Public Enemies tells the story of the notorious bank robber, John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) and his associates as they win their illicit gains in Chicago in the 30's. At the same time, J. Edgar Hoover is looking for blood, and places Melvin Purvis (Christian Bale) in charge of catching Dillinger and his friends.
While I know little of the history surrounding the true story of Dillinger and Purvis, this film had the 'ring of truth' about it, that made me believe in it. There are scenes showing expertly planned jailbreaks, bank robberies, charming villains enjoying their down-time and smooth policemen. It all looked and felt like everything I know of 1930's America, and I'd be happy to believe there is enough of the real history in there that any changes were within poetic license.
From very early on in the film, I found myself rooting for Dillinger, although in essence he was the 'bad guy'. In a way, I was also rooting for Purvis, though I knew that in order for the film to be good cinema, only one of them could win. With each event, I worried, wondering if the end was coming for Dillinger's crime wave. He was a bank robber, and he used people as human shields... but as he did so, he offered a cold hostage his coat, and sang to another hostage in the getaway car.
Johnny Depp has proven to me time and time again that he is a versatile and brilliant actor. His performance as Dillinger did not disappoint me at all. With each turn of events, you could see every facet of the character played out. While he was a violent man, there were also ways in which he was gentlemanly, and Johnny Depp brings both of these sides of the character out with confidence and surety. He especially excelled in showing Dillinger's love for Billie Freschette, but also his carefree attitude, never thinking ahead.
On the other side of the screen, Christian Bale pleasantly surprised me. I have often being underwhelmed by his performances on the big screen, but in Public Enemies he plays the polished policeman well. Playing a character somewhere between the emotionless cleric John Preston of Equilibrium and the vigilante superhero Batman, Bale portrays the single-minded, practical Purvis with keen insight. While grieving for a dead colleague, or staring down the barrel of a gun, Purvis had great screen-presence, and was a believable leader.
Aside from these two stars, there was an excellent supporting cast, which made the whole film immensely watchable and entertaining. All in all, a very well filmed and put-together show.
If I had to make any criticism, it would be that the large cast made it occasionally difficult to follow who was who, especially amongst the people that Dillinger found himself working for. However, this can be said of many films that set out to mirror real-life, which has its own extensive cast. And although I was occasionally lost in the supporting cast, the leading roles strung everything together well enough that in most parts it didn't really matter.
As a welcome break from mediocre action movies and overly depressing dramas, I thoroughly enjoyed Public Enemies.
Tuesday, 28 July 2009
Sunday, 28 June 2009
Review of 'The Handmaid's Tale' by Margaret Atwood
I didn't take English A level myself, but many of my friends did. Through most of the AS year, there were copies of The Handmaid's Tale kicking around the sixth-form common room, and I was always intrigued. Occasionally I'd overhear conversations about the book, scholarly discussions, and the kind of in-depth analysis that put me off English Literature as a subject in the first place. But it sounded interesting, and so I promised to read it on its own terms.
The Handmaid's Tale is a science fiction story, but science fiction is an almost incidental affectation. The book is good science fiction, because the world in which the main character lives is essential to her story. Otherwise, it is purely about the character, who she is, what happens to her, and why she made the choices that she did. The story is set in a future that seems bleak and dark. Women have been segregated into functions, and Offred is a Handmaid; her function is produce offspring for married couples that are otherwise unable. Stripped of her individuality and even her original name, Offred must struggle with her memories and with her knowledge, and with her emotions.
As science fiction, The Handmaid's Tale is a very interesting exercise. The world is so different from that of today, that it is almost inconceivable how it could come about from the current United States. However, as the story progresses this becomes believable, even inevitable. It is a future well told. The narrator reveals snippets of information, very gradually throughout the story. Very little is exposed at any one point, but gradually I got a picture of the world, of the character, of the past that had led to this future.
As Offred is not in a position of knowledge or power, not everything is revealed. This is both brilliant and slightly frustrating. I was devouring each snippet of knowledge, wishing for more. I wanted to know what was going on in the world as a whole; what was happening outside Offred's home city. Throughout, I got the feeling that the author knew and just wasn't telling me... but this in its way is brilliant. The world is so thoroughly conceived that I was convinced that these details existed, but a first-person tale would have to have had a very different narrator to gather all of those details, and then it wouldn't have been a Handmaid's tale at all.
The story follows a character's development, so it doesn't have a single consistent plot stream. The most I could say is that it's a story of Offred's posting with one particular Commander. At some points it seems like a particular story thread is going to open up new opportunities, but while there are many interesting occurrences, there is nothing world-changing in her story. She is there to tell it how it is, living and dealing with a heavily oppressive regime. She is not there to change the world.
I have to say that I was slightly unsure about the ending, or rather the fact that it does not end. Offred's story just stops, and the epilogue explains nothing of what happened to her. In some ways, I find this frustrating. I wanted to know what happened to her, and what became of her. In other ways, the ending would perhaps have been less powerful if it had been more neat. I am unsure. However, in most cases, I think I would prefer a more complete ending, with a little less ambiguity.
Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed The Handmaid's Tale. It was compulsively readable, very easy to read and very well written. I found pages slipping by without effort, which is a very refreshing feeling. Every emotion is conveyed skilfully and powerfully, and at times I felt like I was totally immersed in Offred's world. While I classify it as science fiction, I would by no means limit its readership to science fiction fans. This book is very accessible to all kinds of readers. In fact, it might appeal to non science fiction readers more, because of the way the story is about a single person, in an unremarkable position, struggling in a cruel world.
There is only one novel that I have still loved after tearing it apart and reading it numerous times at school. I would tentatively say that, if I had continued, I would still have loved The Handmaid's Tale. While not my usual kind of ripping yarn, it was a powerful story, brilliantly told. It is definitely added to a list of highly recommended texts.
The Handmaid's Tale is a science fiction story, but science fiction is an almost incidental affectation. The book is good science fiction, because the world in which the main character lives is essential to her story. Otherwise, it is purely about the character, who she is, what happens to her, and why she made the choices that she did. The story is set in a future that seems bleak and dark. Women have been segregated into functions, and Offred is a Handmaid; her function is produce offspring for married couples that are otherwise unable. Stripped of her individuality and even her original name, Offred must struggle with her memories and with her knowledge, and with her emotions.
As science fiction, The Handmaid's Tale is a very interesting exercise. The world is so different from that of today, that it is almost inconceivable how it could come about from the current United States. However, as the story progresses this becomes believable, even inevitable. It is a future well told. The narrator reveals snippets of information, very gradually throughout the story. Very little is exposed at any one point, but gradually I got a picture of the world, of the character, of the past that had led to this future.
As Offred is not in a position of knowledge or power, not everything is revealed. This is both brilliant and slightly frustrating. I was devouring each snippet of knowledge, wishing for more. I wanted to know what was going on in the world as a whole; what was happening outside Offred's home city. Throughout, I got the feeling that the author knew and just wasn't telling me... but this in its way is brilliant. The world is so thoroughly conceived that I was convinced that these details existed, but a first-person tale would have to have had a very different narrator to gather all of those details, and then it wouldn't have been a Handmaid's tale at all.
The story follows a character's development, so it doesn't have a single consistent plot stream. The most I could say is that it's a story of Offred's posting with one particular Commander. At some points it seems like a particular story thread is going to open up new opportunities, but while there are many interesting occurrences, there is nothing world-changing in her story. She is there to tell it how it is, living and dealing with a heavily oppressive regime. She is not there to change the world.
I have to say that I was slightly unsure about the ending, or rather the fact that it does not end. Offred's story just stops, and the epilogue explains nothing of what happened to her. In some ways, I find this frustrating. I wanted to know what happened to her, and what became of her. In other ways, the ending would perhaps have been less powerful if it had been more neat. I am unsure. However, in most cases, I think I would prefer a more complete ending, with a little less ambiguity.
Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed The Handmaid's Tale. It was compulsively readable, very easy to read and very well written. I found pages slipping by without effort, which is a very refreshing feeling. Every emotion is conveyed skilfully and powerfully, and at times I felt like I was totally immersed in Offred's world. While I classify it as science fiction, I would by no means limit its readership to science fiction fans. This book is very accessible to all kinds of readers. In fact, it might appeal to non science fiction readers more, because of the way the story is about a single person, in an unremarkable position, struggling in a cruel world.
There is only one novel that I have still loved after tearing it apart and reading it numerous times at school. I would tentatively say that, if I had continued, I would still have loved The Handmaid's Tale. While not my usual kind of ripping yarn, it was a powerful story, brilliantly told. It is definitely added to a list of highly recommended texts.
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
Review of 'Stranger in a Strange Land' by Robert Heinlein
It's difficult to say how far into the future this is set, and Heinlein cleverly avoids mentioning dates (almost certainly a wise move). In some ways his world is far beyond ours; interplanetary travel, hovering cars, and grass carpets some of the things we can expect. Socially, perhaps, Heinlein is half a step behind our current progression, but it is not so far behind that it rankled. In this future, an exploratory manned mission is sent to Mars with several couples aboard. However, after arriving on Mars they are never heard from again. Many years later, a follow-up expedition is sent to find out what happened to them. Once there they discover the Martians, and they discover the only survivor of the original expedition; a baby born soon after the original crew's arrival on Mars, raised by Martians.
Stranger in a Strange Land is compulsively written, beautifully descriptive and incredibly well-paced. Heinlein reveals his future Earth piece by piece, and unravels his ideas about the Martians and Mike's upbringing equally carefully and gradually. The characters are all believable, from Mike himself as he struggles to understand people, to the people that become his guardians and friends. Everything about the book is incredibly well put together, and has many elements that give it the air of realism that makes it very easy to fully immerse yourself in the book.
The plot seems to split the book into two main sections. The first half sees Mike's arrival from Earth and escape from the confines he is originally found in, into the care of nurse Jill Boardman and lawyer-doctor-writer Jubal Harshaw. They try to teach Mike about the world and the human way, at the same time learning a lot about the Martian way. I thoroughly enjoyed this half of the book, smiling and laughing and feeling along with the characters. The plot was at times intense, at other times carefree, and always expertly crafted.
