Review: A Thousand Splendid Suns by Khaled Hosseini

I'll start out right away by saying that A Thousand Splendid Suns was not a fun book. It was pretty horrible at times, and with strong themes of domestic violence and female oppression, it's not going to be for everyone... so please be warned.

But it's also an incredibly powerful book. I won't go so far as to say I enjoyed it, because enjoyment isn't exactly the right word for what I was feeling... but of what I did feel, I felt a lot. it was deeply affecting, wonderfully written, with a gripping story and characters that kept me turning the page even as I winced at the descriptions and wished the characters out of their current situations.

Set in Afghanistan, in time ranging from the 70s to the beginning of the Afghanistan war, it follows the lives of two women. Mariam has grown up in a kolba mud hut, the illegitimate child of a wealthy man. At the age of fifteen she is married off to a much older man, and sent to Kabul, far from her home. Laila was born in Kabul, to progressive parents. She is bright and ambitious, and focused on schooling, intending to study and to go to university. When Taliban rule changes everything for women in Afghanistan, Mariam and Laila find themselves thrown together, just trying to get by in a world where being a second-class citizen would be a few steps up from where they are.

What struck me most about this book is how well all the characters are developed. There are people from many different backgrounds and realities, and each of them felt intensely real: which made the events of the book all the more difficult to handle. Mariam and Laila are completely different women, but they are united because they are suffering under the same oppression. In the whole cast, there are no heroes, just people, living as real people do, some noble and some not. Even the characters that I would class as 'villains' were well-rounded, and complex, rather than just flat-out evil. Most importantly I believed all of them. They felt real, they existed. The writing made it come to life, in all its horrific detail.

As I said earlier, this book is not for the faint-hearted. Laila's life starts out being fairly happy-go-lucky, but the war quickly destroys everything she knew and loved. Mariam was born into a hard life, and it doesn't get easy at any point in the novel, from her secluded upbringing with her strongly disillusioned mother, to life with her abusive husband.

The book is clearly written by someone that feels very strongly about the issues laid out in the book. It doesn't feel like it's deliberately set out to educate foreigners, but it does feel incredibly well researched and realised. Throughout the book and all the things that happen, there's a strong undercurrent that the author finds it abhorrent, which makes some of it slightly easier to stomach. Slightly.

And the writing... I find it hard to define why one writer is good and another is not. However, I can say that Hosseini's writing is very easy to follow. It flowed well. The dialogue felt realistic (in that dialogue-is-the-best-of-real-speech way). The chapters are short, which meant that I got to the end of one instantly wanting to start the next to find out what happens. The descriptions paint a broad picture, leaving your mind to fill in the details. It was one of the best written books I've read in a while.

I have my reservations in recommending this book, because the content made it really hard to read at times... but it was incredibly well written, and had a strong message. It felt like the whole book was saying this is what it was like, which I found both challenging, interesting, compelling.

Of course, this book has been out for some years now, so if you wanted to, you've probably already read it... But if you haven't, and you do intend to, then I recommend doing so when you're neither very happy or very sad: the former and it will bring you down with a crunch, the latter and you will be a weeping mess. It's best approached when you're feeling grounded and resilient... and even then don't expect to come out unscathed.

And I'd recommend having a happier book on stand-by to read afterwards. And possibly chocolate.

Review of the End of Mr Y by Scarlett Thomas

I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but I have to say it's one of the reasons I first picked this book up. It's an odd size and shape, with black-lined pages, so it does stand out from the crowd. I don't really know what I was expecting from that. A friend who'd previously read it said that it was good, but by the time I came to read it, I couldn't even remember what the blurb on the back said.

I'll say now, it was a pretty compulsive read. The last book I read (the third in a trilogy, which I'm not sure I could review without spoiling the whole trilogy because the ending was so disappointing), took over a month, despite the fact that it was compelling. I started Mr Y last weekend when I had very little else to do, but nonetheless it made the time fly by happily, and I read the whole book within a week, which goes to show that if nothing else, it was very readable.

Without wanting to give too much away, The End of Mr Y is about a PhD student, Ariel Manto, studying thought experiments in science and literature, who finds a book (The End of Mr Y), of which there is only supposed to be one copy left in existence. The book is supposed to be cursed, so that anyone who reads it will die. And so it leads to smiles and happiness, obviously...

Ariel is an interesting main character; she's flawed, but believable, which makes it possible to really identify with her as she's facing things. She's also intelligent and well-read, and so a relatively large portion of the book is her explaining or debating various aspects of philosophy and metaphysics with the people she meets along the way. It's a little odd at time, but I have to say it contains one of the best explanations of quantum theory that I've ever read. My biggest criticism of this is that sometimes the discussions get a little too one-sided; Ariel thinking aloud to one or other avid listener. But all the people she's talking to tend to be very well-educated, so even this has just enough realism that it doesn't become annoying.

The plot winds carefully through various problems, and solutions, and some interesting things crop up along the way. I can't say I agreed with the underlying structure of the world that the book was trying to imply, but it was definitely an interesting and riveting idea... and ideas is really what science fiction is all about. I wanted slightly more out of the ending than I got; I think some of the emotion was drained out of it, which was a little sad. But it didn't detract from the brilliance of the lead-up (unlike the aforementioned trilogy I just finished).

One of the things I like most about the book is that it bends genres a bit. It's nominally science fiction, but with heavy elements of (low) fantasy, while the setting is contemporary. On plot alone, it might have become one of those rare accessible science fiction books, like The Handmaid's Tale... but the heavy debate sections probably lean it back towards the genre fans.

All in all, I'm glad I judged this particular book by its cover enough to pick it up and buy it. It was a great read, and I was thoroughly entertained all the way through. Recommended.

Review of the 2011 film 'War Horse'

This film completely passed me by when it was on in the cinema, which is a bit of a shame really. The month it was out, I went see Sherlock Holmes 2 (brilliant fun), and Haywire (immensely disappointing), and didn't even notice War Horse until the oscar nominations were released. But given that I was a huge Black Beauty fan as a kid, I was glad of the eventual opportunity to watch it.

War Horse, is, uh... about a horse. In the war (first world, to be precise). A farmer in devon buys a rather beautiful unbroken thoroughbred colt when he was supposed to buy a workhorse, and his son falls in love with the animal, names him Joey, and trains him up for riding and ploughing. There's a rather endearing horse-training montage. But then the harvest fails, and the war comes, and the farmer has to sell the horse to get enough money to make his rent. The story then follows the horse across Europe during the war, and follows the boy as he too goes to war.

A film about a horse is generally problematic, because you have to anthropomorphize the horse enough to make it a watchable main character, while not making it so humaized so as to be unbelievable. In this, I think War Horse does a lot better than Black Beauty ever did, if only because it didn't have the irritating narration over the top. This film proved that you can get a horse to fill the screen without trying to give it a voice, which I liked. In the course of the story, the very well-trained horse demonstrates just a little too much self-awareness, and it's a little twee in places, but I kind of expected that, and they didn't overdo it, which was a real risk. I would say that horse films are never quite the same when you know any horse body-language; the image of a horse running in terror doesn't have quite the same impact when you see how happy and alert he looks.

The story also manages to get across some of the horror of war, albeit from a horse's perspective for much of it, and a slightly sanitized version from the boy's.

As is probably inevitable in a story of this nature, the human characters get slightly short-changed, but some of them do manage to shine through. The main character,  Albert (Jeremy Irvine) gives a spirited and cute performance, but his character is a little overly fanciful for my taste, and while I appreciate his fanciful nature, it seems like he's always a little removed from the events he's taking part in. The supporting cast, however, are almost without exception brilliant, from the farmer and his wife (Peter Mullen and Emily Watson), to the cavalry Captain Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston) and Major Stewart (Benedict Cumberbatch) who occupy a short, but very stirring section at the beginning of the war. Each of them brings a very different character to life for their segment, and makes Joey's journey more believable as they drift through the story.

I suppose my major criticism of the film was the lack of the feeling of the passage of time. The prologue covers the three or four years as the horse grows from a foal to a saleable colt, which is fine. The rest of the film covers a similar length of time (the span of the war), but there wasn't really a sense of how long Joey spends in each of his stopovers; did he spend a year in the English cavalry before being captured by the Germans to haul an ambulance cart, or a month? Was he on a farm in France for two months, or two years? The film makes it look like he spends barely a few days in each scenario, and then suddenly four years have passed.

But that's a small criticism. This was one of those genuinely good films that you can actually enjoy. The rare 'oscar material' piece that actually stands up as a good piece of fiction, rather than just an art piece for the benefit of film critics. But then, you'd expect Stephen Spielberg to do a good job.

I'll finish this review there, but I would like to mention briefly that this film does pretty well with its historically accurate female characters... but I think that's a blog for another time.

Review of the 2008 film the Incredible Hulk

So, I picked a great time to think about reviving my review blog. I had a relaxing day in, including an opportunity to watch a film. I recently got the Avengers box set, and the only film in it I hadn't seen was the Incredible Hulk.

I knew it hadn't been as well reviewed as some of the others, but I wanted to see it anyway. Mild spoiler warnings ahead, folks.

Well, the start was okay. It took the interesting approach of joining Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) several months (maybe even years) after the accident that leaves him with his impressive green alter-ego. I think just about everyone who'd bother to watch a Hulk film knows his back-story, so it was a good way to get to the part of the story they were trying to tell..

The opening credits give a brief run through of Hulk's genesis, and then as soon as they fade out, we cut to Bruce in Brazil, working in a bottling factory and trying to cope with his inner demon. It hints at relationships at the past, Elizabeth “Betty” Ross (Liv Tyler) and General Thaddeus Ross (William Hurt), but leaves most of that exposé for later.

