Your enjoyment of this film will depend almost entirely on your attitude when you enter the cinema. If you want a classy action drama, or expect even a modicum of self-respect, you will be very disappointed. If you go in expecting a very silly but entertaining action film, you are likely to enjoy this film immensely.
I went to the cinema with the latter attitude. After seeing the first two films (albeit a while ago now), I expected a ridiculous, but amusing plot and lots of action. The film was no more far-fetched than the first two films, just as funny and just as action packed. I came out of the movie feeling suitably entertained. It wasn’t the best film of the century, but I think it achieved its aims, and I certainly enjoyed it.
Rick O’Connell (Brendan Fraser) is the bored, retired hero, who can fight his way out of so many different scenarios. Evy (Maria Bello), his wife, is equally bored with their retirement, and is trying in vain to write a sequel to her two famously successful novels; the Mummy and the Mummy Returns. Meanwhile, Evy’s brother, Jonathan (John Hannah) has a night-club in Shanghai, and their son Alex (Luke Ford) is also in China, raising the mummy of the movie: the Chinese Emperor (who incidentally has superpowers), played by Jet Li. Isabella Leong also joins the cast as Lin, charged with protecting the Emperor’s tomb, her job later becomes to chase the Emperor with a cursed weapon: the only one that can kill the undead Emperor.
All these characters are superb, well acted creations that were believable in their roles without taking themselves too seriously. They made the witty one-liners with a straight face, but the characters seem to realise that they’re in a movie at the right moments, so that it doesn’t become melodramatic. The onscreen interaction between all the characters is seamless. While there was never any question of realism, the characters made it seem almost plausible. I also liked the fact that while Evy and Rick have been married for quite some time, they are still very much in love. They took their assignment because they were bored of mundane life, but the excitement wasn’t necessary for renewing their love. It was a nice touch.
The plot erred on the side of the predictable: at any point you can tell immediately the outcome of their current predicament, just by realising you’re not far enough into the film for them to win yet. However, you can still be emotionally invested enough in the fantastic characters to actually care what happens to them, and I was still engrossed in the action, wondering about exactly how they would get out of whatever scrape the plot had put them in.
The film moves too fast for you to really care that it doesn’t make that much sense. The characters and the constant action kept me entertained without getting too repetitive, and I didn’t mind the predictability; perhaps there was something behind Brendan Fraser’s eyes that let me know that the character also knew the plot was predictable. He didn’t care, in fact he seemed to be having a lot of fun… which made it more amusing to watch.
I would have preferred if the actress that played Evelyn in the first two films could have returned, although Maria Bello did do a great job, and she had very good onscreen chemistry with Brendan Fraser. I also found the special effects used when the Emperor was cursed hilarious: it looked something like a man made out of chocolate. These are my two main criticisms.
This film probably got bad reviews because the critics have been to so many action films that they realise they’re mostly the same. They are probably bored by any film that doesn’t cross lines into new areas of innovation and excitement. I’m not a professional critic: I’m just a normal moviegoer, with a love of silly movies. In a book, I might expect better… but I very much enjoyed the Mummy III. It was never meant to be taken seriously, and as such, it is a very entertaining film.
Monday, 11 August 2008
Friday, 1 August 2008
Review of the 2008 film ‘The Dark Knight’
The latest batman film follows on from the deeply broody gothic horror prequel ‘Batman Begins,’ leaving the old image of camp, flashy Batman movies far behind. Christian Bale plays the gravelly-voiced hero, and his more mellifluous alter ego, Bruce Wayne, as he battles his evil anarchist nemesis, The Joker (Heath Ledger).
I will immediately state the one thing I loved most about this film. Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker captures the insanity, psychopathy and genius of the role perfectly, and his anarchistic actions make for a disturbing, but highly skilled performance. The Joker has a shrewd mind and plenty of confidence, without cockiness. He always has a way out, which makes him a terrifying villain. The voice and facial expressions that Ledger gives to this character show an almost reptilian coldness, and his constant lip-smacking is disgusting, and perfect, all at the same time. Ledger’s Joker is one of the best antagonists I have seen in a very long while.
But Ledger is just the best of a brilliant bunch. Christian Bale acts rich jet setter and mysterious vigilante with equal competence, maintaining his acting standards from ‘Batman Begins’. Gary Oldman’s quiet, contemplative police officer, Gordon, says all that he needs to say, without needing to bully. Oldman brings across integrity, with Gordon’s understanding that while Batman’s vigilante justice is not pretty, it is sometimes necessary. Aaron Eckhart plays the honest good-guy, Harvey Dent; the prosecutor who’s determined to put the villains behind bars, and make sure that Gotham no longer need the vigilante. Harvey has some tough times in the film, and from start to finish, Eckhart’s performance is believable, strong and evocative.
Then there are the less major roles, played by equally leading actors. Michael Caine returns as faithful butler, Alfred. With steadfast loyalty and quirky (very British) humour, Alfred plays guide, conscience and aide. Even with limited screen time, Michael Caine has excellent screen presence. Then there’s Lucius Fox, played by Morgan Freeman, another fantastic actor playing a minor role. The intelligent manager acts as guiding hand and moral voice for Batman and Bruce Wayne, and I don’t ever recall seeing Morgan Freeman act anything less than brilliantly.
Unfortunately I have to say that the female actors in this film were either less inspiring or simply outclassed. I was not overly impressed by Maggie Gyllenhaal or Monique Curnen, although both gave competent performances… they were simply in a movie with too much male talent.
The characters of this film were good enough to make a slightly meandering plot highly watchable. But while the plot is occasionally haphazard, in a way it mirrors the Joker’s desire for anarchy as he causes havoc in Gotham. My major criticism of the plot is that there is little by way of an overriding arc, and the movie seems almost split in two by one scene. The borderline was slightly too abrupt, so that it seemed that the plot was over, but the movie showed no signs of finishing.
However, haphazard and chaotic as the overall plot was, the individual plot elements captured some incredible scenes of fear and tension. Many of these sequences would have made excellent shorts on their own. They also show people forced into making difficult choices. The Joker’s calculated scheming makes people show the horrible side of human nature, as well as the more hopeful one.
In terms of filming, many of the visuals in this film are stunning, if a little gratuitous. Also, much to my relief, the director rediscovered the steady-cam for fight scenes rather than the shaky camera-work that I found so annoying in ‘Batman Begins.’ The fistfights are short and punctuated, with ‘kapow’ ‘wop’ style effects, making them more realistic than protracted scenes that are common in other action dramas. The pyrotechnic effects are truly explosive (if you’ll pardon the pun)… I could argue this as a good point or a bad point, depending on personal tastes. For me, there was a little too much ‘boom.’ There are also some horrific injuries on display in this film, perhaps not for the squeamish. Frankly, I was slightly concerned that this film was dubbed ‘12A’ and not the ‘15’ or ‘18’ that would have been appropriate.
‘The Dark Knight’ doesn’t have the same broody gothic mood as ‘Batman Begins,’ and it could be argued that Heath Ledger’s performance carries the movie against improbable odds. It could also be argued that a more scissor-happy editor could have improved the film with no ill effects, or that the direction could have done with a little more consistency of atmosphere. However, all in all, The Dark Knight is an entertaining, if highly disturbing, action movie. The characters make it all worth watching, carrying a plot that would not carry itself. I wouldn’t recommend it for children, but if you enjoy the darker side of action movies, you will probably like The Dark Knight.
I will immediately state the one thing I loved most about this film. Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker captures the insanity, psychopathy and genius of the role perfectly, and his anarchistic actions make for a disturbing, but highly skilled performance. The Joker has a shrewd mind and plenty of confidence, without cockiness. He always has a way out, which makes him a terrifying villain. The voice and facial expressions that Ledger gives to this character show an almost reptilian coldness, and his constant lip-smacking is disgusting, and perfect, all at the same time. Ledger’s Joker is one of the best antagonists I have seen in a very long while.
But Ledger is just the best of a brilliant bunch. Christian Bale acts rich jet setter and mysterious vigilante with equal competence, maintaining his acting standards from ‘Batman Begins’. Gary Oldman’s quiet, contemplative police officer, Gordon, says all that he needs to say, without needing to bully. Oldman brings across integrity, with Gordon’s understanding that while Batman’s vigilante justice is not pretty, it is sometimes necessary. Aaron Eckhart plays the honest good-guy, Harvey Dent; the prosecutor who’s determined to put the villains behind bars, and make sure that Gotham no longer need the vigilante. Harvey has some tough times in the film, and from start to finish, Eckhart’s performance is believable, strong and evocative.
Then there are the less major roles, played by equally leading actors. Michael Caine returns as faithful butler, Alfred. With steadfast loyalty and quirky (very British) humour, Alfred plays guide, conscience and aide. Even with limited screen time, Michael Caine has excellent screen presence. Then there’s Lucius Fox, played by Morgan Freeman, another fantastic actor playing a minor role. The intelligent manager acts as guiding hand and moral voice for Batman and Bruce Wayne, and I don’t ever recall seeing Morgan Freeman act anything less than brilliantly.
Unfortunately I have to say that the female actors in this film were either less inspiring or simply outclassed. I was not overly impressed by Maggie Gyllenhaal or Monique Curnen, although both gave competent performances… they were simply in a movie with too much male talent.
The characters of this film were good enough to make a slightly meandering plot highly watchable. But while the plot is occasionally haphazard, in a way it mirrors the Joker’s desire for anarchy as he causes havoc in Gotham. My major criticism of the plot is that there is little by way of an overriding arc, and the movie seems almost split in two by one scene. The borderline was slightly too abrupt, so that it seemed that the plot was over, but the movie showed no signs of finishing.
However, haphazard and chaotic as the overall plot was, the individual plot elements captured some incredible scenes of fear and tension. Many of these sequences would have made excellent shorts on their own. They also show people forced into making difficult choices. The Joker’s calculated scheming makes people show the horrible side of human nature, as well as the more hopeful one.
In terms of filming, many of the visuals in this film are stunning, if a little gratuitous. Also, much to my relief, the director rediscovered the steady-cam for fight scenes rather than the shaky camera-work that I found so annoying in ‘Batman Begins.’ The fistfights are short and punctuated, with ‘kapow’ ‘wop’ style effects, making them more realistic than protracted scenes that are common in other action dramas. The pyrotechnic effects are truly explosive (if you’ll pardon the pun)… I could argue this as a good point or a bad point, depending on personal tastes. For me, there was a little too much ‘boom.’ There are also some horrific injuries on display in this film, perhaps not for the squeamish. Frankly, I was slightly concerned that this film was dubbed ‘12A’ and not the ‘15’ or ‘18’ that would have been appropriate.
‘The Dark Knight’ doesn’t have the same broody gothic mood as ‘Batman Begins,’ and it could be argued that Heath Ledger’s performance carries the movie against improbable odds. It could also be argued that a more scissor-happy editor could have improved the film with no ill effects, or that the direction could have done with a little more consistency of atmosphere. However, all in all, The Dark Knight is an entertaining, if highly disturbing, action movie. The characters make it all worth watching, carrying a plot that would not carry itself. I wouldn’t recommend it for children, but if you enjoy the darker side of action movies, you will probably like The Dark Knight.
Tuesday, 29 July 2008
Review of ‘I Am Legend’ by Richard Matheson
It is the fault of writers like Richard Matheson that the vampire genre of horror novels became outmoded and cliché. But I cannot dislike him for that, because with ‘I Am Legend,’ Richard has done what I so love, in creating a cross-genre novel. Straddling horror and science fiction, I Am Legend tells the tale of Robert Neville, the last living man on Earth, when a plague has caused the spread of vampirism throughout the whole of humankind.