In the second half, Mike undergoes a (sharp, by human standards) transition into adulthood and the story follows him as he attempts to find his way in the wider world, and show others the Martian way. In this half, Heinlein gets a lot more political, struggling through Mike with religion and world politics. To me, this half felt a little odd; I did not fully comprehend the point of view being put forward, so I found it difficult to roll along with it. As Mike would say, I did not 'grok its fullness'. While it was still very well written, the plot became less intense and more thought-provoking, while the subject matter became a lot more controversial. I began to see why people at the time had sought to suppress the novel.
Part of me thinks that the novel would have been complete had it finished at the end of the first half, but in another way it needed it. Either way, the sudden change in mood and energy half way through left me lurching slightly. I was not entirely comfortable with the subject matter in the second half of the book, which made it more difficult to enjoy. However, throughout, it remains well-written and everything is excellently described. Only the ending seemed a little short, with a couple of loose ends not quite tied up as I would have liked.
All of the characters grow and change throughout the novel, especially Mike, and his friends. The only character that doesn't seem to change dramatically between start and finish is Jubal Harshaw, who is already old, set in his ways, and wise. For me he was a brilliant character, able to play devils advocate for any position and understand things always from all points of view. This quality is something I strive for (and usually fail) for myself, so seeing it so well-done in a character on the page was wonderful. Jubal's point of view made it easier to enter into the story more fully, and for that I loved him.
Stranger in a Strange land is a long book. It took me a very long time to read, mostly because of limited time available for me to devote to it. However, I think it was worth all the time it took to read it. Perhaps not for the faint-hearted, but definitely a good read. I've heard that others of Heinlein's books are better, and I am looking forward to reading these enthusiastically, because if they are as good throughout as the first half of Stranger, I feel I will begin to fully grok how Heinlein worked his way into the ranks of science fiction masters, controversial political opinions and all.
Stranger in a Strange Land is compulsively written, beautifully descriptive and incredibly well-paced. Heinlein reveals his future Earth piece by piece, and unravels his ideas about the Martians and Mike's upbringing equally carefully and gradually. The characters are all believable, from Mike himself as he struggles to understand people, to the people that become his guardians and friends. Everything about the book is incredibly well put together, and has many elements that give it the air of realism that makes it very easy to fully immerse yourself in the book.
The plot seems to split the book into two main sections. The first half sees Mike's arrival from Earth and escape from the confines he is originally found in, into the care of nurse Jill Boardman and lawyer-doctor-writer Jubal Harshaw. They try to teach Mike about the world and the human way, at the same time learning a lot about the Martian way. I thoroughly enjoyed this half of the book, smiling and laughing and feeling along with the characters. The plot was at times intense, at other times carefree, and always expertly crafted.
In the second half, Mike undergoes a (sharp, by human standards) transition into adulthood and the story follows him as he attempts to find his way in the wider world, and show others the Martian way. In this half, Heinlein gets a lot more political, struggling through Mike with religion and world politics. To me, this half felt a little odd; I did not fully comprehend the point of view being put forward, so I found it difficult to roll along with it. As Mike would say, I did not 'grok its fullness'. While it was still very well written, the plot became less intense and more thought-provoking, while the subject matter became a lot more controversial. I began to see why people at the time had sought to suppress the novel.
Part of me thinks that the novel would have been complete had it finished at the end of the first half, but in another way it needed it. Either way, the sudden change in mood and energy half way through left me lurching slightly. I was not entirely comfortable with the subject matter in the second half of the book, which made it more difficult to enjoy. However, throughout, it remains well-written and everything is excellently described. Only the ending seemed a little short, with a couple of loose ends not quite tied up as I would have liked.
All of the characters grow and change throughout the novel, especially Mike, and his friends. The only character that doesn't seem to change dramatically between start and finish is Jubal Harshaw, who is already old, set in his ways, and wise. For me he was a brilliant character, able to play devils advocate for any position and understand things always from all points of view. This quality is something I strive for (and usually fail) for myself, so seeing it so well-done in a character on the page was wonderful. Jubal's point of view made it easier to enter into the story more fully, and for that I loved him.
Stranger in a Strange land is a long book. It took me a very long time to read, mostly because of limited time available for me to devote to it. However, I think it was worth all the time it took to read it. Perhaps not for the faint-hearted, but definitely a good read. I've heard that others of Heinlein's books are better, and I am looking forward to reading these enthusiastically, because if they are as good throughout as the first half of Stranger, I feel I will begin to fully grok how Heinlein worked his way into the ranks of science fiction masters, controversial political opinions and all.
Saturday, 6 June 2009
Review of the 2009 film 'Coraline'
It seems I'm developing a habit for mainly seeing Neil Gaiman's works on screen. Aside from Stardust and the first of the Sandman comics, I have read very little of the author's works... but this is the second of his films that I have seen at the cinema. It seems his works lend themselves well to the big screen.
I saw Coraline in 3D... so I'll talk about that, once I examine the film on its merits.
On moving to a new house in the country, Coraline Jones feels she will not like it much. In her neighbours she finds some amusement and eccentricity, but the only child her age she finds annoying, and her parents are too busy to entertain. In a search of the house, however, she comes across a small door in the wall. Behind is apparently bricked up, until she is led back there in the middle of the night and finds herself in another version of her house, with her Other Mother and Other Father, and exciting wonders created for her. It all seems amazing, but as you might expect there is more to it than meets the eye and it's all a bit too good to be true.
I was intrigued by the plot and swept along by it as I watched. I was not surprised to hear later that the book on which this film was based has often been compared to Alice In Wonderland (my initial thoughts were Through the Looking Glass, but the point stands). Many of the same themes were in the film as Coraline explores the new world and tries to find her way home when she discovers the truth. However, Coraline is a lot darker than Alice, and while Coraline even has her own version of the Cheshire cat, the darkness in the other world, and the threat that the Other Mother eventually possesses is quite different to Alice's own travails. The plot was rich and interesting. The themes covered many of the problems that children might face after a move; loneliness and looking for adventure and new friends, as well as some of the more general emotional troubles a child with busy parents might face. As Coraline learns and grows through the film, I grew to really care for her character, and it was a very nice progression.
In pacing the film slipped somewhat. The main part is wonderful for creating interest and suspense, while the latter part the film feels somewhat rushed, with the ending reached all too soon. It felt almost like a mini-adventure tacked on the end, except for the way in which it resolved the plot.
The film was brought to life in brilliant stop-motion animation. It was very pretty, although stylistically I felt it was trying a little to hard to mimic Tim Burton's unique style of animation and modelling, which it did not quite achieve. However, it was still beautiful and an interesting and quirky style that brought the surreal plot and characters to life.
As a film and as a story I would very much recommend Coraline to viewers of all ages as an occasionally creepy, ever-so-slightly scary, very entertaining film.
To the 3D aspect of the film, then...
Well, to be honest, if I could have found a showing in 2D I would have seen that instead. The 3D thing, while interesting, strikes me as a bit of a gimmick and doesn't really add anything to the film itself. I'm glad I went to see one film in 3D, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it. Some people have said they found the 3D disorienting. While I did, I did find some of the more gratuitous 3D shots a little strange. There were lots of shots of things done purely to make the most of 3D filming, whereas for the majority of the film the extra depth did very little. I'll be interested to see how the 3D thing goes, and as the technology improves I expect it'll become even more common. However, I was not particularly impressed by it, except from the position of scientific interest.
I saw Coraline in 3D... so I'll talk about that, once I examine the film on its merits.
On moving to a new house in the country, Coraline Jones feels she will not like it much. In her neighbours she finds some amusement and eccentricity, but the only child her age she finds annoying, and her parents are too busy to entertain. In a search of the house, however, she comes across a small door in the wall. Behind is apparently bricked up, until she is led back there in the middle of the night and finds herself in another version of her house, with her Other Mother and Other Father, and exciting wonders created for her. It all seems amazing, but as you might expect there is more to it than meets the eye and it's all a bit too good to be true.
I was intrigued by the plot and swept along by it as I watched. I was not surprised to hear later that the book on which this film was based has often been compared to Alice In Wonderland (my initial thoughts were Through the Looking Glass, but the point stands). Many of the same themes were in the film as Coraline explores the new world and tries to find her way home when she discovers the truth. However, Coraline is a lot darker than Alice, and while Coraline even has her own version of the Cheshire cat, the darkness in the other world, and the threat that the Other Mother eventually possesses is quite different to Alice's own travails. The plot was rich and interesting. The themes covered many of the problems that children might face after a move; loneliness and looking for adventure and new friends, as well as some of the more general emotional troubles a child with busy parents might face. As Coraline learns and grows through the film, I grew to really care for her character, and it was a very nice progression.
In pacing the film slipped somewhat. The main part is wonderful for creating interest and suspense, while the latter part the film feels somewhat rushed, with the ending reached all too soon. It felt almost like a mini-adventure tacked on the end, except for the way in which it resolved the plot.
The film was brought to life in brilliant stop-motion animation. It was very pretty, although stylistically I felt it was trying a little to hard to mimic Tim Burton's unique style of animation and modelling, which it did not quite achieve. However, it was still beautiful and an interesting and quirky style that brought the surreal plot and characters to life.
As a film and as a story I would very much recommend Coraline to viewers of all ages as an occasionally creepy, ever-so-slightly scary, very entertaining film.
To the 3D aspect of the film, then...
Well, to be honest, if I could have found a showing in 2D I would have seen that instead. The 3D thing, while interesting, strikes me as a bit of a gimmick and doesn't really add anything to the film itself. I'm glad I went to see one film in 3D, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it. Some people have said they found the 3D disorienting. While I did, I did find some of the more gratuitous 3D shots a little strange. There were lots of shots of things done purely to make the most of 3D filming, whereas for the majority of the film the extra depth did very little. I'll be interested to see how the 3D thing goes, and as the technology improves I expect it'll become even more common. However, I was not particularly impressed by it, except from the position of scientific interest.
