Search

Search only in certain items:

FIRESTARTER (2022)
FIRESTARTER (2022)
2022 | Action, Horror
3
4.4 (5 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Commits the Biggest Film Crime - It's Boring
Sometimes, I watch a movie, so you don’t have to.

I watched the remake of the Stephen King novel FIRESTARTER, so you don’t have to.

The current “leader in the clubhouse” for the worst film of 2022, FIRESTARTER is based on the very good Stephen King novel that was published in 1980 and was made into a pretty cheesy, pretty ‘80s flick in 1984 that made Drew Barrymore (fresh off her work in ET) a bonafide movie star.

No such luck in this one.

Produced by Blum House, Directed by Keith Thomas (THE VIGIL) and adapted from King’s novel by Scott Teems (HALLOWEEN KILLS), this version of FIRESTARTER was dead on arrival, with a weak script, mediocre directing and less than stellar visual effects, consequently making a film that is the worst sort of film…boring. It doesn’t even have the ambition to be “so bad, it’s good”, it is just plodding and mediocre throughout.

But, at 1 hour 34 minutes, it is mercifully short, so it does have that going for it.

What it also has going for it is a “game” Zach Efron as “Firestarter’s Father” and he elevates the scenes he is in to something that comes close to watchable. And when Sydney Lemmon is along as “Firestarter’s Mom” the screen comes the closest to interesting. But the rest…”meh”.

Ryan Kiera Armstrong plays “Firestarter”, Charlie McGee - the young lady who can start fires with her telepathic powers - and she is “just fine”, but she does not have the star power or “it” factor that Barrymore brought to the proceedings previously. She is just not a compelling enough presence on screen to save this turkey. I don’t blame her, I blame the weak Direction by Thomas and the limp script by Teems.

The only other character/performance that sparks some interest in this film is Michael Grayeyes (TOGO) who plays a Native American tracker with his own telekinetic powers who is put on the trail of Charlie by the mysterious Institute (a shadowy Gov’t agency that chases after various “special” people - mostly kids - in quite a few Stephen King novels). Inexplicably, this role was played by an aging, pony-tailed George C. Scott (obviously chasing a paycheck) in the 1984 film. Grayeyes succeeds more.

But these glimmers of competence only aggravates more when the film bogs back down in cardboard villains (what has happened to your career, Gloria Ruben) and exposition spouting scientists (what a waste of Kurtwood Smith) and less than spectacular action sequences that, mostly, consist of Armstrong screaming while a wind machine blows her hair back while sub-par CGI flames engulf the screen.

And…adding insult to injury…the "guy in the asbestos suit” (a mainstay of any film involving fire) does not even get a day of stunt pay! It’s like going to see a Tom Cruise Mission Impossible film and Cruise doesn’t do some sort of crazy stunt!

After the success of IT, PART ONE in 2017, there was a renaissance, of sorts, of adaptations of Stephen King works and even though PET SEMATARY (2019) was pretty decent and IT, CHAPTER TWO and DOCTOR SLEEP (2019) were okay, THE DARK TOWER, the TV remake of THE STAND, LISEY’S STORY and now FIRESTARTER were all terrible, so maybe we’ve seen the end of this phase of King adaptations (I doubt it, but one can hope).

Save yourself and hour and a half of your life and skip this Firestarter. Instead, revisit the 1984 version - it plays like an Oscar-winner compared to this turkey. Or, better yet, read the original Stephen King work - it is the best of all of these.

Letter Grade: C- (and I’m being generous)

3 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis).
  
Pitch Perfect 3 (2017)
Pitch Perfect 3 (2017)
2017 | Comedy
comedy (0 more)
soundtrack not as good as expected (0 more)
Comedy classic with mediocre music
Pitch Perfect is back! Expect nothing but jaw-dropping harmonies, startling costumes and classic comedy. The third and final instalment of the Barden Bellas story finishes in aca-style!