While I was constantly aware that, at the time, vampires had not been done to death, I always had it in the back of my mind that, whenever I read anything about what publishers want, they always say ‘no vampires’. Writing in the 50’s, Matheson was not to know the difficulty that modern authors would face when trying to bring an original slant to the vampire story. He had only Dracula, and one or two others, to draw on. It is rather amusing to think that, today, Matheson would probably not have got this book published, especially not as his first novel.
I am Legend contains many of the standard vampire myths, including the fear of mirrors, the cross, garlic. At the beginning it seems that the science fiction element is missing, and it concentrates on the horror. It paints a tale of loneliness, of survival, of one man’s struggle to come to terms with a world that has become completely alien to him. Robert Neville is the face of humanity in this story. He has found some solace in routine, and in hunting by day, killing the living dead that walk at night. He struggles with his loneliness, he seeks comfort in his whiskey, he spends months tortured by the nightly shouts of vampires, especially the voice of a vampire that was, in life, his friend.
Over the course of the novel, Neville explores the nature of the vampire. Here is where the story becomes science fiction, leaving behind the horror-story. With halting steps, Neville investigates using the tools left over from the fall of society. Sometimes I found the ‘scientific’ explanations for the vampire myth to be somewhat weak. I was not sure how much was intended to sound weak, perhaps pointing out that Neville has learned all he has from books, and has little knowledge of scientific methodology. He is, perhaps, making most of it up as he goes along. However, a lot of what is explained sounds plausible. I found myself wondering if Matheson himself believed in vampires, or wanted to, and was trying to find ways to explain all the common vampire mythologies.
The modern approach to similar vampire stories seems to be to ignore those parts of the vampire myth that are based in superstition: the cross and mirrors, are conveniently disregarded, except in the rare story where vampires are demonic, rather than viral in nature. Matheson’s explanations draw on a variety of scientific disciplines, none of which sit entirely comfortably on my scientific shoulders. I am not a biologist, and I have no knowledge of bacteriology or physiology, so I could not speak to the rigour of his methods, or the truth in his explanations. But, from a scientific gut feeling, some worked and some didn’t.
Again I come back to the fact that this was written in the 1950’s. Perhaps Matheson had researched as rigorously as he could, knew all their was to know, and to people, even scientists, in the 50’s it all sounded perfectly reasonable. I would like to think so. And even if that isn’t true, it doesn’t matter. Because at its core, I Am Legend is a fantastic story. Neville was a stunningly crafted character, resilient but astoundingly human, with the incredible desire just to survive that many would lack in a similar circumstance. He is curious and inquisitive and he demonstrates the ability to adapt to the harshest of circumstance.
The writing is carefully crafted. Small details that seem to be almost incidental in the story come back again, with significance. I am Legend has barely a wasted word, which is a wonderful relief after reading verbose and poorly edited works of more modern fiction. It flips between anxious intensity and near-despair, amusement and raw survival instinct.
Despite my scientific scepticism, I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and towards the end it was more and more difficult to put it down. This book would appeal equally to readers of horror and readers of SF. It is another title well deserving of the honoured classification of ‘SF Masterwork’.
While I was constantly aware that, at the time, vampires had not been done to death, I always had it in the back of my mind that, whenever I read anything about what publishers want, they always say ‘no vampires’. Writing in the 50’s, Matheson was not to know the difficulty that modern authors would face when trying to bring an original slant to the vampire story. He had only Dracula, and one or two others, to draw on. It is rather amusing to think that, today, Matheson would probably not have got this book published, especially not as his first novel.
I am Legend contains many of the standard vampire myths, including the fear of mirrors, the cross, garlic. At the beginning it seems that the science fiction element is missing, and it concentrates on the horror. It paints a tale of loneliness, of survival, of one man’s struggle to come to terms with a world that has become completely alien to him. Robert Neville is the face of humanity in this story. He has found some solace in routine, and in hunting by day, killing the living dead that walk at night. He struggles with his loneliness, he seeks comfort in his whiskey, he spends months tortured by the nightly shouts of vampires, especially the voice of a vampire that was, in life, his friend.
Over the course of the novel, Neville explores the nature of the vampire. Here is where the story becomes science fiction, leaving behind the horror-story. With halting steps, Neville investigates using the tools left over from the fall of society. Sometimes I found the ‘scientific’ explanations for the vampire myth to be somewhat weak. I was not sure how much was intended to sound weak, perhaps pointing out that Neville has learned all he has from books, and has little knowledge of scientific methodology. He is, perhaps, making most of it up as he goes along. However, a lot of what is explained sounds plausible. I found myself wondering if Matheson himself believed in vampires, or wanted to, and was trying to find ways to explain all the common vampire mythologies.
The modern approach to similar vampire stories seems to be to ignore those parts of the vampire myth that are based in superstition: the cross and mirrors, are conveniently disregarded, except in the rare story where vampires are demonic, rather than viral in nature. Matheson’s explanations draw on a variety of scientific disciplines, none of which sit entirely comfortably on my scientific shoulders. I am not a biologist, and I have no knowledge of bacteriology or physiology, so I could not speak to the rigour of his methods, or the truth in his explanations. But, from a scientific gut feeling, some worked and some didn’t.
Again I come back to the fact that this was written in the 1950’s. Perhaps Matheson had researched as rigorously as he could, knew all their was to know, and to people, even scientists, in the 50’s it all sounded perfectly reasonable. I would like to think so. And even if that isn’t true, it doesn’t matter. Because at its core, I Am Legend is a fantastic story. Neville was a stunningly crafted character, resilient but astoundingly human, with the incredible desire just to survive that many would lack in a similar circumstance. He is curious and inquisitive and he demonstrates the ability to adapt to the harshest of circumstance.
The writing is carefully crafted. Small details that seem to be almost incidental in the story come back again, with significance. I am Legend has barely a wasted word, which is a wonderful relief after reading verbose and poorly edited works of more modern fiction. It flips between anxious intensity and near-despair, amusement and raw survival instinct.
Despite my scientific scepticism, I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and towards the end it was more and more difficult to put it down. This book would appeal equally to readers of horror and readers of SF. It is another title well deserving of the honoured classification of ‘SF Masterwork’.
Saturday, 26 July 2008
Review of the 2008 film ‘Wall-E’
Wall-E is an adorable, heart-warming story about a robot. It is also a thought-provoking science fiction story about the current environmental and ecological crises that we are facing as a species. In the future, Earth is a glorified rubbish tip, and the company that seems to run most of the world develops the ‘Wall-E’ class of robots to clean up, while most, if not all, humankind leaves on a space ship on a five-year luxury cruise. However, something goes wrong and 700 years later, only one Wall-E robot remains functional, and humankind is still in space.
The first part of the film has very little dialogue, and yet the robots in it, Wall-e and Eve, are incredibly expressive in their own way. The toils of little Wall-e as he struggles to come to terms with his own personality, his loneliness, and his sudden lack of loneliness is remarkably well described throughout the film. In some ways, the robots are much more expressive than the human characters.
While our little robot has spent 700 years cleaning up Earth as best he can, and collecting such trinkets as he sees fit, humankind has taken a downturn. The inhabitants of the spaceship live in hover chairs, eating food that comes in cups. They are all overweight blobs, communicating to each other through heads-up display, and very rarely actually taking note of what is around them. 700 years has left humanity in a rather sorry state, with robots to cater to their every whim, even walking seems an unfamiliar concept.
As the plot progresses we see Wall-e’s personality growing, and we see him gradually opening peoples eyes, affecting them for the better. Between the Captain of the spaceship and two passers-by that Wall-e happens to ‘bring to life’ we see the film’s world explored, and we see the vicious circles that lead down that path. We also see the changes that bring hope and encouragement, with some restoration of the faith in human nature.
Wall-E is a kid’s film. The emotions of characters have to be made plain, and the explanations have to be clear, for the younger viewers to understand. Younger viewers will also appreciate the chase-scenes, the cleaning robot that constantly chases after trails of mud left by Wall-e’s tracks, and the struggle of our human and robot protagonists against the rigid and unmoving ‘autopilot’.
But Wall-E is also one of those rare gems: a kids' film that also has a lot in it for adults. From humour that steps sometimes beyond what most young children will grasp, to underlying messages that are more disturbing to adults than they are to children, everyone can learn from Wall-E. And within the framework of a post-apocalyptic world, we are told a funny, endearing story about a robot that has developed sentience. It is witty, it is lovely, and it tells a story in fantastic style. The lessons are subtly driven home: they are taken-as-read to the extent that the plot can be enjoyed without feeling beaten down by the force of the warnings and moral debates the subject matter should raise.
One question I would have for the makers of film is why did Wall-e survive, but not all his other companions? Throughout, our little protagonist strikes the viewer as resourceful, intelligent and almost indestructible, but it is unclear why he realised this potential while his companions fell by the wayside. It is also never made clear exactly what global crisis left the world as uninhabitable as it eventually is.
In the end, you have to come back to the explanation of ‘it’s a kids film, and there isn’t enough time for all the explanations’. However, what it deals with, it deals with spectacularly well. The love story, the adventure story and the drama mesh seamlessly into a beautiful work of animation and a film that both adults and children can enjoy to the fullest extent. If you haven’t seen it yet, do. I thoroughly recommend it.
The first part of the film has very little dialogue, and yet the robots in it, Wall-e and Eve, are incredibly expressive in their own way. The toils of little Wall-e as he struggles to come to terms with his own personality, his loneliness, and his sudden lack of loneliness is remarkably well described throughout the film. In some ways, the robots are much more expressive than the human characters.
While our little robot has spent 700 years cleaning up Earth as best he can, and collecting such trinkets as he sees fit, humankind has taken a downturn. The inhabitants of the spaceship live in hover chairs, eating food that comes in cups. They are all overweight blobs, communicating to each other through heads-up display, and very rarely actually taking note of what is around them. 700 years has left humanity in a rather sorry state, with robots to cater to their every whim, even walking seems an unfamiliar concept.
As the plot progresses we see Wall-e’s personality growing, and we see him gradually opening peoples eyes, affecting them for the better. Between the Captain of the spaceship and two passers-by that Wall-e happens to ‘bring to life’ we see the film’s world explored, and we see the vicious circles that lead down that path. We also see the changes that bring hope and encouragement, with some restoration of the faith in human nature.
Wall-E is a kid’s film. The emotions of characters have to be made plain, and the explanations have to be clear, for the younger viewers to understand. Younger viewers will also appreciate the chase-scenes, the cleaning robot that constantly chases after trails of mud left by Wall-e’s tracks, and the struggle of our human and robot protagonists against the rigid and unmoving ‘autopilot’.
But Wall-E is also one of those rare gems: a kids' film that also has a lot in it for adults. From humour that steps sometimes beyond what most young children will grasp, to underlying messages that are more disturbing to adults than they are to children, everyone can learn from Wall-E. And within the framework of a post-apocalyptic world, we are told a funny, endearing story about a robot that has developed sentience. It is witty, it is lovely, and it tells a story in fantastic style. The lessons are subtly driven home: they are taken-as-read to the extent that the plot can be enjoyed without feeling beaten down by the force of the warnings and moral debates the subject matter should raise.
One question I would have for the makers of film is why did Wall-e survive, but not all his other companions? Throughout, our little protagonist strikes the viewer as resourceful, intelligent and almost indestructible, but it is unclear why he realised this potential while his companions fell by the wayside. It is also never made clear exactly what global crisis left the world as uninhabitable as it eventually is.
