With a terrific, mad cast list (Sellers! Cleese! Attenborough! Ringo!), THE MAGIC CHRISTIAN is funny at many points (if not a laugh a minute), but more often than that, just completely insane!
Reviews
13 Reviews
The Warrior
(2001)
Not bad, but less exciting than it could have been.
8 June 2020
This film is moving, and has some beautiful shots. But, surprisingly for a film called The Warrior, it doesn't have any sword fights. It never becomes quite as exciting as you think it should be. There's a few sword slashes (at random civilians, not in a fight), but it doesn't reach a level of high tension. The costumes and props are pretty decent - it seems the budget went on those things rather than special effects, since there is very little blood, and the deaths are so obviously fake.
If you're looking for an evocative tale about one man's grief and pain in a historical Indian setting, I highly recommend it. But it is most definitely not the Indian equivalent of APOCALYPTO or HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS.
If you're looking for an evocative tale about one man's grief and pain in a historical Indian setting, I highly recommend it. But it is most definitely not the Indian equivalent of APOCALYPTO or HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS.
Star Trek
(1966–1969)
A Show That Still Sparks Joy
12 February 2020
Fittingly for a sci-fi series set in the future, Star Trek is timeless. Sometimes it feels like it shouldn't be (the show's gender politics can be "interesting") and yet it touches on issues that still resonate today: the social and political (war and peace, duty, military intervention, race and prejudice - it offers fascinating insights into Cold War American idealism) and occasionally the metaphysical, but its eternal appeal mostly comes from it being about those basic, crucial facts of human existence: curiosity, ambition and friendship.
Nowadays, shows are frequently ironic and highly self-aware. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is refreshing to watch the pure, unapologetic, sci-fi of Star Trek. It just makes you very happy, and the old set designs don't stop you from feeling you feeling that you're there, with the crew, on another planet.
The main performances are all extremely memorable. The moments where William Shatner overacts are easy to laugh at, but his overall acting is underrated: there's a real playfulness to his performance (see the Fizzbin clip for a perfect example), and though his punctuated style of speaking is not effortlessly charming, *it is charming nonetheless*, and all the more remarkable for it. Meanwhile, Leonard Nimoy as Spock shows that "stoic" doesn't need to mean "wooden" (something today's actors would do well to learn), and he expresses so much with so little. Truly one of the great TV performances of all time. Scotty, Uhura, Sulu and Chekhov all delight as well. Bless Gene Roddenberry.
Nowadays, shows are frequently ironic and highly self-aware. There's nothing wrong with that, but it is refreshing to watch the pure, unapologetic, sci-fi of Star Trek. It just makes you very happy, and the old set designs don't stop you from feeling you feeling that you're there, with the crew, on another planet.
The main performances are all extremely memorable. The moments where William Shatner overacts are easy to laugh at, but his overall acting is underrated: there's a real playfulness to his performance (see the Fizzbin clip for a perfect example), and though his punctuated style of speaking is not effortlessly charming, *it is charming nonetheless*, and all the more remarkable for it. Meanwhile, Leonard Nimoy as Spock shows that "stoic" doesn't need to mean "wooden" (something today's actors would do well to learn), and he expresses so much with so little. Truly one of the great TV performances of all time. Scotty, Uhura, Sulu and Chekhov all delight as well. Bless Gene Roddenberry.
Three Men and a Baby
(1987)
Leaves you smiling
1 February 2020
Obviously not the greatest comedy of all time, and though generally charming, it has few laugh out loud moments. That said, the performances and the direction are all decent. And, most importantly, it leaves you with a great big smile on your face. You can't ask for too much more than that.
Dracula
(2020)
A terrifically creepy, unfaithful but not unreasonable adaptation.
2 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This adaptation of Dracula is terrifically creepy. Very little I watch now genuinely freaks me out, but this did. To begin with, I was uncertain about the changes from Stoker's novel, but as the episode progressed I was less bothered. Gattis and Moffat are doing something different - what matters is that they are doing it well, notwithstanding a few cringey/contrived moments.
It is true that part of what makes the book great is the slow, tragic and harrowing realisation that Lucy is changing, the characters are helpless to stop it, and they'll have no choice but to kill her. [Edit: in the first two episodes,] The BBC's Dracula has eschewed the subtlety of such horror in favour of grotesque spectacle. However, this is fair enough, as it is an approach that may well be better suited to television. Indeed, the meandering second half of Stoker's novel where they chase Dracula through Europe would be difficult to adapt - and had they been faithful I think it would have been too drawn out and repetitive, whereas the TV series takes us straight into the action. In other words, the changes seem reasonable enough, and the ones they have made give the story focus. Still, I will be disappointed if we don't get some Whitby and hospital/familiar scenes [update, we did, to an extent!]
