Since I started writing reviews, Martina Cole keeps coming back into the frame, because of the collection I bought all those years ago. I cannot in good faith give them away until I have read each book. Now I come to the penultimate book in the original set that I bought, and I find myself in the position again of reviewing a book I didn't enjoy, and trying to review it as objectively as possible. So here goes.
George Markham is a seriously disturbed man that starts out looking at BDSM pornography and ends up roaming the streets raping and murdering a string of young women. Kate Burrows is the detective inspector trying to find him. Patrick Kelly is a local hard-man, and father of one of the victims of Markham's killing spree. Patrick and Kate meet in the course of the case and start to fall in love over the background of tragedy, but love between a borderline villain and a senior police officer would be paved with troubles, even if there wasn't a vicious murderer on the loose.
The pacing of this novel is much better than of any other Martina Cole novel I have read. Rather than a biographical life story of a character embroiled in crime, this is a police investigation drama, where the reader has the advantage of knowing from the start who did it. The tension of the investigation mounts steadily over the course of the novel, as the police resort to more and more drastic methods of finding their man.
George Markham should be an interesting character, but aside from feeling a distaste for his views about women, I couldn't find him at all hateful or sympathetic. He wasn't real enough; he was another bland character brought to the pages. I couldn't believe in him, even as a psychopath. It was very disappointing. Cole tries to make him sympathetic by telling some of backstory and childhood, with his overbearing, controlling mother, but I couldn't believe in the mother either, so I didn't feel sorry for him... I didn't feel very much at all.
Psychologically, Cole's serial killer was slightly off. Markham starts out by watching snuff films, and acting as a peeping tom. Peeping toms do sometimes turn into rapists, but they usually do so by breaking into houses. Markham's first victim is killed in the woods near her house. Admittedly not many people will know the psychology of serial killers when reading these books, but often the devil is in the detail and here I was let down.
Detective Inspector Kate Burrows is a better character to me; she is a single mother living with her daughter and mother, trying to make ends meet. She loves her job, and has strict moral values. Theoretically she should be quite likeable in her actions as well; she has to deal with some sexism in the workplace, and keep a professional attitude when her home life is falling apart. However, again, Cole's writing style puts me off all of her characters. Cole states outright the character traits she thinks her characters have, without letting the reader come to any of their own conclusions.
Kate's relationship with Patrick Kelly is almost believable, but they both have fiery tempers, and start monologuing at each other at the drop of a hat. The constant repetition of arguments and heart-to-hearts and soul-seeking on the part of both of these characters gets very irritating, and with every rehash of a sentence to the effect of “no matter what he did, Kate still wanted him,” makes me lose respect for the character and the author in the same moment.
All or most of my gripes with Martina Cole come to her writing style. She switches point-of-view repeatedly in the middle of scenes, and she tells detailed stories about characters that will only be in the book for one scene in an attempt to make you feel sorry for them when their ends befall them. Why not let you feel sympathy through the family that have been left behind? Cole leaves very little about her characters to the imagination, but an awful lot about the places and rooms.
As before, I am finding a lot to criticise about this book, and little to compliment. However, after reading eight Martina Cole novels, I find myself still unable to enjoy them. If you can, then you will probably enjoy 'The LadyKiller' but I did not. I'm afraid I have failed in objectivity.
Sunday, 11 January 2009
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Review of the 2004 film 'The Butterfly Effect'
The butterfly effect, also known as chaos theory, states that a small event (such as a butterfly flapping its wings) has knock on effects that can have very large-scale consequences. As a child, Evan has blackouts, with large hunks of time he cannot remember. A psychologist suggests that he should keep a journal, in order to jog his memory about the events. Later in his life, he re-reads the journals and finds that he can remember the lost sections of his memory. Soon afterwards he finds that he can change what happens.
Conceptually, this film is very interesting. By changing very small events from his past, Evan has huge effects on his 'present'. His future keeps changing, he completely alters the outlook for himself and his closest friends. Sometimes things work out better in some ways, but usually they end up worse in others. By trying to 'fix' one aspect of his present, he 'breaks' another.
In execution, this isn't a bad film; it is quite well acted, especially by the younger actors. I have often said that American children lose their ability to act once they hit puberty, and the adult (or rather late teenage) actors seem to prove this somewhat, although the leading lady, Kayleigh (Amy Smart) does a very good job of portraying her various different possible futures throughout the course of the film. The younger self of Evan and Tommy were definitely better than than their adult counterparts, however. The special effects used are understated but very effective, when they are used; more fancy cinematography than computer generated effects, but there are some clever moments that meant that the style of filming carried the plot well.
The reasons I didn't like this film were more to do with the bleakness of the whole thing. There are odd moments of romance and joy, but they are all quickly overshadowed by depression and destruction. Evan begins to realise that there is no way to make all of his friends have a happy ending, from the start that he has. It isn't one of those sad films that you enjoy because of the deep emotion, and there isn't enough action to make this into one of the bleak but dramatic ripping yarns. The film was impossible to 'enjoy', because it was so dark, and it wasn't quite good enough to forgive this, and right through the end it was incredibly bleak.
Perhaps the reason that I didn't enjoy this film was because of the time I watched it (late night on boxing day)... but I didn't particularly like it, and I didn't find it as gripping or interesting as the concept of the plot would have suggested. It was a very clever film, and thus it's not a film I would encourage people to universally dismiss. It wasn't a bad film, but as a subjective viewer, I didn't enjoy it. If you tend not to like dark, 'think' films, then I would recommend you find something less depressing to spend your time on.
Conceptually, this film is very interesting. By changing very small events from his past, Evan has huge effects on his 'present'. His future keeps changing, he completely alters the outlook for himself and his closest friends. Sometimes things work out better in some ways, but usually they end up worse in others. By trying to 'fix' one aspect of his present, he 'breaks' another.
In execution, this isn't a bad film; it is quite well acted, especially by the younger actors. I have often said that American children lose their ability to act once they hit puberty, and the adult (or rather late teenage) actors seem to prove this somewhat, although the leading lady, Kayleigh (Amy Smart) does a very good job of portraying her various different possible futures throughout the course of the film. The younger self of Evan and Tommy were definitely better than than their adult counterparts, however. The special effects used are understated but very effective, when they are used; more fancy cinematography than computer generated effects, but there are some clever moments that meant that the style of filming carried the plot well.
The reasons I didn't like this film were more to do with the bleakness of the whole thing. There are odd moments of romance and joy, but they are all quickly overshadowed by depression and destruction. Evan begins to realise that there is no way to make all of his friends have a happy ending, from the start that he has. It isn't one of those sad films that you enjoy because of the deep emotion, and there isn't enough action to make this into one of the bleak but dramatic ripping yarns. The film was impossible to 'enjoy', because it was so dark, and it wasn't quite good enough to forgive this, and right through the end it was incredibly bleak.
Perhaps the reason that I didn't enjoy this film was because of the time I watched it (late night on boxing day)... but I didn't particularly like it, and I didn't find it as gripping or interesting as the concept of the plot would have suggested. It was a very clever film, and thus it's not a film I would encourage people to universally dismiss. It wasn't a bad film, but as a subjective viewer, I didn't enjoy it. If you tend not to like dark, 'think' films, then I would recommend you find something less depressing to spend your time on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)