In the end, you have to come back to the explanation of ‘it’s a kids film, and there isn’t enough time for all the explanations’. However, what it deals with, it deals with spectacularly well. The love story, the adventure story and the drama mesh seamlessly into a beautiful work of animation and a film that both adults and children can enjoy to the fullest extent. If you haven’t seen it yet, do. I thoroughly recommend it.
Review of ‘The Runaway’ by Martina Cole
This is another life story from Martina Cole, telling the story of Cathy Conner. Daughter of a dock-dolly, living in squalor in the East End, Cathy’s life is changed when an incident leads to her being taken into care. Of course, in this case ‘care’ is used in the loosest possible sense of the word, and Cathy very quickly decides she wants out… and so she goes on the run. Finding herself in Soho, a transvestite names Desrae rescues her, and turns the path of her life around. Then there is Eamonn Docherty, son of her former stepfather, and a soul to whom Cathy had incredible, incomprehensible love and loyalty towards. He flees to New York after a murder, and makes a life for himself there as a criminal… but of course eventually he returns, and his path crosses with Cathy’s again.
I found the first part of the novel quite difficult to read, because almost all of the characters are thoroughly unlikeable. This occasionally includes the protagonist herself, though for different reasons than most. Most of the characters are harsh, often violent, with motivations and justifications that just don’t ring true. Cathy is, at first, a basically good kid that occasionally acts out-of-character.
After a while, though, the style settles down, especially after Desrae is introduced. Transvestites and gays were not readily accepted in 1970’s London, but Desrae has a measure of protection from his lover, who is a big ‘face’ in the area. Desrae’s character is wonderful, motherly and genuinely kind, though very worldly. He makes light of many situations, and has learned to live in a world that doesn’t widely accept him. While Martina’s style of introducing and describing these characters doesn’t quite sit right with me (it is far too expositional for my tastes), I found myself rapidly coming to like Desrae. With Cathy herself (after her life story catches up with her character) and, eventually, the ‘good-cop-bad-cop’ Richard Gates, there were some characters I could relate to. After that I began to enjoy the story.
Martina Cole writes in a cockney accent. Her written Irish, American and Italian accents are slightly less believable, and even her Londoners eventually begin to all sound the same. The cockney rhyming slang and angry character monologues start to ‘get on your wick’. The general writing style is third person limited, which means that each scene is described through the eyes of a particular character. This usually works quite well. However, I take issue with the fact that it often switches perspective in the middle of scenes, or even paragraphs. I also take issue with minor characters being introduced in scenes told from their perspective, for them only to be killed in the next scene. I would consider it unnecessary, as most of what she tells about them (usually about their being a psycho, and generally unpleasant individual) could be told just as well from a different perspective.
Still, these little bugaboos aside, the story of Cathy Conner and her life in the Soho underworld is occasionally funny and heart-warming. Her unconditional love for the complete jackass that is Eamonn Docherty is strangely understandable from her background, and only serves to make you feel more sorry for her. Her relations with her odd ‘family’ consisting of a transvestite, a renowned ‘Madam’, a New York gangster, a bent policeman and her beautiful daughter makes for a varied life, spanning all the ups and downs one can expect from a life of crime led by a basically decent individual.
The things that annoy me most about Martina Cole annoy me because they crop up in all of her novels. I think that almost all of her stories include paedophilia, rape, incest and whores on one level or another, while gun crime and drugs are taken as read in almost every situation. The main character is almost invariably an attractive female ‘survivor’ lead into a life because of a desire to escape a more hideous earlier one. Cole’s children also have the ring-of-false about them, although I am the first to admit that I had a sheltered and happy, normal childhood in a privileged area, while the children in these books have led a much harsher lives. Still, even the more privileged children seem old before their time in these books. The minor characters; gangsters, hard-men, whores; seem to draw from a very small stock of characters that Martina keeps in a file and draws at random. The secondary main characters, next to the charismatic, strong female lead, tend to be a little more varied, but even they sometimes draw on a series of consistent tropes.
As stories about the criminal underworld, Cole’s novels work quite well, but the repetition is somewhat tiresome. On its own, any one of the novels is interesting and enjoyable. If you have never read any Martina Cole and enjoy books of the same persuasion, I have no doubt that you will enjoy your first Martina Cole book… whichever one you pick. Perhaps you are also of the persuasion that could read as many as you like and still enjoy each one on its own merits. All I know is that I am not, particularly, and while I read all of them, and often even feel some empathy with the characters, I do not enjoy them as much as I did my first Martina Cole novel, ‘Maura’s Game’.
All that said, I did enjoy ‘The Runaway,’ probably more than some of Martina’s books. It was worth reading, if only for Desrae, and by the end, though things seem to have taken a slide downhill, there is still the feeling that it could all work out for the best. And it’s still not enough to put me off reading the two remaining Martina Cole novels I have waiting on my shelf.
I found the first part of the novel quite difficult to read, because almost all of the characters are thoroughly unlikeable. This occasionally includes the protagonist herself, though for different reasons than most. Most of the characters are harsh, often violent, with motivations and justifications that just don’t ring true. Cathy is, at first, a basically good kid that occasionally acts out-of-character.
After a while, though, the style settles down, especially after Desrae is introduced. Transvestites and gays were not readily accepted in 1970’s London, but Desrae has a measure of protection from his lover, who is a big ‘face’ in the area. Desrae’s character is wonderful, motherly and genuinely kind, though very worldly. He makes light of many situations, and has learned to live in a world that doesn’t widely accept him. While Martina’s style of introducing and describing these characters doesn’t quite sit right with me (it is far too expositional for my tastes), I found myself rapidly coming to like Desrae. With Cathy herself (after her life story catches up with her character) and, eventually, the ‘good-cop-bad-cop’ Richard Gates, there were some characters I could relate to. After that I began to enjoy the story.
Martina Cole writes in a cockney accent. Her written Irish, American and Italian accents are slightly less believable, and even her Londoners eventually begin to all sound the same. The cockney rhyming slang and angry character monologues start to ‘get on your wick’. The general writing style is third person limited, which means that each scene is described through the eyes of a particular character. This usually works quite well. However, I take issue with the fact that it often switches perspective in the middle of scenes, or even paragraphs. I also take issue with minor characters being introduced in scenes told from their perspective, for them only to be killed in the next scene. I would consider it unnecessary, as most of what she tells about them (usually about their being a psycho, and generally unpleasant individual) could be told just as well from a different perspective.
Still, these little bugaboos aside, the story of Cathy Conner and her life in the Soho underworld is occasionally funny and heart-warming. Her unconditional love for the complete jackass that is Eamonn Docherty is strangely understandable from her background, and only serves to make you feel more sorry for her. Her relations with her odd ‘family’ consisting of a transvestite, a renowned ‘Madam’, a New York gangster, a bent policeman and her beautiful daughter makes for a varied life, spanning all the ups and downs one can expect from a life of crime led by a basically decent individual.
The things that annoy me most about Martina Cole annoy me because they crop up in all of her novels. I think that almost all of her stories include paedophilia, rape, incest and whores on one level or another, while gun crime and drugs are taken as read in almost every situation. The main character is almost invariably an attractive female ‘survivor’ lead into a life because of a desire to escape a more hideous earlier one. Cole’s children also have the ring-of-false about them, although I am the first to admit that I had a sheltered and happy, normal childhood in a privileged area, while the children in these books have led a much harsher lives. Still, even the more privileged children seem old before their time in these books. The minor characters; gangsters, hard-men, whores; seem to draw from a very small stock of characters that Martina keeps in a file and draws at random. The secondary main characters, next to the charismatic, strong female lead, tend to be a little more varied, but even they sometimes draw on a series of consistent tropes.
As stories about the criminal underworld, Cole’s novels work quite well, but the repetition is somewhat tiresome. On its own, any one of the novels is interesting and enjoyable. If you have never read any Martina Cole and enjoy books of the same persuasion, I have no doubt that you will enjoy your first Martina Cole book… whichever one you pick. Perhaps you are also of the persuasion that could read as many as you like and still enjoy each one on its own merits. All I know is that I am not, particularly, and while I read all of them, and often even feel some empathy with the characters, I do not enjoy them as much as I did my first Martina Cole novel, ‘Maura’s Game’.
All that said, I did enjoy ‘The Runaway,’ probably more than some of Martina’s books. It was worth reading, if only for Desrae, and by the end, though things seem to have taken a slide downhill, there is still the feeling that it could all work out for the best. And it’s still not enough to put me off reading the two remaining Martina Cole novels I have waiting on my shelf.
Thursday, 17 July 2008
Review of the 2005 film ‘Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang’
With a brilliant (if slightly complicated) plot and wonderful characters, ‘Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang’ is one of the most entertaining films I have seen this year, and I think it will rapidly be finding its place on my list of favourite movies.
Robert Downey Jr plays quirky petty criminal Harry Lockhart, narrator of our tale. Chance circumstances lead Lockhart to LA, invited to a party where he meets the sarcastic private detective ‘Gay Perry’ (Val Kilmer) and the hopeful actress, Harmony (Michelle Monaghan). From there things go downhill, and ‘detective lessons’ aimed at making Lockhart a better actor start to have very real consequences.
This film manages to be funny without being too slapstick, and it manages to be dramatic without taking itself too seriously. While the events and plot might outline any number of Hollywood detective stories, the fact that the characters are aware of this makes it much easier to swallow, and everything takes place with a mixture of drama, suspense and entertainment. From the caustic remarks of Gay Perry to the naïve and occasionally idiotic bumbling of the narrator, this film is beautifully scripted, and the acting is behind the quality of story one hundred percent.
Unfortunately, from the point of view of a reviewer, any points that I could find to scorn are scorned by the characters in the movie before I have a chance. They constantly make reference to ‘Johnny Gossamer’ novels, which are cheesy paperback detective stories that Harmony read constantly as a child. That the plot reads like such a fictional flick is referenced, and even ‘explained’. The actual detective, Perry, mocks Lockhart relentlessly for acting like he’s a TV detective. And because it’s a comic film, these ‘flaws’ are arguably selling points, making the film more of a parody.
But ‘Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang,’ also has its dramatic moments. Fear, anger, hope and love are portrayed beautifully on screen, and there is never a sense of any character feeling, leave alone being, invincible. From beginning to end, the film entertains and amuses, without forgetting to have an extra special flare.
Some films manage to capture a balance between comedy and action drama perfectly, and this is one of them. I would recommend this film to anyone. Unless you have serious problems with guns and violence and swearing.
Robert Downey Jr plays quirky petty criminal Harry Lockhart, narrator of our tale. Chance circumstances lead Lockhart to LA, invited to a party where he meets the sarcastic private detective ‘Gay Perry’ (Val Kilmer) and the hopeful actress, Harmony (Michelle Monaghan). From there things go downhill, and ‘detective lessons’ aimed at making Lockhart a better actor start to have very real consequences.
This film manages to be funny without being too slapstick, and it manages to be dramatic without taking itself too seriously. While the events and plot might outline any number of Hollywood detective stories, the fact that the characters are aware of this makes it much easier to swallow, and everything takes place with a mixture of drama, suspense and entertainment. From the caustic remarks of Gay Perry to the naïve and occasionally idiotic bumbling of the narrator, this film is beautifully scripted, and the acting is behind the quality of story one hundred percent.