So far so good?

Well, the first twenty minutes were actually reasonably promising in some ways, which just made it all the more galling when it fell apart completely later. The initial problem was with Bruce; I saw the man struggling with the Hulk, but there wasn't any hint of the brilliant scientist. Having seen Avengers Assemble (ie Hulk done well) I really felt this absence. And then there was the General, who's after Bruce, to try and unlock the secret of the Hulk to make more of them. Well, as motivations go, it's a little shaky, but we'll go with it.

He sends in a hit squad who have no clue what they're up against, you know, for fun? There's an entertaining if mindless free-running chase sequence, ending with the inevitable appearance of the Hulk, and the military's humiliating defeat. The hit squad is led by Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth), who rather than being put off by the fact that his squad is torn to shreds, is instead entranced by the Hulk's power, and decides to go after such power himself.

Motivations just get shakier as time goes on.

Bruce is the only one that really make sense in the film; he's in touch with a mysterious scientist “Mr Blue” who claims to have found a cure for Bruce's condition. Fine. But, in search of this, he walks to America. Yes, that's right. Walks. From Brazil. (And this is about the point where I started to go “really? REALLY?”)

While trying to find some data about the original accident, he runs back into his old love interest, Betty. Her characterization is paper thin, and I felt like she was on sedatives. She isn't given the luxury of a motivation, even a shaky one. In terms of Liv Tyler's roles, this made Arwen look like the Princess of Good Character Development. Her one sympathetic moment in the film is when she snaps into a rage at a taxi driver.

Characterization was weak, motivations poorly explained, and plot was just a way of getting from one fight scene to the next. So, was the action worth it?

I'm a fan of mindless action movies, and I like fight scenes, and random explosions as much as the next slightly crazed geek, but the action sequences could not make up for the film's failings. Far from the big green Rage Monster, Hulk actually looked too restrained and controlled at times. He tears the army apart systematically, and then protects Betty when she Does Stupid. The fight scenes were mostly iterations on 'Hulk throws heavy object,' and 'Hulk hits heavy object with other heavy object.' Then there are at least a couple of occasions where they could have easily avoided a confrontation with the Hulk, and didn't because of poor decision making and worse pattern recognition.

The final battle sequence is lacklustre. Rather than rage-ful, the Hulk looks rather bored and unimpressed by the whole thing. I don't blame him. Oh, and he claps his hands out to put out a fire. Really? REALLY?

The last nail in the coffin for me was that through all of this, the film seemed to take itself far too seriously. When you're acting all serious business with crazed marines and THE HULK around, you can't then throw in the old crowd-pleasing lines without it jarring slightly. And it jarred quite a lot.

So, I'm going to relegate this to lowest-tier Marvel along with Iron Man 2. Whatever happened, Joss Whedon Fixed the Hulk in Avengers Assemble, so I think we'll all be happier if we pretend this didn't happen and move on with our lives.  

Resurrection

So, I've been thinking for a little while about resurrecting this old blog, but harnessing all three of the Rs, rather than just the reviewing aspect. I hope to include random thoughts to share with the world, and some stuff about my writing as well as my reading and viewing habits.

This might all fall apart again next April when I'm going to be away for a while, but for now, I'll try and post at least a couple of times a month. Let's see how this goes.

Review of the 1984 film 'Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind'

In the post-apocalyptic world, the sea of decay sweeps the land, devouring everything in its path and leaving the air toxic and unbreathable. In the Valley of the Wind, they stave off the spread of the sea of decay, but they otherwise let it be. Then people come from another land where they are trying to beat back the sea of decay with technology. Nausicaa, the princess of the valley of wind, resolves to stop them from destroying the world she has known and loved.

Nausicaa is one of the first Hayao Miyazaki films, and is considered to be the first film produced by Studio Ghibli (of Spirited Away fame). It has shades of some of their later works, and while it is not as polished or finely detailed as some of them, it is an excellent film, and I very much enjoyed it.

As a science fiction, there is an interesting world created in the post-apocalyptic waste. It is plain to see what they have lost from the time before. The world-building reminded me a bit of Philip Reeve's Mortal Engines series of books, in the way it alludes to what happened without making a focus of it. The focus is, instead, around the people living in this world, and the ways they have found of coping with its hardships. The creatures that live in the sea of decay are wonderful expansions, and enough within the realms of possibility that I found it easy to suspend disbelief.

The plot is brilliant and dramatic. It was based on a manga, which clearly had a significant imagination, as well as story-telling skill behind it, though I don't know precisely how much was borrowed. It was beautifully told and brought to life, with the possible exception of the ending, which I thought slightly rushed.

The environmental message that leaks through in so many of Miyazaki's films (perhaps just because he likes producing that kind of film) was very much in evidence. It wasn't too heavy-handed, though, which is good... and the message was both a vehicle for the plot and part of the plot, without detracting from the struggle that the characters were going through.

The antagonists and protagonists alike all have their strong and weak points, making it very realistic in terms of how people deal with situations. Nausicaa herself is nature-loving and kind, but she is strong, proud and determined. In all, she is one of the strongest female leads I have ever seen in an anime. She wasn't whiny or defensive; she was proactive, and well-loved by the people around her. While I don't normally tout the feminist card, especially in reviews, it was a refreshing change from some anime films I've seen with female leads who basically provide moral support and screaming.

Visually, the film is good, but not brilliant. With a more detailed animation style (such as that used in later Ghibli films), and with a higher frame-rate, this could have been a much more visually arresting film. As it was the power was in the story, which is good in some ways, but disappointing in others. However, the characters were all drawn expressively enough to carry the emotion of the film, and the plot lost nothing by its slightly primitive animation style.

While not the best Miyazaki film I have seen, Nausicaa was an excellent film. I would definitely recommend it to all anime fans (though I'm told the manga is better).

Review of the 1993 film 'Falling Down'

Sitting in a boiling hot car in a traffic jam, a man known through most of the film only as D-Fens stews, growing increasingly frustrated. Eventually he leaves his car in the traffic jam and takes his frustration on a journey across town by foot, leaving a path of destruction in his wake.

Falling Down is quite a scary film, in the sense, that as you watch Michael Douglas' character growing more and more insane along his path, you wonder what he will do. I was scared for his ex-wife and his daughter, and what he might do if and when he reached them. I was scared for all the people he met along the way that tried to stand in his path. At the same time, the power of it was that on some level, it was possible to understand at least part of his anger and frustration, without ever condoning his actions.

The acting in Falling Down is brilliant across the board, with each character bringing his point and purpose to life, from the main characters down to the man in the traffic jam that first meets D-Fens. The plot is equally excellent, even in its simplicity. We watch the policeman that starts to piece things together from disparate reports, and we watch D-Fens wandering through town, dealing with people in his path. The two threads coalesce excellently, in a brilliant ending that is as fantastic as it is inevitable.

The dialogue and plot are likewise brilliant, and while I couldn't tell you a lot about the cinematography, it was a visually very effective film. I think the filming achieved a lot with camera angles and the right view at the right time. A particular example would be the opening shots of the movie, as we watch the man in the car sweating, staring at the things around him in quick, distinct shots of various items that he can see. The first thing we hear is his breathing, and then the incredible noise of the traffic jam breaks through and we see him in his car-prison.

As I've already alluded, a lot of the power was in the amount of compassion that I had for the lead character, even in his worst moments. Society had not been at its best when dealing with him, and I felt for him because of that. I felt that some of the things he was rebelling against did need to be rebelled against, although preferably not in so violent and dramatic a fashion.

As with so many films that I enjoyed, I am finding it difficult to come up with negative points to balance out my own enthusiastic opinions, which makes it difficult to give a balanced review. However, as I'm only doing this for fun anyway, I'm going to stick with that... Falling Down was a brilliant film, and I think it will stand the test of time well, if not as well as other things. It's another not-for-the-faint-hearted film, but I think it was definitely worth watching.

Review of the 1988 film 'My Neighbour Totoro'

Conceived as a children's film with no real conflict, My Neighbour Totoro follows sisters Satsuki and Mei when they move, with their father to a house in the countryside. In the forest near their house, Mei discovers Totoro, a spirit of nature, and she and her sister have a series of adventures.

Totoro is obviously meant as a children's film, but it still had a lot of appeal. The plot is simple, but there is a lot of the kind of magic and wonder in it that makes such fantasy films so fun to watch. Visually, the film is beautiful and the characters are all likeable.

As a film with no conflict, you would think that it would be boring. I think if I was in the mood for a crazy action film, it would be a little bit boring. However, primarily this was a happy, funny film that is meant to amuse and delight. I very much enjoyed it, and while I hesitate to use the word cute, I think that best describes much of the movie.

This would be a great film to watch if you are feeling down, or if you want to watch something happy without the usual dose of angst that accompanies many films. I don't have many criticisms, positive or negative, beyond that, so I will stop there.

Review of the 2009 film 'Sherlock Holmes'

When Sherlock Holmes and Dr John Watson apprehend a criminal mastermind Lord Blackwood and see him sent to the gallows, they think that will be the last of him. So it is somewhat surprising when Blackwood apparently rises from the grave, and Holmes must put his incredible intellect and deductive ability to good work trying to stop more deaths.

I had very mixed feelings when I first saw the trailer for this movie. It seemed far more sensationalist and Hollywood action film than I would have expected from the Victorian genius. However, it did look like an entertaining film, so I wasn't certain.

