Search
Bex Heber (5 KP) rated Good Omens in TV
Jul 12, 2019 (Updated Jul 13, 2019)
I'm a long time Terry Pratchett fan and whilst I haven't read the book, David Tennant and Micheal Sheen were enough of a selling point. They did not dissapoint; the dynamic they have throughout is both entertaining and endearing. However I think this is in large part a credit to the actors rather than the show.
The writing often missed the mark for me, sometimes only by hair but many of the characters never really managed to find their stride. What surprised me most, is that where this was most felt was in dialogue taken directly from the book. Even watching as someone who hadnt read the book I found it noticable and then later confirmed it by reading The Guardian's review. It appears Neil Gaiman was reluctant to take too many artistic liberties, perhaps in tribute to Prattchett but it seemed to hurt the show as a result.
It worked in places, the opening narration felt distinctly and enjoyably Pratchett-esque but even in this case the narration began to become over bearing as it continued to feature heavily in later episodes.
Saying this, I can't pretend I didn't enjoy the show, watching David and Micheal caper around with ridiculous CGI and yellow contacts to boot was always going to be entertaining and there are moments of brilliance, but given the potential of such a ridiculous plot and ensemble, I found the whole thing mostly forgettable.
The writing often missed the mark for me, sometimes only by hair but many of the characters never really managed to find their stride. What surprised me most, is that where this was most felt was in dialogue taken directly from the book. Even watching as someone who hadnt read the book I found it noticable and then later confirmed it by reading The Guardian's review. It appears Neil Gaiman was reluctant to take too many artistic liberties, perhaps in tribute to Prattchett but it seemed to hurt the show as a result.
It worked in places, the opening narration felt distinctly and enjoyably Pratchett-esque but even in this case the narration began to become over bearing as it continued to feature heavily in later episodes.
Saying this, I can't pretend I didn't enjoy the show, watching David and Micheal caper around with ridiculous CGI and yellow contacts to boot was always going to be entertaining and there are moments of brilliance, but given the potential of such a ridiculous plot and ensemble, I found the whole thing mostly forgettable.
Just a Minute: BBC Radio Comedy: Best of 2015
Paul Merton, Full Cast, Nicholas Parsons and B.B.C. Radio
Book
Four of the best 2015 episodes of the much-loved panel game chaired by Nicholas Parsons. Just a...
David McK (3233 KP) rated Doctor Who: Engines of War in Books
Aug 19, 2023
The War Doctor.
A previously unknown incarnation of the Time Lord known only as The Doctor, as portrayed by John Hurt in the Dr Who 50th anniversary special 'the Day of the Doctor' in 2013 during Matt Smith's tenure as The Doctor (and with David Tennant also reprising his role as the same character).
The War Doctor refers to the fact that *this* incarnation participated in the Time War, a fundamental part of the backstory of Nu-Who, between the Daleks and the Time Lords.
Its also open to interpretation whether the Engines of War of the title here are those Daleks, or the various TARDIS's used by the Time Lords during this story, which itself is largely split into 3 segments: part 1 on the planet Moldox (which the Daleks have conquered, and where the Doctor meets his new companion for this story), part 2 on Gallifrey (the home of the Time Lords), and part 3 in the space above Moldox, in the Tantalus Eye.
The result is something that is generally light-weight enough: solid if not spectacular. But, then again, that could probably apply to just about every extended universe tie in there is!
A previously unknown incarnation of the Time Lord known only as The Doctor, as portrayed by John Hurt in the Dr Who 50th anniversary special 'the Day of the Doctor' in 2013 during Matt Smith's tenure as The Doctor (and with David Tennant also reprising his role as the same character).
The War Doctor refers to the fact that *this* incarnation participated in the Time War, a fundamental part of the backstory of Nu-Who, between the Daleks and the Time Lords.
Its also open to interpretation whether the Engines of War of the title here are those Daleks, or the various TARDIS's used by the Time Lords during this story, which itself is largely split into 3 segments: part 1 on the planet Moldox (which the Daleks have conquered, and where the Doctor meets his new companion for this story), part 2 on Gallifrey (the home of the Time Lords), and part 3 in the space above Moldox, in the Tantalus Eye.
The result is something that is generally light-weight enough: solid if not spectacular. But, then again, that could probably apply to just about every extended universe tie in there is!
Matt Smith - The Biography
Book
As aspiring youth footballer before injury forced him to reconsider his career, Smith left his...
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Dark Waters (2019) in Movies
Nov 28, 2019
Dark Waters, the screenplay developed from the New York Times Magazine article: The Lawyer Who Became DuPont’s Worst Nightmare. The article tells of Robert Bilott (Mark Ruffalo), a corporate environmental lawyer, who headed the years long battle against DuPont in one of the landmark cases that held the company accountable for their actions.