Unfortunately, from the point of view of a reviewer, any points that I could find to scorn are scorned by the characters in the movie before I have a chance. They constantly make reference to ‘Johnny Gossamer’ novels, which are cheesy paperback detective stories that Harmony read constantly as a child. That the plot reads like such a fictional flick is referenced, and even ‘explained’. The actual detective, Perry, mocks Lockhart relentlessly for acting like he’s a TV detective. And because it’s a comic film, these ‘flaws’ are arguably selling points, making the film more of a parody.
But ‘Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang,’ also has its dramatic moments. Fear, anger, hope and love are portrayed beautifully on screen, and there is never a sense of any character feeling, leave alone being, invincible. From beginning to end, the film entertains and amuses, without forgetting to have an extra special flare.
Some films manage to capture a balance between comedy and action drama perfectly, and this is one of them. I would recommend this film to anyone. Unless you have serious problems with guns and violence and swearing.
Tuesday, 15 July 2008
Review of ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’ by Philip K. Dick
I feel like something of a fraud even trying to review this book, but I feel I should at least try. It has been listed as one of the science fiction masterworks. Perhaps I can see why. I can certainly see why the film makers took up on it, creating ‘Blade Runner’ from the premises outlined in the book… although it should be stated from the very beginning that book and film diverge very rapidly in terms of plot.
In the future, after a war leaves the planet ravaged, many people flee the Earth in favour of the colonies. They are promised android assistants on the colonies, and as with any consumer product, the quality of these androids must continue to improve to meet demand. Rick Deckard is a bounty hunter, hired to hunt down and kill escaped androids that return to Earth, and it is his lucky day. Eight of the latest model have just landed in his jurisdiction, and he is hired to go after the remaining six when his superior is injured in the course of duty.
Philip K Dick does a brilliant job of laying out the ‘new world’ where this novel is set. It is a depressing reality, almost hopeless, dark and dreary. People can alter their emotions at the touch of a dial with a ‘mood organ’ and it’s just as well, because any inherent joy in the world fails to come across in the story. And then there are the androids… fleeing the colonies to seek a better life in this bastardised version of the planet that we, the readers, know. It is a very unfamiliar reality but it is written so as to be completely believable. The characters, too, fit perfectly within the context, and promote empathy from the readers as they struggle in the world the past has left for them.
I did not enjoy this book, in the usual sense of the word… it was thought provoking, it was very well written and the plot was engaging and interesting, but enjoying it would imply I enjoyed moral dilemmas and suffering. Rather I accepted that it was so, because the writing made it convincing, but it was very difficult to like it. Some of the characters were likeable, in odd ways, but the plot and events described a world that was fundamentally a horrible place. The fact that I didn’t enjoy it probably proves that it did what it set out to do, and is a testament to the writer’s skill.
This book sets out a disturbing world, and sets believable characters within this world. It is a very good book, and I highly recommend it to all readers of science fiction that worry about the world. This is deservedly a classic, and it is probably one of the greatest works of speculative fiction I have ever read.
In the future, after a war leaves the planet ravaged, many people flee the Earth in favour of the colonies. They are promised android assistants on the colonies, and as with any consumer product, the quality of these androids must continue to improve to meet demand. Rick Deckard is a bounty hunter, hired to hunt down and kill escaped androids that return to Earth, and it is his lucky day. Eight of the latest model have just landed in his jurisdiction, and he is hired to go after the remaining six when his superior is injured in the course of duty.
Philip K Dick does a brilliant job of laying out the ‘new world’ where this novel is set. It is a depressing reality, almost hopeless, dark and dreary. People can alter their emotions at the touch of a dial with a ‘mood organ’ and it’s just as well, because any inherent joy in the world fails to come across in the story. And then there are the androids… fleeing the colonies to seek a better life in this bastardised version of the planet that we, the readers, know. It is a very unfamiliar reality but it is written so as to be completely believable. The characters, too, fit perfectly within the context, and promote empathy from the readers as they struggle in the world the past has left for them.
I did not enjoy this book, in the usual sense of the word… it was thought provoking, it was very well written and the plot was engaging and interesting, but enjoying it would imply I enjoyed moral dilemmas and suffering. Rather I accepted that it was so, because the writing made it convincing, but it was very difficult to like it. Some of the characters were likeable, in odd ways, but the plot and events described a world that was fundamentally a horrible place. The fact that I didn’t enjoy it probably proves that it did what it set out to do, and is a testament to the writer’s skill.
This book sets out a disturbing world, and sets believable characters within this world. It is a very good book, and I highly recommend it to all readers of science fiction that worry about the world. This is deservedly a classic, and it is probably one of the greatest works of speculative fiction I have ever read.
Friday, 11 July 2008
Review of ‘Excession’ by Iain M Banks
An Excession is an object that does not belong to the Culture, or that of any other species they know. It is beyond their current level of technology. Moreover, they have no idea what it is or how it does what it can do. It is potentially a threat. It potentially means the end of life as they know it. When such an object appears, everyone concerned rallies to try and work out what the object is, what it wants, and how to get rid of it.
As a novel, Excession is yet another example of the Fear of Editing. Aside from more typos than I’d usually accept, the introductory section of this novel is far longer than it needs to be. At least half of the book deals with introducing new characters (human, alien and Mind). There are innumerable names to remember, of ships and people and drones, and many of them appear only once or twice and have very minor roles to play. By halfway through, I was thoroughly confused as to which ships were aligned with which people, and who was on which side of confrontations. By the very end it is just about made obvious again, but I feel that a good editor could have encouraged Banks to be a little clearer.
Another problem I have with Banks’ less-edited works is his overly long sentences. Especially earlier in the novel, Banks seems to think that sentences are almost passé and decides instead to focus on the paragraphs. It makes much of it very difficult to read. Consequently, the first half of the book took a lot of reading to get through. The dialogue between Ships, especially, bordered on the florid and reading at any speed was almost impossible.
After that, though, the style starts to settle down a bit and get on with the plot. The story itself is actually quite good, as long as you can hold about a dozen ship names and several humans in your head at once. It follows a twisting thread of conspiracies, several strategies by various groups to attack or preserve or communicate with the excession. As each plot thread makes its way towards the conclusion, there is a definite sense of tension and intrigue. The ending itself is a bit of a disappointment, after all the build up, but as a whole the second half delivers almost enough to reward a reader that survives the first half.
In this story, the people are at worst incidental, at best pawns to the ship Minds. They have very little say in what goes on. While in some ways this makes for a unique perspective, it makes the story ring a little hollow. The ships themselves are quite brilliant characters and generally more interesting than the humans. The most intriguing thing is that they all think they are doing the right thing, even though this leads them to totally different conclusions. However, it is much more difficult to assign motivations and reasoning processes to AI Minds. As a consequence, the novel lacks a real human perspective to make it possible to really engage with the plot. In space opera, this is nearly unforgivable. Unfortunately, I also have trouble thinking of Banks’ Culture novels as anything other than space opera.
I enjoyed the latter half of the novel, but I felt it was excessively hard to get into, if you’ll excuse the pun. This novel could, and possibly should, be cut down to at most two thirds its current length, and then it would become a very good read. As it is, I wouldn’t recommend this book to any but the most devoted Banks fan, and certainly not to a first-time reader of SF or of Iain M.
As a novel, Excession is yet another example of the Fear of Editing. Aside from more typos than I’d usually accept, the introductory section of this novel is far longer than it needs to be. At least half of the book deals with introducing new characters (human, alien and Mind). There are innumerable names to remember, of ships and people and drones, and many of them appear only once or twice and have very minor roles to play. By halfway through, I was thoroughly confused as to which ships were aligned with which people, and who was on which side of confrontations. By the very end it is just about made obvious again, but I feel that a good editor could have encouraged Banks to be a little clearer.
Another problem I have with Banks’ less-edited works is his overly long sentences. Especially earlier in the novel, Banks seems to think that sentences are almost passé and decides instead to focus on the paragraphs. It makes much of it very difficult to read. Consequently, the first half of the book took a lot of reading to get through. The dialogue between Ships, especially, bordered on the florid and reading at any speed was almost impossible.
After that, though, the style starts to settle down a bit and get on with the plot. The story itself is actually quite good, as long as you can hold about a dozen ship names and several humans in your head at once. It follows a twisting thread of conspiracies, several strategies by various groups to attack or preserve or communicate with the excession. As each plot thread makes its way towards the conclusion, there is a definite sense of tension and intrigue. The ending itself is a bit of a disappointment, after all the build up, but as a whole the second half delivers almost enough to reward a reader that survives the first half.
In this story, the people are at worst incidental, at best pawns to the ship Minds. They have very little say in what goes on. While in some ways this makes for a unique perspective, it makes the story ring a little hollow. The ships themselves are quite brilliant characters and generally more interesting than the humans. The most intriguing thing is that they all think they are doing the right thing, even though this leads them to totally different conclusions. However, it is much more difficult to assign motivations and reasoning processes to AI Minds. As a consequence, the novel lacks a real human perspective to make it possible to really engage with the plot. In space opera, this is nearly unforgivable. Unfortunately, I also have trouble thinking of Banks’ Culture novels as anything other than space opera.
I enjoyed the latter half of the novel, but I felt it was excessively hard to get into, if you’ll excuse the pun. This novel could, and possibly should, be cut down to at most two thirds its current length, and then it would become a very good read. As it is, I wouldn’t recommend this book to any but the most devoted Banks fan, and certainly not to a first-time reader of SF or of Iain M.
Thursday, 10 July 2008
Review of the 2008 film ‘Prince Caspian’ (Chronicles of Narnia)
It has been years since I last read the Narnia books, and I can’t say I remember Prince Caspian terribly well... my references to the book come from a Wikipedia refresher. I also never saw the earlier production of the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, although it received very good reviews from people whose opinions I trust.
However, none of us were particularly happy with this film, mainly because they twisted the plot into a standardised Hollywood epic fantasy. This film contained all that could be expected from such a film: swashbuckling battles, adrenaline-fuelled chases through woods on horseback, epic battles and even romance. The only problem is, this is nothing like the original Prince Caspian.
The basic synopsis is the same: the four children, Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy, are returned to Narnia after being summoned by Susan's horn. After working out where they are, they come upon a dwarf and discover that Narnia is now run by the Telmarine, who don't believe in the talking beasts or dwarves and other mystical creatures. And they certainly don't believe in Aslan. Prince Caspian does believe, and he should be heir to the throne but for his uncle, Miraz, who would rather his own son became the heir.
Admittedly, the film starts well. The scenes of the children returning to Narnia show their confusion and eventual realisation, and when they appear, fully kitted out as kings and queens of Narnia, they do look like they belong in that world. The dwarves and some of the talking animals are wonderful, beautifully animated and well acted. The centaurs let the side down slightly, with awkward movements and poor animation that makes them look more like a human stuck onto a horse, rather than a single beast.
Prince Caspian himself is, as well as a European heartthrob-wannabe, a well-acted role, encompassing much of the necessary moral dispute and attempts to marry Narnian with Telmarine culture. Aside from him, many of the human characters fell short of my expectations, through no fault of the actors. While C.S. Lewis has often been criticised for sexism, Susan’s exploits in this film were too reminiscent of Legolas from Lord of the Rings. When will Hollywood realise that an archer on the ground in the midst of a skirmish where all the opponents are in full battle armour with swords stands almost no chance? I can only assume that Susan was given super-strength for the purposes of the movie, that her arrows were tipped with a metal hard enough to pierce iron (when combined with her super-strength)… oh, and that her bow had a bladed edge.