The result was far more pleasing than I had hoped, though, and I was thoroughly glad that I went to see the film, even while it was, in some ways as sensationalist and Hollywood action film as I had feared. None of my specific concerns turned out to be a reality, and I was instead confronted with a film that kept much of the spirit of the old Victorian hero, while giving him new life and breaking away from the fastidious old man character that populated the previous dramatisations.

In terms of plot, there is a great amount of interest and pleasant non-linearity to the Holmes plot. I didn't find it overly predictable, and I found each explanation and forward movement very well carried out. Holmes' ability to deduce facts from minimal information is as legendary as I remember from the stories, and each step left me with the same frustration that I remember Watson feeling when Holmes made jumps that no others would have been able to reach.

The mood was dramatic, but it kept enough of the intrigue you would expect of a Holmes movie so that it wasn't too cheesy (not to say it was never cheesy, because it was... but entertainingly so, rather than cringingly so). The film doesn't attempt to be too spooky, which would have detracted from Robert Downey Junior's curt and forthright Holmes. Visually, the film was stunning and very well set up and choreographed, from fight scenes to simple scenes of Holmes being eccentric in the comfort of his own, rather disorderly, home.

I think what made this film, however, was the acting. Robert Downey Junior and Jude Law do a fantastic job as the duo of Holmes and Watson, and the supporting cast around them are equally as brilliant. Downey Jr acts the true British upper class eccentric, smoking his pipe and approaching all problems with wild-eyed enthusiasm as he searches for puzzles that will challenge him. Watson, long-suffering friend of Holmes, does well at dealing with tiresome Holmes, and acting as foil, comic relief and sidekick at different moments. The other characters are equally as well-acted, from Rachel McAdams getting her 'feist' on, to the incompetent police inspector and the varied antagonists that appear throughout the film.

Put it all together, and I got an amusing (occasionally hilarious), high-budget action film, with a very good central plot-string, superb acting and an excellent soundtrack. My main criticisms would revolve around the silliness of many of the plot elements. Don't see this film if you like your movies to be rigorously historically and scientifically accurate. I also wasn't too happy with the obvious cue-for-a-sequel moment at the end, but I supposed we must let Hollywood have these things.

I can imagine that Holmes has polarised opinions somewhat, between those who think that it's a brilliant direction to take the old franchise, and those that think it's a travesty. I'm firmly in the former column, so if you still cling to the belief that Holmes should be a stately, decorous and cleanly old gentleman with a magnifying glass and a few minor eccentricities, perhaps you will not enjoy this film as much as I did. However... you might be surprised.

To everyone else, go and see Holmes, and you probably won't regret it, if you've ever liked a crazy action film. This is crazier than most, and more entertaining than most.

Review of 'Day of the Triffids' by John Wyndham.

I had a lot of preconceptions about Day of the Triffids before I read it, many of which I think stemmed from what I'd heard about the B-movie. For a start I thought that the Triffids were aliens. In fact, in the book, they are genetically engineered plants, created and farmed for their many useful properties, while their more dangerous aspects such as locomotion and a dangerous sting are overlooked.

The story of the book, however, mostly focuses on the result of a solar storm, which creates a fantastic light show across the globe. Most of the population are watching... and the following morning, it appears that everyone who was watching has gone blind. A few sighted people are left to try and forge a new life from the fall of civilisation. In the midst of this, the Triffids start to stir, perhaps realising that they have the advantage over a blind human.

Day of the Triffids has a relatively simple plot, following Bill Masen as he tries to make some sense of the world that has been left behind. He is forced to make a number of choices along the way, about whether to abandon the people left blinded, or to try and do what he could to help them. Along the way, he meets Josella Playton, another left sighted after the meteor shower. The charm of the book is partly in this simplistic plot; it is just the story of how people cope with adversity, and the kinds of things that they would have to start thinking about.

The characterisation is, on the whole, excellent, if a little dated by today's standards. However, in many respects I think that Day of the Triffids will age better than many similar science fiction stories, because it doesn't try to pretend that people are anything other than people. In the story, people deal with the crisis in a variety of different ways. Some panic, others get depressed, some remain rational against all odds and start trying to think of a way through it. This is dealt with spectacularly throughout the book, and was one of the most impressive things about it.

By far the best thing about the book, though, is the world-building. John Wyndham starts from two basic premises. First, accept the Triffids as reality. Second, accept the meteor storm that leaves most of the population blind. After those two points, everything that happens follows logically and naturally. John Wyndham creates a world that works, and stands up to enough scrutiny that for the whole length of the book, I didn't notice a single thing that stood out as being wrong or ridiculous. This is not to say that they were not there, but the book was written well enough, and clever enough, that it stood up to casual reading. And what more can you ask of a book that you are reading casually?

Finally, I cared about what happened. I was pulled through the story, interested in each plot turn and event that changed how things worked. I like books that make me care, and I like ripping yarn stories, so this book was definitely a winner.

This book is well-deserving of its place in the minds of the public, and is another on my list of highly recommended reads.

Review of the 2009 film 'Avatar'

Welcome to Pandora; a verdant green world with an atmosphere that's poisonous to humans, and a considerable native population of large, blue-skinned humanoids who live in harmony with the world around them. When humans arrive in search of a mineral known only as 'unobtanium' the Na'vi fight back, concerned that the humans are destroying their world. In an attempt to negotiate peace, and become friends with the Na'vi, scientists develop the avatar project and create Na'vi bodies from a meld of Na'vi and human DNA, synchronised with the nervous system of the avatar's pilot so that the pilot can control the avatar, and live as a Na'vi. Jake Sully, a wounded ex-marine, takes on one of these avatars and attempts to learn more about the Na'vi.

Avatar has gotten a lot of bad, or at least tepid, press for being a beautiful but predictable film. People have said that although it is very pretty, it has stolen it's plot from a number of different films, and hasn't got an original bone in its body.

I feel this is unfair on avatar. To show my point, I will start out by discussing what I feel are the film's negative points:

It's true that the film is focused around an issue that's very much in vogue at the moment, and although it takes it out to a new locale, it's still essentially the same idea. Increasingly in films, the role of humans as bad guy is becoming more fashionable, and when you listen to the news, it's easy to see why this has percolated through into popular media. Much of the plot and thematic devices are reused, borrowed and adapted from elsewhere. The characters have clear and obvious traits, and nothing really surprised me about any of them. The romantic subplot was obvious from minute one, and a lot of the other plot devices were obvious, if not from the start, then from the second that their possibility was introduced so that their later use was not quite so deus-ex-machina.

So far, I guess, I'm agreeing with all of the other critics. However, and this is a big however, I thoroughly enjoyed Avatar. I sat willingly through nearly three hours of movie and was eager to find out what happened next, even when I knew what was going to happen next.

The overarching plot was very predictable; the fifty word plot synopsis wouldn't shock you at all, but there were moments when things happened that did surprise me. Without wanting to spoil anything, there were times when I hadn't predicted the outcome, and so I was saddened by the result. And, additionally, there are only so many stories, but there are a great many ways to tell a story. This story takes the science fiction telling, and many of the elements around the plot were brilliant; world design and technology design are brilliant across the board.

In some respects characterisation left something to be desired; each character had one trait that they were allowed to exploit, and one moment where they were allowed to show anything else, except for the lead antagonist, who was not allowed to be anything other than an irredeemable bastard. However (again), there was a lot that was good about the way the characters worked. The scientists acted like scientists. The soldiers acted like soldiers. The acting was, on the whole, excellent, and with slightly limited material, the lead cast did get to shine.

And yes, people are right, the film was beautiful. The 3D occasionally got in the way (for me), but for the most part added depth (hurr hurr) to the storytelling, and made it a great visual spectacle. The alien creature designers clearly had a lot of fun, but they ended up creating a wholly believable world. The human technology invented for the world is stunning, and there are some technologically very believable things. Indeed, looking at his filmography, one of Cameron's strengths seems to be creating generally accessible, but believable, science fiction. For this, he should definitely be praised.

The punch line is, of course, that if I was to make a list of movie features and rate each one individually, Avatar would score average at best in all but visual effects and world building. Yet, all of the elements come together in a superb package, that was supremely entertaining, and very good science fiction to boot. This is definitely worth seeing, and it was one of the most enjoyable films I saw last year.

Review of 'The Stars My Destination' by Alfred Bester.

It's strange, buying a book mainly because a character in your favourite television show was named after the author, but that's probably the main reason I first picked up The Stars My Destination (also previously published under the title Tiger Tiger). This is another one of the books published in the Science Fiction masterworks series, though, so I suspected that I was in for a good ride, and I was right.

Gully Foyle is the sole survivor on his mostly burned-out ship. He is an uneducated nobody, surviving through sheer bloody-mindedness. He does not know how he came to be there. Eventually, he has a chance for rescue, but his would-be rescuer passes him by. At that moment, he vows revenge on those that passed him by, and in vowing and seeking his vengeance he becomes more than he was.

The central science-fiction premise around which the world is hung is the development (or rather discovery) of personal, instantaneous teleportation. With just the power of their minds, people can travel up to a thousand miles across the world. While the concept seems even more unlikely today than it did when the book was written, the society that Bester created around it rang very true, and I loved the way that he created the world where such a form of teleportation was possible.

Around this tenet, Bester also created a rich world where a number of other things were possible, and in this, Gully Foyle wanders and seeks his vengeance. He is helped and hindered along the way by a cast of characters with as much variety as I have come to expect from real life. There is a greedy, self-absorbed businessman who manages somehow to avoid many of the cliches that now hang around such a character; There is a woman who has grown so sick of the role that women are given in the world of instantaneous teleportation that she has turned to a life of petty crime; Then there is a poor teacher who has the negative qualities of telepathy (broadcasting her thoughts) without the benefits of being able to read minds.