Review of the 2009 film 'Star Trek'
It was obvious from the start of this film that it wasn't the same Star Trek that I grew up with. If I'm honest, when I saw the trailer I thought that they had made Star Trek into something alien and wrong, and just given the characters the same names.
I wasn't entirely incorrect in this, but I wasn't entirely right either. There was lots of hat-tipping towards the fans of the original series (some would say too much), but in many other ways the characters and people were completely different than their original counter-parts. Perhaps they were striving hard to find a balance, and in some ways they made it, in other ways they did not.
The plot of the film follows Kirk and the other characters from the original Star Trek series as they end their time at the Star Fleet academy and arrive on the Enterprise under Captain Pike, ready to embark on a rescue mission. Kirk finds himself up against many hardships, including the logical, by-the-book Spock as he fights to forge a name for himself.
While the plot spans the boundary between action-adventure and science fiction, it seemed to me that it was veering a little more towards action, with the science fiction played down except in as far as the technology available acted as a useful plot-device. There was some overuse of the 'Character Shield' however, and from quite early on you could begin to see which character was going to survive the story.
As far as the characters go, I felt that some of them captured the essence better than others. Kirk had much of the same fearless attitude as his original counter-part, and he certainly had the same approach to hand-to-hand combat. He had a lot of the cocky youth about him, but he also had the air of the effortless genius, which I think was what they were aiming for with the impassioned Kirk. His relationship with Bones McCoy was beautiful from the start, and there was very good onscreen chemistry between the two. Bones himself did a very good job of straddling the boundary between the old character and the new. He had the same variable temperament, and I loved his portrayal. I believe Bones actually captured something very important and developed on it from the original character. While he had relatively less screen-time than Spock or Kirk, I loved every minute of it.
The start of Spock's shaky relationship with Kirk was an interesting twist on the original version of events. While, as I have said, the film-makers made it very obvious from the start that they were moving away from the original canon, the Spock-Kirk relationship had to be strong, and it was. Starting antagonistically, the two have to come around to the mutual respect and admiration that was present in the series, regardless of canon. Both actors managed this admirably.
With Uhura they tried to improve the original character by making it clear that she had a well-defined job role and necessary skills. However, in many ways, she was still the bridge-ornament that the original character had been, and was the only candidate for the shoe-horned romance, which made her a weaker character in my opinion. In many ways she was even more lacking than Nichelle Nicholls' Uhura, because the original character was a black woman was appearing in a position of command on a television program in the sixties. In those days, any presence was an improvement on what had gone before. Nowadays, I think they could have gone a little further. While she was a very good actor, and portrayed the character she was given very well, I was somewhat disappointed by the conventional Uhura. The shoe-horned romance also annoyed me for several reasons, but I'm attempting not to spoil the details for those who have not yet had a chance to see the film.
Scotty was played by Simon Pegg. He captured the humorous side of the original scotsman very well, but in some ways seemed to miss some of the original's professionalism and scottish darkness; in many ways Pegg's performance turned Scotty into something of a pastiche, and while his comic relief was well-received, I cannot say I was one-hundred percent convinced by it. Chekov and Sulu were both brilliantly acted, but as with Uhura I felt that while the original characters did a lot for multiculturalism, the new characters almost held it back. Chekov's accent is made a source of comedy, although the character is brilliantly intelligent and stands out despite his relatively minor role. At another point, I was very disappointed that in a combat situation Sulu pulled out a sword to use, both because it stereotyped the character, and because in the future I'd expect some other weapon to be far more effective.
Overall, however, Star Trek was a good action movie, and a fair Space Opera. It was not the original Star Trek, and separated itself both in canon and mood, but it was an entertaining film. It had enough to keep the older fans amused and also to encourage a new audience, and as such I will recommend it. I will be interested to see if this is kept up in any future sequels, if future sequels occur.
I wasn't entirely incorrect in this, but I wasn't entirely right either. There was lots of hat-tipping towards the fans of the original series (some would say too much), but in many other ways the characters and people were completely different than their original counter-parts. Perhaps they were striving hard to find a balance, and in some ways they made it, in other ways they did not.
The plot of the film follows Kirk and the other characters from the original Star Trek series as they end their time at the Star Fleet academy and arrive on the Enterprise under Captain Pike, ready to embark on a rescue mission. Kirk finds himself up against many hardships, including the logical, by-the-book Spock as he fights to forge a name for himself.
While the plot spans the boundary between action-adventure and science fiction, it seemed to me that it was veering a little more towards action, with the science fiction played down except in as far as the technology available acted as a useful plot-device. There was some overuse of the 'Character Shield' however, and from quite early on you could begin to see which character was going to survive the story.
As far as the characters go, I felt that some of them captured the essence better than others. Kirk had much of the same fearless attitude as his original counter-part, and he certainly had the same approach to hand-to-hand combat. He had a lot of the cocky youth about him, but he also had the air of the effortless genius, which I think was what they were aiming for with the impassioned Kirk. His relationship with Bones McCoy was beautiful from the start, and there was very good onscreen chemistry between the two. Bones himself did a very good job of straddling the boundary between the old character and the new. He had the same variable temperament, and I loved his portrayal. I believe Bones actually captured something very important and developed on it from the original character. While he had relatively less screen-time than Spock or Kirk, I loved every minute of it.
The start of Spock's shaky relationship with Kirk was an interesting twist on the original version of events. While, as I have said, the film-makers made it very obvious from the start that they were moving away from the original canon, the Spock-Kirk relationship had to be strong, and it was. Starting antagonistically, the two have to come around to the mutual respect and admiration that was present in the series, regardless of canon. Both actors managed this admirably.
With Uhura they tried to improve the original character by making it clear that she had a well-defined job role and necessary skills. However, in many ways, she was still the bridge-ornament that the original character had been, and was the only candidate for the shoe-horned romance, which made her a weaker character in my opinion. In many ways she was even more lacking than Nichelle Nicholls' Uhura, because the original character was a black woman was appearing in a position of command on a television program in the sixties. In those days, any presence was an improvement on what had gone before. Nowadays, I think they could have gone a little further. While she was a very good actor, and portrayed the character she was given very well, I was somewhat disappointed by the conventional Uhura. The shoe-horned romance also annoyed me for several reasons, but I'm attempting not to spoil the details for those who have not yet had a chance to see the film.
Scotty was played by Simon Pegg. He captured the humorous side of the original scotsman very well, but in some ways seemed to miss some of the original's professionalism and scottish darkness; in many ways Pegg's performance turned Scotty into something of a pastiche, and while his comic relief was well-received, I cannot say I was one-hundred percent convinced by it. Chekov and Sulu were both brilliantly acted, but as with Uhura I felt that while the original characters did a lot for multiculturalism, the new characters almost held it back. Chekov's accent is made a source of comedy, although the character is brilliantly intelligent and stands out despite his relatively minor role. At another point, I was very disappointed that in a combat situation Sulu pulled out a sword to use, both because it stereotyped the character, and because in the future I'd expect some other weapon to be far more effective.
Overall, however, Star Trek was a good action movie, and a fair Space Opera. It was not the original Star Trek, and separated itself both in canon and mood, but it was an entertaining film. It had enough to keep the older fans amused and also to encourage a new audience, and as such I will recommend it. I will be interested to see if this is kept up in any future sequels, if future sequels occur.
Review of the 2007 film '300'.
The Persians are threatening the Roman empire, and the oracles refuse to condone war against them. In defiance, King Leonidus leads 300 of his best Spartans to face them in battle, hoping that their skill will prove superior to the enemies much greater numbers.
I have no idea about the voracity of the events of this film, but I suspect that it was only loosely grounded in the facts of the time. Stylistically and cinematically, however, I immensely enjoyed this film, and would recommend it to anyone that likes action films.
The acting is strong throughout, and they make the warlike attitude of the Spartans completely believable. I have never understood how anyone can find war glorious or wonderful, but somehow the actors in this film made me feel it. King Leonidus (Gerard Butler) was a brilliant character, defiant in the face of tradition and proud. However, his confidence and hope in his men was not completely misplaced. He felt his small army was the best hope for Sparta, and he was prepared to risk death alongside them. More importantly, if the screens were to be believed, they were proud and willing to fight alongside him.
Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey) was, for me, one of the most interesting characters in this film. She was a proud Spartan woman, keenly intelligent and strong, like her husband. The story following the queen showed a woman that loves him fiercely, but accepts their way of life whole-heartedly. The actress gets across the pain of parting, without showing a moment of weakness. This felt like one of the most realistic portrayals in the film.
In plot, the film is mostly a long sequence of battles and politics. There is a lot of attention paid to action sequences, with plenty of gore to please the more bloodthirsty viewer. The subtleties of the plot are few, and politics mostly come down to explaining why the King is still fighting with only 300 men.
I was not quite so keen on the slightly over-exposed film, but it was at least stylistically fitting. There was not much colour in the film, which I think brought across the Spartan way of life quite well.
If you like large-scale action movies, I would recommend 300. If you enjoyed Troy, you will definitely enjoy 300, because it is a similar vein, but done better (albeit with less famous actors). However, even if you didn't enjoy Troy, I wouldn't rule out 300, because it was a very enjoyable film quite separate from the other. I connect them only as films about a similar era, with a similar attitude to historical fact; that it should never be stuck to so rigidly that it gets in the way of an entertaining film.
I have no idea about the voracity of the events of this film, but I suspect that it was only loosely grounded in the facts of the time. Stylistically and cinematically, however, I immensely enjoyed this film, and would recommend it to anyone that likes action films.
