatically get away with poor scripts and acting, both of which are in abundant supply here.
The movie starts with the loss of an Oil Rig off the Florida coast. Now in reality this would cause great consternation to all involved and a major and long running intervention by local, state and government departments (and probably a good deal of international attention too)? Apparently not though and apart from a few questions at a press conference it is quickly excused and forgotten. This isn't twisting reality for the sake of the movie, rather its ignoring it completely as it would just slow things down and complicate the writing task.
So all is clear for the Evil Corporation to bulldoze their plans through and hit trouble - and disaster. No problem in theory, however the bad guys are simply wooden and ridiculous, and Imo this is down to both poor writing and bad acting. I point much of the blame on Cleavant 'Sliders' Derricks who is simply awful, and Wallace Merck, and...well all the baddies!!! In contrast the good guys are a fairly decent overall, although I am getting somewhat tired of the lead roles being both Intelligent & Supermodel material...but maybe that's just what Hollywoodesque scientists are nowadays. But putting this one gripe aside they are at least far from cringe worthy, and maybe even fair to say above average for the SyFy movie universe. However one cannot balance the other entirely and so overall its a thumbs down on the casting account too.
The story as a whole follows a somewhat predictable routine once you've gotten past the shoddy beginning. There a definite lack of the big Volcano effects one would usually expect, and for some odd reason even the low tech, low budget magma and lava is kept to an absolute minimum. For a disaster movie it sure does seem to minimise the actual disasters!
So how do I rate the movie??? I initially wanted to add a few points because or the decent good guys, however immediately these and more were knocked off by the terrible baddies who ruined any scene they were in. And the SFX...well there really weren't many to speak of so that doesn't help either. What finally made the difference as to which aside of average the score would fall was the apparent apathy of the authorities from beginning to end (The Major and a few National Guard is all they could muster!?!). If they don't care why should I?
4/10...lazy writing, lazy (bad guy) acting
Ps. If you want a similar film bit done not only with bigger budget but also better writing, standards and definitely better all round acting then stick to Volcano or Dantes Peak, neither of which are classics but still offer a better experience without the bad-bad guys making you throwing your popcorn at the screen!
OK so it's a somewhat generic low budget disaster movie but that should really only be an excuse for few or ineffectual special effects. In contrast it certainly doesn't mean you can automatically get away with poor scripts and acting, both of which are in abundant supply here.
The movie starts with the loss of an Oil Rig off the Florida coast. Now in reality this would cause great consternation to all involved and a major and long running intervention by local, state and government departments (and probably a good deal of international attention too)? Apparently not though and apart from a few questions at a press conference it is quickly excused and forgotten. This isn't twisting reality for the sake of the movie, rather its ignoring it completely as it would just slow things down and complicate the writing task.
So all is clear for the Evil Corporation to bulldoze their plans through and hit trouble - and disaster. No problem in theory, however the bad guys are simply wooden and ridiculous, and Imo this is down to both poor writing and bad acting. I point much of the blame on Cleavant 'Sliders' Derricks who is simply awful, and Wallace Merck, and...well all the baddies!!! In contrast the good guys are a fairly decent overall, although I am getting somewhat tired of the lead roles being both Intelligent & Supermodel material...but maybe that's just what Hollywoodesque scientists are nowadays. But putting this one gripe aside they are at least far from cringe worthy, and maybe even fair to say above average for the SyFy movie universe. However one cannot balance the other entirely and so overall its a thumbs down on the casting account too.
The story as a whole follows a somewhat predictable routine once you've gotten past the shoddy beginning. There a definite lack of the big Volcano effects one would usually expect, and for some odd reason even the low tech, low budget magma and lava is kept to an absolute minimum. For a disaster movie it sure does seem to minimise the actual disasters!
So how do I rate the movie??? I initially wanted to add a few points because or the decent good guys, however immediately these and more were knocked off by the terrible baddies who ruined any scene they were in. And the SFX...well there really weren't many to speak of so that doesn't help either. What finally made the difference as to which aside of average the score would fall was the apparent apathy of the authorities from beginning to end (The Major and a few National Guard is all they could muster!?!). If they don't care why should I?
4/10...lazy writing, lazy (bad guy) acting
Ps. If you want a similar film bit done not only with bigger budget but also better writing, standards and definitely better all round acting then stick to Volcano or Dantes Peak, neither of which are classics but still offer a better experience without the bad-bad guys making you throwing your popcorn at the screen!
Splinter
(I) (2008)
Smarter than your average B movie fungus!
30 May 2015
The basic storyline may not be so much different from so many other horror films but it at least carries it through with more success than most.
The beginning is a little difficult to stomach as it relies on 'young couple in the semi-wilderness', with an annoying 'Beauty and the Geek' twist (which I must admit is still better than 'high school teens'). Add in a slightly deranged on the run criminal and his slightly dim, rather too easily led girlfriend and its seems to be set for the yawn inducing B-Movie cliché cupboard.
However, despite Splinter succumbing to a certain amount of clichés, and let's admit that its so difficult not to, it does not prevent it from raising itself above the average
The cast is small but efficiently used, and better yet you even want to do more than simply leave them to their fate. This is despite some irritating points, mostly centred around the early scenes of the Geek & From characters. Still they can at least deliver a line and act a scene like they care about more than just the pay cheque which is a far cry from many films of the genre and budget.
The location is also minimal being a little bit of anonymous countryside and roads together with an equally out the way American gas station, neither of which stand out as being first choice with regards locations for most films. Here though, once the film moves on past the intro and to the station, it again does well with the confined stage used to good effect in inducing a suitable sense of imprisonment
The film relies heavily on good old fashioned visual effects helped somewhat by the overuse of shaky cameras and quick cuts. This may be a compromise but the two combine well and so offset most of the negatives of such camera work (most not all, it really needs more steady shots in non- action scenes).
Its a short movie too that helps keep things trotting along at a fair pace, and although perhaps a little predictable it at least doesn't do things strictly by the numbers of the pages of 'horror book of movie makers'.
.... Unoriginal at times, probably more across the whole than individual scenes, but on the whole fairly enjoyable and certainly either a few minutes of your time.
7/10...mostly marked down for the clichéd characters and over use of shaky-cam.
The beginning is a little difficult to stomach as it relies on 'young couple in the semi-wilderness', with an annoying 'Beauty and the Geek' twist (which I must admit is still better than 'high school teens'). Add in a slightly deranged on the run criminal and his slightly dim, rather too easily led girlfriend and its seems to be set for the yawn inducing B-Movie cliché cupboard.
However, despite Splinter succumbing to a certain amount of clichés, and let's admit that its so difficult not to, it does not prevent it from raising itself above the average
The cast is small but efficiently used, and better yet you even want to do more than simply leave them to their fate. This is despite some irritating points, mostly centred around the early scenes of the Geek & From characters. Still they can at least deliver a line and act a scene like they care about more than just the pay cheque which is a far cry from many films of the genre and budget.
The location is also minimal being a little bit of anonymous countryside and roads together with an equally out the way American gas station, neither of which stand out as being first choice with regards locations for most films. Here though, once the film moves on past the intro and to the station, it again does well with the confined stage used to good effect in inducing a suitable sense of imprisonment
The film relies heavily on good old fashioned visual effects helped somewhat by the overuse of shaky cameras and quick cuts. This may be a compromise but the two combine well and so offset most of the negatives of such camera work (most not all, it really needs more steady shots in non- action scenes).
Its a short movie too that helps keep things trotting along at a fair pace, and although perhaps a little predictable it at least doesn't do things strictly by the numbers of the pages of 'horror book of movie makers'.
.... Unoriginal at times, probably more across the whole than individual scenes, but on the whole fairly enjoyable and certainly either a few minutes of your time.
7/10...mostly marked down for the clichéd characters and over use of shaky-cam.
Oddly uneventful
26 May 2015
This felt like an episode that was trying to fill in gaps or details from a couple of series ago, mixed in rather hapazardly with the 'beginning of the end' that this should have been with the result being a rather mixed episode that fails to impress.
The first half is essentially based around various flashbacks to events on pre-war Caprica that could have provided great background and added depth to the personal lives of some of the shows key character. Instead with them being revealed so late on there will be no time to see how such dramas and introductions will have influenced the lives involved.