And at the centre of it all is the determined Gully Foyle. He maintains his purpose throughout the story, even when it is difficult to believe that any real person would. But somehow, he forces himself to ambition when he is given a hook for his vengeance, and he channels all that energy towards getting what he wants. He doesn't care that it makes people along the path hate him for it, and he happily uses them to get what he wants. However, throughout the character grows from a down-and-out to an intelligent, well-educated human being, who has every possibility. It is strange watching how such a destructive force as revenge builds an incredibly intelligent and resourceful man out of a nobody, but in the pages of The Stars My Destination, it is pulled off with immense skill.

The story was brilliantly told, and I greatly enjoyed the simple (but not bare or too utilitarian) prose. The plot was rich, interesting and compelling, encouraging me with each step to read on. It was the kind of compulsion that I had missed in the Deptford Trilogy, in fact, though I will not state that the book stands as well as Great Literature. Importantly, the characters and story all rang true, once the central tenets had been accepted with a pinch poetic license and I can well see why this book has made it into the science fiction masterworks.

It almost seems bad form to comment upon the books flaws, but I probably should. Most of them stem from the fact that the book is quite dated; it was written some time ago and the views on society, women and science are a little out of date by now. This book has perhaps not stood the test of time as well as some science fiction books. Equally, though, in my opinion it has lasted better than some, and I can forgive a lot when I take into account that it was written a long time before the present day.

In the end, the story is made by the brilliance of the main character; and while I do not necessarily believe that anyone is capable of anything they set their mind to, Gully Foyle rings true as a character who does pull off that feat, and as such I found him inspirational, even though his motivation was questionable.

As you can probably tell, I enjoyed this book... and I think that most science fiction fans will. I do not think it has yet supplanted any of my top favourites... but perhaps that is only because my favourites haven't lasted through fifty years of time taking a completely different path to that which the writers expected.

Review of 'The Deptford Trilogy' by Robertson Davies

Starting in the small Canadian village of Deptford, this trilogy of novels follow the lives of three men whose lives started, or were greatly affected by, that village. The first is Dunstan Ramsay, a relatively unremarkable history professor, looking back over his life to an event that occurred in his tenth year and shaped much that happened to him afterwards. The second is a rich, highly respected lawyer, David Staunton, the son of Ramsay's old friend Boy Staunton. The third is Magnus Eisengrim, the greatest magician in the world, who was also born in Deptford.

These novels aren't the usual sort of thing I would read, and I cannot say that I would have ever come across them if they hadn't been recommended to me. However, they are very good books, and are certainly very well written. The characters are all well-rounded, and interesting. Each has a good story to tell, and each is well told. Throughout each book, there are a number of interesting themes, such as friendship, loyalty, myth and vengeance. They are dealt with skilfully and as each story develops, you see how each character has been shaped by his past.

While I can honestly say that I enjoyed these stories, I have more to say on the negative side than usual, and this is perhaps because I have stepped outside my reading comfort zone. However, I also mainly noticed flaws that I have picked up on (or that others have mentioned) about my own writing.

Firstly, all of the main characters were all incredibly intelligent and self-aware. This in itself is not a flaw, but there were very few characters bought to the fore in the whole story who did not meet this general description, which I feel lost something of the tapestry of life.

Secondly, all of the characters seemed to speak in the same, or very similar, voices. The consistency of tone was very good for the first story, where it was all told in first-person perspective from Ramsay's point of view. However, when all three of the stories were told in the same tone, it became less interesting and lost the characters some of their variety, especially in the third story, where other characters have a lot more to say. This is not to say that the narrative voice was dull; just that the style was a little too consistent between characters.

Thirdly, although I wanted to read on, and was interested in the outcomes of all of the stories, this book was not what I would describe as a page-turner. Usually stories that interest also grab me, to a lesser or greater extent. For the Deptford Trilogy I wanted to read on, but I was not compelled in the same way as for many ripping yarn stories.

However, at no point did I consider stopping reading the book; throughout I wanted to find out what happened, it just took me a lot longer than some books. The first book introduced me to a cast of characters who had enough variety to intrigue (earlier comments notwithstanding). There was also a considerable amount of extraneous knowledge and information dotted around the plot. The second book, especially, taught me a few things that I didn't know, while exploring the life and character of the subject of that novel, David Staunton.

I've thus finished this omnibus with mixed feelings. The threads that pull all three stories together are intriguing and the characters and tales are very strong, and quite believable, even in their most fanciful moments. It was definitely strong literature, very cleverly and well written. However, while the book was entertaining enough, it just wasn't as gripping as I wanted it to be, so I found it took me a very long time to read.

If, like me, you prefer ripping-yarn stories that pull you through on tenter-hooks, and have a plot that grabs you, you may find, like me, that the Deptford trilogy is a surprisingly good read, but not precisely your cup of tea. If, however, you are very much into fictional life-stories and semi-historical fiction, I think that this is a fine example of its kind, and you will probably enjoy it greatly.

The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier

When I started this blog, I never intended for it to be solely reviews. Unfortunately it seems to have turned out that way, to the extent that I'm tentative about posting non-review blogging posts now. However, I've recently found a few things I wanted to write about, and seeing as that's what blogs are for... I might as well use the opportunity while it's there.

Two weeks ago, I was in Paris, visiting the touristy places in one of the best-known historic cities in Europe. I have a lot to say about a lot of things I saw there, but for now, I want to talk about the Arc de Triomphe.

The Arc de Triomphe stands at a junction between several big roads in Paris, the biggest being the Champs Elysées and the Avenue de la Grande Armée. It was built by Napoleon to honour his troops on their journey home. It can be seen from just about any point in Paris that stands above three stories high, but disappears surprisingly fast when you walk away from it at ground level.

An impressive white edifice, it stands proud and tall, with an ornamented but elegant design. The views from the top level are stunning. But the thing that really struck me when I was at the Arc, was not inside the giant structure at all.

Between two of the giant pillars there is a plain gravestone, with some flowers and a flame that is always lit.

“Ici repose un soldat Francais, mort pour la patrie.”

Here lies a French soldier who died for his country.

The tomb of the unknown soldier is a tradition I've known about for as long as I can remember, but until I stood there, under the arch, I didn't really understand it. I've never seen the soldier in Westminster Cathedral (a little closer to home), so I don't know if I would have been affected the same way there.

But as I stood there, surrounded by crowds, reading the signs that asked me to treat the site with the respect it deserved, I realised that it wasn't just the tomb of an unknown soldier. It was the tomb of every unknown soldier.

Here lies a man who fought and died for his country. Wrong or right, he took up arms to fight a force he believed needed to be fought. The Generals sat above him, somewhere, and directed him, but he was the one fighting. He was the one that faced the enemy on equal footing. And somewhere along the line, somehow, he was killed.

It happened to a lot of men. There are thousands upon thousands of graves, of those who died in two world wars. Some were recovered, named, buried. Their families knew and mourned properly.

But some just never came home.

Reality and fiction say a lot about how difficult it is to mourn properly when there is no closure. Burying a close loved-one, especially one who dies young, must be hard; I have been very sheltered in this in my life so far, but I can imagine something of what it would feel, even if my imagination could never truly harness the reality. It's even harder to imagine what it must be like to lose someone and never know what happened, to never be able to bury them.

So, when I stood beside the grave under the Arc de Triomphe, I think I realised just how much it must have meant. The symbolism behind the Unknown Soldier may have allowed people just a touch of what they needed. Perhaps they could imagine that their beloved lay underneath that well-loved grave; that buried in state is the man that they adored in their time. And while he was never named, he is still there, at rest.

It hit me with a cold wind, and I stared for a long moment.

Looking up, there is a lot of the Arc that is impressive, and important; a very powerful monument. It contains the names of many. But none of them meant anything to me; a name is just a name if it's someone you don't know and never will.

But an Unknown Person, unnamed... that could be anyone. And I think that will stay with me a lot longer than the views along the Champs Elysées.

Review of Babel-17 by Samuel R. Delany

In the far future, humans have spread out among the stars, discovered alien life and is in the midst of a war. A series of catastrophic 'accidents' around the galaxy are preceded by communications in a language that no one understands. Rydra Wong, however, has an extremely keen linguistic mind, and starts to extract meaning from Babel-17. And with understanding, she sets out in search of whoever speaks the strange and remarkable tongue.

Babel-17 is another one of the sci-fi masterworks, so I had an inkling it would be good before I picked it up. As it was, though, I was still blown away by it. With a brilliant plot, a wonderful cast of characters and prose that I can only dream of writing, this stands rightly among the sci-fi masterworks.

Linguistics is a field I've always been interested in, but never had enough time to devote to it. Discovering a sci-fi novel, where the plot is based around linguistics is interesting, and it's always nice when a passive interest meets an active one. The linguistic explorations and Rydra's attempts to explain how things work make for very compelling and interesting reading. In addition, the other characters add a whole host of personas and interests to the plot. From the customs officer whose life is changed after spending one evening with Rydra, to the trio of navigators and the wonderful way they interact with each other... it all fits together seamlessly.

The world-building is fantastic, as well, I should say. The way the 'Transport' people work, and the way the society in general works is introduced gradually throughout the novel. There are one or two things that are introduced slightly too soon before they become plot-relevant, but in general, it all fits together. The world is beautiful, vibrant, and nearly completely believable. Even something of art and science in their world is described and painted beautifully.