Peter and Edmund were better: Peter was believable in the role of a sixteen-year-old with the memories of a king. Edmund played a more stoic role as sidekick and knight, but his exploits were within the realms of possibility, and certainly of fantasy and Narnian rules. Lucy was the most believable of all, slipping easily into the role of the youngest child, the healer who talks to the trees. It is just a small mercy that they didn’t decide to give the pint-sized heroine a sword and have her slash her way through the enemy with her siblings.
In terms of plot, this film includes battles that never existed in the book, and do nothing but call into question the motives (not to mention tactical abilities) of everyone in the film. An extra battle, never present in the book, only serves produce a blood-bath that is entirely Not Suitable for Small Children, and create unnecessary tension between Peter and Caspian. The only possible explanation for this extra battle-scene that I can find is to hold the attention of people who need an action sequence every ten minutes to keep them awake.
This film was not all bad. It is occasionally witty or heart-warming. There are scenes that arguably portray internal struggles and ill-wisdom much better than the book. But I was not happy with the way that Hollywood has twisted a story about chivalry and courage into an action-packed stereotype that uses every possible opportunity to create a bloodbath.
Even if you ignore the fact that this film was obviously filmed in the same place as Lord of the Rings, and that it often has delusions that it *is* Lord of the Rings, this film tries so hard to follow the Hollywood formula that it almost forgets its origins. I cannot blame the writers for wanting to modernise the story to a certain extent. The story line of the book can be used to draw rather obvious lessons about today’s world. But with ‘Prince Caspian’ the writers went too far the other way. In trying to create an action-packed film with characters and plot that the modern audience could Really Relate To, they forgot two of the most important tenets of writing this sort of film: to tell a good story, and to be entertaining.
However, none of us were particularly happy with this film, mainly because they twisted the plot into a standardised Hollywood epic fantasy. This film contained all that could be expected from such a film: swashbuckling battles, adrenaline-fuelled chases through woods on horseback, epic battles and even romance. The only problem is, this is nothing like the original Prince Caspian.
The basic synopsis is the same: the four children, Peter, Edmund, Susan and Lucy, are returned to Narnia after being summoned by Susan's horn. After working out where they are, they come upon a dwarf and discover that Narnia is now run by the Telmarine, who don't believe in the talking beasts or dwarves and other mystical creatures. And they certainly don't believe in Aslan. Prince Caspian does believe, and he should be heir to the throne but for his uncle, Miraz, who would rather his own son became the heir.
Admittedly, the film starts well. The scenes of the children returning to Narnia show their confusion and eventual realisation, and when they appear, fully kitted out as kings and queens of Narnia, they do look like they belong in that world. The dwarves and some of the talking animals are wonderful, beautifully animated and well acted. The centaurs let the side down slightly, with awkward movements and poor animation that makes them look more like a human stuck onto a horse, rather than a single beast.
Prince Caspian himself is, as well as a European heartthrob-wannabe, a well-acted role, encompassing much of the necessary moral dispute and attempts to marry Narnian with Telmarine culture. Aside from him, many of the human characters fell short of my expectations, through no fault of the actors. While C.S. Lewis has often been criticised for sexism, Susan’s exploits in this film were too reminiscent of Legolas from Lord of the Rings. When will Hollywood realise that an archer on the ground in the midst of a skirmish where all the opponents are in full battle armour with swords stands almost no chance? I can only assume that Susan was given super-strength for the purposes of the movie, that her arrows were tipped with a metal hard enough to pierce iron (when combined with her super-strength)… oh, and that her bow had a bladed edge.
Peter and Edmund were better: Peter was believable in the role of a sixteen-year-old with the memories of a king. Edmund played a more stoic role as sidekick and knight, but his exploits were within the realms of possibility, and certainly of fantasy and Narnian rules. Lucy was the most believable of all, slipping easily into the role of the youngest child, the healer who talks to the trees. It is just a small mercy that they didn’t decide to give the pint-sized heroine a sword and have her slash her way through the enemy with her siblings.
In terms of plot, this film includes battles that never existed in the book, and do nothing but call into question the motives (not to mention tactical abilities) of everyone in the film. An extra battle, never present in the book, only serves produce a blood-bath that is entirely Not Suitable for Small Children, and create unnecessary tension between Peter and Caspian. The only possible explanation for this extra battle-scene that I can find is to hold the attention of people who need an action sequence every ten minutes to keep them awake.
This film was not all bad. It is occasionally witty or heart-warming. There are scenes that arguably portray internal struggles and ill-wisdom much better than the book. But I was not happy with the way that Hollywood has twisted a story about chivalry and courage into an action-packed stereotype that uses every possible opportunity to create a bloodbath.
Even if you ignore the fact that this film was obviously filmed in the same place as Lord of the Rings, and that it often has delusions that it *is* Lord of the Rings, this film tries so hard to follow the Hollywood formula that it almost forgets its origins. I cannot blame the writers for wanting to modernise the story to a certain extent. The story line of the book can be used to draw rather obvious lessons about today’s world. But with ‘Prince Caspian’ the writers went too far the other way. In trying to create an action-packed film with characters and plot that the modern audience could Really Relate To, they forgot two of the most important tenets of writing this sort of film: to tell a good story, and to be entertaining.
Friday, 4 July 2008
Review of the 2008 film ‘Hancock’
There have been a lot of superhero movies recently and Hancock manages to be something more or less dissimilar from all of them. It is no mean feat to bring something fresh and original to the superhero concept. So many of these movies have the stalwart protagonist and the evil super-villain it is their duty to thwart.
From the start, Hancock sets itself up as something else. Will Smith plays the almost apathetic superhero ‘Hancock,’ a layabout bum who ‘saves the day’ but wreaks all kinds of havoc in the process, causing billions of dollars of damage to Los Angeles. Strangely enough, his alcoholism and generally abhorrent behaviour leave the people rather angry. The turning point comes when he saves the life of failing PR man, Ray (Jason Bateman). In return, Ray offers to improve the superhero’s image, make him liked and appreciated and above all, less alone.
For a while after Hancock’s montage of redemption, it looks like the film is going to turn into a run-of-the-mill superhero flick… he is the only superhero in the world, the bullet-proof strong man flies in to save the day - and he even has the shiny superhero suit. But then another plot-twist arrives, which stirs things up and makes the second half of the film a little more interesting.
The superhero protagonist in this film is different from the square-jawed superman image in outlook, if not ability. Hancock’s life has shaped him into someone that feels alone, rejected by the people he tries to help, and therefore he doesn’t much care about what he damages along the way. The superhero’s battle to understand himself has been used to varying effect in many such movies, and Hancock’s has a lot in common with many such struggles. However, the excellent acting and some poignant moments mean that the story is very well handled.
Unfortunately, the film is let down somewhat by its villains. While the parts of the movie that focus on Hancock are superb, the super-villain, if he can be called that, is a rather weak character, and his lackeys show less flare than a damp squib. This is redeemable only by the limited screen-time these characters are afforded, and as the plot isn’t a straightforward superhero-pits-his-wits-against-the-villain story, it is more or less whitewashed by the more important struggles.
Some of the camera work is annoyingly shaky, and the more critical members of the audience may find some of the story a little hollow, or not fully explained. Parts of the second half of the movie try too hard to increase suspense, while not explaining events or characters properly. Unfortunately, there is a fine line between too much suspense, and too much exposition, and the script fell just shy of it.
However, for most viewers, out to see an exciting movie with a lot of action and engaging plot, this film is entertaining and witty, if very, very silly.
From the start, Hancock sets itself up as something else. Will Smith plays the almost apathetic superhero ‘Hancock,’ a layabout bum who ‘saves the day’ but wreaks all kinds of havoc in the process, causing billions of dollars of damage to Los Angeles. Strangely enough, his alcoholism and generally abhorrent behaviour leave the people rather angry. The turning point comes when he saves the life of failing PR man, Ray (Jason Bateman). In return, Ray offers to improve the superhero’s image, make him liked and appreciated and above all, less alone.
For a while after Hancock’s montage of redemption, it looks like the film is going to turn into a run-of-the-mill superhero flick… he is the only superhero in the world, the bullet-proof strong man flies in to save the day - and he even has the shiny superhero suit. But then another plot-twist arrives, which stirs things up and makes the second half of the film a little more interesting.
The superhero protagonist in this film is different from the square-jawed superman image in outlook, if not ability. Hancock’s life has shaped him into someone that feels alone, rejected by the people he tries to help, and therefore he doesn’t much care about what he damages along the way. The superhero’s battle to understand himself has been used to varying effect in many such movies, and Hancock’s has a lot in common with many such struggles. However, the excellent acting and some poignant moments mean that the story is very well handled.
Unfortunately, the film is let down somewhat by its villains. While the parts of the movie that focus on Hancock are superb, the super-villain, if he can be called that, is a rather weak character, and his lackeys show less flare than a damp squib. This is redeemable only by the limited screen-time these characters are afforded, and as the plot isn’t a straightforward superhero-pits-his-wits-against-the-villain story, it is more or less whitewashed by the more important struggles.
Some of the camera work is annoyingly shaky, and the more critical members of the audience may find some of the story a little hollow, or not fully explained. Parts of the second half of the movie try too hard to increase suspense, while not explaining events or characters properly. Unfortunately, there is a fine line between too much suspense, and too much exposition, and the script fell just shy of it.
However, for most viewers, out to see an exciting movie with a lot of action and engaging plot, this film is entertaining and witty, if very, very silly.
Sunday, 29 June 2008
Review of the 2006 film ‘Miami Vice’
My opinion of this film may be somewhat tainted by the time and manner in which I watched it. After an evening watching Star Wars and the Princess Bride, a drunken companion and I decided to stay up and watch another movie. Low volume and the late-night atmosphere is bound to alter perceptions of any film… on such a night did I first watch ‘Troy’ and I fell asleep. This time, we watched Miami Vice.
I didn’t fall asleep, but it was not because of the engaging plot and wonderful characters. I found very little in it to grasp my attention or keep my interest. Consequently I didn’t pay enough attention to understand where the plot was going, or even what the characters were called. I had a vague grasp of what was going on, but mostly the plot seemed to wind aimlessly. Scenes that were supposed to show character development seemed to be quite boring and derivative.
I would give a plot synopsis, but all that I could work out in my admittedly sleepy state was that there were some police officers going undercover to chase after some drug barons. With a name like ‘Miami Vice’ this film had plenty of opportunity for sex and violence. Both were present, the former in excess, but neither was particularly convincing. The acting did not greatly inspire me, although I have seen much worse. Despite potentially evocative material, I found myself completely emotionally detached from the film and its characters. In fact, the most interesting thing I found in the whole film was one of the more stoic female characters acting with military precision during a rescue attempt.
As I stated at the beginning, I’m sure that my state of mind at the time of watching was not ideal to fully appreciate this film. Perhaps if I had a fuller understanding of the plot and characters then I may have appreciated the film a lot more. At the same time, I was not falling asleep… if I was tired, then I *would* have fallen asleep during this film. I didn’t… I watched, and I tried to pay attention. By the end I had worked out that everyone except 6 or 7 characters were ‘bad guys.’ By the end I more-or-less understood the relationship between Jamie Foxx’s character and Gong Li’s character. By the end I more-or-less understood why they were undercover in the first place. But by the end I still wasn’t particularly concerned by the peril or even potential death of these characters.
There were some scenes of gratuitous violence, clustered around the beginning and end of the film… but any promise of a mindless action flick, which would at least have been entertaining, was rapidly displaced by boredom and monotony and characters occasionally shouting at each other.