How did Laura Roslins hearing that her sisters and father were killed in a car crash give her the steel to lead the human survivors? Was the tension between Gaius Baltar and his elderly father the key to how Caprica Six ingratiated herself in to his life? Just how did Lee Adamas introduction to Starbuck via his brother Zac,her then boyfriend, develop in to a more heated love-hate on-off relationship?
Sadly we will never know how these scenes tie in to those already shown a year or more earlier as from the second half of this episode it moves forward towards the shows conclusion - the epic final showdown between the Human and Cylon races.
So back to the present day and things were intended to become more interesting as Admiral Adama, having seen Heras photo on the'Wall of the Lost' decides to undertake one final risky mission seeking out the Cylon Colony 'Homeworld' and attempt a rescue of the prodigal Half Human-Half Cylon child on which both sides believe their shared fate will one day rest.
But again I was left somewhat wanting.
Having informed the crew and civilians remaining aboard the Galactica about the decision to attempt the rescue/attack the off-watch personnel arrive on the hangerdeck and I expected another passionate speech as we've come to expect from the Admiral...but it never came. I felt like he simply said 'volunteers on this side, others on that'...no emotion from anyone. Even when Doc Cottle volunteered and Adama explains that of all the people he is the one who mustn't go I didn't get teary eyed, well except for the yawn.
So overall it was not only an episode of two halves,but also of two feelings.
The flashbacks were a waste at this point and added nothing in the context of the closing trio of episodes being far too late in the multi-series run.
The present day scenes were lacking in the emotion that should have flooded through following Adamas decision and announcement.
A final point that annoyed me somewhat was how Kara and Anders produced the coordinates for the Ceylon Home world. Did I miss something? Kara 'plugs in' Anders, begs for information based on her and Heras dots and numbers....and then it simply cuts to her walking out...Where was the convoluted, techno-babble cryptic that Hybrids vocalise? ....
So I was underwhelmed by the episode due to it feeling like a wasted effort both with the flashbacks being too late to influence or inform, and the present day scenes feeling rushed and staid in relation to what could have been.
6/10...losing a couple for simply being so disjointed and wasting half the episode that could havebeen use to beef up the second part, and the extra for the uncharacteristically un-emotional decision making and speeches, (My lowest score of the whole shows history, sad when you consider this should have been such a hard working, emotional episode)
The first half is essentially based around various flashbacks to events on pre-war Caprica that could have provided great background and added depth to the personal lives of some of the shows key character. Instead with them being revealed so late on there will be no time to see how such dramas and introductions will have influenced the lives involved.
How did Laura Roslins hearing that her sisters and father were killed in a car crash give her the steel to lead the human survivors? Was the tension between Gaius Baltar and his elderly father the key to how Caprica Six ingratiated herself in to his life? Just how did Lee Adamas introduction to Starbuck via his brother Zac,her then boyfriend, develop in to a more heated love-hate on-off relationship?
Sadly we will never know how these scenes tie in to those already shown a year or more earlier as from the second half of this episode it moves forward towards the shows conclusion - the epic final showdown between the Human and Cylon races.
So back to the present day and things were intended to become more interesting as Admiral Adama, having seen Heras photo on the'Wall of the Lost' decides to undertake one final risky mission seeking out the Cylon Colony 'Homeworld' and attempt a rescue of the prodigal Half Human-Half Cylon child on which both sides believe their shared fate will one day rest.
But again I was left somewhat wanting.
Having informed the crew and civilians remaining aboard the Galactica about the decision to attempt the rescue/attack the off-watch personnel arrive on the hangerdeck and I expected another passionate speech as we've come to expect from the Admiral...but it never came. I felt like he simply said 'volunteers on this side, others on that'...no emotion from anyone. Even when Doc Cottle volunteered and Adama explains that of all the people he is the one who mustn't go I didn't get teary eyed, well except for the yawn.
So overall it was not only an episode of two halves,but also of two feelings.
The flashbacks were a waste at this point and added nothing in the context of the closing trio of episodes being far too late in the multi-series run.
The present day scenes were lacking in the emotion that should have flooded through following Adamas decision and announcement.
A final point that annoyed me somewhat was how Kara and Anders produced the coordinates for the Ceylon Home world. Did I miss something? Kara 'plugs in' Anders, begs for information based on her and Heras dots and numbers....and then it simply cuts to her walking out...Where was the convoluted, techno-babble cryptic that Hybrids vocalise? ....
So I was underwhelmed by the episode due to it feeling like a wasted effort both with the flashbacks being too late to influence or inform, and the present day scenes feeling rushed and staid in relation to what could have been.
6/10...losing a couple for simply being so disjointed and wasting half the episode that could havebeen use to beef up the second part, and the extra for the uncharacteristically un-emotional decision making and speeches, (My lowest score of the whole shows history, sad when you consider this should have been such a hard working, emotional episode)
Beware the 'Irish'..
21 May 2015
Despite its sometimes crude subtext - or sometimes simply text as its not always so deep and clever - I usually love this show for its bright nature, likable cast, and cheeky humour.
Unfortunately this episode, which has the girls working yet another '2nd' job (I've lost count now!), has fallen in to the trap of what I refer to as including a 'Hollywood British accent' (although this times it's actually supposed to be Irish) by introducing Nashit, an Irish/Indian dumb-as-he-is-cute waiter in The High, the girls 2nd/3rd/4th...career turn.
....fail!
OK so we also have Jennifer Coolidge with her odd 'Polish accent' but at least she is meant as to provide a comic turn as opposed to a serious character.
I would have loved to give a more positive review but unfortunately this one bugbear pretty much spoils the whole act!!!!!
OMG it's set up to have Nashit as a recurring character at Hans diner....please tell me it's not true.... .... Scenes without that accent...8/10 Scenes with that accent...4/10
Average...6!
Unfortunately this episode, which has the girls working yet another '2nd' job (I've lost count now!), has fallen in to the trap of what I refer to as including a 'Hollywood British accent' (although this times it's actually supposed to be Irish) by introducing Nashit, an Irish/Indian dumb-as-he-is-cute waiter in The High, the girls 2nd/3rd/4th...career turn.
....fail!
OK so we also have Jennifer Coolidge with her odd 'Polish accent' but at least she is meant as to provide a comic turn as opposed to a serious character.
I would have loved to give a more positive review but unfortunately this one bugbear pretty much spoils the whole act!!!!!
OMG it's set up to have Nashit as a recurring character at Hans diner....please tell me it's not true.... .... Scenes without that accent...8/10 Scenes with that accent...4/10
Average...6!
Survivor
(I) (2014)
Glossy nonsense that leads nowhere slowly!
17 May 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I like Kevin Sorbo, he plays the low key hero well. Its just unfortunate he does as many poor roles as he does good ones and I feel he is well under used here instead relying on pretty faces, glossy shots, odd music, dodgy background story, nonsense ongoing story....
The story is a pretty basic SciFi stable - mankind messes up the planet, searches for a new one, finds more than they bargained for. Nothing wrong with that except the way they messed it up was pretty non-sensical even in a budget SciFi flic - adjusting Earth's orbit via particle accelerators and creating wormholes throughout the galaxies!!?!?!
Err...no on many levels!...and explained in the blink of an eye before falling in to the trap of 'pretty people, ridiculous personal dramas, overly glossy shots...etc' rather than concentrating on quality of the script and screenplay to make up for the lack of £¥$¢
One of only 7 ships, long since lost alone in space, tracks a signal and sends a dropship into a wormhole, where of course disaster strikes and the ship is lost leaving the few survivors (oddly all young, bright tweens, plus for some reason the main ships captain!) stranded on the alien world.
Cue hostile humans and monstrous humanoids (and a Horse!!!), all of which appear without any questions from the protagonists...and the humans speak perfect English despite initially having their own language! (I'm surprised it took so long for the survivors to work out the twist - ps Its Earth!)
The film then turns in to a montage of scenes in which Danielle Chuchran learns to ride said horse, shows off her athletic and rock-climbing, fights off alien hoards, wins the lottery saves the planet, resets time...err...I think I fell asleep at some point...all thanks to her amazing wrist implant that can perform any task she asks of it (scanning bodies, remote firing ship beacons, atmospheric testing...)
Finally things start to move and then it just goes from 'uh?' to 'duh!'
And on to the nasty creatures which would have looked at home in the Lord of the Rings. Unfortunately they seems to fit more in to the 'good idea at the time' category than having any real impact. And in any case if this is simply meant to be a 'future earth' then their presence just doesn't make sense in the time scale between ship launch and crash.