Bilott, is visited by a farmer, Wilbur Tennant (Jim Azelvandre), who was an acquaintance of his Grandmother. As a child, he visited her home in West Virginia during the summers and had fond memories of that farm. Robert, having worked with DuPont on many cases, felt confident that he would be able to sort out the situation for Tennant. What he does not realize until he visits Wilbur’s farm is that the situation is more dire than he had known.
Wilbur had arrived with multiple VHS tapes recording the various issues that were happening to his farm animals. Bilott witnesses the mass graves that littered Tennant’s farm from his herd that had died from various illnesses. Wilbur is convinced that the reason is the dump that DuPont has created next to his property.
Mark Ruffalo’s portrayal of Bilott is an exercise in subtlety. He becomes more purpose driven once his investigation and research in the information that DuPont had sent due to discovery. Anne Hathaway plays Sarah Bilott, Robert’s wife and steadfast partner. Over the years, Sarah had been supportive, however as the case drags on and Rob’s pay gets cut repeatedly, the strain begins to show.
This film has a stellar cast. From Tim Robbins, as Tom Terp, the managing partner at the firm, Victor Garber as DuPont’s in-house counsel. Mare Winningham as Darlene Kiger, a lead plaintiff in the class action suit and Bill Pullman as Harry Dietzler, lead counsel for the plaintiffs.
This movie has the quality that awards season loves. It is a David vs. Goliath, under dog wins story. Mark Ruffalo does a great portrayal of a man who initially does not want to pursue the case, then shifts to the defender of the people.
This movie is along the lines of Erin Brockovich and Norma Rae.
4.5 out of 5 Stars
Bilott, is visited by a farmer, Wilbur Tennant (Jim Azelvandre), who was an acquaintance of his Grandmother. As a child, he visited her home in West Virginia during the summers and had fond memories of that farm. Robert, having worked with DuPont on many cases, felt confident that he would be able to sort out the situation for Tennant. What he does not realize until he visits Wilbur’s farm is that the situation is more dire than he had known.
Wilbur had arrived with multiple VHS tapes recording the various issues that were happening to his farm animals. Bilott witnesses the mass graves that littered Tennant’s farm from his herd that had died from various illnesses. Wilbur is convinced that the reason is the dump that DuPont has created next to his property.
Mark Ruffalo’s portrayal of Bilott is an exercise in subtlety. He becomes more purpose driven once his investigation and research in the information that DuPont had sent due to discovery. Anne Hathaway plays Sarah Bilott, Robert’s wife and steadfast partner. Over the years, Sarah had been supportive, however as the case drags on and Rob’s pay gets cut repeatedly, the strain begins to show.
This film has a stellar cast. From Tim Robbins, as Tom Terp, the managing partner at the firm, Victor Garber as DuPont’s in-house counsel. Mare Winningham as Darlene Kiger, a lead plaintiff in the class action suit and Bill Pullman as Harry Dietzler, lead counsel for the plaintiffs.
This movie has the quality that awards season loves. It is a David vs. Goliath, under dog wins story. Mark Ruffalo does a great portrayal of a man who initially does not want to pursue the case, then shifts to the defender of the people.
This movie is along the lines of Erin Brockovich and Norma Rae.
4.5 out of 5 Stars
Hairy Maclary from Donaldson's Dairy
Book and Education
App
The immensely popular Hairy Maclary from Donaldson’s Dairy is now available as an interactive...
Is There Life Outside the Box: An Actor Despairs
Book
Despite displaying unspectacular scientific aptitude at school - he even managed to fail CSE...
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Fright Night (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Twenty-six years ago, “Fright Night” premiered in theaters and went on to become a fondly remembered title amongst horror fans. The movie cleverly combined horror and humor to create a fresh take on the vampire and teen horror genres which had started to grow stale. While the movie spawned a largely forgettable direct to video sequel, the original film has remained popular over the years. So, when I first heard that they were planning on remaking the film I was skeptical as I felt it would be very difficult to match the original film.
Boasting an impressive cast which includes Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and Toni Collette, the remake does not try to reinvent the wheel, but instead takes the formula of the original and creates an entirely new entry into the saga.
For those unfamiliar with the series, Yelchin stars as Charlie Brewster, a young man who is trying to balance watching over his single mother, and his growing relationship with a girl way out of his league named Amy (Imogen Poots). He is also wrestling with becoming part of a cooler crowd at the cost of alienating his geeky former best friend, Ed, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse.
Colin Farrell plays the handsome and suave new next door neighbor who easily charms Charlie’s mom, played by Toni Colette. Unbeknownst to his neighbors, the charming and charismatic Jerry, played by Colin Ferrell, is actually a vampire who’s come to their Las Vegas suburb to continue his nighttime hunts. Ed has become suspicious of the recent disappearances in their community and confides to Charlie that he’s had Jerry under surveillance and knows that he is a vampire.