The acting is strong throughout, and they make the warlike attitude of the Spartans completely believable. I have never understood how anyone can find war glorious or wonderful, but somehow the actors in this film made me feel it. King Leonidus (Gerard Butler) was a brilliant character, defiant in the face of tradition and proud. However, his confidence and hope in his men was not completely misplaced. He felt his small army was the best hope for Sparta, and he was prepared to risk death alongside them. More importantly, if the screens were to be believed, they were proud and willing to fight alongside him.
Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey) was, for me, one of the most interesting characters in this film. She was a proud Spartan woman, keenly intelligent and strong, like her husband. The story following the queen showed a woman that loves him fiercely, but accepts their way of life whole-heartedly. The actress gets across the pain of parting, without showing a moment of weakness. This felt like one of the most realistic portrayals in the film.
In plot, the film is mostly a long sequence of battles and politics. There is a lot of attention paid to action sequences, with plenty of gore to please the more bloodthirsty viewer. The subtleties of the plot are few, and politics mostly come down to explaining why the King is still fighting with only 300 men.
I was not quite so keen on the slightly over-exposed film, but it was at least stylistically fitting. There was not much colour in the film, which I think brought across the Spartan way of life quite well.
If you like large-scale action movies, I would recommend 300. If you enjoyed Troy, you will definitely enjoy 300, because it is a similar vein, but done better (albeit with less famous actors). However, even if you didn't enjoy Troy, I wouldn't rule out 300, because it was a very enjoyable film quite separate from the other. I connect them only as films about a similar era, with a similar attitude to historical fact; that it should never be stuck to so rigidly that it gets in the way of an entertaining film.
Review of the 1998 film 'What Dreams May Come'
In this film, Robin William's plays Chris Nielson, a devoted husband and father of two. In a tragic accident, both of his children are killed, and a while later, he too follows in another accident. He is transported to heaven, where he is led through the first stages of coming to terms with his own death by a friend from his past. As he is learning to love the afterlife that he is granted, he finds out that his wife, his soul-mate, has committed suicide, and her own despair has condemned her to hell.
There are many beautiful themes in this film, with a lot of very effective imagery. Death is bitter-sweet, with knowledge of the people that are left behind, but also joy as they realise that everything can be exactly as it should be. The darker parts of the film deal with despair and the agonies that humans can put each other through just as well.
Visually, the film is quite stunning. The scenes carry splendour and serenity all in one, as the characters forge their own worlds in which to come to terms with death. In particular, there is a fabulous scene when Chris first comes to heaven. He finds his solace using a rendering of a painting his wife had made for them. At first, the world is literally painted and Williams is paddling through the painting, covering himself with splots of all different colours. It was very well done, and a wonderful image that helped me to really immerse in Chris' journey.
The plot, while relatively simple, is very well paced. The beginning and end have a kind of symmetry that made me smile, and everything in between seems to go through, dealing with events in their own time without rushing or lingering.
The acting was consistent and very good throughout the film. Robin Williams always manages happiness and sadness with equal strength, as Chris tries to be light and happy through dark times and as he struggles to deal with his own losses. Chris' guides in the afterlife play teacher and friend, and are believable in each role. The characters' emotions are portrayed wonderfully by all of the actors, from the happiness in normal life, through to the anguish of loss, and the confusion of death.
My main criticism of this film is that sometimes it seems a little too dark, and a little too monotone. While there is a clear difference in the emotions that are being conveyed at different times, sometimes the overall mood and atmosphere does not seem to change enough to really capture this. There is always a sense of loss throughout the film. Perhaps this is a strength, rather than a weakness. However, it felt that at the times when Chris is trying to be happy and preparing to wait for his wife to join him there should be more of a lift. And when he receives the bad news, and the explanation of his wife's death, there should be more of a dip in the mood.
However, in general this film was warm and thought-provoking, getting across many interesting ideas about death and people and souls. Conceptually, it is a very good film, and I thoroughly enjoyed the way it portrayed its chosen slant, regardless of whether I completely agree with its choices or not. What Dreams May Come is definitely a film for those that like quiet, thought-provoking entertainment, and as such I believe it succeeds in its aims.
There are many beautiful themes in this film, with a lot of very effective imagery. Death is bitter-sweet, with knowledge of the people that are left behind, but also joy as they realise that everything can be exactly as it should be. The darker parts of the film deal with despair and the agonies that humans can put each other through just as well.
Visually, the film is quite stunning. The scenes carry splendour and serenity all in one, as the characters forge their own worlds in which to come to terms with death. In particular, there is a fabulous scene when Chris first comes to heaven. He finds his solace using a rendering of a painting his wife had made for them. At first, the world is literally painted and Williams is paddling through the painting, covering himself with splots of all different colours. It was very well done, and a wonderful image that helped me to really immerse in Chris' journey.
The plot, while relatively simple, is very well paced. The beginning and end have a kind of symmetry that made me smile, and everything in between seems to go through, dealing with events in their own time without rushing or lingering.
The acting was consistent and very good throughout the film. Robin Williams always manages happiness and sadness with equal strength, as Chris tries to be light and happy through dark times and as he struggles to deal with his own losses. Chris' guides in the afterlife play teacher and friend, and are believable in each role. The characters' emotions are portrayed wonderfully by all of the actors, from the happiness in normal life, through to the anguish of loss, and the confusion of death.
My main criticism of this film is that sometimes it seems a little too dark, and a little too monotone. While there is a clear difference in the emotions that are being conveyed at different times, sometimes the overall mood and atmosphere does not seem to change enough to really capture this. There is always a sense of loss throughout the film. Perhaps this is a strength, rather than a weakness. However, it felt that at the times when Chris is trying to be happy and preparing to wait for his wife to join him there should be more of a lift. And when he receives the bad news, and the explanation of his wife's death, there should be more of a dip in the mood.
However, in general this film was warm and thought-provoking, getting across many interesting ideas about death and people and souls. Conceptually, it is a very good film, and I thoroughly enjoyed the way it portrayed its chosen slant, regardless of whether I completely agree with its choices or not. What Dreams May Come is definitely a film for those that like quiet, thought-provoking entertainment, and as such I believe it succeeds in its aims.
Saturday, 25 April 2009
Review of 'Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency' by Douglas Adams
Douglas Adams' outlandish and slightly surreal sense of humour is brought to bear on the detective genre in fantastic style with this book. The story follows Richard MacDuff, Cambridge graduate and software engineer working with Gordon Way at WayForward industries. After an evening dining with a Professor at his old Cambridge college, a series of unusual occurrences lead Richard into the services of Dirk. As a detective, Dirk Gently firmly believes in the fundamental interconnectedness of all things; somehow there is a connection between a sofa stuck in a stairwell, a conjuring trick and a mysterious murder, and he is determined to find out what it is.
The plot of this story is a beautiful example of the kind of forward planning that I have never found myself quite capable of. It opens a series of strings, then brings them all back together seamlessly by the end of the book. There is no rushing, no unnecessary detail, and the yarn is spun extremely well. Anything that is important is mentioned at its first occurrence as commonplace, then brought up later as extraordinary. The story is compelling and never boring, and the suspense is kept up until the last few pages where the reader is let down just slowly enough to avoid the ending feeling rushed.
The characters in this book were all brilliant. They each seemed rich and real, despite everything that was going on. Richard is a good example of a computer scientist obsessed with strange ideas and given enough freedom to explore them. The Professor of Chronology was only a slight fantasy caricature of the Cambridge Don stereotype, and within it he was believable and real. Even Dirk, eccentric as he is, has an air of reality that is carried through the book. As well as starting out good characters, I felt that there was excellent consistency throughout.
In terms of comedy, I don't know if Douglas Adams' humour is for all; it is often off-the-wall and odd, but for me that was one of it's greatest charms. This book wasn't often laugh-out-loud funny, but it was consistently amusing, and I had a smile on my face for much of the reading. At each turn the strange events fit perfectly with what is known of the world we have been introduced to.
Generally, this was a very entertaining read, well written and very well composed. This is another to add to my list of recommendations of a very enjoyable, if slightly odd and irreverent science fiction comedy.
The plot of this story is a beautiful example of the kind of forward planning that I have never found myself quite capable of. It opens a series of strings, then brings them all back together seamlessly by the end of the book. There is no rushing, no unnecessary detail, and the yarn is spun extremely well. Anything that is important is mentioned at its first occurrence as commonplace, then brought up later as extraordinary. The story is compelling and never boring, and the suspense is kept up until the last few pages where the reader is let down just slowly enough to avoid the ending feeling rushed.
The characters in this book were all brilliant. They each seemed rich and real, despite everything that was going on. Richard is a good example of a computer scientist obsessed with strange ideas and given enough freedom to explore them. The Professor of Chronology was only a slight fantasy caricature of the Cambridge Don stereotype, and within it he was believable and real. Even Dirk, eccentric as he is, has an air of reality that is carried through the book. As well as starting out good characters, I felt that there was excellent consistency throughout.
In terms of comedy, I don't know if Douglas Adams' humour is for all; it is often off-the-wall and odd, but for me that was one of it's greatest charms. This book wasn't often laugh-out-loud funny, but it was consistently amusing, and I had a smile on my face for much of the reading. At each turn the strange events fit perfectly with what is known of the world we have been introduced to.
Generally, this was a very entertaining read, well written and very well composed. This is another to add to my list of recommendations of a very enjoyable, if slightly odd and irreverent science fiction comedy.
Friday, 10 April 2009
Review of 'Broken' by Martina Cole
Broken sees the return of Kate Burrows and Patrick Kelly from 'The LadyKiller' in a new story. Young children are being taken from their mothers and left in peril. Most are rescued from harm, but then the body of a small child is discovered... Kate is on the investigation. In the mean time, Patrick gets into trouble with some very dangerous individuals.
Despite my continuing tirade against Martina Cole, I have to say this wasn't that bad. It was an entertaining read with a good plot and some good characters. Perhaps I started the book with such low expectations that anything would have seemed good, but as I read I found myself forgetting how much the style annoyed me for large swathes, and I was actually quite keen to find out what would happen.