The movie was at best 'watchable' and filled a few minutes of my life. Unfortunately it was at times rather painful, and at others rather boring thanks to the poor script and storyline,and not least the ending which screamed 'pilot for a series' as there was no real conclusion merely a sort-of-final battle followed by the arrival of the mother ship. .... If it hadn't been for an evening of boring TV I may not have made it to the end (tbh I may not even have gotten through the opening credits with the ridiculous 'earth is doomed' history)
There are better films out there on similar themes.
3/10
The story is a pretty basic SciFi stable - mankind messes up the planet, searches for a new one, finds more than they bargained for. Nothing wrong with that except the way they messed it up was pretty non-sensical even in a budget SciFi flic - adjusting Earth's orbit via particle accelerators and creating wormholes throughout the galaxies!!?!?!
Err...no on many levels!...and explained in the blink of an eye before falling in to the trap of 'pretty people, ridiculous personal dramas, overly glossy shots...etc' rather than concentrating on quality of the script and screenplay to make up for the lack of £¥$¢
One of only 7 ships, long since lost alone in space, tracks a signal and sends a dropship into a wormhole, where of course disaster strikes and the ship is lost leaving the few survivors (oddly all young, bright tweens, plus for some reason the main ships captain!) stranded on the alien world.
Cue hostile humans and monstrous humanoids (and a Horse!!!), all of which appear without any questions from the protagonists...and the humans speak perfect English despite initially having their own language! (I'm surprised it took so long for the survivors to work out the twist - ps Its Earth!)
The film then turns in to a montage of scenes in which Danielle Chuchran learns to ride said horse, shows off her athletic and rock-climbing, fights off alien hoards, wins the lottery saves the planet, resets time...err...I think I fell asleep at some point...all thanks to her amazing wrist implant that can perform any task she asks of it (scanning bodies, remote firing ship beacons, atmospheric testing...)
Finally things start to move and then it just goes from 'uh?' to 'duh!'
And on to the nasty creatures which would have looked at home in the Lord of the Rings. Unfortunately they seems to fit more in to the 'good idea at the time' category than having any real impact. And in any case if this is simply meant to be a 'future earth' then their presence just doesn't make sense in the time scale between ship launch and crash.
The movie was at best 'watchable' and filled a few minutes of my life. Unfortunately it was at times rather painful, and at others rather boring thanks to the poor script and storyline,and not least the ending which screamed 'pilot for a series' as there was no real conclusion merely a sort-of-final battle followed by the arrival of the mother ship. .... If it hadn't been for an evening of boring TV I may not have made it to the end (tbh I may not even have gotten through the opening credits with the ridiculous 'earth is doomed' history)
There are better films out there on similar themes.
3/10
Collision Earth
(2011 TV Movie)
Disgraced scientist, "Seattle" devastated...must be a SyFy movie!
3 May 2015
Because its a made for TV movie on a much smaller budget than the usual Hollywood fare I always try to look for the small positives than pick out the disappointing negatives...but this was a difficult one to judge.
The plot is pretty thin and most definitely not based on any science or engineering that comes close to real world truths. At best it can be described as 'fanciful', though its often closer to ludicrous as Mercury somehow gets forced out its orbit on a collision course with earth - a variation on the old asteroid theme I suppose so nice to think the writers at least tried even if the final result was less than perfect.
What didn't ring so well was the old cliché of the disgraced/renegade scientist being the anti-hero of the plot. Even the squeezing in of his Astronaut wife who by pure coincidence is on a spaceship journeying to the doomed Mercury isn't enough to distract from this oldest and most annoying of SyFy/Disaster characters.
Talking of the actors its a fair lineup of B/TV-stars but even this isn't enough to save them from over/underacting and the terrible screenplay and script. As the primary lead Kirk Acevedo ensures that the term Wooden Expression will continue in acting circles, whilst Dianne Farr as his Astronaut wife is entirely wasted in ridiculous space drama segments.
After the space drama the more earth based effects of the floating/falling cars are absolutely laughable and definitely second rate CGI, especially when it appears nothing else is magnetic in 'Seattle' it seems.
This was pretty poor even considering the less than good competition. It wasn't so much a major point of failure that affects the rating but rather a massive dose of boredom as I completely failed to get excited by what was altogether a rather by-the-numbers movie. .... +A different premise +Decent cast (but wasted!) -Bored and wooden acting -Poor effects -Very,very Clichéd
So that's 2+, 3-
Watchable, laughable, forgettable -4/10
The plot is pretty thin and most definitely not based on any science or engineering that comes close to real world truths. At best it can be described as 'fanciful', though its often closer to ludicrous as Mercury somehow gets forced out its orbit on a collision course with earth - a variation on the old asteroid theme I suppose so nice to think the writers at least tried even if the final result was less than perfect.
What didn't ring so well was the old cliché of the disgraced/renegade scientist being the anti-hero of the plot. Even the squeezing in of his Astronaut wife who by pure coincidence is on a spaceship journeying to the doomed Mercury isn't enough to distract from this oldest and most annoying of SyFy/Disaster characters.
Talking of the actors its a fair lineup of B/TV-stars but even this isn't enough to save them from over/underacting and the terrible screenplay and script. As the primary lead Kirk Acevedo ensures that the term Wooden Expression will continue in acting circles, whilst Dianne Farr as his Astronaut wife is entirely wasted in ridiculous space drama segments.
After the space drama the more earth based effects of the floating/falling cars are absolutely laughable and definitely second rate CGI, especially when it appears nothing else is magnetic in 'Seattle' it seems.
This was pretty poor even considering the less than good competition. It wasn't so much a major point of failure that affects the rating but rather a massive dose of boredom as I completely failed to get excited by what was altogether a rather by-the-numbers movie. .... +A different premise +Decent cast (but wasted!) -Bored and wooden acting -Poor effects -Very,very Clichéd
So that's 2+, 3-
Watchable, laughable, forgettable -4/10
Seattle Superstorm
(2012 TV Movie)
Disastrous example of its genre...pun intended!
24 April 2015
There are so many disaster movies out there, both good, bad and mediocre, that it takes some effort to say this falls squarely in to the 'don't bother' category...
As a TV movie Seattle Superstorm doesn't start off well with its rather misleading title - a few dark clouds and a bit of wind does not make a Super-storm. Follow this up with dodgy acting, iffy dialogue, middle of the road effects,and worst of all terrible storyline and writing, and what you have is a disaster movie as a package and not just a genre.
Character wise I didn't mind 'dad/scientist' Tom (Esai Morales) and could tolerate 'mom/Navy Lt' Emma (Ona Grauer) (although a Lt as the highest Military adviser?) however I would happily put their kids up for adoption as both 'gearhead' Wyatt (Jared Abrahamsom) and 'ecochick' Chloe (MacKenzie Porter) are eternally grating in their sinicism and petty battles. Of course two movie teenagers whose parents are due to remarry will rarely be best buddies (unless they are too close!),however this pair should be hidden in a dark seller with boxing gloves to sort out their differences.
So what about the story? Well I for one am glad the US military will happily shoot down UFOs with apparently knowing nothing more than it was plotted by a bored tech operator in the standard 'Artic station'. And aren't we glad that the debris lands within yards of the nations disaster management officials...who just happen to be in Seattle(or Vancouver!?!..a dodgy CGI needle does not make a city!).
The result is an increasingly dangerous superstorm that threatens to destroy the world in 4 weeks which gives the perfect excuse for dodgy science to win the day - but not before the requisite near death experiences of the primary characters.
And this is what annoys me the most. In the mighty USA, so often gloating of their superiority in overcoming all threats its the same four dysfunctional family members who provide much of the knowledge and impetus in saving the world, not because its a TV movie and so you need a cheap and cheerful set of heros but seemingly because the government officials are ruled by a jerk, the armed forces are nonexistent after the initial actions, the emergency departments are awol, and even the local Seattle folks are busy just hiding in a dark corner.
I seem to have fallen asleep during the explanation of the 'alien' artifacts so no spoilers other than saying what a surprise that the Russian chief scientist just happens to wander in to the exact same Seattle Lab that the protagonists are working in at the perfect moment to give detail background to the effects and the results. Maybe the security also fell asleep...?