The comedy follows the reunification of the Bellas as they embark on a USO tour, entertaining the troops in Europe. In classic Bella-style, the tour is also a competition between the acts to open the show for DJ Khaled during the final show in France.

From the get-go, we are bombarded with endless classic comedy moments. Take for instance, the awe-inspiring yacht opening and the explosive escape.

Despite a confusing start to the film, questions are later answered. Why are they on a boat? Why did it explode? It eventually makes sense. The story then makes a swift flashback to a few weeks before the story began.

Beca (Anna Kendrick) follows her dreams as a music producer. The rest of the Bellas, bar Emily (Hailee Steinfield) continue to pursue their careers

The cast is flawless. Its predecessors clearly proved this. Each and every film is underpinned by the cast's chemistry. Thankfully, Fat Amy (Rebel Wilson) is still as funny as ever. Amy also meets her match as Lily (Hana Mae Lee) proves to be quite the comedic character.

We also see new appearances. The likes of Ruby Rose (Calamity) stars as the front lady of the band 'Evermoist' (arguably the best and worst band name ever).

We couldn't miss the soundtrack (it is a musical). It is fantastic. However, it has to be the weakest of the three.

The Bellas are almost the only artists on the tour who are acapella. The majority of the other groups play instruments, except in another classic riff-off. The music couldn't have ended a more 'perfect' way. A beautiful rendition of George Michael's Freedom bought a tear to the eye.



The cinematography was equally as good as other films. We even get to see numerous surprises from Fat Amy (explosive scenes).

We even see a montage of sorts during a performance on tour. The camera shots also seemed to fit together, making the film flow and avoiding a yawn.

There are also some great side plots. From comical to the dramatic likes of explosions, the action does at points seem unnecessary.

We were also treated moments of pure comedy gold! A classic but predictable scene occurred in DJ Khaled's hotel suite.

Pitch Perfect 3 is a great finale to the end of the series. It roads the trilogy off in the 'perfect' way. Have you seen the first two? If so, we urge you to watch the third instalment. Have you not seen either? We advise you to binge watch them all!
  
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)
On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969)
1969 | Action, Mystery, Romance
Characters – James Bond is back, he is still a womaniser only now he doesn’t have the same spark of charisma that he had been showing in previous films, he still must go head to head with Blofeld, but he just doesn’t feel right this time around. Tracey is the Bond girl this time around, she isn’t as easy as the previous one showing a higher intelligence to stay ahead of Bond and not following the traditions that her father wants. Blofeld returns and for some reason doesn’t recognise Bond even after meeting him in the last film, so that is strange. He has a masterplan to take over the world or at least put money in his pocket, well bank account. Draco is the connection to locate Blofeld with him being Tracy’s father it also helps with the locating as part of a deal.

Performances – George Lazenby doesn’t have the same level of charisma or charm that Sean Connery brings, this only disappoints and takes us away from the film in places. Diana Rigg does bring class the to Bond girl role, showing more commitment to this role that Lazenby. Telly Savalas struggles to step into Donald Pleasence’s shoes in the Blofeld role almost being a parody of the character.

Story – The story here takes James on his latest mission which is to capture Blofeld after his escape last time out, this takes him in a new direction away from the tropical islands and into the snow-covered mountain ranges as Blofeld is working on his next plan to become rich. The story is a way too long compared to previous films and does drag at times, the fact Blofeld doesn’t remember James is a big issue for me because them coming face to face was a big moment in You Only Live Twice. The highlight of the story comes from the fact we get a surprise ending which does show us that we are ready to continue the battle.

Action/Adventure – The action is a complete mixed bag because certain fights are good, but then the horrible green screen moments just don’t work. The adventure takes James to a new location which is all we want at times.

Settings – We are set in the Swiss Alps on top of one of the mountains which shows us a base that isn’t easy to escape from and away from the bikinis we have been seeing too often.


Scene of the Movie – Ski escape.