Babel-17 is only a short book, so it's necessarily quite punchy and fast-paced. There are a few plot elements and 'decisions' that strike me as strange. And there are some scenes that the author seems to dwell on, when perhaps others may have seemed more plot-relevant. However, in the span of 200 or so pages, the author built a world and a cast of characters, and made me care for all of them. The ending seemed slightly rushed; there was a chapter that was only vaguely coherent, followed by a few that led the book to its end, but never really fully explained everything. On the whole, though, it was very well paced, and everything up to those last few chapters made me enjoy it all the more. At the end, I was left wanting more, so if that was the intention, Mr. Delany certainly achieved his objective.

One thing I found slightly strange is that the main character, Rydra Wong, and another character who is only present for a short time, are the only two convincing female characters... the others are slightly bland, and don't have as much stage-presence as the male characters. Another criticism I'd have is that there are the occasional bits that are hard to read; especially a three-page long sentence (not as bad as it sounds, and skilfully done, but even so; hard going).

In general, Babel-17 was an excellently crafted, easy-to-read 200 pages, with world and characters I didn't find it hard to love. I'd recommend it wholeheartedly to anyone who likes science fiction, especially, but not exclusively, if you also enjoy linguistics.

Review of the 2004 film 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'

I'm discovering it's very difficult to review things... especially if I really enjoyed it. If I was to embark upon this properly, I'd have to pick films at random, rather than choosing films that I am fairly certain I'm going to enjoy. However, my intent was always to be an 'everyman' reviewer. Hopefully I can attempt to be balanced even when I enjoyed a film, and hopefully people can judge from my reviews whether they would enjoy something or not. I'm sure that professional reviewers quickly become jaded, so a film has to do something very special to stand out. Not so for me, as I like cheesy crazy action movies as much as the next guy.

However, sometimes I watch a film that I have lots of things to say about, positive and negative.

And so to my next review... Sky Captain.

Jude Law stars as Sky Captain, a mercenary crack pilot with almost the almost superhuman ability to fly through cities without destroying buildings (much). Gwyneth Paltrow plays a cut-throat journalist who will do just about anything to get a story. Together, they set out in search of the coordinator of a series of attacks involving highly technologically advanced giant robots and flying machines.

If it sounds steam-punk and cheesy, it is... but that's not necessarily a bad thing. There is a quite gripping and thrill-riding-ly entertaining plot, veneered with strong stilton. The plot held up to closer examination better than most other elements of the film. If you took for granted that the level of technology was possible in the supposed time period (the 50's I think), and that Sky Captain and his number-two tech expert Dex (Giovanni Ribisi) are as good as they are claimed to be, then everything else sort of works, in a silly way. There were some good action scenes, a good mystery element and some amusing twists. It came with comedy and drama and managed both pretty well.

My main problem with this film was that I didn't particularly like the characters. The Captain himself was arrogant in the way only crack pilots in film seem to be, but he was good enough to pull it off. Dex had enough screen presence to stand up, but he didn't really stand out, or have enough screen time to make me really like him. Angelina Jolie's character had enough charm to actually make me like Angelina for possibly the first time ever... but again, she had limited screen time, so it wasn't enough to redeem the movie.

And then, trailing notably behind these characters in my estimation, I hated Gwyneth Paltrow's character. I didn't actively hate her in the way that you'd hate a well-done bad guy. I hated her in the sense that it was a terrible character, and I didn't find the portrayal good enough to rescue it. In the vein of journalistic stereotypes, Polly Perkins, puts herself in harms way and almost gets killed several times in her determination to get a story and a few pictures. Far from brave and ambitious, I found her irritating and stupid, and I wanted to slap her face on more than one occasion. She was worse than useless in aiding the plot, and spent a lot of time fretting about her beloved camera in a way I found vexing.

Leaving my ire behind though, let's move on to the filming. While the special effects would not be considered ground-breaking, they were adequate, and the filming style covered that a lot; the film user a lot of sepia and blue-filters, which I think dulled the difference between real and CG. However, aside from this notable benefit, I didn't particularly like the sepia. I found it hard to watch (as in, odd glares and shadows, rather than the this-film-is-too-frustrating sense). I can cope with blue filters, though, so for those bits of the film I wasn't squinting at the TV quite as much.

I should add a note that this film had a brilliant soundtrack, which added greatly to the atmosphere of the film. Reminiscent of some of John Williams better works, Edward Shearmur does a brilliant job of backing this film and adding a pinch of what's needed to every scene.

So, let's balance up: pretty good, quite gripping plot, with some good characters and one supremely irritating one who gets a lot of screen-time. Filming techniques that I half-liked and half-disliked. Reasonable acting and adequate special effects. But for a film I watched on a lazy Saturday and had hardly heard of before, it wasn't a bad couple of hour's entertainment.

Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is a fairly good film, but it's not quite the epic it could have been. It's not going to top my list of favourites, and it won't be high on my list of things to re-watch soon, but it might be worth giving it a go, if you like that sort of thing.

Review of the 2007 film 'Bridge to Terabithia'

I knew nothing about Bridge to Terabithia before watching it. Reading this review will somewhat deprive you of that opportunity. I recommend approaching this film with your mind open, so if you want to see it before reading this... know only that I recommend you watch it. I had trouble even deciding whether to post this review. However...

For those that would rather know more...

Bridge to Terabithia affected me in ways that only a couple of other films ever have. It was incredibly effective, and for many reasons really got to me. It's hard to review it without spoiling it, but I'll do my best.

Josh Hutcherson is a preteen with the usual trials of the kid who isn't quite in the cool crowd. When Leslie Burke starts at the school, the pair initially start off on the wrong foot, but soon become friends. Leslie has many of the same problems as Josh, but she is much better at letting things wash over her. She has a strong personality, and some wisdom far beyond her years, with the imagination and playfulness of youth. Together, they create a world of their own, Terabithia, driven by imagination and escapism.

I don't know what I was expecting when I sat down to watch this film; I think I expected something far more fanciful and fantastical than what I got. Perhaps I thought it would a fantasy similar to 'City of Ember'. I thought it was a kid's film, and I thought it would be the kind of hollywood kid's film cheese I've come to expect. As it was, though, I got something that took me back to my own experiences of youth; my own attempts to use imagination and fictional worlds to escape from the world of today. I was incredibly sympathetic towards the characters, which made it easy to enjoy the highs, and to feel the lows even more distinctly.

The acting in this film is brilliant, by children and adults alike. Even Zooey Deschanel, who I normally find annoying, was good in this film (though her part was thankfully reasonably small). Everything meshes together perfectly.

On the other side, there were a few things I liked less about this film... some of the characters didn't fit quite as well as others, and nothing much is ever made of two of Josh's sisters. In one or two places, there were ideas that not everyone will agree with, but as it was all presented as children's ideas, I think it was easier to swallow.

The visual effects are pretty average, and the plotline is fairly simplistic. But, this is not an epic storyline about children discovering a Narnia-like fantasy world. This is about children and the power of imagination. It reminded me of a lot of things I had thought gone, and evoked a churn of new emotions (to get overly poetical).

I think Bridge to Terabithia has wound its way rightfully up into my favourite films. There's something about it that I think, and hope, will stay with me. It's something I think I could watch again and again, and each time love it anew, even if the twists and turns have less punch than the first time.

In a way, I'm glad I knew nothing about the film before seeing it. It caught me and immersed me in a way that few films I have seen ever have. I loved every moment, even the saddest moments. And I hope that if and when you see it, you enjoy it on as many levels as I did.

Review of the 2006 film 'A Scanner Darkly'

A Scanner Darkly is a story about the dangers of drugs. In the future, a drug known as 'substance D' is the current bane of civilisation. The narcotics police send undercover agents out to try and infiltrate groups of addicts, to find and bring down those who are distributing the drugs. Keanu Reeves plays a narcotics known by codename 'Fred'. His undercover guise is as Bob Arctor, living in a house with two other Substance D addicted men.

Having never read the book, I cannot tell you how true it is to Philip K Dick's original creation, but I can say that as a film, this stood up very well. There was some brilliant acting from all of the cast, especially Robert Downey Jr, who is fast becoming one of my favourite actors. The film is shown as cell-shaded live action. You can tell that the cast are real, but the unreality of the overlaying colour accentuates the drug-haze that its characters are living in. There are some interesting effects as well. When not undercover, the narcotics officers wear suits that hide their identity, showing images of switching faces, flashing a series of strange and different images.

The plot thread that the majority of the film follows is relatively simple. It is mostly following Bob and his group, and watching him as he tries to discover more about the drug network. Throughout there are a series of interactions that show the life that they are living, listening in on their 'trippy' conversations. It is an interesting sketch. The ending of the film, however, shows what everything else has been leading up to, and it impressed me greatly.

At times the mood of the film is relatively comic, as you watch the characters having conversations that most level-headed people would never have. At these points, I found myself wondering if they were based off actual conversations that Philip K Dick had had. Often the film is a lot darker, as Bob becomes more drug addicted and starts losing his faculties.

The film held my interest throughout, and made me think about what it was trying to achieve. As well as good acting, and a very good script, it captured a variety of moods. From the opening scene of watching a drug-addicted man imagine that he is covered in insects, to the final conclusion, there is a lot of good story-telling, and a wonderful variety of characters. As science fiction it is squarely within the realms of possibility, perhaps making the film that little bit more plausible and unnerving.

This isn't a light-hearted film, but I enjoyed it very much as a film to watch and get my teeth into. I think it would have a lot of appeal to many people, and definitely not one just for science fiction fans.