Maybe one day I’ll watch this film again, in circumstances more amenable to enjoying such a film. But I have watched films in the middle of the night before, and I have enjoyed them. Even giving this film the benefit of the doubt, I suspect that I wouldn’t enjoy it if I did see it again, and I certainly didn’t enjoy it first time around.
I didn’t fall asleep, but it was not because of the engaging plot and wonderful characters. I found very little in it to grasp my attention or keep my interest. Consequently I didn’t pay enough attention to understand where the plot was going, or even what the characters were called. I had a vague grasp of what was going on, but mostly the plot seemed to wind aimlessly. Scenes that were supposed to show character development seemed to be quite boring and derivative.
I would give a plot synopsis, but all that I could work out in my admittedly sleepy state was that there were some police officers going undercover to chase after some drug barons. With a name like ‘Miami Vice’ this film had plenty of opportunity for sex and violence. Both were present, the former in excess, but neither was particularly convincing. The acting did not greatly inspire me, although I have seen much worse. Despite potentially evocative material, I found myself completely emotionally detached from the film and its characters. In fact, the most interesting thing I found in the whole film was one of the more stoic female characters acting with military precision during a rescue attempt.
As I stated at the beginning, I’m sure that my state of mind at the time of watching was not ideal to fully appreciate this film. Perhaps if I had a fuller understanding of the plot and characters then I may have appreciated the film a lot more. At the same time, I was not falling asleep… if I was tired, then I *would* have fallen asleep during this film. I didn’t… I watched, and I tried to pay attention. By the end I had worked out that everyone except 6 or 7 characters were ‘bad guys.’ By the end I more-or-less understood the relationship between Jamie Foxx’s character and Gong Li’s character. By the end I more-or-less understood why they were undercover in the first place. But by the end I still wasn’t particularly concerned by the peril or even potential death of these characters.
There were some scenes of gratuitous violence, clustered around the beginning and end of the film… but any promise of a mindless action flick, which would at least have been entertaining, was rapidly displaced by boredom and monotony and characters occasionally shouting at each other.
Maybe one day I’ll watch this film again, in circumstances more amenable to enjoying such a film. But I have watched films in the middle of the night before, and I have enjoyed them. Even giving this film the benefit of the doubt, I suspect that I wouldn’t enjoy it if I did see it again, and I certainly didn’t enjoy it first time around.
Wednesday, 11 June 2008
Review of 'The Siren's of Titan' by Kurt Vonnegut.
So far, the Sci-fi Masterworks series seems to have lived up to its name.
I had never heard of this author or this book before I decided, on a whim, to buy it. Now, having read it I am supremely glad that it entered my circle of awareness. The Sirens of Titan was written in the late fifties, so certain elements of the science fiction of the time have to be instantly taken into account. However, starting from this basis, it is a fantastically amusing and wonderful story.
In this particular future, space travel has been halted because of the discovery of a 'chrono-synclastic infundibulum,' which is a bizarre kind of spatial anomaly. One man decided to enter this anomaly, with his dog, and as a consequence finds that he is spread over space, only materialising at certain intervals. The benefit, however, is that he can see into the future.
This story has a wonderful cast of characters, and is beautifully told. It is an exceptionally easy read, being written in a simplistic, almost childlike tone, without being too childish. But at the same time, it is quietly philosophical, and often outright hilarious. It has an almost perfect balance of thought-provoking text, interesting plot developments and entertainment. The reader can leave it laughing, and dismiss it as an amusing read, or they can be engrossed in the story line, in finding out how the characters get to where they are going, and what happens there. Alternatively, it provides discussion material, in the form of age-old questions about whether the future is set in stone, or whether we can have any say in our own destiny.
I enjoyed this book so much that aside from a few comments about the way that science fiction has changed in the intervening years, I cannot find any negative points to mention. Yes, there is the fact that nowadays authors would never get away with native aliens on other planets in our solar system. Yes, there is the interesting juxtaposition between technology we consider antiquated, and technology we still have yet to achieve. Yes, there is the fact that the mood, characterisation and even length of this novel are somewhat of-its-time. But even so, I feel it has aged very well.
This book is deservedly described as a classic, and I would recommend it to everyone, whether or not they were a science fiction fan, because I feel it has universal appeal.
I had never heard of this author or this book before I decided, on a whim, to buy it. Now, having read it I am supremely glad that it entered my circle of awareness. The Sirens of Titan was written in the late fifties, so certain elements of the science fiction of the time have to be instantly taken into account. However, starting from this basis, it is a fantastically amusing and wonderful story.
In this particular future, space travel has been halted because of the discovery of a 'chrono-synclastic infundibulum,' which is a bizarre kind of spatial anomaly. One man decided to enter this anomaly, with his dog, and as a consequence finds that he is spread over space, only materialising at certain intervals. The benefit, however, is that he can see into the future.
This story has a wonderful cast of characters, and is beautifully told. It is an exceptionally easy read, being written in a simplistic, almost childlike tone, without being too childish. But at the same time, it is quietly philosophical, and often outright hilarious. It has an almost perfect balance of thought-provoking text, interesting plot developments and entertainment. The reader can leave it laughing, and dismiss it as an amusing read, or they can be engrossed in the story line, in finding out how the characters get to where they are going, and what happens there. Alternatively, it provides discussion material, in the form of age-old questions about whether the future is set in stone, or whether we can have any say in our own destiny.
I enjoyed this book so much that aside from a few comments about the way that science fiction has changed in the intervening years, I cannot find any negative points to mention. Yes, there is the fact that nowadays authors would never get away with native aliens on other planets in our solar system. Yes, there is the interesting juxtaposition between technology we consider antiquated, and technology we still have yet to achieve. Yes, there is the fact that the mood, characterisation and even length of this novel are somewhat of-its-time. But even so, I feel it has aged very well.
This book is deservedly described as a classic, and I would recommend it to everyone, whether or not they were a science fiction fan, because I feel it has universal appeal.
Saturday, 7 June 2008
Review of the 2008 film ‘Iron Man’
I enjoy superhero movies slightly less than the next girl. The original breed I found slightly too cheesy or too camp. I never liked Superman, in any of his incarnations. I never read any of the numerous comics, either, though I have heard a lot about them from friends, and I have to say I was never overly enthused.
But recently, the film industry seems to be getting it right. The X-men, Batman Begins, Spiderman… all of these took the superhero concept and made it inspiring, reworking the genre until it became a new form of fantasy. They have (mostly) ignored the camp 80’s concept of the lycra-clad well-muscled squeaky-clean protagonist, introducing levels of ambiguity that make the lead roles darker and much more interesting.
Iron Man is another example of the film industry getting it right. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), genius and director of Stark Industries, essentially an American weapons production company, is kidnapped and held by terrorists, who want him to produce an example of his latest deadly weapon. Locked in a cell, with the supplies he needs to make the weapon and one helper, he works… but not on the weapon. His escape attempt involves an iron suit, armed and virtually impervious to bullets.
Then Tony Stark goes home, to a place that has access to far better equipment…
The film starts with an engaging scene, in one go introducing character and conflict, whilst paving the way for the rest of the first act. From there on, there is a good balance of action, drama and emotional content. The inevitable Hollywood romance is quiet and understated. The main character is likeable as a protagonist, while still being believable as the rather immature director of a company that primarily produces weapons, and the character development is well acted and well filmed.
As a superhero, Iron Man is a very interesting take on the traditional element: similar to batman in that he is a rich man with resources, rather than an alien or mutant, but the emphasis is on his suit, rather than gadgetry and martial arts. The character of Stark, inside the suit, reacts as many people would if they realised they could fly, and his attitude to becoming a superhero is much more human and light-hearted than the great-power-and-great-responsibility style.
This film is not perfect, in some silly ways: g-forces are often completely ignored, and the revelatory scene where Stark discovers a new way of using his suit makes the viewer wonder what he’d originally intended it for… The antagonist, too, is a major down-point, because he errs on the side of stereotypical and in dealing with this antagonist, Stark makes some rookie mistakes that most ten-year-olds would question.
But these things can all be forgiven in an action film, even if they would be ridiculous in any other medium. What matters is the entertainment value, and this film contains that in great supply.
And be sure to watch until after the credits for the near-traditional sequel pitch.
But recently, the film industry seems to be getting it right. The X-men, Batman Begins, Spiderman… all of these took the superhero concept and made it inspiring, reworking the genre until it became a new form of fantasy. They have (mostly) ignored the camp 80’s concept of the lycra-clad well-muscled squeaky-clean protagonist, introducing levels of ambiguity that make the lead roles darker and much more interesting.
Iron Man is another example of the film industry getting it right. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr), genius and director of Stark Industries, essentially an American weapons production company, is kidnapped and held by terrorists, who want him to produce an example of his latest deadly weapon. Locked in a cell, with the supplies he needs to make the weapon and one helper, he works… but not on the weapon. His escape attempt involves an iron suit, armed and virtually impervious to bullets.
Then Tony Stark goes home, to a place that has access to far better equipment…
The film starts with an engaging scene, in one go introducing character and conflict, whilst paving the way for the rest of the first act. From there on, there is a good balance of action, drama and emotional content. The inevitable Hollywood romance is quiet and understated. The main character is likeable as a protagonist, while still being believable as the rather immature director of a company that primarily produces weapons, and the character development is well acted and well filmed.
As a superhero, Iron Man is a very interesting take on the traditional element: similar to batman in that he is a rich man with resources, rather than an alien or mutant, but the emphasis is on his suit, rather than gadgetry and martial arts. The character of Stark, inside the suit, reacts as many people would if they realised they could fly, and his attitude to becoming a superhero is much more human and light-hearted than the great-power-and-great-responsibility style.
This film is not perfect, in some silly ways: g-forces are often completely ignored, and the revelatory scene where Stark discovers a new way of using his suit makes the viewer wonder what he’d originally intended it for… The antagonist, too, is a major down-point, because he errs on the side of stereotypical and in dealing with this antagonist, Stark makes some rookie mistakes that most ten-year-olds would question.
But these things can all be forgiven in an action film, even if they would be ridiculous in any other medium. What matters is the entertainment value, and this film contains that in great supply.
And be sure to watch until after the credits for the near-traditional sequel pitch.
Tuesday, 3 June 2008
Review of the 2008 film 'Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull'
I must admit when I heard that there was a new Indiana Jones film being released, I was a little apprehensive. This lifted somewhat when I heard that it was still going to be Harrison Ford, but I was still concerned that they would change the atmosphere, make it a camped-up slapstick comedy flick, with little else to recommend it. Alternatively I thought it might take itself too seriously, and ruin the light-hearted drama of the original trilogy.
I needn’t have worried. It seems that Steven Spielberg and George Lucas remain safe hands when it comes to Henry Jones Jr.
This film captured the atmosphere of the original movies almost effortlessly. Allowances were made for the fact that Indie was older than in the first films, and the occasional reference was made to his previous adventures, but there was the same balance of action and comedy, with the same one-liners that we’ve come to expect.
It’s been a while since I saw the original film, though I remember most of them quite well. The ending of this film is no more sane than those, and some of the scenes have stepped well clear of the line between fiction and fantasy. But Indiana Jones was never about sanity, and the plot lines were never firmly rooted in our reality, so this much did not bother me. There was some inconsistencies, which were a little troubling, and a few scenes that seemed to border on the gratuitous: perhaps the result of a brainstorming session between fans who suddenly find themselves as script-writers, all saying “You know what we should do!”. The ending was about as far-fetched as could be allowed in a movie that was, still, set mostly in our reality, and suffered a little from Hollywood cheese.