As the plot unfolds, Cole hints at things that are to come with excellent pacing, and I was actually genuinely surprised by some of the revelations. Despite Cole's continuing attempts to undermine her characters by spelling out their traits and thought processes, I found myself quite liking Kate Burrows, even though at times I couldn't believe in her. While I couldn't understand or relate to the bad guys or the unfortunates that Cole is writing about, I did for the most part accept them enough to get into the story, which was a huge improvement over some of the things I've read. For the first time in a long while I glimpsed something of what has made Martina Cole quite so popular.
However, while the elation I feel at never having to read another of Martina Cole's novels has left me with a propensity to be magnanimous, I feel I must also mention some of the major criticisms that occasionally reminded me why I disliked the previous books. For one thing, certain characters were undergoing regular personality-transplants which grates on the reader a little at times, especially when it is drawn attention to by some of Martina's stock phrases.
Which brings me to my main criticism of all the books: I don't understand why all her characters talk and think in the same annoying cockney accents. I'm sick of rhyming slang. I'm sick of people loving each other 'in their own way' as opposed to the normal, healthy way. I'm sick of Kate 'feeling the pull' of Patrick: yes, she's hot for him, I get that... please, move on. I'm sick of characters telling me that people are 'a touch'. A touch of what? Plague? All of these would be fine if they appeared a couple of times, but the fact that I noticed them means that they are used far too regularly, and as Martina's characters are so fond of saying: it got on my wick.
I'm harsh, by now... as I bought these books, I had to read them. If I had bought them all consecutively rather than in a batch, I would have read perhaps three or four before growing tired and not bothering. So they were entertaining reads, once upon a time, and I don't believe for a second that the ones I read first were just inherently better. So, as I have said before, you may well enjoy Martina Cole. As an experienced hand, I believe this is one of her best books, and certainly one of the most interesting plots that she has written. It could have done with being half the length, but it was not as mind-numbing as other things I've read.
In conclusion, while I tentatively put 'Broken' forward as a good read in comparison with other Martina Cole novels, I am still very glad I do not have any more such books waiting on my shelf.
Despite my continuing tirade against Martina Cole, I have to say this wasn't that bad. It was an entertaining read with a good plot and some good characters. Perhaps I started the book with such low expectations that anything would have seemed good, but as I read I found myself forgetting how much the style annoyed me for large swathes, and I was actually quite keen to find out what would happen.
As the plot unfolds, Cole hints at things that are to come with excellent pacing, and I was actually genuinely surprised by some of the revelations. Despite Cole's continuing attempts to undermine her characters by spelling out their traits and thought processes, I found myself quite liking Kate Burrows, even though at times I couldn't believe in her. While I couldn't understand or relate to the bad guys or the unfortunates that Cole is writing about, I did for the most part accept them enough to get into the story, which was a huge improvement over some of the things I've read. For the first time in a long while I glimpsed something of what has made Martina Cole quite so popular.
However, while the elation I feel at never having to read another of Martina Cole's novels has left me with a propensity to be magnanimous, I feel I must also mention some of the major criticisms that occasionally reminded me why I disliked the previous books. For one thing, certain characters were undergoing regular personality-transplants which grates on the reader a little at times, especially when it is drawn attention to by some of Martina's stock phrases.
Which brings me to my main criticism of all the books: I don't understand why all her characters talk and think in the same annoying cockney accents. I'm sick of rhyming slang. I'm sick of people loving each other 'in their own way' as opposed to the normal, healthy way. I'm sick of Kate 'feeling the pull' of Patrick: yes, she's hot for him, I get that... please, move on. I'm sick of characters telling me that people are 'a touch'. A touch of what? Plague? All of these would be fine if they appeared a couple of times, but the fact that I noticed them means that they are used far too regularly, and as Martina's characters are so fond of saying: it got on my wick.
I'm harsh, by now... as I bought these books, I had to read them. If I had bought them all consecutively rather than in a batch, I would have read perhaps three or four before growing tired and not bothering. So they were entertaining reads, once upon a time, and I don't believe for a second that the ones I read first were just inherently better. So, as I have said before, you may well enjoy Martina Cole. As an experienced hand, I believe this is one of her best books, and certainly one of the most interesting plots that she has written. It could have done with being half the length, but it was not as mind-numbing as other things I've read.
In conclusion, while I tentatively put 'Broken' forward as a good read in comparison with other Martina Cole novels, I am still very glad I do not have any more such books waiting on my shelf.
Monday, 23 March 2009
Review of “2001: A Space Odyssey” by Arthur C Clarke
If I had realised that the book was based on the film, I probably would have seen the film first. However, now that I have read the book, I will review it. Even if it is now a few years out of date (dating sci-fi is always a dangerous thing to do).
In the far distant past, a tribe of mankind's ancestors are affected by a strange alien crystal monolith, which gives evolution a nudge in a certain direction. In the (for the sake of argument) near future, a black monolith is uncovered on the moon. Two years after this, a ship is sent on a mission to fly-by Jupiter, using it as a sling-shot to grant it the extra momentum required to reach its target; Saturn.
This is a story told in three parts, and two of them, at least, I found interesting. The first section, following Moon-Watcher the man-ape as his tribe is affected by the monolith was interesting enough to keep me reading eagerly to find out what happened. It was perhaps a little slow, containing a lot of unnecessary detail, but it was not bogged down by them, and it got its points across very well. The second was more fast-paced, more intriguing and had a character I found it easier to relate to as he was swept away from Earth to a mission on the moon. The suspense as he made his way to the moon was very well done, and the pacing such that I didn't get bored before anything happened.
The third and final section, though, following David Bowman and life on the ship Discovery, I found quite boring. Dave himself didn't have much character, and the story of his life onboard ship I found dull and unnecessary: I have seen writers give much clearer and better descriptions with much less text and the story would have been better if this had been cut back. Perhaps the dull tone was there to be in keeping with the monotony of life on the ship; but it also has to tell a story, and for a long while nothing happened.
When finally things did start to happen (as I stuck with it knowing that they must) I found the attempts at suspense crude and obvious, the pacing (again) flawed and slow, and the peril did not feel real enough for me to be at all disturbed by it. When the famous scenes with Hal and Dave came about, I was reading dispassionately, and I wasn't particularly interested in the fate of Dave, Hal or any of the other characters. The ending, at least, redeemed the book a little, but even then it was a bit too surreal and strange for me to really get behind it. Perhaps it would have worked better on screen, but from what people have told me, they didn't get that far in the film... I have to wonder if anything actually happened in this movie.
All in all, I was not overwhelmed by 2001 a Space Odyssey. It was bland, quite interesting in parts, but not the science fiction classic that the film's cult following would have led me to believe.
In the far distant past, a tribe of mankind's ancestors are affected by a strange alien crystal monolith, which gives evolution a nudge in a certain direction. In the (for the sake of argument) near future, a black monolith is uncovered on the moon. Two years after this, a ship is sent on a mission to fly-by Jupiter, using it as a sling-shot to grant it the extra momentum required to reach its target; Saturn.
This is a story told in three parts, and two of them, at least, I found interesting. The first section, following Moon-Watcher the man-ape as his tribe is affected by the monolith was interesting enough to keep me reading eagerly to find out what happened. It was perhaps a little slow, containing a lot of unnecessary detail, but it was not bogged down by them, and it got its points across very well. The second was more fast-paced, more intriguing and had a character I found it easier to relate to as he was swept away from Earth to a mission on the moon. The suspense as he made his way to the moon was very well done, and the pacing such that I didn't get bored before anything happened.
The third and final section, though, following David Bowman and life on the ship Discovery, I found quite boring. Dave himself didn't have much character, and the story of his life onboard ship I found dull and unnecessary: I have seen writers give much clearer and better descriptions with much less text and the story would have been better if this had been cut back. Perhaps the dull tone was there to be in keeping with the monotony of life on the ship; but it also has to tell a story, and for a long while nothing happened.
When finally things did start to happen (as I stuck with it knowing that they must) I found the attempts at suspense crude and obvious, the pacing (again) flawed and slow, and the peril did not feel real enough for me to be at all disturbed by it. When the famous scenes with Hal and Dave came about, I was reading dispassionately, and I wasn't particularly interested in the fate of Dave, Hal or any of the other characters. The ending, at least, redeemed the book a little, but even then it was a bit too surreal and strange for me to really get behind it. Perhaps it would have worked better on screen, but from what people have told me, they didn't get that far in the film... I have to wonder if anything actually happened in this movie.
All in all, I was not overwhelmed by 2001 a Space Odyssey. It was bland, quite interesting in parts, but not the science fiction classic that the film's cult following would have led me to believe.
Sunday, 22 March 2009
Review of the 2009 film 'Watchmen'
My first cinema trip of the year (it's been a slow starter, to be sure) was to see Watchmen, yet another superhero flick. I have to say that after watching it, it became immediately obvious where some of the inspiration for the Pixar superhero spoof The Incredibles (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317705) came from. I should also say that I have never read the graphic novel, so my opinions might be different to those of someone that had.
The 'masks' started as a way of fighting back against masked gangs, but they became a superhero group. None of them, bar one, had any actual super powers; aside from intense physical training, fight-skill and gadgetry, these are supposed to be normal people taking on the masks. But they fought crime, delivered their own brand of vigilante justice, and the masked heroes became the expected day-savers. Later, though, as the second generation of masks came to fame, the public grew angry at the vigilantes, and eventually the masks were outlawed and the heroes went into retirement. The plot begins when one of the first generation of masks is murdered, and Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), the only mask who never revealed his true identity to the other masks, investigates in the belief that someone is seeking out masks. All this on the background of the cold war, with the doomsday clock sweeping ever closer to midnight...