Review of the 2009 film 'Up'

The Pixar film series have included many that are brilliant, and Up is no exception. I thoroughly recommend this film, so you should go out and see it now... and then come back and read the rest of my review.

Up follows the story of Carl Frederickson, an elderly man who is living alone in a house he has known since childhood. Then there is Russell, a young 'wilderness explorer' looking to get his Helping the Elderly badge. Karl sends him off on a fake errand, but Russell ends up on Mr Frederickson's house, when Carl launches the house with an enormous bunch of helium balloons and sets off to South America.

With poignancy, adventure, comedy and sadness all rolled into one film, it's hard not to find something to like in Up. I liked everything. The action sequences were clever and exciting, without being overdone. I found the comical elements and characters hilarious. There were also some surprisingly hard-hitting emotional moments that made me think; this is still Disney, so it wasn't exactly a tear-jerker, but it was still quite special.

Likewise, the characters in this story are wonderful. Carl is a grumpy old man, with a life-story that I could really relate to, and I felt for him even in his most crotchety moment. Russell, while overeager, has a lot of admirable and amusing character traits. Even at his most annoying, he is a nice character. The other side-kicks and the antagonist are likewise amusing.

Up also comes with an incredible soundtrack by Michael Giacchino. The main theme is catchy and brilliant; adaptable for all highs and lows and beautiful. I've been humming it for the last two days, and I'm going to attempt to learn it on the piano. It really adds something to the film to make it extra special.

For a balanced review, I should try and say some things that don't make Up to be perfection incarnate, because it isn't. There are some moments where the plot is a little predictable, and there are perhaps a few too many scenes showing the house floating amongst the clouds, with no good reason. I also found there were moments where characters were rather more sprightly than is generally possible for their age.

However, my overall feeling is overwhelmingly positive. This was a highly entertaining children's film, with a considerable amount to keep the adults amused as well.

As a final note, I should say that I watched Up in 3D at the cinema. The last (and so far only other) film I saw in 3D (Coraline), seemed to use 3D as a gimmick to have lots of things jumping out of the screen. I didn't like this. Up, however, used it to give much more depth to the shot, and had hardly any needless things jumping out of the screen at you. It made good use of the 3D, and it was far less annoying and distracting than I think it would be for many things.

Review of the 2008 film 'Cloverfield'

In Manhattan, a small group of friends are throwing a farewell party in honour of Rob (Michael Stahl-David). His best friend Hud (T.J Miller) is going around the party collecting farewell messages using Rob's handheld video recorder. When an earthquake shocks the city and all hell breaks loose, Hud keeps hold of the camera and documents the progress of a small group of his friends as they attempt to escape the havoc.

I'm not sure how to describe my experience of this film. In some ways I thought it was brilliant, in other ways I was slightly disappointed. However, when I think of some of the things that disappointed me, I wonder if it would have been better had it been done differently, and I am uncertain.

I'll start with the characters. Quite quickly, I got an idea of what all the characters were like, and enough of their backstory to give them the shade of realism required. And so, I found that I cared about what happened to them. As the film progressed, those attachments were used well in the plot to shock and scare, and worry and interest. It kept me watching. It was well acted and throughout I had a good impression of the character's fear and their real-world heroism as they suffered their ordeal.

What plot was there was designed to keep the characters in the city for long enough to show off all that was happening. There were some visually interesting moments and some (slightly) scary ones. As none of the characters that the film was following really knew what was going on in the larger picture, the viewer didn't really know what was going on either. There were bits of subplot revealed through snatches of the tape that was being overwritten. As the characters make their way through the city, there are some excellent monster-shots and some spectacular displays of destruction and death. What can be described as the main plot thread, following friends going to rescue another friend who is trapped, was a little bit weak, and a little too cheesy, but it was covered well enough by good acting and some superb action sequences.

Telling the story through a camcorder was an interesting choice. In some ways, it turned what could have been a fairly run-of-the-mill monster flick into a good film. It kept you with the action, at ground level with a small group of people you could relate to. As they ran and screamed and attempted to work out what was going on, the camcorder shooting made it a little bit more realistic. The snatches of monster-footage were very interesting, and didn't give enough information to form a cohesive picture of the alien/monster to start picking too many holes in it.

In other ways, I didn't like the camcorder approach. There were moments where I wanted to tell the cameraman to put the camera down and act like a sensible human being. The camera was nearly always at head-height, even when its holder was running, screaming, fighting, climbing and falling. It felt more like a story being told from first-person perspective than a film told through a camcorder. Where most people would have dropped the camera to protect themselves, even temporarily, the camera always showed enough of the action. And no one seemed to mind the camera; they didn't mind bearing their souls in front of it, or the fact that Hud had at least one hand always glued to it.

On balance, I think Cloverfield was a good film. I did enjoy it, but I won't be adding it to my top-ten any time soon. There was a great monster-movie hidden somewhere within an interesting method of story-telling and while I enjoyed it, I was slightly dissatisfied with many of the choices taken through the film. I found the plot on the cheesy-side, and the ending frustrating, but I enjoyed the concept and feel of the movie. If you get a chance, I think it's worth seeing once.

Review of the 2008 film 'City of Ember'

When disaster threatens the world, people survive in the City of Ember, deep underground and powered by a generator that gives light and heat to the city. The first Mayor of Ember is entrusted with a box, that contains instructions about what to do when 200 years are over, and Ember is reaching the end of its intended life. However, the box is lost, and over 200 years since Ember was founded, the people are beginning to run out of stored food, and the generator is dying.

I found the concept behind the film very interesting; Ember itself and the story behind it is a very nice idea. In mood, it reminded me of a cross between two of my favourite children's books. Visually, the make-do-and-mend feel was put across very well. The characters are often wearing threadbare or worn clothes, and all the machinery and buildings look like they are two-hundred years old, run by a society that doesn't have the expertise or resources to maintain them.

In addition, the feel of the society seemed about right. When the children come of age and leave school, they have an 'assignment day' where they do not choose jobs, but rather pick them randomly from a bag. There seems to be a strong community spirit, and for the most part the people seem to band together to make things work in the city. However, there is the normal kind of conflict that you'd expect with people living in close quarters. As a world, I found it worked very well.

The story follows Lina Mayfleet (Saoirse Ronan), a messenger, and Doon Harrow (Harry Treadaway), a pipeworker. When Lina finds the box and realises that they contain instructions about how to leave Ember, she and Doon try to put the torn instructions back together in order to save the people of their city.

Once you get past the stunning visuals, and interesting underlying concepts and society, however, I found City of Ember to be a fun film, but not as special as everything else might have implied. There were a lot of great actors (including Bill Murray, Tim Robbins and Martin Landau), and a lot of good acting, but the main characters didn't hold the plot together as well as I thought they should. Ronan and Treadaway did a very good job of getting the plot across, but I felt they were a little too much the all-American teen to really carry off the steam-punk style film.

The plot was a little thin, and at times predictable. I think the film was aimed at children much younger than I am, and having children as the main character tends to enforce this opinion. I would hope, though, that a film with as much conceptual promise as this one would give a little more to its adult viewers. It seemed to use every conceivable plot 'trick' to get the characters through to the film's conclusion.

Having said that, I did enjoy the film. It was a pleasant, easily watchable film and it was a fun plot, even if I felt it did not quite live up to the brilliant concepts and world. If you have an hour and a half and want something fun to watch, I'd recommend this film, but I wouldn't go into it with your expectations set too high. Although it's visually brilliant, it's a little on the shallow side, and it is probably much better when viewed by people under the age of fourteen.

Review of the 2009 film 'District 9'

Set in Johannesburg, either in the present day or the not too distant future, District 9 is about the aftermath of the arrival of aliens. The race, known as the prawns, arrived on Earth in a mothership, which came to a stop over Johannesburg and stayed there, without moving, for three months until the ship was cut open to reveal a large number of malnourished, leaderless aliens. The aliens were given a temporary home, which became a shanty town for the aliens. Gangs seized on the opportunities that arose, creating new crime, and people became more and more scared of the aliens, until eventually it is decided that they must be relocated outside of Johannesburg. While searching one of the shacks for illegal weapons, Wikus van de Merwe (Sharlto Copley), finds a device, which sprays him with a strange black fluid. Not long after he starts noticing some strange effects, as alien DNA starts to transform him.

There are a lot of things I could say about this film, and it's difficult to know where to start. Firstly, the film is a good science fiction movie. It doesn't explain any of the technology, but while some of it seems outlandish, none of it seems completely implausible. Often the most difficult thing to believe is that the aliens could have made their technology on Earth with their obviously limited resources, and with what is known (or at least assumed) about their societal structure. The aliens are sufficiently alien to seem different and almost terrifying to us. However, they are bipedal humanoids with a similar facial structure, so they have enough in common to be sympathetic characters when the plot requires it.

One of the things I liked, from the science fiction points of view, is that the aliens cannot speak English, and the humans cannot speak their language; both have learned to understand the other, but they lack the vocal devices to produce the alien sounds.

At times the film leaves science fiction in all but weaponry and make-up and becomes an excellent action movie. It is often very gory. In a way this makes it more effective on a visceral level, but in other ways I found it unpleasant and at times it made watching difficult. I wouldn't recommend this films for the faint-hearted, and as one of my friends warned me, I wouldn't take snacks. There are some very good action sequences and fight scenes. The character of Wikus gradually grows throughout the film from slightly gawky bureaucrat to the action hero victim and there is some brilliant acting along the way. The difference between the man that laughs as he finds and aborts a nest of alien eggs, and the person he becomes at the end of the film is marked, and each step of the transition is very well performed.