That Moment That Annoyed Me – Blofeld not remember Bond.

Final Thoughts – This is the weakest in the series to date, we just don’t get drawn in like before and the attempted new technology use only hinders the film.

 

Overall: Weakest Bond film to date.
  
IC
Imperfectly Criminal (Imperfect, #2)
Mary Frame | 2014
8
8.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
I am a <em>huge </em>fan of Mary Frame’s <i><a href="http://www.bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfect-chemistry-by-mary-frame"; target=" rel=">Imperfect Chemistry</a></i>. I love the book to pieces and praise/recommend it while running left and right and kindly shoving it down everyone’s throats while humbly reminding them that this is indeed New Adult.

<i>Imperfectly Criminal</i> is the sequel to <i>Imperfect Chemistry</i> and the second book in Mary Frame’s <i>Imperfect </i>series. The best part is? It’s a stand alone! With the kicker being ending spoilers from <i>Imperfect Chemistry</i> (of course, my English teachers are cringing because saying imperfect a million times in a paragraph is very... repetitve). This book features Freya, who Frame first introduces us back in the first novel as one of Lucy’s newest friends.

In terms of favorite character in the series Lucy still takes the crown, but Freya is a close second now that I’ve gotten the chance to know her as a character. (She’s not as cute as Lucy! Plus the family dynamic in the first novel is like the Weasleys...) She adores food, Lucy’s quirks, and she’s hilarious. Have a quote about how unstereotypical cliches get in this adorable series.
<blockquote class="tr_bq">...he’s got me all flabbergasted with the skin and the muscle and the… a mini George Takei is oh mying in my head.</blockquote>
Or two.
<blockquote class="tr_bq">This is where I should probably wax on and on about how sweet and handsome he looks while he’s sleeping, but really he looks like a slack-jawed yokel.</blockquote>
Hilarious character aside though, <i>Imperfectly Criminal</i> deals with a much more serious problem its predecessor. For those who’ve read <i>Imperfect Chemistry </i>and met Freya in the first book, Frame mentions a bad relationship Freya gets out of but doesn’t go into much detail (after all, Lucy is the main character). We get more intel on what happened to Freya in book two as she helps the guy she originally hired to beat up her ex prove he was innocent when two of the boys he beat up end up dead. While she’s doing all of that, she’s also struggling with her attraction to Dean and the after effects of her relationship with her ex.
<i>
</i> <i>Imperfectly Criminal</i> has laugh out loud moments for a light read while also dealing with serious, darker issues, and I can’t wait to see how Frame will take the rest of the series.

&nbsp;

<a href="https://bookwyrmingthoughts.com/review-imperfectly-criminal-by-mary-frame/"; target="_blank">This review was originally posted on Bookwyrming Thoughts</a>
  
RI
2
2.0 (1 Ratings)
Book Rating
I quote from the final page of this publication: "The writer of this book will face similar virulent criticism. It will be savaged in the book reviews on Amazon, mainly by non-readers, to take its ratings and thus popularity down." In fact, this is the last, but by no means the only rant by the author who appears to have a definite chip on his shoulder for some reason. Since he subjects Thomas Penn's work, 'The Winter King' to such virulent criticism, one can only suspect that he was turned down by Penn's publisher. One can hardly be surprised. I have read this book, despite wanting on a number of occasions to give up in disgust. It is full of errors of spelling (e.g. youngest for younger, now instead of not), so has evidently not had either a proof reader or an editor. There are also many factual errors with names and titles becoming hopelessly confused. On one page we're told that Sir James Tyrell was hanged and a couple of pages later we're told that Henry Tudor was so kind as to merely condescend to cut his head off!