This was an incredibly well-produced and well-directed film. Everything in it fitted together supremely well, and the filming was exemplary. The special effects were brilliantly done, and while some of it documented unrealistic events, they didn't overshadow the importance of plot or characters. Equally, the costumes were all wonderful, and very much of the time; the 'classic' costumes belonging to the first-generation masks looked like they were made in the 50s, while the later costumes were better produced and looked more like they belonged in their own timezone. There was a lot of comic-book violence, with a lot of gory scenes in various places around the movie... all looked extremely realistic, terrifying and sickening. All in all, not a film for children.
The film also did a very good of mixing the fantastical elements with the realistic. Aside from Doctor Manhatten (Billy Crudup), a superman explained by a freak accident in a physics laboratory, there is very little that could not fit into the world as we know it. Night Owl's (Patrick Wilson) flyer (Archie) and glasses, and Rorschach's mask all stretch the limits of what was possible then, and indeed now, but there was a surprising amount of realism about it all.
What I found to be the best thing in this film, though, were the characters; all of the actors seemed comfortable in the roles, and while they were given limited space for back story, each of them appeared to have a real past, even if it was never explored. While Rorschach, Silk Spectre and Doctor Manhatten were given a reasonable amount of flashbacks, telling of their relevant past, the other characters all seemed to have just as much depth, complicated emotions, human reactions and thought processes... they were all very real, down to the slightly self-conscious, humorous slant they put on their being masked superheroes.
While I could accept Doctor Manhatten's super-powers as they were given a reason, albeit an implausible one, I was very conscious that the other characters were not supposed to have any innate abilities. Their strength and speed was supposedly the result of training and confidence... however, at various times throughout the movie I found the superheroes tipping over into super-human. I can forgive a lot in the name of plot, and in the end I forgave this as well, but I feel that the makers of this film should have chosen either to have outright super-powers, or kept the abilities of these heroes to within the normal tolerances of very fit and well-trained humans.
All I can say about the ending is that I felt it let the film down a bit. There was some very pretty filming sequences, but of all the film the conflict the characters were supposedly going through seemed to have the least effect; when it should have had most. Only Rorschach's outbursts had the same punch.
Overall, though, Watchmen was a brilliant film and I would heartily recommend it as both an excellent example of a superhero drama, and as an excellent example of the transition from graphic novel to screen.
The 'masks' started as a way of fighting back against masked gangs, but they became a superhero group. None of them, bar one, had any actual super powers; aside from intense physical training, fight-skill and gadgetry, these are supposed to be normal people taking on the masks. But they fought crime, delivered their own brand of vigilante justice, and the masked heroes became the expected day-savers. Later, though, as the second generation of masks came to fame, the public grew angry at the vigilantes, and eventually the masks were outlawed and the heroes went into retirement. The plot begins when one of the first generation of masks is murdered, and Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), the only mask who never revealed his true identity to the other masks, investigates in the belief that someone is seeking out masks. All this on the background of the cold war, with the doomsday clock sweeping ever closer to midnight...
This was an incredibly well-produced and well-directed film. Everything in it fitted together supremely well, and the filming was exemplary. The special effects were brilliantly done, and while some of it documented unrealistic events, they didn't overshadow the importance of plot or characters. Equally, the costumes were all wonderful, and very much of the time; the 'classic' costumes belonging to the first-generation masks looked like they were made in the 50s, while the later costumes were better produced and looked more like they belonged in their own timezone. There was a lot of comic-book violence, with a lot of gory scenes in various places around the movie... all looked extremely realistic, terrifying and sickening. All in all, not a film for children.
The film also did a very good of mixing the fantastical elements with the realistic. Aside from Doctor Manhatten (Billy Crudup), a superman explained by a freak accident in a physics laboratory, there is very little that could not fit into the world as we know it. Night Owl's (Patrick Wilson) flyer (Archie) and glasses, and Rorschach's mask all stretch the limits of what was possible then, and indeed now, but there was a surprising amount of realism about it all.
What I found to be the best thing in this film, though, were the characters; all of the actors seemed comfortable in the roles, and while they were given limited space for back story, each of them appeared to have a real past, even if it was never explored. While Rorschach, Silk Spectre and Doctor Manhatten were given a reasonable amount of flashbacks, telling of their relevant past, the other characters all seemed to have just as much depth, complicated emotions, human reactions and thought processes... they were all very real, down to the slightly self-conscious, humorous slant they put on their being masked superheroes.
While I could accept Doctor Manhatten's super-powers as they were given a reason, albeit an implausible one, I was very conscious that the other characters were not supposed to have any innate abilities. Their strength and speed was supposedly the result of training and confidence... however, at various times throughout the movie I found the superheroes tipping over into super-human. I can forgive a lot in the name of plot, and in the end I forgave this as well, but I feel that the makers of this film should have chosen either to have outright super-powers, or kept the abilities of these heroes to within the normal tolerances of very fit and well-trained humans.
All I can say about the ending is that I felt it let the film down a bit. There was some very pretty filming sequences, but of all the film the conflict the characters were supposedly going through seemed to have the least effect; when it should have had most. Only Rorschach's outbursts had the same punch.
Overall, though, Watchmen was a brilliant film and I would heartily recommend it as both an excellent example of a superhero drama, and as an excellent example of the transition from graphic novel to screen.
Sunday, 15 March 2009
Review of 'Chocky' by John Wyndham
I am a few years older than the target demographic for Chocky, but a mark of a good children's book is accessibility to adults. My mum had spoken highly of it, as had one of my best friends, so I sat down to read it. As a children's book, it is an incredibly easy read... the narrative flow is simple and comprehensible, and the book is quite short. However, it was very accessible to me as a sometimes-adult reader, and it was another book that made up for my struggling through the Martina Cole at the beginning of the year.
When Matthew starts talking to himself and asking unusual questions, his parents think it is a phase he is going through. When he reveals the existence of Chocky, at first they think that it is an imaginary friend... an unusual phase for an eleven year old boy, but still something reasonable, explainable and above all fictional. Eventually, however, they have to face the possibility that Chocky is something else entirely, as Matthew demonstrates skills and abilities that no child of his age could easily pick up, and that no one has taught him.
The science fiction in this story is very subtle, and discovered only gradually over the course of the story. This made incredibly easy to immerse in the world, and meant that all the elements of strangeness, while quiet, stood out quite clearly as the narrative progressed. The main character, Matthew's father has a very down-to-earth attitude, which makes it very easy to follow his trains of thought and it is very easy to relate to his point of view. It is also very easy to relate to the character of Matthew; a sensitive, intelligent and above-all quite normal boy... with Matthew, John Wyndham has bypassed many of the usual pitfalls of adults writing about children, and Matthew comes across as a very real representation of an eleven year old boy.
As usual, I find it a struggle to come up with a balanced review; if I have enjoyed a book, its bad points fall behind... if I did not enjoy it, its good points usually escape me. The problems I might be able to pick out of this book all amount to the fact that it was written a few years ago, and times have changed. I find it quite easy to step my thinking back in time, but others might not. A feminist review might find the mother character a little irrational and annoying (in a sixties sit-com way), but from looking at my own mother (who would be about the same age at the time the book was written), I can see how the attitudes and thoughts of the time could have bred a woman (and family) that acted very much this way. A physicist or theoretical mathematician might question the logistics of the science fiction elements, but it's a children's books and the characters and story take precedence, so this doesn't really bother me.
In short, Chocky is a very good children's science fiction, and adults will also find it an easy and entertaining read. If you never enjoy anything that you construe to be 'dated' then you might want to give it a miss, but otherwise, I would recommend this to nearly anyone, even if they usually don't enjoy science fiction.
When Matthew starts talking to himself and asking unusual questions, his parents think it is a phase he is going through. When he reveals the existence of Chocky, at first they think that it is an imaginary friend... an unusual phase for an eleven year old boy, but still something reasonable, explainable and above all fictional. Eventually, however, they have to face the possibility that Chocky is something else entirely, as Matthew demonstrates skills and abilities that no child of his age could easily pick up, and that no one has taught him.
The science fiction in this story is very subtle, and discovered only gradually over the course of the story. This made incredibly easy to immerse in the world, and meant that all the elements of strangeness, while quiet, stood out quite clearly as the narrative progressed. The main character, Matthew's father has a very down-to-earth attitude, which makes it very easy to follow his trains of thought and it is very easy to relate to his point of view. It is also very easy to relate to the character of Matthew; a sensitive, intelligent and above-all quite normal boy... with Matthew, John Wyndham has bypassed many of the usual pitfalls of adults writing about children, and Matthew comes across as a very real representation of an eleven year old boy.
As usual, I find it a struggle to come up with a balanced review; if I have enjoyed a book, its bad points fall behind... if I did not enjoy it, its good points usually escape me. The problems I might be able to pick out of this book all amount to the fact that it was written a few years ago, and times have changed. I find it quite easy to step my thinking back in time, but others might not. A feminist review might find the mother character a little irrational and annoying (in a sixties sit-com way), but from looking at my own mother (who would be about the same age at the time the book was written), I can see how the attitudes and thoughts of the time could have bred a woman (and family) that acted very much this way. A physicist or theoretical mathematician might question the logistics of the science fiction elements, but it's a children's books and the characters and story take precedence, so this doesn't really bother me.
In short, Chocky is a very good children's science fiction, and adults will also find it an easy and entertaining read. If you never enjoy anything that you construe to be 'dated' then you might want to give it a miss, but otherwise, I would recommend this to nearly anyone, even if they usually don't enjoy science fiction.
Review of 'Axiomatic' by Greg Egan
Axiomatic is a book of short stories, so reviewing it becomes very difficult; do I sit down and review each story in turn, pick out a few favoured or disfavoured stories or do I just review the book as a collection? I choose to take a path somewhere between the latter two options.
Axiomatic is a very fine collection. Greg Egan is obviously very skilled in the art of the short story. Before I read Diaspora, I read the first short story in this book, and I really enjoyed it. It instantly hooked, explained events and the world over the course of the story and finished neatly in the course of the few pages allotted. This proved to be characteristic; with each story, Egan introduces his cast, world-builds and gives a plot to follow, each ending satisfactorily in a few thousand words.
