Change Your Image
simon-james
Reviews
Game of Thrones (2011)
Better than the book
George R. R. Martin books are a well written but often tedious read. He has created a rich lore world that feels like a medieval Europe but with a hint of fantasy with a large cast of characters. And this is often the problem to many characters with to many parts to play. But the HBO adaptation filters out a lot of the tedium and condenses it into a very gripping show. It almost feels like the Sopranos set in Middlearth.
The only problem that I can see with the show is the knowledge of what I know is coming from the books. And I know who dies and what happens and I think the non-book reading fans of the show will be very unhappy with some of the major characters just being killed off on almost a whim by Martin's trying to shock style of writing. And come the second season they will feel that there aren't really any likable characters to care about any more. So we may see lower viewing figures when popular characters are killed off.
And will HBO really carry out the show to the end is another big problem. We are four books into the adventure with the fifth coming this summer and no resolve on any of the plot points, Martin is making this a 7 book epic, so will HBO run this for 7 season?
That is why I give it a 8 because of what the future could bring for the shows production. But so far a very enjoyable show.
The Deep (2010)
Avoid at all costs!!
I saw this being advertised on the BBC and it looked quite interesting so I watched the first part. And I was hooked! OK the bad acting was a little off putting, but the show had created a mystery about a Submarine that goes missing in the Arctic ocean and something gigantic had caused it's disappearance.
I told all my friends about it, and said to catch the repeat in the week and I got on-board a few people that was hooked to.
And then part two happened! The mystery has been solved you learn about the something gigantic and the bad acting is still there and this is only part 2 out of 5.
By the end of part 3 you are now bored and know how the story is going to pan out.
You find yourself uninterested and really don't care what happens to anyone, and actually hope that they all somehow meet a horrible icy death by the end of part 5.
I really wish I had not invested 5 hours of my life in this predictable, badly written, poorly acted rubbish.
And I have to say a big SORRY to my friends that I dragged into this boring show. Can you forgive me?
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987)
Has not aged well, but still great sci-fi!!!
When this show first aired in 87 I was fan instantly. And for the next 7 years I watched and loved every minute of it. Up until my purchase of the box set DVD a couple of weeks ago, I hadn't seen the show since 1994. And I was shocked at how a show I watched religiously hasn't aged well and seem very corny at times.
The stories are still compelling and well written, but all seems a bit to politically correct and almost cheesy. It's like when Riker tells a alien race that kills animals for meat that "we don't enslave our animals, for meat" I was like what? And all that standing around the bridge with big grins and laughing at something whimsical that Data might have said.
And the whole federation and it's prime directive seems like it is something that has just been spewed out from the EU parliament. It has a idealistic, wishful thinking, outlook of the future of humanity. That in todays terroristic climate is something that we will never archive, let alone in 400 years time.
Thats not to say the ST:TNG is bad because it's hasn't aged well. 90% of the episodes are amazingly fun to watch, and some even shocking. The last few season of the show are all quality, and is worth watching just to see Patrick Stewart's performance. And has laid the foundations for shows like Stargate and Battlestar Galactica, and made the television producers realise that sci-fi can be intelligent and adult.
TNG is still the best of the Startrek franchises hands down and should be watched by all sci-fi fans.
The Mist (2007)
Could have been a lot better!
A nice idea but far to many clichéd characters and set ups.
1. You have your handsome leading man and woman
2. You have your token black guy
3. Your religious nut job
4. Your cowardly self preservation guy
5. Your nerd
6. Your old man or woman or both
7. A useless person in authority (usually a sheriff but this time some soldiers).
Put them in a shopping mall in the mist and have them being attacked by monsters.
1. There's the scene where no one believes there are monsters, until someone dies.
2. There's the scene where the people that kiss end up dead.
3. There's the usual rescue a kid scene.
4. Your Simpson style panicky mob with pitch forks or butcher knifes killing someone scene.
5. The lets go out in do mortal danger to get some thing that will help one dying person and get a X amount of people dead in the process scene.
So why a 5 out of 10? because the twist in the end is very good. Expect a standard clichéd horror movie with a good end.
Righteous Kill (2008)
Could have been a lot better!
This film should have been a master class in acting it has Robert DeNiro, Al Pacino and Brian Dennehy in it. So why did it feel that they couldn't be bothered to act?
Pacino's acting through the film feels as if they just turned the camera on him and filmed him just doing everyday stuff. DeNiro was a bit better but still felt as if he only showed up on set to collect the pay cheque at the end of the day. Dennehy who is a fine actor was only in a hand full of scenes that all revolved around his office. Donnie Wahlberg played the same cop that he played in Saw. 50 Cent's character was just plain pointless and could have been played by anyone, so why did he get third billing in the film? it shows that the there is something very wrong here.
And the problem with this film my friends is a very weak, predictable script. If DeNiro and Pacino didn't sign for this film it would have never got made. Because they are the only thing that makes this film interesting.
House of Saddam (2008)
The Sopranos in Iraq
Anyone that loves their classic gangster sagas will love this series. The story of Saddam is one, that nearly every on Earth knows; but no one really knew what motivated him and why he was such a tyrant. Well this four part miniseries tries to put together the facts behind this man.
Yigal Naor who plays Saddam acting is so much like James Gandolfini you would swear it was his Arab brother. And there are moments when Saddam and his henchmen are sitting around in restaurants, eating and making fun of one another. You think this just like Paulie, Sil and the guys. And he's got a adviser who has a different faith just like Hesh. And even his a son that is a disappointment to him just like AJ. Saddam was basically a Gangster and like all Gangsters, he will rise and fall.
The difference with The Sopranos and House of Saddam is, one is fiction and one is real. The BBC/HBO should have first given this series a four hour cinema release. It's that good!