Overall I was pleasantly surprised - not by the movie as it was pants,but that I made it through to the end considering it wasn't even 'so bad its good' because it's really not.
I've seen worse effects, and not all the acting was terrible...and that's about it for good points. The rest of the points were negatives and the score reflects it...
3/10...avoid
As a TV movie Seattle Superstorm doesn't start off well with its rather misleading title - a few dark clouds and a bit of wind does not make a Super-storm. Follow this up with dodgy acting, iffy dialogue, middle of the road effects,and worst of all terrible storyline and writing, and what you have is a disaster movie as a package and not just a genre.
Character wise I didn't mind 'dad/scientist' Tom (Esai Morales) and could tolerate 'mom/Navy Lt' Emma (Ona Grauer) (although a Lt as the highest Military adviser?) however I would happily put their kids up for adoption as both 'gearhead' Wyatt (Jared Abrahamsom) and 'ecochick' Chloe (MacKenzie Porter) are eternally grating in their sinicism and petty battles. Of course two movie teenagers whose parents are due to remarry will rarely be best buddies (unless they are too close!),however this pair should be hidden in a dark seller with boxing gloves to sort out their differences.
So what about the story? Well I for one am glad the US military will happily shoot down UFOs with apparently knowing nothing more than it was plotted by a bored tech operator in the standard 'Artic station'. And aren't we glad that the debris lands within yards of the nations disaster management officials...who just happen to be in Seattle(or Vancouver!?!..a dodgy CGI needle does not make a city!).
The result is an increasingly dangerous superstorm that threatens to destroy the world in 4 weeks which gives the perfect excuse for dodgy science to win the day - but not before the requisite near death experiences of the primary characters.
And this is what annoys me the most. In the mighty USA, so often gloating of their superiority in overcoming all threats its the same four dysfunctional family members who provide much of the knowledge and impetus in saving the world, not because its a TV movie and so you need a cheap and cheerful set of heros but seemingly because the government officials are ruled by a jerk, the armed forces are nonexistent after the initial actions, the emergency departments are awol, and even the local Seattle folks are busy just hiding in a dark corner.
I seem to have fallen asleep during the explanation of the 'alien' artifacts so no spoilers other than saying what a surprise that the Russian chief scientist just happens to wander in to the exact same Seattle Lab that the protagonists are working in at the perfect moment to give detail background to the effects and the results. Maybe the security also fell asleep...?
Overall I was pleasantly surprised - not by the movie as it was pants,but that I made it through to the end considering it wasn't even 'so bad its good' because it's really not.
I've seen worse effects, and not all the acting was terrible...and that's about it for good points. The rest of the points were negatives and the score reflects it...
3/10...avoid
Inferno
(1998 TV Movie)
Decent TV movie spoiled by too many sub-plots
24 April 2015
The film beginning is fairly good considering its a pretty standard TV disaster movie, however once things start to be fleshed out it rapidly becomes overwhelmed by characters and subplots that do more and more to distract from the movies positives ultimately leading to enough mismatches to flesh out 2 or even 3 different films...but which squeezed in to one just distracts and detracts from the enjoyment.
Watxch out for the stereotypes from the standard liberal but tough schoolteacher and the requisite gang banging brother of a dead gang member, a disgraced because he tried to do the right thing doctor and the lifeguard he befriends - who just happens to be the ex of the mad tow truck driver...etc etc...and apparently there was some army guys too...
Such is the poorly setup melodrama and the way the story concentrates more on these characters than the almost forgotten disaster of the impending 60c+ heatwave that any potential edge of the seat tension and drama is smoothed over and its difficult to even say there was any.
The question of who dies,who survives and how/why doesn't even come in to it by the end as there's too many by the book twists to put any flesh on the bones of any individuals or plots. I simply sat and watched each mini- story as a separate as there was no real immersive interplay or connection even when the characters had some supposed back story. Just mentally tick or cross them off as they go because in most cases you never seem to want to care enough to do more than count them in and count them out again. ... Surprisingly I did find Inferno quite likable, if rather forgettable, despite the lack of depth and annoying characters and multiple subplots. For a TV movie it fills the time effectively enough, however it just doesn't do enough to warrant a rewatching in a hurry.
Overall the SF was decent for its genre/budget - outside of the weird space fireball shots. The plot was driven along with enough energy to prevent sleep, though not enough to set the heart racing either. Characters, scenes and dialogue were very mixed and this is where the movie loses points, especially the way some characters seemed to be shoehorned in to the plot but without any redeemable features (The tow truck duo - I'm pointing at you!)
Overall this could have been polished up and had a reasonable score and with one or two less characters and subplots it may have made it...but no, I'm afraid as it stands:
5/10...
Watxch out for the stereotypes from the standard liberal but tough schoolteacher and the requisite gang banging brother of a dead gang member, a disgraced because he tried to do the right thing doctor and the lifeguard he befriends - who just happens to be the ex of the mad tow truck driver...etc etc...and apparently there was some army guys too...
Such is the poorly setup melodrama and the way the story concentrates more on these characters than the almost forgotten disaster of the impending 60c+ heatwave that any potential edge of the seat tension and drama is smoothed over and its difficult to even say there was any.
The question of who dies,who survives and how/why doesn't even come in to it by the end as there's too many by the book twists to put any flesh on the bones of any individuals or plots. I simply sat and watched each mini- story as a separate as there was no real immersive interplay or connection even when the characters had some supposed back story. Just mentally tick or cross them off as they go because in most cases you never seem to want to care enough to do more than count them in and count them out again. ... Surprisingly I did find Inferno quite likable, if rather forgettable, despite the lack of depth and annoying characters and multiple subplots. For a TV movie it fills the time effectively enough, however it just doesn't do enough to warrant a rewatching in a hurry.
Overall the SF was decent for its genre/budget - outside of the weird space fireball shots. The plot was driven along with enough energy to prevent sleep, though not enough to set the heart racing either. Characters, scenes and dialogue were very mixed and this is where the movie loses points, especially the way some characters seemed to be shoehorned in to the plot but without any redeemable features (The tow truck duo - I'm pointing at you!)
Overall this could have been polished up and had a reasonable score and with one or two less characters and subplots it may have made it...but no, I'm afraid as it stands:
5/10...
Destroyed by 'Hollywood Brit' casting...!
11 March 2015
I usually thoroughly enjoy an episode of Castle where even the 'poor' ones are decidedly 'above average'.
Not this one though. Whatever score I wanted to give it was instantly halved by the odd, and most definitely wrong, choice of an Australian to play a Limey - Does anyone even use the term 'Limey' anymore?
Apparently this guy was from the East End of London but with an Eton education who then joined the Police...talk about a stretch! I'm surprised he didn't claim to be a minor Royal too!
And what's with the never ending will they/won't they with Castle & Beckett...for goodness sake it's 4 series in and its going nowhere very slowly, there's not even been a near miss of a relationship...
I really hope the writers and producers have learned from the bad reception to this episode!!!!!
For now I'm simply trying to resist the temptation to jump ahead to the next episode and not bother putting any effort im to finishing watching this one...
Not this one though. Whatever score I wanted to give it was instantly halved by the odd, and most definitely wrong, choice of an Australian to play a Limey - Does anyone even use the term 'Limey' anymore?
Apparently this guy was from the East End of London but with an Eton education who then joined the Police...talk about a stretch! I'm surprised he didn't claim to be a minor Royal too!
And what's with the never ending will they/won't they with Castle & Beckett...for goodness sake it's 4 series in and its going nowhere very slowly, there's not even been a near miss of a relationship...
I really hope the writers and producers have learned from the bad reception to this episode!!!!!
For now I'm simply trying to resist the temptation to jump ahead to the next episode and not bother putting any effort im to finishing watching this one...
The Dark Knight
(2008)
Batman Returns...err...again...mores the pity.
3 January 2015
So this is the second installment of Christopher Nolan's trilogy and it carries on the tradition of being too long, too gadget central, too many subplots and villains..and most damningly it's too hyped up and unable to deliver.
The special effect are what these films hang as much on as the acting l and they are indeed spectacular...Well most of them are spectacular...Well some...Well so many are not only plainly absurd but incomprehensible such as the 'wall of phones' whose sole reason to be considered as a good idea was likely because it would appear so impressive when finalised on screen - oh how wrong they were as it was a mess of fast paced blurry images further confused by rapid camera pans and fast zooms.