The film also has a significant social message. It carries many themes, the most noticeable being xenophobia. Setting this film in South Africa was quite brave, almost providing commentary on some of the actual events that occurred in that part of the world. The film manages to evoke considerable sympathy for the aliens, while in places still revealing an understandable human point of view. The message was thought-provoking, but I don't think it over-laboured its points, and it was all the more powerful because it didn't spoon on its social messages. They are there, but the plot is more important, which allows the film to be an entertaining science-fiction/horror movie whilst still exploring some difficult issues.

From start to finish, I think District 9 was a very good film. It was gory, which might put me off watching it again in the immediate future, but it was also very interesting. The science-fiction elements were not as well conceived as some of the societal themes, but it was still a very good science fiction movie. I am not sure I could call it a brilliant movie, but it is a film I might recommend everyone (with a sufficiently strong stomach) see at least once.

Review of 'Inversions' by Iain M Banks

When I struggled through 'Excession' by the same author, a friend who had similarly found Excession difficult, recommended to me that I read Inversions. I am glad I listened to his recommendation. Inversions was a very enjoyable read.

Where other Iain M Banks novels suffer from lack of characterisation, over-verbosity and too much love of AI, Inversions is almost the opposite. To the uninitiated, it would read as a curious fantasy story of mysterious and seemingly unrelated events across two kingdoms. To those in the know, it is a novel about the Culture, in disguise. Told from the point of view of the affected, the meddled-with, Inversions tells two stories. One narrator is apprentice to a Doctor who brings medical knowledge far in advance of what is known at the time. The other tells the story of the bodyguard to another leader of a different regime on the same world.

Usually I am most impressed with Iain M Bank's aliens, and while there was a hint of this in his world-building, all the people in it were very much people. His characterisation was stronger in this novel than I've seen in any of his other science fiction, with the possible exception of 'Consider Phlebas'. The apprentice, Oelph tells his story as loyal servant, loyal apprentice, and as a man who has a great deal of affection for the subject of his narrations. Doctor Vosill herself has a great deal of character; she brings progress and change and controvesial opinions as she acts as physician to the king.

On the other side of the sea, the bodyguard DeWar and the cast of characters in his story, are likewise well-rounded and developed as people. DeWar struck me as a conflicted and fervently loyal man. As his story unfolds, he tells a series of stories that sound remarkably familiar to anyone who knows anything about the Culture. The concubine Perrund, the Protector and his son, all have their own strong personalities, in many different ways. It was easy to follow their stories, and to care about the outcome.

Telling the story from the perspective of those who are being manipulated is an interesting twist, and provided me with the viewpoint of the Culture that I enjoyed from Consider Phlebas. In the earlier work, the Culture was the enemy and it was never made clear whether they were the force for good or evil. Inversions returns to that ambiguity, and allows the knowing reader to enjoy the thought experiments that Vosill and DeWar present.

The characters, the story-telling and the interesting plot intersections and parallels made Inversions a compelling read. It was a lot easier to digest than some of Banks' other stories, and because it was primarily about small groups of people rather than whole civilisations I found myself able to really enjoy it as a science-fiction fantasy crossover story. It wasn't trying so hard to be clever that it forgot to be good, and it wasn't striving so hard for moral discussion that it forgot to be interesting. These things all conspired to make Inversions a brilliant book, with enough depth and plot-interest to keep attention throughout its pages.

Review of the 2009 film 'Public Enemies'

Public Enemies tells the story of the notorious bank robber, John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) and his associates as they win their illicit gains in Chicago in the 30's. At the same time, J. Edgar Hoover is looking for blood, and places Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) in charge of catching Dillinger and his friends.

While I know little of the history surrounding the true story of Dillinger and Purvis, this film had the 'ring of truth' about it, that made me believe in it. There are scenes showing expertly planned jailbreaks, bank robberies, charming villains enjoying their down-time and smooth policemen. It all looked and felt like everything I know of 1930's America, and I'd be happy to believe there is enough of the real history in there that any changes were within poetic license.

From very early on in the film, I found myself rooting for Dillinger, although in essence he was the 'bad guy'. In a way, I was also rooting for Purvis, though I knew that in order for the film to be good cinema, only one of them could win. With each event, I worried, wondering if the end was coming for Dillinger's crime wave. He was a bank robber, and he used people as human shields... but as he did so, he offered a cold hostage his coat, and sang to another hostage in the getaway car.

Johnny Depp has proven to me time and time again that he is a versatile and brilliant actor. His performance as Dillinger did not disappoint me at all. With each turn of events, you could see every facet of the character played out. While he was a violent man, there were also ways in which he was gentlemanly, and Johnny Depp brings both of these sides of the character out with confidence and surety. He especially excelled in showing Dillinger's love for Billie Freschette, but also his carefree attitude, never thinking ahead.

On the other side of the screen, Christian Bale pleasantly surprised me. I have often being underwhelmed by his performances on the big screen, but in Public Enemies he plays the polished policeman well. Playing a character somewhere between the emotionless cleric John Preston of Equilibrium and the vigilante superhero Batman, Bale portrays the single-minded, practical Purvis with keen insight. While grieving for a dead colleague, or staring down the barrel of a gun, Purvis had great screen-presence, and was a believable leader.

Aside from these two stars, there was an excellent supporting cast, which made the whole film immensely watchable and entertaining. All in all, a very well filmed and put-together show.

If I had to make any criticism, it would be that the large cast made it occasionally difficult to follow who was who, especially amongst the people that Dillinger found himself working for. However, this can be said of many films that set out to mirror real-life, which has its own extensive cast. And although I was occasionally lost in the supporting cast, the leading roles strung everything together well enough that in most parts it didn't really matter.

As a welcome break from mediocre action movies and overly depressing dramas, I thoroughly enjoyed Public Enemies.

Review of 'The Handmaid's Tale' by Margaret Atwood

I didn't take English A level myself, but many of my friends did. Through most of the AS year, there were copies of The Handmaid's Tale kicking around the sixth-form common room, and I was always intrigued. Occasionally I'd overhear conversations about the book, scholarly discussions, and the kind of in-depth analysis that put me off English Literature as a subject in the first place. But it sounded interesting, and so I promised to read it on its own terms.

The Handmaid's Tale is a science fiction story, but science fiction is an almost incidental affectation. The book is good science fiction, because the world in which the main character lives is essential to her story. Otherwise, it is purely about the character, who she is, what happens to her, and why she made the choices that she did. The story is set in a future that seems bleak and dark. Women have been segregated into functions, and Offred is a Handmaid; her function is produce offspring for married couples that are otherwise unable. Stripped of her individuality and even her original name, Offred must struggle with her memories and with her knowledge, and with her emotions.

As science fiction, The Handmaid's Tale is a very interesting exercise. The world is so different from that of today, that it is almost inconceivable how it could come about from the current United States. However, as the story progresses this becomes believable, even inevitable. It is a future well told. The narrator reveals snippets of information, very gradually throughout the story. Very little is exposed at any one point, but gradually I got a picture of the world, of the character, of the past that had led to this future.

As Offred is not in a position of knowledge or power, not everything is revealed. This is both brilliant and slightly frustrating. I was devouring each snippet of knowledge, wishing for more. I wanted to know what was going on in the world as a whole; what was happening outside Offred's home city. Throughout, I got the feeling that the author knew and just wasn't telling me... but this in its way is brilliant. The world is so thoroughly conceived that I was convinced that these details existed, but a first-person tale would have to have had a very different narrator to gather all of those details, and then it wouldn't have been a Handmaid's tale at all.

The story follows a character's development, so it doesn't have a single consistent plot stream. The most I could say is that it's a story of Offred's posting with one particular Commander. At some points it seems like a particular story thread is going to open up new opportunities, but while there are many interesting occurrences, there is nothing world-changing in her story. She is there to tell it how it is, living and dealing with a heavily oppressive regime. She is not there to change the world.

I have to say that I was slightly unsure about the ending, or rather the fact that it does not end. Offred's story just stops, and the epilogue explains nothing of what happened to her. In some ways, I find this frustrating. I wanted to know what happened to her, and what became of her. In other ways, the ending would perhaps have been less powerful if it had been more neat. I am unsure. However, in most cases, I think I would prefer a more complete ending, with a little less ambiguity.

Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed The Handmaid's Tale. It was compulsively readable, very easy to read and very well written. I found pages slipping by without effort, which is a very refreshing feeling. Every emotion is conveyed skilfully and powerfully, and at times I felt like I was totally immersed in Offred's world. While I classify it as science fiction, I would by no means limit its readership to science fiction fans. This book is very accessible to all kinds of readers. In fact, it might appeal to non science fiction readers more, because of the way the story is about a single person, in an unremarkable position, struggling in a cruel world.

There is only one novel that I have still loved after tearing it apart and reading it numerous times at school. I would tentatively say that, if I had continued, I would still have loved The Handmaid's Tale. While not my usual kind of ripping yarn, it was a powerful story, brilliantly told. It is definitely added to a list of highly recommended texts.

Review of 'Stranger in a Strange Land' by Robert Heinlein

It's difficult to say how far into the future this is set, and Heinlein cleverly avoids mentioning dates (almost certainly a wise move). In some ways his world is far beyond ours; interplanetary travel, hovering cars, and grass carpets some of the things we can expect. Socially, perhaps, Heinlein is half a step behind our current progression, but it is not so far behind that it rankled. In this future, an exploratory manned mission is sent to Mars with several couples aboard. However, after arriving on Mars they are never heard from again. Many years later, a follow-up expedition is sent to find out what happened to them. Once there they discover the Martians, and they discover the only survivor of the original expedition; a baby born soon after the original crew's arrival on Mars, raised by Martians.