I will admit that with pro-Ricardian sympathies I was probably never going to like this book, but it is a bit of a mess and feels like another case of jumping on the bandwagon. There is no index, no footnotes/endnotes and only a partial list of sources, which is enough to raise questions about academic rigour. If you are going to publish opinions, particular in The Great Debate, these really should be backed up by factual evidence. I think I am most irked by the hypocrisy of Mr Breverton telling us at one point that he is going to take a fresh impartial look at the subject and then immediately showing us exactly which colour he prefers his roses.

His list, near the back of the volume, of all the 'crimes' he thinks Richard III was guilty of really does teeter on the brink of blindness and absurdity. Apparently he is guilty in the case of the Earl of Warwick, son of Richard's older brother, George of Clarence, but whose claim to the throne was barred by his father's attainder (always reversible, but Warwick was then only a child of about 8 years). I'm pretty sure this Warwick was sent to Sheriff Hutton Castle to be brought up with other young persons, as befitted his status by Richard. Of course, as soon as Henry Tudor usurped the throne, this boy was locked up in the Tower only to be executed later on a trumped up charge. I think I know who the guilty party is in that case.

That is my frank opinion on this volume; I will now expect said author to savage me as he has everyone else on Amazon who has pointed out the self-evident shortcomings in this work.
  
1917 (2020)
1917 (2020)
2020 | Drama, War
World War I was called “The Great War” and “The War to End All Wars” as the sheer number of nations and continents involved in the conflict as well as the tremendous loss of life; was thought to be so horrific that war would become a thing of the past.

As we know this did not happen as a generation later the world was once again at war with even great death and destruction to follow. However in “1917” we see the conflict from the viewpoint of a lowly Corporal Schofield (George MacKay) who along with his friend Blake (Dean-Charles Chapman) are tasked with delivering a message across enemy lines to warn advanced units to call of an attack due to an ambush being set by the Germans.

The duo are told that the enemy has pulled back and as such; the dreaded No Man’s Land between the opposing trenches are likely to be abandoned as well their approach to a town near their destination. With the phone lines down; the duo are the only option and they are at first shocked to learn that it would just the two of them.

As they make their way across a grim and corpse-laden battlefield, the audience as well as the two men get a look at the horrific conditions that combat took place under and how fallen individuals were left to decompose where they fell due to the entrenched and stagnant nature of Trench Warfare.

As complications mount, the two must face up to their greatest fears and challenges; driven by a sense of mission and purpose for a conflict they just want to see end so they can return home to their families.

Director Sam Mendes has crafted an Oscar Caliber film as it is gripping as it is breathtaking thanks to the amazing visuals. The contrast between the beauty of the landscape and the carnage of war has rarely been captured as well as it was in this film and the fact that Mendes had a hand in writing the story based on stories told by a relative really help to bring the full impact of the story home.

The film has some amazing sequences like sustained and extended shots where you wonder how Mendes was able to film scenes with so many things going on in one take as there is a scene near the start that looks as if it is an extended scene with no breaks or cutaways.
In the end the biggest selling point for the film is that it is a human drama at its core. While there is combat and action, they are not the focal points as much of the film centers around the young men and their conversations.

The film will stay with you after the credits roll and I consider “1917” to be one of the best films of 2019 and one not to be missed.
  
Playing for Keeps (2012)
Playing for Keeps (2012)
2012 | Comedy, Drama, Sport
4
5.6 (11 Ratings)
Movie Rating
Gerard Butler has stepped out of his 300 uniform and into some soccer
cleats. As a former international soccer star, George (Butler) is down on
his luck. He has no job, and he’s living in Virginia, attempting to
reconnect with his estranged son.

The story opens with some backstory about George’s past before quickly
tumbling into his present situation. George’s ex-wife (Jessica Biel) is
getting remarried, and his son Lewis (Noah Lomax) is having a hard time
learning to trust his real father after being separated for so long.

The plot quickly unfolds into a predictable “chick-flick” scenario, where
the main character is floundering and wants to get back what he once had.
His path to redemption comes in the form of coaching his son’s youth
soccer team, while fending off hordes of attractive soccer *moms* who want
to place hands on the well-sculpted Coach Dryer!