While the title of the book might give the impression of a series of stories similarly structured and paced, the actual stories follow varying patterns, all of them interesting. The characters vary considerably, but all of them impress a strong sense of self within a page of reading them, and appear entirely self-consistent within their world. The worlds vary, and the topics vary. Egan explores many fields of science. He has a tendency towards hard SF, but he deals with it as well as he did in Disapora, and does not waste time explaining scientific detail over page-long expositions when the medium does not allow it. Character-driven hard SF takes complicated ideas back into the realm of the possible, and Egan did stunningly well in this for both Diaspora, and in this collection.
His characters vary from normal people in extraordinary situations, normal people in situations that are normal for their time (but nearly inconceivable in ours) to extraordinary people dealing with normal and extraordinary events. They are good, bad and neutral, they all feel very real and they all fit perfectly within their setting.
Obviously some of the stories are better than others, but people might disagree over which were the best. There is some continuity of narrative style, but that probably just proves that Egan wrote all of them in a smallish time-span, and is neither a negative nor positive point. Occasionally the stories deal with controversial viewpoints, or things that just didn't sit quite well with my own experience and upbringing. Again, though, I cannot fault the collection for this because I was made to think about my own world-view and experience, and that in itself is a valuable thing, and probably marks a good writer (even if I did not always agree with the conclusions).
Now to short-review a few of my favourites.
The Infinite Assassin follows a character walking into a strange disturbance of parallel worlds. The story starts in confusion, and gradually everything is explained until the plot rises to a brilliant climax and finished equally brilliantly. It was a thoroughly excellent and impelling read.
Eugene deals with a revolution in made-to-order babies and an attempt by one scientist to create the most intelligent child ever born. While the story itself is fairly slow-paced and descriptive, giving a lot of back-story into the characters and discussing their moral standpoints, the ending is intriguing, almost funny in its insight, but also very thought-provoking.
The Safe-Deposit Box deals with an altogether stranger topic; a man exists who wakes up each morning in a new host body, and attempts to carve out a life and his own personality while spending each day with different people, unable to have anything that is truly his own. It is a fascinating look at the adaptability of consciousness, and a very interesting world-view.
Into Darkness introduces a future world where a wormhole has become unstuck, and appears almost at random on the surface of the Earth. The wormhole goes one-way through time; from past to a few minutes in the future, and within the limits of the wormhole's area of effect, you can only travel one way. It becomes very easy to become trapped against a wall, and crushed by the inexorable pressure to move forward. The Runners go in to try and help who they can; to save children and other vulnerable people that are moving through the wormhole. The idea itself is fascinating, and the conclusion of the story almost frightening. This story really shows off Greg Egan's talent for making hard SF accessible to the world.
The stories I didn't enjoy as much dealt more with the concept of consciousness; implants to affect viewpoint, jewels that completely mimic the brain until a switch is made so that the jewel takes over. I did very much enjoy these stories, and they were definitely very skilfully told, but my own preferences tended towards the physical sciences, rather than the stories that discussed the 'magic' of consciousness. This is entirely just personal preference, though, so I would encourage other readers to give each story a chance. They are all brilliant in their way.
Being a book of short stories, Axiomatic was incredibly easy to read. Each little episode was terribly difficult to put down, and I found myself hungry for more after each story. If you want some excellent SF short stories to read, you could do much worse than Axiomatic.
Axiomatic is a very fine collection. Greg Egan is obviously very skilled in the art of the short story. Before I read Diaspora, I read the first short story in this book, and I really enjoyed it. It instantly hooked, explained events and the world over the course of the story and finished neatly in the course of the few pages allotted. This proved to be characteristic; with each story, Egan introduces his cast, world-builds and gives a plot to follow, each ending satisfactorily in a few thousand words.
While the title of the book might give the impression of a series of stories similarly structured and paced, the actual stories follow varying patterns, all of them interesting. The characters vary considerably, but all of them impress a strong sense of self within a page of reading them, and appear entirely self-consistent within their world. The worlds vary, and the topics vary. Egan explores many fields of science. He has a tendency towards hard SF, but he deals with it as well as he did in Disapora, and does not waste time explaining scientific detail over page-long expositions when the medium does not allow it. Character-driven hard SF takes complicated ideas back into the realm of the possible, and Egan did stunningly well in this for both Diaspora, and in this collection.
His characters vary from normal people in extraordinary situations, normal people in situations that are normal for their time (but nearly inconceivable in ours) to extraordinary people dealing with normal and extraordinary events. They are good, bad and neutral, they all feel very real and they all fit perfectly within their setting.
Obviously some of the stories are better than others, but people might disagree over which were the best. There is some continuity of narrative style, but that probably just proves that Egan wrote all of them in a smallish time-span, and is neither a negative nor positive point. Occasionally the stories deal with controversial viewpoints, or things that just didn't sit quite well with my own experience and upbringing. Again, though, I cannot fault the collection for this because I was made to think about my own world-view and experience, and that in itself is a valuable thing, and probably marks a good writer (even if I did not always agree with the conclusions).
Now to short-review a few of my favourites.
The Infinite Assassin follows a character walking into a strange disturbance of parallel worlds. The story starts in confusion, and gradually everything is explained until the plot rises to a brilliant climax and finished equally brilliantly. It was a thoroughly excellent and impelling read.
Eugene deals with a revolution in made-to-order babies and an attempt by one scientist to create the most intelligent child ever born. While the story itself is fairly slow-paced and descriptive, giving a lot of back-story into the characters and discussing their moral standpoints, the ending is intriguing, almost funny in its insight, but also very thought-provoking.
The Safe-Deposit Box deals with an altogether stranger topic; a man exists who wakes up each morning in a new host body, and attempts to carve out a life and his own personality while spending each day with different people, unable to have anything that is truly his own. It is a fascinating look at the adaptability of consciousness, and a very interesting world-view.
Into Darkness introduces a future world where a wormhole has become unstuck, and appears almost at random on the surface of the Earth. The wormhole goes one-way through time; from past to a few minutes in the future, and within the limits of the wormhole's area of effect, you can only travel one way. It becomes very easy to become trapped against a wall, and crushed by the inexorable pressure to move forward. The Runners go in to try and help who they can; to save children and other vulnerable people that are moving through the wormhole. The idea itself is fascinating, and the conclusion of the story almost frightening. This story really shows off Greg Egan's talent for making hard SF accessible to the world.
The stories I didn't enjoy as much dealt more with the concept of consciousness; implants to affect viewpoint, jewels that completely mimic the brain until a switch is made so that the jewel takes over. I did very much enjoy these stories, and they were definitely very skilfully told, but my own preferences tended towards the physical sciences, rather than the stories that discussed the 'magic' of consciousness. This is entirely just personal preference, though, so I would encourage other readers to give each story a chance. They are all brilliant in their way.
Being a book of short stories, Axiomatic was incredibly easy to read. Each little episode was terribly difficult to put down, and I found myself hungry for more after each story. If you want some excellent SF short stories to read, you could do much worse than Axiomatic.
Review of The Foundation Trilogy by Isaac Asimov
After a prolonged absence in which I was mostly writing for my novel and getting caught up with the 'real world stuff', I return to my review blog to tell you all about what I've been reading recently. Starting with this...
The Foundation Trilogy was always one of those pieces of classic science fiction I was told I had to read from an early age. I never quite got around to it until about two months ago, when I borrowed the trilogy from my mum and started devouring them page by page. They deserve every bit of praise they ever receive, even if the first book starts quite slowly.
A very long time into the future, Hari Seldon develops the field of psychohistory; an interesting social science, which uses statistics and implied complex mathematics to predict, with startling accuracy, trends in culture and probable future courses. Asimov explains this science as well as is possible without it actually existing; he always explains that it wouldn't be possible in a population of millions, or even billions... but with the galactic population numbering in the multi-trillions, it becomes possible to predict mob mentalities. And thus, Hari Seldon predicts the fall of the Empire, and thirty thousand years of chaos and barbarism before the rise of the next. In an effort to reduce the length of this barbaric period, Seldon sets up two foundations... plotting out the course of their future with a series of crises they must overcome on their inexorable rise to the beginning of the next Empire. The novels follow the story of the first Foundation, set up on a small planet at the edge of the galaxy called Terminus.
The first book, as I have said starts slowly. Perhaps this is not quite fair; the very beginning is as instantly intriguing and interesting as one could expect from any novel, and it draws the reader into the world of psychohistory. However, the first book is a slow progression, waiting for the Foundation to overcome the inevitable crises with equal inevitability; it's just a question of seeing what happens and how it is resolved. This is not a weakness, because the results are always interesting, but it does lend a certain security for the reader, which is not perhaps as powerful as a plot where events are assumed to be random and unpredictable.
Another minor issue I had with the first book was that it was very episodic. Each section follows a different character and just as you are becoming accustomed to one character, another takes his place as the lead role, and the story moves on. However, this is probably a limitation of telling a story that spans 300 years, and so I can forgive it.
The second book follows two crisis stages. In the first, a strong general has appeared in the Empire, under the last strong Emperor, set on conquest of the Foundation. In the second crisis, it begins to look as though Seldon was not as omniscient as he appeared through the first book and a half. Psychohistory is a tool for predicting the behaviour of civilisations, moves and movements, and motives of entire cultures; when it comes to individuals, the tool is much less effective. And so, when a rather singular and completely unpredictable individual known only as 'The Mule' appears, the Seldon plan is set off course by some degrees, and it becomes impossible to tell what will happen next. Suddenly, the actions of individuals are important again.
This turn in the book means that the story keeps on getting more and more interesting. From the relatively small victories and stories in the first book, the first tale in the second book is considerably more epic, following a wider cast of characters. In the second tale, the characters are suddenly more than just tools of the wider plot and the whole story becomes easier to relate to, and a whole lot more interesting. The twists and turns in the plot are the work of a real master story-teller, and at the end of the book I was left in awe of the way everything was set up so quietly and perfectly.