Some have disliked this more modern darker Batmam but i feel it works so much better considering the industrialist metropolis the films are supposed to take place in. It works well and is a major saving grace - so why they took the story out of its home turf for the first time for a scene didn't really make sense, nor did kt add anything other than a seeming pointless 'you cant escape me' scene.(hardly a new one for Batman!)
So eventually you have to mention Heath Ledgers Joker, who's entrance to the story is contradictory to what follows as he robs a bank before later on denigrating those who do such things for money (burning his own literally warehouse sized pile of loot in the process). He also makes a habit of killing his cohorts, yet oddly is never short of company when required for a job. Surely anyone worth hiring is also wise enough to avoid taking the job.
I find Ledger performance annoying, and at times bizarre. He supposedly spent 6 weeks alone in a hotel room perfecting the role? What on earth did he do in that time because it wasn't acting lessons. Supposedly he developed the characters idiosyncrasies and 'made them his own'. All I see is a whiney, lip licking fool with grandiose plans that really should not have a hope of succeeding even within the confines of movie land.
Yet succeed they do as obviously in Gotham city its easy to sneak in to hospitals, lay dozens of explosive charges in order to blow the place up room by room, and all while wondering around with a white painted face that no one ever questions. If you wish to avoid the surveillance state then Gotham's the place to live it seems as only Batman himself has any success monitoring and preventing crime whilst everyone else couldn't spot wrongdoing or spy on people even if the subject had a big scary clown smile, white face makeup, frizzy hair, purple suits, and a whole whost of other personal and social pointers to his myriad of psychological and sociological problems.
Fear not though as Joker is not alone.
TwoFace is a pointless addition to the plot and adds nothing. Maybe he could have been a worthy villain in the future but we now know that won't be happening.
Batman himself...well fine except that raspy signature voice is as annoying as Jokers wet lipped squeakiness.
Morgan Freeman, so often a stalwart of great films, was a nothing character. His drive and motivation of Batman's technical side was limp and he felt like he was running on flat batteries.
Pointless me going through an A-Z of all the film moments and character, good and bad, a I reckon most people will see this as either a Magnificent 10, or a Terrible 1 and many others will have listed a myriad of both positive and negative arguments in support or damnation of the film... So my final roundup is this.
Its not a terrible film, but its far from the classic some make out, and I suspect some fanboys will never downgrade a film from a 10 if based on their favourite comic.
I found too many faults and was too irritated to care about some characters including primary ones. Also far too long and I failed to react to any last second twist of big bang finale thus most definitely not leave me hanging on for more.
5/10...wanted more but in less time. Alas it didn't arrive even when running late in to the night.
The special effect are what these films hang as much on as the acting l and they are indeed spectacular...Well most of them are spectacular...Well some...Well so many are not only plainly absurd but incomprehensible such as the 'wall of phones' whose sole reason to be considered as a good idea was likely because it would appear so impressive when finalised on screen - oh how wrong they were as it was a mess of fast paced blurry images further confused by rapid camera pans and fast zooms.
Some have disliked this more modern darker Batmam but i feel it works so much better considering the industrialist metropolis the films are supposed to take place in. It works well and is a major saving grace - so why they took the story out of its home turf for the first time for a scene didn't really make sense, nor did kt add anything other than a seeming pointless 'you cant escape me' scene.(hardly a new one for Batman!)
So eventually you have to mention Heath Ledgers Joker, who's entrance to the story is contradictory to what follows as he robs a bank before later on denigrating those who do such things for money (burning his own literally warehouse sized pile of loot in the process). He also makes a habit of killing his cohorts, yet oddly is never short of company when required for a job. Surely anyone worth hiring is also wise enough to avoid taking the job.
I find Ledger performance annoying, and at times bizarre. He supposedly spent 6 weeks alone in a hotel room perfecting the role? What on earth did he do in that time because it wasn't acting lessons. Supposedly he developed the characters idiosyncrasies and 'made them his own'. All I see is a whiney, lip licking fool with grandiose plans that really should not have a hope of succeeding even within the confines of movie land.
Yet succeed they do as obviously in Gotham city its easy to sneak in to hospitals, lay dozens of explosive charges in order to blow the place up room by room, and all while wondering around with a white painted face that no one ever questions. If you wish to avoid the surveillance state then Gotham's the place to live it seems as only Batman himself has any success monitoring and preventing crime whilst everyone else couldn't spot wrongdoing or spy on people even if the subject had a big scary clown smile, white face makeup, frizzy hair, purple suits, and a whole whost of other personal and social pointers to his myriad of psychological and sociological problems.
Fear not though as Joker is not alone.
TwoFace is a pointless addition to the plot and adds nothing. Maybe he could have been a worthy villain in the future but we now know that won't be happening.
Batman himself...well fine except that raspy signature voice is as annoying as Jokers wet lipped squeakiness.
Morgan Freeman, so often a stalwart of great films, was a nothing character. His drive and motivation of Batman's technical side was limp and he felt like he was running on flat batteries.
Pointless me going through an A-Z of all the film moments and character, good and bad, a I reckon most people will see this as either a Magnificent 10, or a Terrible 1 and many others will have listed a myriad of both positive and negative arguments in support or damnation of the film... So my final roundup is this.
Its not a terrible film, but its far from the classic some make out, and I suspect some fanboys will never downgrade a film from a 10 if based on their favourite comic.
I found too many faults and was too irritated to care about some characters including primary ones. Also far too long and I failed to react to any last second twist of big bang finale thus most definitely not leave me hanging on for more.
5/10...wanted more but in less time. Alas it didn't arrive even when running late in to the night.
Zulu
(1964)
A true to life story of strength and courage - on both sides, and without a 'Hollywood romance'
3 January 2015
Zulu is a fine example of what a war movie should be. There's no attempt at tying in unnecessary back story's, oddly misplaced romances, or blood & guts and cgi action and explosions for the sole sake of transitory visual impact as opposed story.
Unfortunately few modern films of the genre can match the classics of the 50s and 60s when the story was #1 and the money makers of marketing departments were there to sell the film on merit as opposed to mere profitability - Saving Private Ryan is one good example of a recent film that makes the grade, Pearl Harbour tells the 'Hollywood war story' where truth falls behind a sloppy badly after romance (Those who worked on Tora! Tora! Tora! - a vastly superior movie of the same events - must be turning in their graves!)
The mention of Tora! Tora! Tora! is deliberate. Its from the era of film where both story and events were displayed from a realistic human point of view as opposed to what can be rewritten and shown through CGI. Here just as in Tora! both sides in the Battle of Rourkes drift are accurately displayed as brave, valiant warriors but not without human flaws. There's no attempt to portray the natives as a 'lesser savage animal' but merely as an alternative representation of the warrior spirit.
It may be noted just how little gore is shown in any scene compared to modern equivelents, probably as this is about the battle not how much blood is on show in an attempt to crave notoriety amongst potential audiences. Death, and killing, is not treated as a game and whilst each army treats individual losses differently they both respect the sacrifices made by their own as well as the others sides warriors. What you certainly do not see is gloating over kills.
The acting is good, and despite the inevitable screen treatment is based upon solid characters following scripts and scenes that closely match records of the original battle - being a true life battle its nice to see it not sugar coated with incredible feats of heroism written to suit, or trying to demonstrate the absurd notion that this was somehow a naive uneducated native contingent up against obviously superior regular colonial army
As noted by others this wasn't a battle where either side came out as definitive winner or loser. The film follows as there is no victory celebrations simply a mutual respect as the two sides part ways. There's nothing patriotic in the movie about how the British slaughtered the miscreant natives and the viewer is left in no doubt that had the battle continued losses would have been very great on the Zulu side, but absolute on the British - anyone winning this battle would no longer have been an effective unit and thus worthy of bragging rights. ... Just for once its nice to sit back and watch a realistic war movie, based on real event, without mass cgi, consulted and unnecessary subplots - or worse still rewriting history to ensure specific characters are standup hero's, both real and worst still people who are inventions of the writers minds!
This is how it should be done - and it was all done by the British about the British in a battle they didn't win in a war they aren't proud of.
Unfortunately few modern films of the genre can match the classics of the 50s and 60s when the story was #1 and the money makers of marketing departments were there to sell the film on merit as opposed to mere profitability - Saving Private Ryan is one good example of a recent film that makes the grade, Pearl Harbour tells the 'Hollywood war story' where truth falls behind a sloppy badly after romance (Those who worked on Tora! Tora! Tora! - a vastly superior movie of the same events - must be turning in their graves!)