This film is incredibly formulaic, and it’s predictable every step of the
way. That said, Butler, Biel, and the rest of t*he cast* do an exceptional
job given what they had to work with. I even have to give some props to
the young actor, Noah Lomax, for giving a noteworthy performance as the
son.

While there were some great chuckles and all-out laughs mixed with a few
touching moments, it’s hard to look past the poor production values of this
film. Many of the scenes were filmed in a free-hand format. The shaking is
not just noticeable, but rampant throughout the film. It’s very
distracting, and downright shoddy film-making.

The directing wasn’t bad, in general, but I think a more seasoned director
would have at least chosen better angles. Case-in-point: many of the
scenes involving the red Ferrari were obviously lit with bright, white
lights reflecting off the surface of the car, giving us a view of grips and
other personnel behind the camera.

Dennis Quaid starts the film with a great role, and delivers a fantastic
performance. Unfortunately, after the jail scene, he’s oddly absent until
the end of the film. His absence was so awkward that it distracted me from
the people who were on the screen. I even asked myself: where did Dennis
Quaid’s character go?

Uma Thurman, playing Quaid’s character’s wife, and Catherine-Zeta Jones,
playing a soccer mom, did a marvelous job (again, despite not having much
to work with).

The Hollywood stars saved this film from rating lower, due to their vast
acting experience and talent, but I can’t recommend the movie as a whole.
Even their performances weren’t enough to keep Playing For Keeps in the
same ballpark as a well-produced film. It’s shoddy movie-making at best.

I recommend you wait to watch this one at home and save your movie theater
budget for another flick, *but if you are into chick-flicks, Playing for
Keeps will not disappoint.*
  
40x40

Tim Booth recommended Love by The Beatles in Music (curated)

 
Love by The Beatles
Love by The Beatles
2006 | Pop, Rock
8.0 (3 Ratings)
Album Favorite

"I find that many albums by The Beatles don't completely hold together for me. While Sgt. Pepper's… holds together stylistically, it isn't one of my favourite albums. However, I have to include The Beatles, because they are clearly the greatest band that ever stalked the earth. I got into the Love album to introduce my son to The Beatles. George Martin lovingly remastered it and I think he has made some improvements. Sonically it is fantastic. It flows. I love being able to go across their entire span of history. I went to the Love Cirque De Soleil show in Las Vegas, which was a bad idea, but this record is a fantastic introduction and became my son's understanding of The Beatles. The other records are well worth investigating, of course, and they made truly great records, but there aren't any that could go in my Baker's Dozen. The album contains 'A Day In The Life', which is in my top five greatest songs. I love the fact it was created through such a mad, collaborative technique. One part is John, one part is Paul and they left a minute-and-a-half to fill with something. What fucking amazing, arrogant craziness could do that? And, to then produce one of the greatest songs. That song is akin to how James write to a degree. We write through improvisation. No one takes anything into a room. We start improvising and the improvisation may take ten minutes or it may take 90 minutes. We record it all and then whoever wants to can take a track, chop it up in whatever way they want to, and then present it back to the band. Someone else can then input and add a keyboard line or whatever. Therefore, we have this collaborative process that you can hear on the new album that is a little insane, as we might have had a part, which worked in the first ten minutes, and then we might try and weld it to something that worked hours later. They don't necessarily join and we have to find a way of joining them. That acceptance of chance can lead to the best moments. Most bands have one or two songwriters (we now have four) and they are at the mercy of their conscious ability. With us, a chaotic reaction to each other is creating the song, which is probably why we have been around for 33 years and we never get bored. We never know what the fuck we are going to do next. The Beatles had that on their greatest collaborative songs, where they couldn't be sure quite where a song was going. They allowed themselves the possibility of fucking songs up in a great way. The Beatles are the Shakespeare of our time. They will still be played in 100 years' time and people will still wonder how the fuck they made such amazing music."

