Change Your Image
fmegeorge
Reviews
Shardlake (2024)
Casting, and ... casting
I think it was Scorcese who said casting isn't 90% of the problem, it's much more important than that.
The casting in this show is not good. But that's not all. It is, fundamentally, a historical drama. Would you like to tell me what the odds would be of an african.abbot in 1500? I'll give you my guess. Approximately 0%.
I'm ok with it if, for example, they cast Denzel Washington in the equalizer. Firstly, (and importantly!) he's a fairly ok actor, and secondly, in the current day it is at least feasible to see someone of african descent in a role like that. I watched the movie, and it was ok.
I can't say the same for shardlake. The casting in general is really not good, but the abbot? And some of the other cast as well? Get real.
Shardlake himself is supposed to be competent, intelligent, despite his spinal deformity (and btw the spinal deformity was the character's only physical abnormality). That is not at all what I got from Hughes. Perhaps he has done some good roles - I don't think this is one of them.
Can we just go back to casting actors based on their ability and their suitability for the role?
House of the Dragon (2022)
Good dragons
I gave this four stars primarily for special effects, and good dragons.
For the rest, my primary takeaway after 6 episodes is that there is not one likeable character in the series.
They range from vaguely unpleasant or incompetent or stupid, through annoying, all the way to totally psychotic.
Perhaps I am in the minority here, but I actually like shows I am watching to have one or two characters that I enjoy watching. Doesn't matter whether it is the protagonist or the bad guy, just give me a character or two to derive pleasure out of.
Oh and by the way the sound engineer is not very good. Neither the tonal balance nor the voice amplitude during dialog are consistent.
So why am I watching this show at all? If it were to depend on me, I wouldn't. My partner wants to watch it, so I go along in total bemusement as to why anyone would do this to themselves voluntarily.
The Undeclared War (2022)
Well crafted script
This is not going to be a conventional review, there are enough of those.
Just briefly, though, the show is well crafted, well scripted, well directed. Very enjoyable, even for geeks like me (uncommon for a computer based plot)
For the rest, here are just some of the technical goofs from the show, for those of you who aren't too knowledgeable in software and hacking. (This is not intended to criticize the show, on the contrary, I really enjoyed these. Although I can't be sure, it's possible that the scriptwriter put them in to amuse people like myself)
No specific order to these, just as they came to mind. Also, they are probably incomplete, I'm sure I missed some.
_____________
When Saara is looking at the malware code, it clearly makes calls to API functions which point to it running on Windows. However, when (in the last episode) she wants to kill the email task, she executes instructions in Linux.
The assembly code that she examines is commented. There is pretty much no way that the machine code for the malware would contain comments; this would only be in the programmer source code which they definitely did not have access to.
The "garbage data" that they analyze in the last episode is supposedly coded in Base64. This, in itself, is not impossible, but there would be calls to a base64 decode in the runtime code to decode the garbage - otherwise there is no way it could ever be executed. Also, this would imply that the runtime code included a base64 decoder, since this is not available as an operating system call. All of this would be obvious.
The garbage data seems to decode to something like python (or similar) - an interpreted (high level) language. Again, not impossible, but this would imply that the runtime code would have to call a python interpreter - which would be obvious. Thus a very unlikely choice - especially given that all the other code was clearly assembly.
Finally about base64 - this is an unlikely coding method. There are far more secure and less crackable coding techniques which are well known, and wouldn't be as obvious. Base64 is not an encryption technique - it is actually used to code email attachments in ASCII for inclusion in Emails, which only support text, not binary data.
The stolen files are supposedly sent out as attachments to emails. In itself not impossible, but unfortunately it would be very obvious. Email functionality is not included in the operating system, and must be provided by the malware in some way - and is very easily recognizable. It is also a fair amount of code, so can't be hidden too easily. It also has to include a base64 encoder for the attachments - again an easily recognizable utility. All in all, a disguised communication protocol would probably be a more likely choice. Finally, one of the sys admins would notice the extremely high data traffic from the email server (or to an external email server) through obvious known ports (25, 587 or 995) - very easy to spot and pretty easy to block too. You don't kill the task, you either shut down the email server (if it is yours) or block the port in the firewall (if it is using a foreign email server). If the sys admin didn't spot this within an hour or so he would be useless (and fired).