The mention of Tora! Tora! Tora! is deliberate. Its from the era of film where both story and events were displayed from a realistic human point of view as opposed to what can be rewritten and shown through CGI. Here just as in Tora! both sides in the Battle of Rourkes drift are accurately displayed as brave, valiant warriors but not without human flaws. There's no attempt to portray the natives as a 'lesser savage animal' but merely as an alternative representation of the warrior spirit.
It may be noted just how little gore is shown in any scene compared to modern equivelents, probably as this is about the battle not how much blood is on show in an attempt to crave notoriety amongst potential audiences. Death, and killing, is not treated as a game and whilst each army treats individual losses differently they both respect the sacrifices made by their own as well as the others sides warriors. What you certainly do not see is gloating over kills.
The acting is good, and despite the inevitable screen treatment is based upon solid characters following scripts and scenes that closely match records of the original battle - being a true life battle its nice to see it not sugar coated with incredible feats of heroism written to suit, or trying to demonstrate the absurd notion that this was somehow a naive uneducated native contingent up against obviously superior regular colonial army
As noted by others this wasn't a battle where either side came out as definitive winner or loser. The film follows as there is no victory celebrations simply a mutual respect as the two sides part ways. There's nothing patriotic in the movie about how the British slaughtered the miscreant natives and the viewer is left in no doubt that had the battle continued losses would have been very great on the Zulu side, but absolute on the British - anyone winning this battle would no longer have been an effective unit and thus worthy of bragging rights. ... Just for once its nice to sit back and watch a realistic war movie, based on real event, without mass cgi, consulted and unnecessary subplots - or worse still rewriting history to ensure specific characters are standup hero's, both real and worst still people who are inventions of the writers minds!
This is how it should be done - and it was all done by the British about the British in a battle they didn't win in a war they aren't proud of.
Nurse Jackie
(2009–2015)
Great show, (mostly) great acting, quirky, believable...
1 January 2015
6 seasons in and the show has lived up to its early promise.
Admittedly there have been a few ups and downs, and in my opinion unfair comparisons with the more dramatic hospital shows however this show continues to stand firm as a solid counter to those overly 'OMG! drama of the week' types with its lighter form of dark humour very effectively countering the inherent saddening, and sometimes negative moments that cannot, and should not be avoided by the makers of such shows.
Eddie Falco as the titular Nurse Jackie is the headline name but I give my honours to Merritt Weaver (Zoey Barkow) and Anna Deveare Smith (Gloria Akilitus). Without these two who match our heroine on every level, and sometimes fly above her, the show would come to nought.
Along the way other characters have come and gone, grown and developed, or been the ever present stalwart. A couple have been grating or wearisome at times but overall thankfully there no one who has been truly cringeworthy.
The question now is where does the show go next? What will season 7 bring?
Imo a little tighter writing schedule could have utilised the existing story lines to wind the show up at a grand season 6 finale. I'm concerned that by continuing the show may rely on pushing the TV vs reality boundaries too far following Jackie's inevitable fall from grace as the 'Angelic' nursing figure she so often conveys in public but fails to live up to in her personal life.
I'll keep my fingers crossed and in the meantime recommend this show to all who are fed up with the usual doom and bloom and unrealistic portrait of hospital life. Take a chance with a less hyped half hour viewing...you may well enjoy it more than you thought, I know I did!
Admittedly there have been a few ups and downs, and in my opinion unfair comparisons with the more dramatic hospital shows however this show continues to stand firm as a solid counter to those overly 'OMG! drama of the week' types with its lighter form of dark humour very effectively countering the inherent saddening, and sometimes negative moments that cannot, and should not be avoided by the makers of such shows.
Eddie Falco as the titular Nurse Jackie is the headline name but I give my honours to Merritt Weaver (Zoey Barkow) and Anna Deveare Smith (Gloria Akilitus). Without these two who match our heroine on every level, and sometimes fly above her, the show would come to nought.
Along the way other characters have come and gone, grown and developed, or been the ever present stalwart. A couple have been grating or wearisome at times but overall thankfully there no one who has been truly cringeworthy.
The question now is where does the show go next? What will season 7 bring?
Imo a little tighter writing schedule could have utilised the existing story lines to wind the show up at a grand season 6 finale. I'm concerned that by continuing the show may rely on pushing the TV vs reality boundaries too far following Jackie's inevitable fall from grace as the 'Angelic' nursing figure she so often conveys in public but fails to live up to in her personal life.
I'll keep my fingers crossed and in the meantime recommend this show to all who are fed up with the usual doom and bloom and unrealistic portrait of hospital life. Take a chance with a less hyped half hour viewing...you may well enjoy it more than you thought, I know I did!
At last an episode worthy of being called a 'classic Dr Who'
25 December 2014
Warning: Spoilers
From an excellent rebirth the Dr Who universe has bounced from piller to post and top to middle (fortunately none reached rock bottom) as regards acting, story lines, and most of all the writing - let's be honest Russell T Davies was a far better lead in this respect than Steven Moffet who frankly headed some seriously mediocre David Tennant episodes.
But I digress as I am pleased to say this is a cracker of an ride, much of it owed to John Hurt who acted the other pair out the museum... and although I like Matt Smiths irreverent attitude and smile I did find David Tennant to be the weakest of the three - sorry four Doctors on show. (Oops. Better go back and note spoilers!..:))
There were scenes that were borderline daft, primarily those centred around QE1. Now I can't blame the actors here but I did find it rather contrived even for Dr Who. Fortunately I quickly forgot once the story moved on a little, and let's be honest what's Dr Who without a bit of 'too stupid'...and thankfully only a bit!
I really do hope this is Rose Tyler's last outing. Whilst I have enjoyed Billie Piper in the role I feel it's reached the end of the line. Time to move on I think especially as she seems to have lost the pep that made her work so well with Christopher Ecclestone - its not her fault as we all change as we age (we do even if we fail to admit to ourselves).
The one thing that Dr Who has always done well, even when other areas drag on somewhat, is drama. Here it is in abundance and is sharply handled and keeps the viewer riveted - but again John Hurt and Matt Smith shine above Tennant. You always know its going to end well but its good to keep the casualty figures a mystery and this episode doesn't easily throw in the towel on suspense to move things towards the happy conclusion.
Bravo BBC...at last its delivered what its promised for so long...
...and like virtually every other Dr Who fan I have 'my Doctor', you know the one...the one you grew up with between the ages of real childhood and sceptical teenager. Mine was Tom Baker and I still rate him above all others so I was surprised and delighted at his little cameo where he did his customary little smile - plus you really could believe he and Matt Smith were one and the same character as they share a few sharp lines.
But I digress as I am pleased to say this is a cracker of an ride, much of it owed to John Hurt who acted the other pair out the museum... and although I like Matt Smiths irreverent attitude and smile I did find David Tennant to be the weakest of the three - sorry four Doctors on show. (Oops. Better go back and note spoilers!..:))
There were scenes that were borderline daft, primarily those centred around QE1. Now I can't blame the actors here but I did find it rather contrived even for Dr Who. Fortunately I quickly forgot once the story moved on a little, and let's be honest what's Dr Who without a bit of 'too stupid'...and thankfully only a bit!
I really do hope this is Rose Tyler's last outing. Whilst I have enjoyed Billie Piper in the role I feel it's reached the end of the line. Time to move on I think especially as she seems to have lost the pep that made her work so well with Christopher Ecclestone - its not her fault as we all change as we age (we do even if we fail to admit to ourselves).
The one thing that Dr Who has always done well, even when other areas drag on somewhat, is drama. Here it is in abundance and is sharply handled and keeps the viewer riveted - but again John Hurt and Matt Smith shine above Tennant. You always know its going to end well but its good to keep the casualty figures a mystery and this episode doesn't easily throw in the towel on suspense to move things towards the happy conclusion.
Bravo BBC...at last its delivered what its promised for so long...
...and like virtually every other Dr Who fan I have 'my Doctor', you know the one...the one you grew up with between the ages of real childhood and sceptical teenager. Mine was Tom Baker and I still rate him above all others so I was surprised and delighted at his little cameo where he did his customary little smile - plus you really could believe he and Matt Smith were one and the same character as they share a few sharp lines.