Needless to say this does not sit well with Charlie, who distances himself further from Ed. But when Ed goes missing, Charlie decides to do some investigating of his own. Charlie turns to a local Vegas performance artist named Peter Vincent (David Tennant), whose vampire-themed show portrays him as an expert in fighting the undead. While at first skeptical over Charlie’s claims, a few devastating confrontations with Jerry and his minions forces Vincent to rethink his role. The two unlikely allies soon find themselves in a deadly race against time to defeat Jerry and save their loved ones before it’s too late.
The film cleverly combines horror and comedy and does a good job of providing some suspenseful moments in between the blood and gore, managing to squeeze in more than a few laughs along the way. While not overly scary, the visual effects work is solid and aside from the converted 3-D is a really enjoyable to watch. The film would’ve been much better had it been shot in 3-D or simply left as a 2-D film as the conversion really didn’t offer anything of value as is often the case in these lab converted efforts.
The cast works very well with one another and Farrell cheekily introduces a few new wrinkles to the vampire lore. I really enjoyed David Tennant’s performance and should they do a sequel I certainly hope that they bring him back. Anton Yelchin gives a reliable performance but I was surprised that Christopher Mintz-Plasse did not have a bigger role but he does have some memorable moments in the film. What really impressed me was that the film did not attempt to do a shot-by-shot remake of the original but instead took the premise of the original and offered a fresh take that easily could have been issued as the third chapter in the series rather than a reboot. While there were nods to the original, outside of the premise it was very much its own film.
The film is not going to set any high marks for new standards in horror nor is the plot fresh and original. It simply knows what its target audience and source material are and sets a course right down the middle without attempting to deviate too much one way or another. “Fright Night” just might be perfect for those looking for a dose of nostalgia and some highly suspenseful, fun entertainment.
Boasting an impressive cast which includes Anton Yelchin, Colin Farrell, David Tennant, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and Toni Collette, the remake does not try to reinvent the wheel, but instead takes the formula of the original and creates an entirely new entry into the saga.
For those unfamiliar with the series, Yelchin stars as Charlie Brewster, a young man who is trying to balance watching over his single mother, and his growing relationship with a girl way out of his league named Amy (Imogen Poots). He is also wrestling with becoming part of a cooler crowd at the cost of alienating his geeky former best friend, Ed, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse.
Colin Farrell plays the handsome and suave new next door neighbor who easily charms Charlie’s mom, played by Toni Colette. Unbeknownst to his neighbors, the charming and charismatic Jerry, played by Colin Ferrell, is actually a vampire who’s come to their Las Vegas suburb to continue his nighttime hunts. Ed has become suspicious of the recent disappearances in their community and confides to Charlie that he’s had Jerry under surveillance and knows that he is a vampire.
Needless to say this does not sit well with Charlie, who distances himself further from Ed. But when Ed goes missing, Charlie decides to do some investigating of his own. Charlie turns to a local Vegas performance artist named Peter Vincent (David Tennant), whose vampire-themed show portrays him as an expert in fighting the undead. While at first skeptical over Charlie’s claims, a few devastating confrontations with Jerry and his minions forces Vincent to rethink his role. The two unlikely allies soon find themselves in a deadly race against time to defeat Jerry and save their loved ones before it’s too late.
The film cleverly combines horror and comedy and does a good job of providing some suspenseful moments in between the blood and gore, managing to squeeze in more than a few laughs along the way. While not overly scary, the visual effects work is solid and aside from the converted 3-D is a really enjoyable to watch. The film would’ve been much better had it been shot in 3-D or simply left as a 2-D film as the conversion really didn’t offer anything of value as is often the case in these lab converted efforts.
The cast works very well with one another and Farrell cheekily introduces a few new wrinkles to the vampire lore. I really enjoyed David Tennant’s performance and should they do a sequel I certainly hope that they bring him back. Anton Yelchin gives a reliable performance but I was surprised that Christopher Mintz-Plasse did not have a bigger role but he does have some memorable moments in the film. What really impressed me was that the film did not attempt to do a shot-by-shot remake of the original but instead took the premise of the original and offered a fresh take that easily could have been issued as the third chapter in the series rather than a reboot. While there were nods to the original, outside of the premise it was very much its own film.
The film is not going to set any high marks for new standards in horror nor is the plot fresh and original. It simply knows what its target audience and source material are and sets a course right down the middle without attempting to deviate too much one way or another. “Fright Night” just might be perfect for those looking for a dose of nostalgia and some highly suspenseful, fun entertainment.
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Mary Queen of Scots (2018) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
January is proving to be a challenging month, so many historical and biographical movies and a lot of me saying "this was great but..."