However, I went into the film expecting to be entertained, and I was not disappointed. Characters both old and new were wonderfully acted and portrayed, and the on-screen chemistry between those characters made it much easier to forgive the more outlandish adventuring. It was also incredibly refreshing to have a love interest that wasn’t a twenty-something supermodel, inexplicably attracted to the much older Indiana (although I’d be lying if I said I didn’t see the appeal).
All in all I recommend this latest in the Indiana Jones saga to fans of the originals, and newcomers alike. It was a thoroughly entertaining adventure story, with an incredibly charismatic and strangely believable lead. Forgive the fantasy, and enjoy the thrill ride.
I needn’t have worried. It seems that Steven Spielberg and George Lucas remain safe hands when it comes to Henry Jones Jr.
This film captured the atmosphere of the original movies almost effortlessly. Allowances were made for the fact that Indie was older than in the first films, and the occasional reference was made to his previous adventures, but there was the same balance of action and comedy, with the same one-liners that we’ve come to expect.
It’s been a while since I saw the original film, though I remember most of them quite well. The ending of this film is no more sane than those, and some of the scenes have stepped well clear of the line between fiction and fantasy. But Indiana Jones was never about sanity, and the plot lines were never firmly rooted in our reality, so this much did not bother me. There was some inconsistencies, which were a little troubling, and a few scenes that seemed to border on the gratuitous: perhaps the result of a brainstorming session between fans who suddenly find themselves as script-writers, all saying “You know what we should do!”. The ending was about as far-fetched as could be allowed in a movie that was, still, set mostly in our reality, and suffered a little from Hollywood cheese.
However, I went into the film expecting to be entertained, and I was not disappointed. Characters both old and new were wonderfully acted and portrayed, and the on-screen chemistry between those characters made it much easier to forgive the more outlandish adventuring. It was also incredibly refreshing to have a love interest that wasn’t a twenty-something supermodel, inexplicably attracted to the much older Indiana (although I’d be lying if I said I didn’t see the appeal).
All in all I recommend this latest in the Indiana Jones saga to fans of the originals, and newcomers alike. It was a thoroughly entertaining adventure story, with an incredibly charismatic and strangely believable lead. Forgive the fantasy, and enjoy the thrill ride.
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
Review of 'Revelation Space' by Alastair Reynolds
The story starts with three seemingly unconnected characters: First, a scientist and archaeologist researching an extinct civilisation on a barren colony world. Secondly, an ex-soldier, current 'Shadowplay assassin' on a once plague-ravaged world. Finally, there is a scientist and member of a ruling Triumvirate on a 'Lighthugger' ship, traveling between the stars. However, if these three characters were truly unrelated, this story would probably be quite short. Instead it turns out that Volyova, on the lighthugger is looking for two things: someone to fill a role on her ship, and for Dan Sylveste, the archaeologist. Khouri, the ex-soldier, is also looking for Sylveste, but for very different reasons.
From the very beginning, this book sets up a lot of unanswered questions, lays open intrigue and strings the plot along the fine line between vagueness and exposition. For a patient reader, there is enough to be going on with at any stage, so that the remaining questions only serve to encourage continued reading. As the plot moves along, some questions are answered, and others are opened. It is a masterful work of plotting.
One of the other wonderful things about this story is the characterisation. None of the characters are totally benevolent, none truly evil. Most are just doing what they can to reach their own personal goal: although most of these goals are at best neutral, and the characters tend to go further than most normal people would in pursuit of these goals. Importantly, the characters are all real enough to evoke emotional responses, which is a strength in any novel.
From reading 'Century Rain' by the same author, it would appear that Alastair Reynolds has two ‘favourite’ themes. One is the Fermi paradox: the galaxy should be teeming with intelligent life, so where is it? The other is nanotechnology, and the question of whether it has potential for good, or if it is simply more trouble than it is worth. This book contains both themes again, integral to the plot, in slightly subtle ways. But the author's views are not rammed home with any kind of force: both are questions that an intelligent reader has the opportunity to think about, to explore as they journey through the plot laid out for them.
Unfortunately, towards the end of the novel, some of the scientific ideas seem a little far-fetched, and the suspension of disbelief becomes more essential, and more difficult, as the plot draws towards its conclusion. While at the beginning, one need only accept things that seem possible, from what we know of science, by the end, readers are asked to accept more radical ideas, completely beyond our current understanding. There is a little in between, but the last section of the book introduces some concepts that are very difficult to think about in any detail without studying the related physics. The last 50 pages or so ask the reader to believe far more than the previous 500, and it makes it slightly less accessible as space opera; lunging a little more towards hard SF.
However, even with the slightly complicated science towards the end, the plot remains accessible, and the characters remain believable. The further you read, the harder it is to stop reading. Revelation Space is an intriguing and suspenseful read that most science fiction readers will enjoy.
From the very beginning, this book sets up a lot of unanswered questions, lays open intrigue and strings the plot along the fine line between vagueness and exposition. For a patient reader, there is enough to be going on with at any stage, so that the remaining questions only serve to encourage continued reading. As the plot moves along, some questions are answered, and others are opened. It is a masterful work of plotting.
One of the other wonderful things about this story is the characterisation. None of the characters are totally benevolent, none truly evil. Most are just doing what they can to reach their own personal goal: although most of these goals are at best neutral, and the characters tend to go further than most normal people would in pursuit of these goals. Importantly, the characters are all real enough to evoke emotional responses, which is a strength in any novel.
From reading 'Century Rain' by the same author, it would appear that Alastair Reynolds has two ‘favourite’ themes. One is the Fermi paradox: the galaxy should be teeming with intelligent life, so where is it? The other is nanotechnology, and the question of whether it has potential for good, or if it is simply more trouble than it is worth. This book contains both themes again, integral to the plot, in slightly subtle ways. But the author's views are not rammed home with any kind of force: both are questions that an intelligent reader has the opportunity to think about, to explore as they journey through the plot laid out for them.
Unfortunately, towards the end of the novel, some of the scientific ideas seem a little far-fetched, and the suspension of disbelief becomes more essential, and more difficult, as the plot draws towards its conclusion. While at the beginning, one need only accept things that seem possible, from what we know of science, by the end, readers are asked to accept more radical ideas, completely beyond our current understanding. There is a little in between, but the last section of the book introduces some concepts that are very difficult to think about in any detail without studying the related physics. The last 50 pages or so ask the reader to believe far more than the previous 500, and it makes it slightly less accessible as space opera; lunging a little more towards hard SF.
However, even with the slightly complicated science towards the end, the plot remains accessible, and the characters remain believable. The further you read, the harder it is to stop reading. Revelation Space is an intriguing and suspenseful read that most science fiction readers will enjoy.
Sunday, 16 March 2008
Review of 'The Player of Games' by Iain M Banks
Set in the same universe as some of his other books, 'The Player of Games' explores the Culture (introduced in 'Consider Phlebas') but is completely accessible as a standalone novel. Jernau Gurgeh is a member of the Culture; a wide-ranging space-faring society of humans and sentient machines. There is no money, no possession as such... and people can, for the most part, do exactly what they want to do with their lives. Jernau Gurgeh chooses to spend his life playing games. He is thought to be one of the best game players in the Culture, skilled in an enormous range of games. And he is bored of winning. Then he is approached, and asked if he will play a rather different game; a game that will be more challenging than any game he has ever come across before.
This book is another classic example of Iain M Banks' talent for creating alien races that are alien, and yet accessible. His main character provides a perfect viewpoint for understanding the Culture, and for looking at the new alien race. The plot is relatively slow paced; it mirrors the games that Gurgeh plays, with slow, deliberate, almost contemplative steps, but it is punctuated by action that adds intrigue as well as urgency to the plot. Despite the occasional lack of pace, it is by no means boring. The game is slowly revealed over the course of the story, and it also becomes evident that there is more going on, and until the end you're not entirely certain what that is.
For those hoping for complete, well-described details on the nature and rules of this horribly complicated game, the book will be something of a disappointment. While the overall form of the game is well established by the end, specific details are somewhat lacking. From the point of view of the writer this is understandable: if the game is as complex as the plot requires, complete description within the confines of that plot is almost impossible. However, this makes some of the descriptions of play slightly hollow, and it is difficult to fully empathise with the Player during the games. As a whole, though, the book is well written, with the events outside of the games skillfully described and the alien race developed wonderfully (although perhaps over-emphasising the similarities between these aliens and our current society).
The Player of Games is an enjoyable read, but it is not a completely gripping thrill ride, nor a wholly thought-provoking literary masterwork. Instead, it straddles the boundary, with an interesting plot that draws the reader (more sedately) through, and some thought-provoking views of society and humanity. One thing that Banks does very well is portray the Culture ambiguously, so that the reader is left to decide for themselves whether they are the force of good or a force of evil; and the reality feels somewhere in between. I would recommend The Player of Games to people that were well-grounded readers of SF (and, perhaps, of Iain M Banks), but it is probably not appropriate for someone making their first forays into genre fiction.
This book is another classic example of Iain M Banks' talent for creating alien races that are alien, and yet accessible. His main character provides a perfect viewpoint for understanding the Culture, and for looking at the new alien race. The plot is relatively slow paced; it mirrors the games that Gurgeh plays, with slow, deliberate, almost contemplative steps, but it is punctuated by action that adds intrigue as well as urgency to the plot. Despite the occasional lack of pace, it is by no means boring. The game is slowly revealed over the course of the story, and it also becomes evident that there is more going on, and until the end you're not entirely certain what that is.
For those hoping for complete, well-described details on the nature and rules of this horribly complicated game, the book will be something of a disappointment. While the overall form of the game is well established by the end, specific details are somewhat lacking. From the point of view of the writer this is understandable: if the game is as complex as the plot requires, complete description within the confines of that plot is almost impossible. However, this makes some of the descriptions of play slightly hollow, and it is difficult to fully empathise with the Player during the games. As a whole, though, the book is well written, with the events outside of the games skillfully described and the alien race developed wonderfully (although perhaps over-emphasising the similarities between these aliens and our current society).
The Player of Games is an enjoyable read, but it is not a completely gripping thrill ride, nor a wholly thought-provoking literary masterwork. Instead, it straddles the boundary, with an interesting plot that draws the reader (more sedately) through, and some thought-provoking views of society and humanity. One thing that Banks does very well is portray the Culture ambiguously, so that the reader is left to decide for themselves whether they are the force of good or a force of evil; and the reality feels somewhere in between. I would recommend The Player of Games to people that were well-grounded readers of SF (and, perhaps, of Iain M Banks), but it is probably not appropriate for someone making their first forays into genre fiction.
Monday, 18 February 2008
Review of the 2007 film 'The Darjeeling Limited'
The Darjeeling Limited opens with a slightly abstract scene of a man in a hotel room, meeting with a girl he has been running away from. There is little holding the scene together, aside from some good acting on the part of Natalie Portman and Jason Schwartzman. It is quietly humorous, without being outright hilarious, the on-screen action is beautifully filmed, even if there is little by way of plot to cement the scene. Then, this scene closes as a short (with its own credits), mostly unrelated to the rest of the film, except in as much as it introduced one of the characters, Jack, and explains references that are mentioned later on.
The main body of the film opens with Bill Murray rushing to catch a train, somewhere in India. This, like the short, is a beautifully filmed misdirection, as the actual plot takes off with another man running past him on the station, to actually catch the train as it is pulling away. This man joins his two brothers in a compartment, for a journey across India together. The Whitman brothers, Francis, Peter and Jack, are a very believable trio, with quirky personalities that don't delve too far into the extremes. It is here that the theme of the movie is revealed. The oldest brother, Francis, has had a near-fatal car accident, and wishes to bond with his brothers on a spiritual journey through India.