The 'encrypted text' which included the date time and place for the meeting, as presented, was too short to contain that information. Also, very short pieces of encrypted text like this are extremely difficult to decrypt without a key - this normally uses statistical frequency of characters or something similar, which requires far more data than was available.
The MAC id of the sandbox was supposedly included in the 'garbage data' - this is unlikely, since the runtime code would first have to decode the garbage data into executable code to find out if it was in the sandbox. This would be a clumsy approach - normally you would have environment tests right at startup, so as to leave as little as possible for an analyst to go on if he is trying to figure out your code.
_________________
I'm sure I've left out many goofs, I didn't make notes as I was watching the show.
Again, these are not intended as a criticism. I didn't feel that they detracted from the show at all, and I enjoyed spotting them. They were enjoyable and entertaining.
Finally, I have to say that I really enjoyed the show. Yes, it had flaws, they didn't bother me at all.
The Time Traveler's Wife (2022)
Properly executed time travel show
There is more than just personal taste to what one likes in a show. There is timing (in your life spectrum), mood, company, other things too.
So let's just start with the simple stuff.
Is it well written (scripted)? I think so. I think it is very well scripted, better than most.
Is it well directed? Yes. And well edited. The timing is good, scenes are not too long, nor too short to convey the emotion they carry (so many of them).
Well cast? I think so. I enjoyed the movie, but in my opinion this was better. Theo James is perfect in the role - I don't think I've ever seen him fit a role better. Clare.(Rose Leslie) is perfect. And an astonishingly accomplished actress.
Then there is episode 3. I am not a fan of shows that jump to and fro in time. Never have been. I have long felt that it is an overused device, and that almost always there are better ways of achieving the same result. Then there is episode 3. It jumps all over the place, and yet the episode is coherent, and tells a story of emotion and portrays character development that would be difficult to convey in a different way. I thought it was an impressive demonstration of direction, acting, and editing. I enjoyed it.
Finally, do I think this is a good series? Will you think this is a good series?
The answer is going to depend in large part on whether you like this kind of show or not. It is emotional, slightly disjointed, requires some concentration to follow well, and it is mostly a drama rather than a thriller or an action show. So, if you don't really go for sci-fi like themes or you don't like dramas, or you don't like emotive shows (and most especially if you don't like nudity or implied nudity) you won't like it.
To my surprise, I liked it. I enjoyed it. I thought it was very well put together. So 8 stars.
Obi-Wan Kenobi (2022)
Another one?
This show actually deserves two distinct ratings. One for special / visual effects (6) and one for plot, character and dialog (2).
I remember as a young man seeing the original star wars movie in 1977. I thought it was imaginative, exciting, entertaining. (Bear in mind I was 18 at the time, and this was probably the first proper science fiction movie I had seen).
Back to this show. In 45 years, they have not come up with a single new idea, new character, new plot line.
I only watched half of the first episode. At that point I was so irritated I just could not watch any more. I have absolutely no intention of trying another episode.
(edit) I really thought this show was quite bad, but then I read a dozen or so of the user reviews and realized that it was actually quite a bit worse than I had assumed.
Sherlok v Rossii (2020)
Imaginative and original
This deserving show has no reviews after two years, and it deserves one.
The characters are believable (almost all), the plots are imaginative and not repeats of other previous depictions of holmes.
I have seen very few shows based on holmes that are worth watching. Not quite none, but very few. This one, in my opinion, is one of those few.
It is darker than previous holmes dramas, and it works
well. The characters are dark, and the plots are dark. Death is frequent, and life is cheap. It has a sombre but well portrayed background of a corrupt society with many villains, most of them prepared to do nearly anything.
It has its problems and limitations, but they are forgivable. The merits of the show allow us to ignore its failings, and they are not many.
I have only watched the french translation (which is extremely good) - if you can find a translation or subtitles for your language, watch this. You won't be disappointed.