Source
  
Kushiel&#039;s Dart (Phèdre&#039;s Trilogy, #1)
Kushiel's Dart (Phèdre's Trilogy, #1)
Jacqueline Carey | 2003 | Romance, Science Fiction/Fantasy
10
8.4 (9 Ratings)
Book Rating
Shelf Life – Kushiel’s Legacy, the Naamah Trilogy, and How Jacqueline Carey Ruined My Ability to Be Impartial About Them
Contains spoilers, click to show
I can honestly say that the nine books that comprise these three trilogies are among the best fantasy available today as well as nine of my all-time favorite books I’ve ever read.

The Spoiler-Free Overview

If you want the shorter, less spoilery answer for what I think of these books: holy crap, yes, they’re as good as everyone says they are. Jacqueline Carey has a way of making me just…feel stuff like no other author can. Plenty of books have caught and held my interest enough that I didn’t want to put them down, but few have made the act of putting them down anyway so torturous. More than once, I hit a point in these stories where I had to drop whatever else I was gonna do that day (that I could realistically drop) just because I had to keep reading to make sure the characters were going to be okay.

This is character-driven fiction at its finest, with people in the pages who come alive and subtly win your heart. More than once, I’ve found reading about their ordeals to be worrying, a little bit painful, and a little bit infuriating (all in a good way, though), and I had to stop and remind myself that these weren’t real people that I was so concerned over and angry for. So if you ever wanted to be really, really invested in the story you’re reading and the people in it, Terre d’Ange is the place to go. All of the eroticism that everyone talks about is just a really nice bonus.

If you want an even shorter answer: do you watch Game of Thrones? Have you read George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire books? Have you at least heard of the fan hype around these stories? The Kushiel and Naamah books are like that, except sexier and with deeper court intrigue. And a lot less incest.

If you want the long answer…

A Dizzying Amount of Adventure Mileage

One thing that has to be said for Kushiel’s Legacy and the Naamah trilogy is that you definitely get your money’s worth of story out of each book. There’s a pattern that I’ve noticed with each of them, which is that you’ll follow the heroine/hero through a massive tribulation, see them endure their hardships and take their small victories where they can, then finally watch matters come to a crux, a climax, and a satisfying resolution…only to realize that you’re only a third of the way through the full page count.

Where most books are content to have one major conflict, Carey packs hers with about three each. The best part is that they’re not laid out in rigid sequence like a series of video game side quests – fight this problem, win, check it off the list, leave it behind and find a new one to fill the word count. No, each new adventure in the same book arises completely organically from the story overall. It makes you realize just how huge a scope these characters’ destinies really are, and just how incredibly wearying it can be and how much seemingly inhuman endurance it takes to be one of the gods’ chosen.

For instance, the first book to kick everything off, Kushiel’s Dart, begins slowly and simply enough. Phedre is an unwanted child who is basically sold into indentured servitude, then trained to be a spy and courtesan while we’re introduced to Terre d’Ange through her eyes over the next couple hundred pages, learning more about the politics and the players in time to watch the drama around them steadily unfold and escalate.

And then her wise mentor gets killed (as wise mentors tend to do), she and her bodyguard companion are betrayed, and the both of them get sold into full-on slavery to the vikings of Skaldia. Plenty of conflict and hardship and planning later, they make their escape and flee into harsh, snowy mountain terrain, falling in love for good measure while they fend off the deadly cold and the pursuit from their enemies. Finally, they make it back to their homeland and clear their names.

This is where most books would be content to stop and maybe leave further contentions for a sequel. Kushiel’s Dart would have been well within its rights to do so as well, and I wouldn’t have complained if it did. But no, it reminds readers, we’re not done yet. There’s a war coming, remember? We talked about this. Catch your breath for a moment, but then we gotta go rally our armies.