UPDATE: 2nd episode was superb - real sense of menace. And unlike many people, I actually enjoyed the 3rd episode. Despite being set in the present day, it was, in some respects, the episode that most resembled the book. Having previously thought they weren't going to include Lucy and Renwick, I was pleasantly surprised to see they did, and it accurately conveyed the growing feeling of horrible inevitability that surrounds Lucy's death and transformation. It was slower than previous episodes - in other words, it matched the pace of the book - so I understand why it wouldn't be for everyone. Still, the modern setting stopped it feeling repetitive (as I'd initially feared it could be) and I appreciated the classic Moffat/Gattis humour. Make what you will of the final explanation for Dracula's weaknesses - it felt unnecessary, but it could have been worse.
All in all, all the episodes had very different feels to them, and I think they all worked on their own terms. Whether they work together is another matter, and their varying styles is perhaps why some who enjoyed the first 2 weren't convinced by the last one. But, personally speaking, I enjoyed all three.
It is true that part of what makes the book great is the slow, tragic and harrowing realisation that Lucy is changing, the characters are helpless to stop it, and they'll have no choice but to kill her. [Edit: in the first two episodes,] The BBC's Dracula has eschewed the subtlety of such horror in favour of grotesque spectacle. However, this is fair enough, as it is an approach that may well be better suited to television. Indeed, the meandering second half of Stoker's novel where they chase Dracula through Europe would be difficult to adapt - and had they been faithful I think it would have been too drawn out and repetitive, whereas the TV series takes us straight into the action. In other words, the changes seem reasonable enough, and the ones they have made give the story focus. Still, I will be disappointed if we don't get some Whitby and hospital/familiar scenes [update, we did, to an extent!]
UPDATE: 2nd episode was superb - real sense of menace. And unlike many people, I actually enjoyed the 3rd episode. Despite being set in the present day, it was, in some respects, the episode that most resembled the book. Having previously thought they weren't going to include Lucy and Renwick, I was pleasantly surprised to see they did, and it accurately conveyed the growing feeling of horrible inevitability that surrounds Lucy's death and transformation. It was slower than previous episodes - in other words, it matched the pace of the book - so I understand why it wouldn't be for everyone. Still, the modern setting stopped it feeling repetitive (as I'd initially feared it could be) and I appreciated the classic Moffat/Gattis humour. Make what you will of the final explanation for Dracula's weaknesses - it felt unnecessary, but it could have been worse.
All in all, all the episodes had very different feels to them, and I think they all worked on their own terms. Whether they work together is another matter, and their varying styles is perhaps why some who enjoyed the first 2 weren't convinced by the last one. But, personally speaking, I enjoyed all three.
The Trial of Christine Keeler
(2019–2020)
Great acting but frustrating direction
30 December 2019
The Profumo affair of the 1960s makes for excellent drama - no surprises there, as it is a fascinating story with interesting 'side details' as well.
The acting is superb - Norton as Stephen Ward is particularly brilliant, but Sophie Cookson as Keeler and Ben Miles (aka Patrick from Coupling) as Profumo delight as well.
The only thing that lets it down is the way they have chosen to tell it. First of all flipping back between the years seems unnecessary and makes it all a bit itty-bitty. Second, although there's nothing wrong with the feminist framing on Keeler's perspective as it keeps the story fresh, the choice to have Keeler narrate the events (saying rather obvious things) makes the whole thing a bit fisted (a shame, as the writing and script the rest of the time is fine). They should have trusted the audience to be able to take in the message without spoon feeding it to them.
The Grand Tour
(2016–2024)
Gets better and better as Clarkson, Hammond and May get into their groove.
14 December 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I had mixed feelings about Season 1. In parts enjoyable, the very scripted and predictable segments were starting to get tired. Sometimes, the obviously and knowingly staged bits could be savoured if you treated it as a sitcom (like the episode where they kept 'dying' in military combat), but not always.
But Season 3 was fantastic. There were still scripted bits, sure, but it was never overdone and enough of it wasn't staged that it no longer felt old. Those were some of the most enjoyable bits. Despite a few 'boomer' jokes, the relationship between the three presenters is as entertaining as it was in the best Top Gear episodes. The Mongolia and America episodes were particular highlights - after all these years, they still have fresh and bold new ideas. The last episode of Season 3 was also quite moving, which I did not expect.
I really enjoyed 'Seamen'. Aside from being pretty funny, the last section on the South China was exhilarating. It's easy to denounce He Grand Tour as formulaic, but the presenters are putting themselves through some really physically tough tasks. I can't wait to see what they do next.