All three brothers have their own issues, wonderfully explored throughout the film. The journey takes them to many places, beautiful scenes, and strange situations. The film is funny, whilst giving an interesting view of the characters and their lives. Their past is hinted at from early on, but not explained fully till much later.
There are recurring themes, which get more amusing each time they are repeated. In particular the inherited set of suitcases that the brothers religiously carry around with them for the entire journey act as a comedic device, while later being used as extremely poignant symbolism. Over the course of the film, it becomes clear that all three brothers have problems that they need to sort out... and by the end, you feel that they are on the way to doing that.
The Darjeeling Limited is a comedy that manages to delve into human nature and relationships and come up with a good plot and characters, whilst still remaining funny. It is slightly off-the-wall while not slipping off the rails into outright fantasy. Then there are the occasional poignant moments, which enforce that this film is not pure comedy. The acting was outstanding, and the direction emphasised the themes, whilst making the most of the some beautiful settings. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and it left me with that wholesome feeling that I had been entertained whilst still watching something that was, beneath the surface, a very 'good' film.
The main body of the film opens with Bill Murray rushing to catch a train, somewhere in India. This, like the short, is a beautifully filmed misdirection, as the actual plot takes off with another man running past him on the station, to actually catch the train as it is pulling away. This man joins his two brothers in a compartment, for a journey across India together. The Whitman brothers, Francis, Peter and Jack, are a very believable trio, with quirky personalities that don't delve too far into the extremes. It is here that the theme of the movie is revealed. The oldest brother, Francis, has had a near-fatal car accident, and wishes to bond with his brothers on a spiritual journey through India.
All three brothers have their own issues, wonderfully explored throughout the film. The journey takes them to many places, beautiful scenes, and strange situations. The film is funny, whilst giving an interesting view of the characters and their lives. Their past is hinted at from early on, but not explained fully till much later.
There are recurring themes, which get more amusing each time they are repeated. In particular the inherited set of suitcases that the brothers religiously carry around with them for the entire journey act as a comedic device, while later being used as extremely poignant symbolism. Over the course of the film, it becomes clear that all three brothers have problems that they need to sort out... and by the end, you feel that they are on the way to doing that.
The Darjeeling Limited is a comedy that manages to delve into human nature and relationships and come up with a good plot and characters, whilst still remaining funny. It is slightly off-the-wall while not slipping off the rails into outright fantasy. Then there are the occasional poignant moments, which enforce that this film is not pure comedy. The acting was outstanding, and the direction emphasised the themes, whilst making the most of the some beautiful settings. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and it left me with that wholesome feeling that I had been entertained whilst still watching something that was, beneath the surface, a very 'good' film.
Sunday, 27 January 2008
Review of 'Stardust' by Neil Gaiman
This is an adorable fairytale about a boy who leaves his (mostly ordinary) home village, and sets out on a quest through the (magical) land of Faerie, to find a fallen star. As such quests tend to go, he is not the only person looking for the star, and at the same time, two other groups set out, both seeking it for different reasons.
Often sweet, regularly amusing and occasionally slightly gruesome, this book juxtaposes the childlike telling of a fairytale quest, with hints of the more realistic, the more worldly, and certainly the more adult perspective. The story is incredibly easy to read, because it is told in language that is, if not simplistic, at least easily comprehensible. And the tale that is woven is a wonderful mixture of the best that fairytales have to offer.
The strengths of this book, and its main source of charm, come from the way in which the protagonist, Tristran Thorn, finds himself in totally new and unfamiliar circumstances and how he deals with them. With his goal always in mind, he trips and stumbles through semi-typical fairytale adventures (all with a slight twist, so as to hold interest). There are those that help and hinder. There are witches, and princes, a unicorn, and talking trees, and almost all of the woodland animals seem to be enchanted humans of some form or other. The picture presented of this world is beautiful and magical, and it is described and explored wonderfully through Tristran's unfamiliarity.
Where I felt the book fell down slightly was in conveying the interactions between characters. While I often dislike books that over-labour the love-story aspect of the tale, I felt this book completely glossed over it, so that although you can tell from quite early on how the story will end, you don't quite believe it until it has already happened. It made more of a brief encounter between two other characters than it did of the love story that the book was leading towards.
However, in spite of this, this book was a very entertaining read, told in elegant style and well worth reading.
Often sweet, regularly amusing and occasionally slightly gruesome, this book juxtaposes the childlike telling of a fairytale quest, with hints of the more realistic, the more worldly, and certainly the more adult perspective. The story is incredibly easy to read, because it is told in language that is, if not simplistic, at least easily comprehensible. And the tale that is woven is a wonderful mixture of the best that fairytales have to offer.
The strengths of this book, and its main source of charm, come from the way in which the protagonist, Tristran Thorn, finds himself in totally new and unfamiliar circumstances and how he deals with them. With his goal always in mind, he trips and stumbles through semi-typical fairytale adventures (all with a slight twist, so as to hold interest). There are those that help and hinder. There are witches, and princes, a unicorn, and talking trees, and almost all of the woodland animals seem to be enchanted humans of some form or other. The picture presented of this world is beautiful and magical, and it is described and explored wonderfully through Tristran's unfamiliarity.
Where I felt the book fell down slightly was in conveying the interactions between characters. While I often dislike books that over-labour the love-story aspect of the tale, I felt this book completely glossed over it, so that although you can tell from quite early on how the story will end, you don't quite believe it until it has already happened. It made more of a brief encounter between two other characters than it did of the love story that the book was leading towards.
However, in spite of this, this book was a very entertaining read, told in elegant style and well worth reading.
Saturday, 19 January 2008
Review of 'The Wasp Factory' by Iain Banks
The first person narrator of this piece is a sixteen-year-old boy, with macabre habits, strange fascinations, and dark secrets. Frank Cauldhame, as he is called, lives on a small island, just off the coast of Scotland, with his father. The island is his world, his domain. Within it, he believes he has almost total power. Frank also has an older brother, Eric, who does not live on the island. But Eric is coming home.
There is only one way to tell a tale from the perspective of a mind as unconventional as Frank’s, and that is in a completely matter-of-fact tone of voice, that makes every bizarre event and belief seem completely reasonable. Frank describes his day, his thoughts and emotions, and at times there is the strong sensation that he is an inevitable consequence of his past and upbringing.
Each event is described with precision, each ritual is mentioned with the assurance of someone that feels such things are completely necessary. The narrator alludes to much in the first chapters, but does not describe any of these things in full till much later. It is this curiousity, as much as anything, which draws the reader through the book. But these things, when finally revealed, do not disappoint.
While there is much about this novel that is almost otherworldly, or at the very least slightly dubious, as a horror novel, it is disturbing in its plausibility. The characters, while skewed from the norm, are definitely not outside the realms of possibility, which makes their actions all the more emotionally wrenching. From beginning to end, The Wasp Factory is intensely readable, and equally disturbing.
There is only one way to tell a tale from the perspective of a mind as unconventional as Frank’s, and that is in a completely matter-of-fact tone of voice, that makes every bizarre event and belief seem completely reasonable. Frank describes his day, his thoughts and emotions, and at times there is the strong sensation that he is an inevitable consequence of his past and upbringing.
Each event is described with precision, each ritual is mentioned with the assurance of someone that feels such things are completely necessary. The narrator alludes to much in the first chapters, but does not describe any of these things in full till much later. It is this curiousity, as much as anything, which draws the reader through the book. But these things, when finally revealed, do not disappoint.
While there is much about this novel that is almost otherworldly, or at the very least slightly dubious, as a horror novel, it is disturbing in its plausibility. The characters, while skewed from the norm, are definitely not outside the realms of possibility, which makes their actions all the more emotionally wrenching. From beginning to end, The Wasp Factory is intensely readable, and equally disturbing.
Review of 'Endymion' by Dan Simmons
Endymion is the sequel to Hyperion and Fall of Hyperion. Reading these two first makes everything much clearer, but I would not say it is completely necessary. Most of the necessary information is referenced somewhere within the book, although sometimes events that occurred in Hyperion/Fall of Hyperion that aren't important to the plot of Endymion are mentioned, which might be a little confusing without having read the first two books first. However, I will try not to spoil the plot of Hyperion in the review below:
Set 250 years after the end of ‘Fall of Hyperion’, this book picks up with completely different characters, a new world order, a completely different feel to the worlds. This is space opera in its richest form; a chase across planetary systems, new space drives, new technologies. The main characters include a child, a convict that narrowly escaped a death sentence, an android and a priest. Raul Endymion is the main character and the narrator. The story starts with an act of anger, of revenge. The harsh consequences lead Raul to meet a man that asks him to go on a seemingly impossible quest. And of course, he accepts.
The story gets increasingly improbable from there on in. But it is told in beautiful style, each new world described so as to make it seem completely believable. And all of the events fit seamlessly into the framework already described in the two Hyperion books. Each new twist of the plot draws the reader further into the story. This is one of those books you just don't want to put down. Each time it seems the pursuers are gaining, you worry for the main characters, you wonder how they can possibly escape in time. Occasionally you are lulled into a false sense of security, only to be shocked completely in the next chapter.
Endymion is beautifully written, wonderfully described. The leader is led through the story by a desire to know how Raul got into the situation from which he is writing, and by the tense, exciting events that are happening in his ‘past’. Perhaps Dan Simmons overuses the cliffhanger as a dramatic device, so that you are almost forced to read through the next two chapters before you even think about putting the book down. But if he is guilty of this sin, then he is acquitted by his skill at using the device. The two connected, interweaving narratives drive the reader through the world, seeing it from two jarring perspectives, and wishing the main characters forward, away from harm.
While I would definitely recommend reading Hyperion first, I can most assuredly recommend Endymion as a very worthwhile read. Dan Simmons has created a universe both beautiful and terrifying, and I believe that all science fiction lovers will revel in it.
Set 250 years after the end of ‘Fall of Hyperion’, this book picks up with completely different characters, a new world order, a completely different feel to the worlds. This is space opera in its richest form; a chase across planetary systems, new space drives, new technologies. The main characters include a child, a convict that narrowly escaped a death sentence, an android and a priest. Raul Endymion is the main character and the narrator. The story starts with an act of anger, of revenge. The harsh consequences lead Raul to meet a man that asks him to go on a seemingly impossible quest. And of course, he accepts.
The story gets increasingly improbable from there on in. But it is told in beautiful style, each new world described so as to make it seem completely believable. And all of the events fit seamlessly into the framework already described in the two Hyperion books. Each new twist of the plot draws the reader further into the story. This is one of those books you just don't want to put down. Each time it seems the pursuers are gaining, you worry for the main characters, you wonder how they can possibly escape in time. Occasionally you are lulled into a false sense of security, only to be shocked completely in the next chapter.
Endymion is beautifully written, wonderfully described. The leader is led through the story by a desire to know how Raul got into the situation from which he is writing, and by the tense, exciting events that are happening in his ‘past’. Perhaps Dan Simmons overuses the cliffhanger as a dramatic device, so that you are almost forced to read through the next two chapters before you even think about putting the book down. But if he is guilty of this sin, then he is acquitted by his skill at using the device. The two connected, interweaving narratives drive the reader through the world, seeing it from two jarring perspectives, and wishing the main characters forward, away from harm.
While I would definitely recommend reading Hyperion first, I can most assuredly recommend Endymion as a very worthwhile read. Dan Simmons has created a universe both beautiful and terrifying, and I believe that all science fiction lovers will revel in it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)