So Phedre and Joscelin set off to the wild and secluded island nation of Alba on the other side of an enchanted strait, a body of water where a vengeful, divine power known as the Master of the Straits lives and for some reason prevents almost all contact between the two nations. Arriving safely enough, they find that Alba is also war-torn at the moment, and the armies they had hoped to rally are busy defending their land from another foe. More plotting and intrigue ensues, alliances and promises are made, and with our heroes’ help, the two sides clash in a decisive battle that gains the side we’re rooting for victory as well as gives them their rightful sovereignty back. Now Phedre has the army she needs. After a sudden and unexpected stop at the Master of the Straits’ island, where they learn the secret of his power and guarantee indefinite safe passage between the nations in return for Phedre losing her closest friend, our heroes finally make it back to their homeland again with their army in tow.

Finally! After all of that struggle, we get a happy ending after all. But wait, not yet you don’t, the chunk of pages left at the end remind you. All you did was get your forces together. Good for you. Now you still gotta go actually fight the war with the Skaldi invaders to determine the fate of your entire nation.

So they do. And only after an awesome last-stand battle (the excitement and careful strategy of which will take you completely by surprise if you first entered this book expecting little more than kinky sex scenes) is the story allowed to wrap up in earnest, our heroes finally earning their long-deserved rest. The dangerous and cunning warlord is defeated, the invading army has been pushed back, the new Queen has ascended the throne, Terre d’Ange has been saved, and Phedre and Joscelin are free to finally be together – with the only little niggle being that the real mastermind behind all of their problems is still loose and taunting them. But we can get to that in the next book. Or five.
  
Game Of Thrones
Game Of Thrones
2011 | Adventure, Drama, Fantasy
Winter has come and gone... and there won't ever be anything like it again!
Contains spoilers, click to show
Game of Thrones. The only show that drove people to brag on social media about the fact they've never seen it every time a new series came out!

I watched this from Season 3, quickly binging the first two seasons about a week before it aired. I'm not a huge Fantasy fan, but this show really was something else. Despite the setting, it gave us everything - blood, guts, drama, sex... even comedy. It gave us some of the most vile and hated antagonists to ever grace the screen, and it made heroes out of the unlikeliest of people.

Watching it week-to-week was difficult for a couple of reasons. One, so much is going on (especially in the earlier seasons) that you can forget a lot in a week, and you find yourself questioning everything. Two, it's so bloody good, you didn't want to wait a whole week to get your fix! Obviously, now it's finished, the second issue is no longer relevant - it's available to binge to your heart's content, which you absolutely should do.

I want to address the recent criticism of the eighth and final season. We waited over two years for it, and many people felt it was rushed, too short and too shallow. I would say 75% of people who watched the last season were left disappointed. Myself included.

But a few days after it had finished, I found myself thinking about the series as a whole more and more. I was reading articles online, theories and arguments about how and why the story played out the way it did. I realised I had felt somewhat detached watching Season 8 because it HAD been two years since I watched Season 7. It's as if I'd forgotten what it was like to watch it.

So, having never seen any episode more than once, I went back to the beginning and watched all eight seasons in a little under three weeks...

SO MUCH BETTER the second time around!

For two reasons. Firstly, there was no break in the story at all. Watching it as it aired meant you had a 12-month break every 10 hours, basically. Easy to lose your thread. Easy to forget things. When that doesn't happen, it's much more enjoyable and actually makes a lot more sense. There was so much I'd forgotten over the course of the nine years it was on, I kind of felt like I'd cheated myself, in a way, by not watching Seasons 1-7 before Season 8 aired.

Second, much in the way that Star Wars Episodes 1-3 work better if you've seen 4-6 first, Game of Thrones was actually much more enjoyable having seen the ending, because things make a lot more sense in retrospect.

***This is where it gets spoilery***





It becomes evident early on, even in the first season, that Jon Snow is one to watch. His shocking death at the end of Season 5 caused much confusion and debate. Obviously, his resurrection early in Season 6 put an end to that, and when the secret about his true identity is finally revealed in Season 8, it was a shocking moment, as everything started to fall into place and the true threat became evident.