Cheesy Xmas fare...Good old BBC style!
25 December 2014
Yes it was cheesy but thankfully never ridiculous or worse still outright stupid. Essentially it was what a Doctor Who Christmas special episode should be, and a far cry from the cartoonist plots and scenes that I felt dragged down much of the Tennant era, and threatened the enjoyment of Matt Smiths version - although he at least seemed to carry off the 'Scooby-Doo- esque' comedy much more naturally. Peter Capaldi finishes his first season with head held high.
Peter Capaldi's one flaw is he sometimes comes across as too dour, but fortunately his acting prowess overcomes the urge to shout at the TV regarding his attitude - although its close at times. I had expected the lifting of some of the burden following the 'Day of the Doctor' episode but again he spends too long seeking the negatives - but I don't blame the actor alone, he only interprets the scripts...thank goodness for Jenna Colemans down to earth and generally positive Claro Oswald. Another fine set of acting.
Nick Frost as was also good as Santa Claus, however he would have come to naught without his wisecracking Elf's who probably had the best moments and lines. Maybe not overly funny throughout, and certainly questionable as to whether it was full of Christmas spirit, I am at least glad to say what true humour there was did hit the mark - and so did the downers.
It's already been said the episode feels like a combination of the Alien and Inception and I don't doubt these subconsciously played a part somewhere in its writing, and for the majority of the viewing it worked well - right up until the last twists and turns which I at least felt was almost too easy to figure out in advance. Sorry Doctor you lose a star for signposting once too often!
So overall not a bad effort, and I feel Dr Who has bounced back well after going through a 'not essential viewing, I'll wait for the repeat' phase. Once again I automatically set the EPG for it above other programmes rather than umming and arr'ing...
Now please Mr/Mrs writers...just lift The Doctors spirits a little and be kind to is poor folk who looks to smile occasionally without having to take a happy pill! (Another -1 star for too much annoyingly negativity)
Peter Capaldi's one flaw is he sometimes comes across as too dour, but fortunately his acting prowess overcomes the urge to shout at the TV regarding his attitude - although its close at times. I had expected the lifting of some of the burden following the 'Day of the Doctor' episode but again he spends too long seeking the negatives - but I don't blame the actor alone, he only interprets the scripts...thank goodness for Jenna Colemans down to earth and generally positive Claro Oswald. Another fine set of acting.
Nick Frost as was also good as Santa Claus, however he would have come to naught without his wisecracking Elf's who probably had the best moments and lines. Maybe not overly funny throughout, and certainly questionable as to whether it was full of Christmas spirit, I am at least glad to say what true humour there was did hit the mark - and so did the downers.
It's already been said the episode feels like a combination of the Alien and Inception and I don't doubt these subconsciously played a part somewhere in its writing, and for the majority of the viewing it worked well - right up until the last twists and turns which I at least felt was almost too easy to figure out in advance. Sorry Doctor you lose a star for signposting once too often!
So overall not a bad effort, and I feel Dr Who has bounced back well after going through a 'not essential viewing, I'll wait for the repeat' phase. Once again I automatically set the EPG for it above other programmes rather than umming and arr'ing...
Now please Mr/Mrs writers...just lift The Doctors spirits a little and be kind to is poor folk who looks to smile occasionally without having to take a happy pill! (Another -1 star for too much annoyingly negativity)
The Day of the Triffids
(2009)
Decent update, but too many stupid scenes and flat script lines
24 December 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Having read the book I remember watching the original 1981 series and being quite impressed. It was near enough to a fantastical but still believable post-apocolyptic event that you could forgive the shortcomings and flaws.
I saw this version when first released and recently stumbled across it again and decided it was worth a second viewing. Suffice to say I was both impressed and appalled.
The plot has understandably moved on in the 20+yrs since the first TV adaption, however its gotten itself lost somewhere thanks to the writers inabilty to keep the characters and situations both exciting and likable, but most of all believable - remember these are supposed to represent realistic people albeit in an alternative now/near future.
Instead there are simply too many characters who insist on ignoring even the most blatant self imposed sensibilities and rules and instead do unnecessary, risky, incomprehensible and too often dangerous things that even a person in shock or suffering anxiety and loss would think twice about. And once you add in absurd events, ridiculous coincidences, and ill thought-out consequences it negates so many of the shows positives.
Many others have listed or noted the weaker subplots, scenes, and characterisations so I'll pick out just a few that erked me early on - in fact lets just stick with the main character intros:
1) Torrence (played by a quietly menacing but bored looking and slightly out of place Eddie Izzard) waking up in the plane after the passengers and crew have been blinded and it threatens lose control. He simply reacts like hes seen it all before - there's no panicking or asking questions but instead calmly grabs inflatable vests from under a few seats and wedges himself in the toilet (nowhere near enough to make a difference btw even if the crash itself isn't so violent it kills him). And when the plane crashes in the middle of London not only is he alive but also he's miraculously virtually alone. Now I'll let them off to a point as its required for the plot, except he's barely shaken or injured yet his clothes are tattered, torn and blackened - yet a moment later he's smashing a shop window for a suit just as every plane crash survivor does.
2) In the meantime Bill is recovering from a close call with a Triffid sting - just as per original, only altered to suit. However the manner he received the sting is ridiculous having handed his glasses to a colleague as she is held hostage in a Triffid farm. As its later shown by the bodies that stings to the face in general can kill the question is if Triffids are so dangerous with their stings why only glasses and not a full mask? And with high fences, secure buildings and armed security (in a UK non-military/government farm!) how did the intruded get so far in the first place?
3) Our heroine Jo, a news reporter, comes out of the underground having miraculously been saved her sight my being ordered to change location by produced. This I'll accept as luck, however the aforementioned plane crash happnes right above her head yet she appears to be the only survivor from the underground, which is doubly unfortunate considering any others would be equally 'lucky' to still retain their sight. She doesn't even seem to look around other than at her apparently dead cameraman (who she does nothing more than glance at). Surely as an outdoor reporter she would be a little more observant even if shook up - obviously not tho as she soon proclaims "I thought I was the only one" when she bumps in to Bill.
I feel the only character who comes out of his first scene with any credibility is Corker who like the older version remains tough, resolute, caring, but shortsighted - although why he's suddenly an American and a Major and dressed like a WW2 airman seems odd (pandering to the US audience? or just another unnecessary change to the original?)
Its a pity there are so many points to highlight as it could have been so much better. I feel the writers have made a mess keeping the rewrite true to the original but relevant to modern audiences. The characters are forced to stumble over a sometimes terrible script that misses the point on too many occasions, and on more than one is simply absurd. The altered plot is lazy and at times unwiedly. Compared to the almost 'scripted reality' feel of the original this is written and produced as a more dramatic affair but comes over as far less believable even taking in to account the SciFi genre.
Just a couple more quickies:
Updated Triffids. More menacing but rather more unreal than those of old.
Also Terrance. Whilst Izzrad is suitably menacing the actual character feels wrong and its not only his entrance but also his quick rise to major player status that has changed.
To sign off there is that one last biggie that isn't just annoying but downright stupid - and I mean worse than the tree climbing Triffids - those awful Tribal Masks and the idea that a little Triffid 'blood' will suddenly make you safe from attack!!! ... Whilst i find the remake fine I still find the original with its older, simpler style more enjoyable. It just seemed to capture the post-apoas well yet in a far less in-your-face manner.
Will there be another version made sometime in the future. I doubt it, at least not for a good while, but if so I sincerely hope it's far more like 1981 that 2009...
I saw this version when first released and recently stumbled across it again and decided it was worth a second viewing. Suffice to say I was both impressed and appalled.
The plot has understandably moved on in the 20+yrs since the first TV adaption, however its gotten itself lost somewhere thanks to the writers inabilty to keep the characters and situations both exciting and likable, but most of all believable - remember these are supposed to represent realistic people albeit in an alternative now/near future.
Instead there are simply too many characters who insist on ignoring even the most blatant self imposed sensibilities and rules and instead do unnecessary, risky, incomprehensible and too often dangerous things that even a person in shock or suffering anxiety and loss would think twice about. And once you add in absurd events, ridiculous coincidences, and ill thought-out consequences it negates so many of the shows positives.