Stranger in a Strange Land is compulsively written, beautifully descriptive and incredibly well-paced. Heinlein reveals his future Earth piece by piece, and unravels his ideas about the Martians and Mike's upbringing equally carefully and gradually. The characters are all believable, from Mike himself as he struggles to understand people, to the people that become his guardians and friends. Everything about the book is incredibly well put together, and has many elements that give it the air of realism that makes it very easy to fully immerse yourself in the book.

The plot seems to split the book into two main sections. The first half sees Mike's arrival from Earth and escape from the confines he is originally found in, into the care of nurse Jill Boardman and lawyer-doctor-writer Jubal Harshaw. They try to teach Mike about the world and the human way, at the same time learning a lot about the Martian way. I thoroughly enjoyed this half of the book, smiling and laughing and feeling along with the characters. The plot was at times intense, at other times carefree, and always expertly crafted.

In the second half, Mike undergoes a (sharp, by human standards) transition into adulthood and the story follows him as he attempts to find his way in the wider world, and show others the Martian way. In this half, Heinlein gets a lot more political, struggling through Mike with religion and world politics. To me, this half felt a little odd; I did not fully comprehend the point of view being put forward, so I found it difficult to roll along with it. As Mike would say, I did not 'grok its fullness'. While it was still very well written, the plot became less intense and more thought-provoking, while the subject matter became a lot more controversial. I began to see why people at the time had sought to suppress the novel.

Part of me thinks that the novel would have been complete had it finished at the end of the first half, but in another way it needed it. Either way, the sudden change in mood and energy half way through left me lurching slightly. I was not entirely comfortable with the subject matter in the second half of the book, which made it more difficult to enjoy. However, throughout, it remains well-written and everything is excellently described. Only the ending seemed a little short, with a couple of loose ends not quite tied up as I would have liked.

All of the characters grow and change throughout the novel, especially Mike, and his friends. The only character that doesn't seem to change dramatically between start and finish is Jubal Harshaw, who is already old, set in his ways, and wise. For me he was a brilliant character, able to play devils advocate for any position and understand things always from all points of view. This quality is something I strive for (and usually fail) for myself, so seeing it so well-done in a character on the page was wonderful. Jubal's point of view made it easier to enter into the story more fully, and for that I loved him.

Stranger in a Strange land is a long book. It took me a very long time to read, mostly because of limited time available for me to devote to it. However, I think it was worth all the time it took to read it. Perhaps not for the faint-hearted, but definitely a good read. I've heard that others of Heinlein's books are better, and I am looking forward to reading these enthusiastically, because if they are as good throughout as the first half of Stranger, I feel I will begin to fully grok how Heinlein worked his way into the ranks of science fiction masters, controversial political opinions and all.

Review of the 2009 film 'Coraline'

It seems I'm developing a habit for mainly seeing Neil Gaiman's works on screen. Aside from Stardust and the first of the Sandman comics, I have read very little of the author's works... but this is the second of his films that I have seen at the cinema. It seems his works lend themselves well to the big screen.

I saw Coraline in 3D... so I'll talk about that, once I examine the film on its merits.

On moving to a new house in the country, Coraline Jones feels she will not like it much. In her neighbours she finds some amusement and eccentricity, but the only child her age she finds annoying, and her parents are too busy to entertain. In a search of the house, however, she comes across a small door in the wall. Behind is apparently bricked up, until she is led back there in the middle of the night and finds herself in another version of her house, with her Other Mother and Other Father, and exciting wonders created for her. It all seems amazing, but as you might expect there is more to it than meets the eye and it's all a bit too good to be true.

I was intrigued by the plot and swept along by it as I watched. I was not surprised to hear later that the book on which this film was based has often been compared to Alice In Wonderland (my initial thoughts were Through the Looking Glass, but the point stands). Many of the same themes were in the film as Coraline explores the new world and tries to find her way home when she discovers the truth. However, Coraline is a lot darker than Alice, and while Coraline even has her own version of the Cheshire cat, the darkness in the other world, and the threat that the Other Mother eventually possesses is quite different to Alice's own travails. The plot was rich and interesting. The themes covered many of the problems that children might face after a move; loneliness and looking for adventure and new friends, as well as some of the more general emotional troubles a child with busy parents might face. As Coraline learns and grows through the film, I grew to really care for her character, and it was a very nice progression.

In pacing the film slipped somewhat. The main part is wonderful for creating interest and suspense, while the latter part the film feels somewhat rushed, with the ending reached all too soon. It felt almost like a mini-adventure tacked on the end, except for the way in which it resolved the plot.

The film was brought to life in brilliant stop-motion animation. It was very pretty, although stylistically I felt it was trying a little to hard to mimic Tim Burton's unique style of animation and modelling, which it did not quite achieve. However, it was still beautiful and an interesting and quirky style that brought the surreal plot and characters to life.

As a film and as a story I would very much recommend Coraline to viewers of all ages as an occasionally creepy, ever-so-slightly scary, very entertaining film.

To the 3D aspect of the film, then...

Well, to be honest, if I could have found a showing in 2D I would have seen that instead. The 3D thing, while interesting, strikes me as a bit of a gimmick and doesn't really add anything to the film itself. I'm glad I went to see one film in 3D, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it. Some people have said they found the 3D disorienting. While I did, I did find some of the more gratuitous 3D shots a little strange. There were lots of shots of things done purely to make the most of 3D filming, whereas for the majority of the film the extra depth did very little. I'll be interested to see how the 3D thing goes, and as the technology improves I expect it'll become even more common. However, I was not particularly impressed by it, except from the position of scientific interest.

Review of the 2009 film 'Star Trek'

It was obvious from the start of this film that it wasn't the same Star Trek that I grew up with. If I'm honest, when I saw the trailer I thought that they had made Star Trek into something alien and wrong, and just given the characters the same names.

I wasn't entirely incorrect in this, but I wasn't entirely right either. There was lots of hat-tipping towards the fans of the original series (some would say too much), but in many other ways the characters and people were completely different than their original counter-parts. Perhaps they were striving hard to find a balance, and in some ways they made it, in other ways they did not.

The plot of the film follows Kirk and the other characters from the original Star Trek series as they end their time at the Star Fleet academy and arrive on the Enterprise under Captain Pike, ready to embark on a rescue mission. Kirk finds himself up against many hardships, including the logical, by-the-book Spock as he fights to forge a name for himself.

While the plot spans the boundary between action-adventure and science fiction, it seemed to me that it was veering a little more towards action, with the science fiction played down except in as far as the technology available acted as a useful plot-device. There was some overuse of the 'Character Shield' however, and from quite early on you could begin to see which character was going to survive the story.

As far as the characters go, I felt that some of them captured the essence better than others. Kirk had much of the same fearless attitude as his original counter-part, and he certainly had the same approach to hand-to-hand combat. He had a lot of the cocky youth about him, but he also had the air of the effortless genius, which I think was what they were aiming for with the impassioned Kirk. His relationship with Bones McCoy was beautiful from the start, and there was very good onscreen chemistry between the two. Bones himself did a very good job of straddling the boundary between the old character and the new. He had the same variable temperament, and I loved his portrayal. I believe Bones actually captured something very important and developed on it from the original character. While he had relatively less screen-time than Spock or Kirk, I loved every minute of it.

The start of Spock's shaky relationship with Kirk was an interesting twist on the original version of events. While, as I have said, the film-makers made it very obvious from the start that they were moving away from the original canon, the Spock-Kirk relationship had to be strong, and it was. Starting antagonistically, the two have to come around to the mutual respect and admiration that was present in the series, regardless of canon. Both actors managed this admirably.

With Uhura they tried to improve the original character by making it clear that she had a well-defined job role and necessary skills. However, in many ways, she was still the bridge-ornament that the original character had been, and was the only candidate for the shoe-horned romance, which made her a weaker character in my opinion. In many ways she was even more lacking than Nichelle Nicholls' Uhura, because the original character was a black woman was appearing in a position of command on a television program in the sixties. In those days, any presence was an improvement on what had gone before. Nowadays, I think they could have gone a little further. While she was a very good actor, and portrayed the character she was given very well, I was somewhat disappointed by the conventional Uhura. The shoe-horned romance also annoyed me for several reasons, but I'm attempting not to spoil the details for those who have not yet had a chance to see the film.

Scotty was played by Simon Pegg. He captured the humorous side of the original scotsman very well, but in some ways seemed to miss some of the original's professionalism and scottish darkness; in many ways Pegg's performance turned Scotty into something of a pastiche, and while his comic relief was well-received, I cannot say I was one-hundred percent convinced by it. Chekov and Sulu were both brilliantly acted, but as with Uhura I felt that while the original characters did a lot for multiculturalism, the new characters almost held it back. Chekov's accent is made a source of comedy, although the character is brilliantly intelligent and stands out despite his relatively minor role. At another point, I was very disappointed that in a combat situation Sulu pulled out a sword to use, both because it stereotyped the character, and because in the future I'd expect some other weapon to be far more effective.

Overall, however, Star Trek was a good action movie, and a fair Space Opera. It was not the original Star Trek, and separated itself both in canon and mood, but it was an entertaining film. It had enough to keep the older fans amused and also to encourage a new audience, and as such I will recommend it. I will be interested to see if this is kept up in any future sequels, if future sequels occur.