However...

Having now done Seasons 1-8 back-to-back, the revelation that Jon Snow is, in fact, a Targaryen is far from surprising, given they've been dropping clues about it since back in the first few episodes. Obviously, at the time, these seemingly throwaway comments meant nothing, but now we know, there are numerous conversations throughout the show that border on being spoilers themselves.

Same with Arya Stark and her storyline. Second time around, even from Season 1, it's evident she was destined to slay The Night King. And as with Jon Snow, you never would've picked up on it at the time, but in hindsight it's been obvious for years.

Now, the major criticism about Season 8 was that it felt rushed and that it sacrificed too many characters arcs for the sake of finishing inside of six episodes. Watching it as it aired, I completely agreed. Jon Snow "suddenly" went from a brooding hero to a pointless extra. Daenerys Targaryen "suddenly" went from the freer of slaves and saviour of Westeros to an insane despot who slaughtered half the world because someone took her toys away.

Not true.

It seemed like that after two years of forgetting almost everything that had happened previously, but watching it from start to finish in one go, those things make perfect sense, and aren't actually that sudden. The Mother of Dragons showed clear and obvious signs of becoming The Mad Queen of Ashes very early on in the show. She was always kind and fair and just... but my goodness, did you get it if you pissed her off! Let's not forget she crucified almost 200 slave-owners long after they surrendered to prove a point. And poor Sam Tarly's father and brother! She had a mean streak, and she lived on a knife's edge. At any point since she married Khal Drogo back at the beginning of Season 1, the slightest push and she would snap. Fast forward to Season 8 and, after many years of fighting to fulfil her birthright and take the Iron Throne, she finds out she's not actually the heir to it at all... that's a pretty big push to a woman with a history of losing her shit when things don't go her way. So not much of a surprise at all, really.

And to address the criticism further, I'll analyse this as a writer. I tell stories for a living. When you're writing a novel, you look at it as a triangle, of sorts. It starts off wide and gradually gets to a point. Game of Thrones began very wide, with lots of characters and subplots. But as time goes on, it narrows and becomes more focused on the main threat... the main storylines - the battle against The Night King and the fight for the Iron Throne. Those two things are what nine years of storytelling were working towards, so yes, when you get to the final season and you have to wrap things up, it makes sense that you're going to focus on the big finish - the point of the series.

Not only that, for the first six seasons, the shows writers and creators had their hands held by George R. R. Martin and his source material. But then the TV show caught up with the books, which meant they suddenly had nothing more than a handful of bullet points to work off instead. Not easy to go from one to the other. They can't embellish things too much, because they run the risk of contradicting and undermining future books, which Mr. Martin wouldn't allow them to do. So they had to keep it simple, stick to the point and finish the job they started - nothing more.

Ultimately, no one likes to see their favourite show end. In hindsight, I think a lot of the criticism the final season received was because the audience forgot what came before it, and because they didn't want it to end.

If you're reading this having never watched it before.... first of all, sorry for ruining the story for you (but I did say it contained spoilers, in my defence). But you have the benefit of being able to binge through this, which means you'll get the full, uninterrupted experience, which is well worth the investment of your time to do.

If you HAVE watched the show before, I strongly suggest re-watching it from the beginning, because I enjoyed it far more the second time around.

This is the kind of show that comes along once a generation. The kind of show people talk about daily long after it finished. It redefines TV drama and I can promise you, you'll never see anything like it again.

That said, don't watch it if you're easily offended or grossed out. Or if you like animals. Oh, and don't watch Season 4, Episode 8 whilst you're eating. And don't watch Season 3, Episode 9 if you believe in the afterlife and have your heart set on getting into Heaven. And it's perfectly acceptable to watch Season 6, Episode 9 and feel like that's what you would do if faced with certain death.

Just perfect.