Many others have listed or noted the weaker subplots, scenes, and characterisations so I'll pick out just a few that erked me early on - in fact lets just stick with the main character intros:
1) Torrence (played by a quietly menacing but bored looking and slightly out of place Eddie Izzard) waking up in the plane after the passengers and crew have been blinded and it threatens lose control. He simply reacts like hes seen it all before - there's no panicking or asking questions but instead calmly grabs inflatable vests from under a few seats and wedges himself in the toilet (nowhere near enough to make a difference btw even if the crash itself isn't so violent it kills him). And when the plane crashes in the middle of London not only is he alive but also he's miraculously virtually alone. Now I'll let them off to a point as its required for the plot, except he's barely shaken or injured yet his clothes are tattered, torn and blackened - yet a moment later he's smashing a shop window for a suit just as every plane crash survivor does.
2) In the meantime Bill is recovering from a close call with a Triffid sting - just as per original, only altered to suit. However the manner he received the sting is ridiculous having handed his glasses to a colleague as she is held hostage in a Triffid farm. As its later shown by the bodies that stings to the face in general can kill the question is if Triffids are so dangerous with their stings why only glasses and not a full mask? And with high fences, secure buildings and armed security (in a UK non-military/government farm!) how did the intruded get so far in the first place?
3) Our heroine Jo, a news reporter, comes out of the underground having miraculously been saved her sight my being ordered to change location by produced. This I'll accept as luck, however the aforementioned plane crash happnes right above her head yet she appears to be the only survivor from the underground, which is doubly unfortunate considering any others would be equally 'lucky' to still retain their sight. She doesn't even seem to look around other than at her apparently dead cameraman (who she does nothing more than glance at). Surely as an outdoor reporter she would be a little more observant even if shook up - obviously not tho as she soon proclaims "I thought I was the only one" when she bumps in to Bill.
I feel the only character who comes out of his first scene with any credibility is Corker who like the older version remains tough, resolute, caring, but shortsighted - although why he's suddenly an American and a Major and dressed like a WW2 airman seems odd (pandering to the US audience? or just another unnecessary change to the original?)
Its a pity there are so many points to highlight as it could have been so much better. I feel the writers have made a mess keeping the rewrite true to the original but relevant to modern audiences. The characters are forced to stumble over a sometimes terrible script that misses the point on too many occasions, and on more than one is simply absurd. The altered plot is lazy and at times unwiedly. Compared to the almost 'scripted reality' feel of the original this is written and produced as a more dramatic affair but comes over as far less believable even taking in to account the SciFi genre.
Just a couple more quickies:
Updated Triffids. More menacing but rather more unreal than those of old.
Also Terrance. Whilst Izzrad is suitably menacing the actual character feels wrong and its not only his entrance but also his quick rise to major player status that has changed.
To sign off there is that one last biggie that isn't just annoying but downright stupid - and I mean worse than the tree climbing Triffids - those awful Tribal Masks and the idea that a little Triffid 'blood' will suddenly make you safe from attack!!! ... Whilst i find the remake fine I still find the original with its older, simpler style more enjoyable. It just seemed to capture the post-apoas well yet in a far less in-your-face manner.
Will there be another version made sometime in the future. I doubt it, at least not for a good while, but if so I sincerely hope it's far more like 1981 that 2009...
Battleship
(2012)
As a famous TV character once said..."I do not say this phrase lightly, in this hallowed place: This is ******* inedible."
24 December 2014
The premise... Alien Space Ships Oops, Bang, Change of Plan Bouncy Bouncy Battleships Ridiculous Special Effects and Plots More Bangs A Museum Piece to the Rescue Implausible and Against the Odds Victory Flag Waving - actually that's pretty much throughout as an alternative to putting effort in to making it halfway decent.
There no denying Battleship is one of the worst,most superficial, ridiculous, over-acted,under-scripted 'recruitment videos' (I hesitate to call it a movie) that I have seen for a good long while.
If you are a fan of clichéd lines and scenes being drowned out by blaring noise and blinding flashes then this may well suit you. If you prefer a minimal amount of bearable story and dialogue that even a mediocre actor can deal with then avoid like its Ebola's nasty brother (and even Rhianna fails to reach such low heights - they could have cast a Plastic Barbie Doll and saved the money).
It does prove one thing though, CG artists are more talented than many actors/directors/producers nowadays...tho to be fair it was a low bar and at times it proves a very polished affair - as in shiny, not well executed, plus it lacks realistic detail and accuracy. (Much like the whole caboodle then!)
I don't mind the occasional flag waving uber (or over)-rated Hollywood blockbuster but this fails even as a $200 million Naval recruitment video. It falls at every hurdle. I don't care about the characters, and the film cares even less about the sub plots. Is it a modern child of Independence Day or Top Gun where its happy to revel in its own stupidity as long as the action and acting hold up - well the originals were borderline in some scenes but this in nowhere near throughout. Maybe it a flawed telling of a decent story...like Pearl Harbour or U571? I'm afraid not as these were ruined by romantic subplots and historical inaccuracies - Battleship is just flawed throughout.
If the US Navy put any real time or money into this film and still allowed American Sailors to appear so inept, implausible, unruly, and incapable of following even the simplest chain of command then I would ask for a refund - or maybe Taylor Kitsch's lead character was based on real Officers in which case...help!...anyone with first hand military knowledge was probably crying the moment he showed up in uniform even before he so implausibly managed to gain command and save the day. The guys a delinquent with gets a ship within minutes of joining up - even the famed James Tiberiusus Kirk want that quick to jump in the captains chair and bark orders like a 20yr veteran.
As noted earlier there probably only the special effects that are likely to keep you involved enough to avoid the remote control off button - hence it gains 1 whole star! However they are almost CG for the sake of CG so it ends up just likes a cut-scene from a video game, except it not even half as immersive. Rather its a 2 dimensional version more worthy of the original board game where even the major battles with huge loss of life and the sinking of serious hardware simply makes you shrug and go 'next...'
Is there anything else to be said...probably, except I cant be bothered.
I've seen it twice, regretted it twice, avoided it twice...don't plan to do it again.
AVOID!
There no denying Battleship is one of the worst,most superficial, ridiculous, over-acted,under-scripted 'recruitment videos' (I hesitate to call it a movie) that I have seen for a good long while.
If you are a fan of clichéd lines and scenes being drowned out by blaring noise and blinding flashes then this may well suit you. If you prefer a minimal amount of bearable story and dialogue that even a mediocre actor can deal with then avoid like its Ebola's nasty brother (and even Rhianna fails to reach such low heights - they could have cast a Plastic Barbie Doll and saved the money).
It does prove one thing though, CG artists are more talented than many actors/directors/producers nowadays...tho to be fair it was a low bar and at times it proves a very polished affair - as in shiny, not well executed, plus it lacks realistic detail and accuracy. (Much like the whole caboodle then!)
I don't mind the occasional flag waving uber (or over)-rated Hollywood blockbuster but this fails even as a $200 million Naval recruitment video. It falls at every hurdle. I don't care about the characters, and the film cares even less about the sub plots. Is it a modern child of Independence Day or Top Gun where its happy to revel in its own stupidity as long as the action and acting hold up - well the originals were borderline in some scenes but this in nowhere near throughout. Maybe it a flawed telling of a decent story...like Pearl Harbour or U571? I'm afraid not as these were ruined by romantic subplots and historical inaccuracies - Battleship is just flawed throughout.
If the US Navy put any real time or money into this film and still allowed American Sailors to appear so inept, implausible, unruly, and incapable of following even the simplest chain of command then I would ask for a refund - or maybe Taylor Kitsch's lead character was based on real Officers in which case...help!...anyone with first hand military knowledge was probably crying the moment he showed up in uniform even before he so implausibly managed to gain command and save the day. The guys a delinquent with gets a ship within minutes of joining up - even the famed James Tiberiusus Kirk want that quick to jump in the captains chair and bark orders like a 20yr veteran.
As noted earlier there probably only the special effects that are likely to keep you involved enough to avoid the remote control off button - hence it gains 1 whole star! However they are almost CG for the sake of CG so it ends up just likes a cut-scene from a video game, except it not even half as immersive. Rather its a 2 dimensional version more worthy of the original board game where even the major battles with huge loss of life and the sinking of serious hardware simply makes you shrug and go 'next...'
Is there anything else to be said...probably, except I cant be bothered.
I've seen it twice, regretted it twice, avoided it twice...don't plan to do it again.
AVOID!
Tell Your Friends