Scrolling back through Saoirse Ronan's acting career I've only actually seen her in two things, Lady Bird and City Of Embers (which for the life of me I cannot remember her in), and I can't say that I was going in as a fan, but I came out pleasantly surprised by her powerful portrayal of Mary.
The cast in this is brilliant, so many recognisable faces. Ian Hart, Gemma Chan, David Tennant (not initially so recognisable until he starts to speak), Brendan Coyle and Joe Alwyn who is clearly hedging his bets by appearing in The Favourite as well.
Margot Robbie is wonderful, just generally, and I love so many of her roles. I do feel like she was rather underused as Elizabeth, but thankfully her brief appearances were quite striking.
I was so happy to see Adrian Lester's name connected to this. I'm slightly obsessed with Hustle, and his stage and screen work is usually something tremendously entertaining to watch. However, I didn't feel that the script allowed him to get anything good out of Lord Randolph sadly. Guy Pearce fared much better and gave an impressive performance.
Visually the locations and costumes make for a magnificent film, but while I wasn't bored at any point it does feel like it could have lost a few minutes here and there.
What you should do
It's worth giving a watch at some point but I don't think there's any rush to get to the cinema for it.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some quality Mary ginger hair... maybe without the halo of volume.
Scrolling back through Saoirse Ronan's acting career I've only actually seen her in two things, Lady Bird and City Of Embers (which for the life of me I cannot remember her in), and I can't say that I was going in as a fan, but I came out pleasantly surprised by her powerful portrayal of Mary.
The cast in this is brilliant, so many recognisable faces. Ian Hart, Gemma Chan, David Tennant (not initially so recognisable until he starts to speak), Brendan Coyle and Joe Alwyn who is clearly hedging his bets by appearing in The Favourite as well.
Margot Robbie is wonderful, just generally, and I love so many of her roles. I do feel like she was rather underused as Elizabeth, but thankfully her brief appearances were quite striking.
I was so happy to see Adrian Lester's name connected to this. I'm slightly obsessed with Hustle, and his stage and screen work is usually something tremendously entertaining to watch. However, I didn't feel that the script allowed him to get anything good out of Lord Randolph sadly. Guy Pearce fared much better and gave an impressive performance.
Visually the locations and costumes make for a magnificent film, but while I wasn't bored at any point it does feel like it could have lost a few minutes here and there.
What you should do
It's worth giving a watch at some point but I don't think there's any rush to get to the cinema for it.
Movie thing you wish you could take home
Some quality Mary ginger hair... maybe without the halo of volume.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Good Omens in TV
Aug 25, 2019
Could’ve been better
I love Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, but yet I’ve never read Good Omens. The book is next on my to read list, but I thought I’d give the show a go first and in the main, I did enjoy it.
The best thing about this show is by far the interactions between Aziraphale and Crowley, and the performances of Michael Sheen and David Tennant. They’re so much fun and this is where virtually all of the laughs in this show come from. They’re a great pairing, even if they are a little over the top at times, and my favourite episode by far was the one that showed their interactions over the ages. It’s the rest of the plot that I feel let’s this show down a little bit. There are some wonderful cameos from a whole host of stars, and Jon Hamm was great if a little underused. I would’ve loved to have seen more of him. However I really wish they hadn’t cast Jack Whitehall, I don’t get his appeal as he’s an horrendous actor and rather irritating.
The problem though is that despite this show being about the Antichrist and the end of the world, the ending itself is rather lacklustre and whilst everyone wants to stop (or start) the end of the world, the urgency and tension and terror is all too lacking. I get that this is meant to be humorous, but it can still be funny and threatening in the same episode. I actually think they could’ve done without the whole end of the world thing and just had buddy type show with Aziraphale and Crowley that would’ve been just as or even more entertaining. I’m intrigued now to see how this plays out in the book and if it works better.
The best thing about this show is by far the interactions between Aziraphale and Crowley, and the performances of Michael Sheen and David Tennant. They’re so much fun and this is where virtually all of the laughs in this show come from. They’re a great pairing, even if they are a little over the top at times, and my favourite episode by far was the one that showed their interactions over the ages. It’s the rest of the plot that I feel let’s this show down a little bit. There are some wonderful cameos from a whole host of stars, and Jon Hamm was great if a little underused. I would’ve loved to have seen more of him. However I really wish they hadn’t cast Jack Whitehall, I don’t get his appeal as he’s an horrendous actor and rather irritating.
The problem though is that despite this show being about the Antichrist and the end of the world, the ending itself is rather lacklustre and whilst everyone wants to stop (or start) the end of the world, the urgency and tension and terror is all too lacking. I get that this is meant to be humorous, but it can still be funny and threatening in the same episode. I actually think they could’ve done without the whole end of the world thing and just had buddy type show with Aziraphale and Crowley that would’ve been just as or even more entertaining. I’m intrigued now to see how this plays out in the book and if it works better.