But Season 3 was fantastic. There were still scripted bits, sure, but it was never overdone and enough of it wasn't staged that it no longer felt old. Those were some of the most enjoyable bits. Despite a few 'boomer' jokes, the relationship between the three presenters is as entertaining as it was in the best Top Gear episodes. The Mongolia and America episodes were particular highlights - after all these years, they still have fresh and bold new ideas. The last episode of Season 3 was also quite moving, which I did not expect.
I really enjoyed 'Seamen'. Aside from being pretty funny, the last section on the South China was exhilarating. It's easy to denounce He Grand Tour as formulaic, but the presenters are putting themselves through some really physically tough tasks. I can't wait to see what they do next.
Blue Velvet
(1986)
Almost a masterpiece.
26 June 2019
Strangely stylistic, Lynch's mastery of music and direction makes this an unsettling yet seductive film. This particularly comes through in the scenes where the songs 'Blue Velvet' and 'In Dreams' are used. However, the last third of the film doesn't quite keep up the same sense of mystery and the same beguiling atmosphere that makes the rest of it so bewitching.
Stunning
26 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
David Dawson gives the performance of his career in this episode, as King Alfred at the end of his days. His acting, the moving conversation between Alfred and Uhtred, the Anglo-Saxon chronicle prop (for us history buffs) and the haunting shot of Alfred waiting in the background makes this the best episode of The Last Kingdom.
David Dawson's King Alfred was enough to make the show worth watching despite many irritating characters. His screen presence on this show will be sorely missed.
David Dawson's King Alfred was enough to make the show worth watching despite many irritating characters. His screen presence on this show will be sorely missed.
Matt Berry elevates this episode.
25 June 2019
Simple yet great idea, but didn't fulfil its potential.
29 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
The premise for flatline was very good. The 2D monsters were very menacing. This episode should have become a classic.
It didn't matter that the Doctor rarely appeared - "Blink" achieved cult status. Coleman gave her best performance of the series up to then.
One thing ruined it. Halfway through episode, the monsters became 3D. It was chilling. But in the end - you have a perfectly good idea - never done on Doctor Who before - so why suddenly make the monsters a lot more ordinary? Before, even though you could hardly see the monsters, the flatlanders (or boneless as BBC has stupidly called them were a very deadly enemy who kept you tense. It's just a shame the second half of the episode failed to keep up the creativity of the first.
It didn't matter that the Doctor rarely appeared - "Blink" achieved cult status. Coleman gave her best performance of the series up to then.
One thing ruined it. Halfway through episode, the monsters became 3D. It was chilling. But in the end - you have a perfectly good idea - never done on Doctor Who before - so why suddenly make the monsters a lot more ordinary? Before, even though you could hardly see the monsters, the flatlanders (or boneless as BBC has stupidly called them were a very deadly enemy who kept you tense. It's just a shame the second half of the episode failed to keep up the creativity of the first.
Enjoyable, but strays too far from the book and radio series.
15 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Having listened to the original radio series and read the books I was very interested to watch the Hitch-hikers guide to the galaxy film. It had top-notch British actors in, so I had high expectations.
It was very funny, but the humour was different from that in the book/radio series and lost some of its charm. It lacked the small plot parts which partly made the hitch-hikers guide to the galaxy radio series so enjoyable. Furthermore it added its own plot sections that were not from the book such Martin the Paranoid Andriod dying saving his companions from enemies in a fight.
So it is not as charming as the book and the plot goes away from the original story-line too much. However, there are some good parts. The portrayal of the characters was excellent and the characters had the same personality as they did in the book - which gave the film some warmth. And the scenes that *did* stay true to the book were great
I neither recommend nor condemn it. Instead, to appreciate how great and charming the hitch-hikers guide to the galaxy is, you need to listen to the Radio series or read the books is.
It was very funny, but the humour was different from that in the book/radio series and lost some of its charm. It lacked the small plot parts which partly made the hitch-hikers guide to the galaxy radio series so enjoyable. Furthermore it added its own plot sections that were not from the book such Martin the Paranoid Andriod dying saving his companions from enemies in a fight.
So it is not as charming as the book and the plot goes away from the original story-line too much. However, there are some good parts. The portrayal of the characters was excellent and the characters had the same personality as they did in the book - which gave the film some warmth. And the scenes that *did* stay true to the book were great
I neither recommend nor condemn it. Instead, to appreciate how great and charming the hitch-hikers guide to the galaxy is, you need to listen to the Radio series or read the books is.
Tell Your Friends