The third book continues in form, with intriguing and intense plot lines and increasing excitement. With the longer plots, there is more time to grow to like the cast for each of the sections, and they remain prominent for longer than in the first novel.
The conclusion of the last book completes the trilogy very nicely, although I can see why many fans, and Asimov himself, considered it unfinished. In some ways, I would have been happy had he stopped there, but the book does not complete the thousand year's interregnum, so the reader is left with a sense of the yawning time gap ahead.
Plot and storyline is definitely the huge strength of these books. However, the individual characters that are involved are also very strong, and each and every one of them was incredibly likeable – or dislikeable- in their own way. While some of the cultural trends and attitudes may seem very dated now, for its time it also had some very progressive elements. As long as the reader is prepared to accept that the writer belonged to a slightly different time (as one does when reading Shakespeare, or Jane Austen, or Dickens) then none of these things should interfere with the enjoyment of the rich and well-woven world that Asimov has created for this story.
The Foundation Trilogy rightfully takes its place among the science fiction classics, and I look forward to reading more Asimov in the future. I recommend this to any science fiction fan who has not yet read it.
The Foundation Trilogy was always one of those pieces of classic science fiction I was told I had to read from an early age. I never quite got around to it until about two months ago, when I borrowed the trilogy from my mum and started devouring them page by page. They deserve every bit of praise they ever receive, even if the first book starts quite slowly.
A very long time into the future, Hari Seldon develops the field of psychohistory; an interesting social science, which uses statistics and implied complex mathematics to predict, with startling accuracy, trends in culture and probable future courses. Asimov explains this science as well as is possible without it actually existing; he always explains that it wouldn't be possible in a population of millions, or even billions... but with the galactic population numbering in the multi-trillions, it becomes possible to predict mob mentalities. And thus, Hari Seldon predicts the fall of the Empire, and thirty thousand years of chaos and barbarism before the rise of the next. In an effort to reduce the length of this barbaric period, Seldon sets up two foundations... plotting out the course of their future with a series of crises they must overcome on their inexorable rise to the beginning of the next Empire. The novels follow the story of the first Foundation, set up on a small planet at the edge of the galaxy called Terminus.
The first book, as I have said starts slowly. Perhaps this is not quite fair; the very beginning is as instantly intriguing and interesting as one could expect from any novel, and it draws the reader into the world of psychohistory. However, the first book is a slow progression, waiting for the Foundation to overcome the inevitable crises with equal inevitability; it's just a question of seeing what happens and how it is resolved. This is not a weakness, because the results are always interesting, but it does lend a certain security for the reader, which is not perhaps as powerful as a plot where events are assumed to be random and unpredictable.
Another minor issue I had with the first book was that it was very episodic. Each section follows a different character and just as you are becoming accustomed to one character, another takes his place as the lead role, and the story moves on. However, this is probably a limitation of telling a story that spans 300 years, and so I can forgive it.
The second book follows two crisis stages. In the first, a strong general has appeared in the Empire, under the last strong Emperor, set on conquest of the Foundation. In the second crisis, it begins to look as though Seldon was not as omniscient as he appeared through the first book and a half. Psychohistory is a tool for predicting the behaviour of civilisations, moves and movements, and motives of entire cultures; when it comes to individuals, the tool is much less effective. And so, when a rather singular and completely unpredictable individual known only as 'The Mule' appears, the Seldon plan is set off course by some degrees, and it becomes impossible to tell what will happen next. Suddenly, the actions of individuals are important again.
This turn in the book means that the story keeps on getting more and more interesting. From the relatively small victories and stories in the first book, the first tale in the second book is considerably more epic, following a wider cast of characters. In the second tale, the characters are suddenly more than just tools of the wider plot and the whole story becomes easier to relate to, and a whole lot more interesting. The twists and turns in the plot are the work of a real master story-teller, and at the end of the book I was left in awe of the way everything was set up so quietly and perfectly.
The third book continues in form, with intriguing and intense plot lines and increasing excitement. With the longer plots, there is more time to grow to like the cast for each of the sections, and they remain prominent for longer than in the first novel.
The conclusion of the last book completes the trilogy very nicely, although I can see why many fans, and Asimov himself, considered it unfinished. In some ways, I would have been happy had he stopped there, but the book does not complete the thousand year's interregnum, so the reader is left with a sense of the yawning time gap ahead.
Plot and storyline is definitely the huge strength of these books. However, the individual characters that are involved are also very strong, and each and every one of them was incredibly likeable – or dislikeable- in their own way. While some of the cultural trends and attitudes may seem very dated now, for its time it also had some very progressive elements. As long as the reader is prepared to accept that the writer belonged to a slightly different time (as one does when reading Shakespeare, or Jane Austen, or Dickens) then none of these things should interfere with the enjoyment of the rich and well-woven world that Asimov has created for this story.
The Foundation Trilogy rightfully takes its place among the science fiction classics, and I look forward to reading more Asimov in the future. I recommend this to any science fiction fan who has not yet read it.
Sunday, 11 January 2009
Review of 'The LadyKiller' by Martina Cole
Since I started writing reviews, Martina Cole keeps coming back into the frame, because of the collection I bought all those years ago. I cannot in good faith give them away until I have read each book. Now I come to the penultimate book in the original set that I bought, and I find myself in the position again of reviewing a book I didn't enjoy, and trying to review it as objectively as possible. So here goes.
George Markham is a seriously disturbed man that starts out looking at BDSM pornography and ends up roaming the streets raping and murdering a string of young women. Kate Burrows is the detective inspector trying to find him. Patrick Kelly is a local hard-man, and father of one of the victims of Markham's killing spree. Patrick and Kate meet in the course of the case and start to fall in love over the background of tragedy, but love between a borderline villain and a senior police officer would be paved with troubles, even if there wasn't a vicious murderer on the loose.
The pacing of this novel is much better than of any other Martina Cole novel I have read. Rather than a biographical life story of a character embroiled in crime, this is a police investigation drama, where the reader has the advantage of knowing from the start who did it. The tension of the investigation mounts steadily over the course of the novel, as the police resort to more and more drastic methods of finding their man.
George Markham should be an interesting character, but aside from feeling a distaste for his views about women, I couldn't find him at all hateful or sympathetic. He wasn't real enough; he was another bland character brought to the pages. I couldn't believe in him, even as a psychopath. It was very disappointing. Cole tries to make him sympathetic by telling some of backstory and childhood, with his overbearing, controlling mother, but I couldn't believe in the mother either, so I didn't feel sorry for him... I didn't feel very much at all.
Psychologically, Cole's serial killer was slightly off. Markham starts out by watching snuff films, and acting as a peeping tom. Peeping toms do sometimes turn into rapists, but they usually do so by breaking into houses. Markham's first victim is killed in the woods near her house. Admittedly not many people will know the psychology of serial killers when reading these books, but often the devil is in the detail and here I was let down.
Detective Inspector Kate Burrows is a better character to me; she is a single mother living with her daughter and mother, trying to make ends meet. She loves her job, and has strict moral values. Theoretically she should be quite likeable in her actions as well; she has to deal with some sexism in the workplace, and keep a professional attitude when her home life is falling apart. However, again, Cole's writing style puts me off all of her characters. Cole states outright the character traits she thinks her characters have, without letting the reader come to any of their own conclusions.
Kate's relationship with Patrick Kelly is almost believable, but they both have fiery tempers, and start monologuing at each other at the drop of a hat. The constant repetition of arguments and heart-to-hearts and soul-seeking on the part of both of these characters gets very irritating, and with every rehash of a sentence to the effect of “no matter what he did, Kate still wanted him,” makes me lose respect for the character and the author in the same moment.
All or most of my gripes with Martina Cole come to her writing style. She switches point-of-view repeatedly in the middle of scenes, and she tells detailed stories about characters that will only be in the book for one scene in an attempt to make you feel sorry for them when their ends befall them. Why not let you feel sympathy through the family that have been left behind? Cole leaves very little about her characters to the imagination, but an awful lot about the places and rooms.
As before, I am finding a lot to criticise about this book, and little to compliment. However, after reading eight Martina Cole novels, I find myself still unable to enjoy them. If you can, then you will probably enjoy 'The LadyKiller' but I did not. I'm afraid I have failed in objectivity.
George Markham is a seriously disturbed man that starts out looking at BDSM pornography and ends up roaming the streets raping and murdering a string of young women. Kate Burrows is the detective inspector trying to find him. Patrick Kelly is a local hard-man, and father of one of the victims of Markham's killing spree. Patrick and Kate meet in the course of the case and start to fall in love over the background of tragedy, but love between a borderline villain and a senior police officer would be paved with troubles, even if there wasn't a vicious murderer on the loose.
The pacing of this novel is much better than of any other Martina Cole novel I have read. Rather than a biographical life story of a character embroiled in crime, this is a police investigation drama, where the reader has the advantage of knowing from the start who did it. The tension of the investigation mounts steadily over the course of the novel, as the police resort to more and more drastic methods of finding their man.
George Markham should be an interesting character, but aside from feeling a distaste for his views about women, I couldn't find him at all hateful or sympathetic. He wasn't real enough; he was another bland character brought to the pages. I couldn't believe in him, even as a psychopath. It was very disappointing. Cole tries to make him sympathetic by telling some of backstory and childhood, with his overbearing, controlling mother, but I couldn't believe in the mother either, so I didn't feel sorry for him... I didn't feel very much at all.
Psychologically, Cole's serial killer was slightly off. Markham starts out by watching snuff films, and acting as a peeping tom. Peeping toms do sometimes turn into rapists, but they usually do so by breaking into houses. Markham's first victim is killed in the woods near her house. Admittedly not many people will know the psychology of serial killers when reading these books, but often the devil is in the detail and here I was let down.
Detective Inspector Kate Burrows is a better character to me; she is a single mother living with her daughter and mother, trying to make ends meet. She loves her job, and has strict moral values. Theoretically she should be quite likeable in her actions as well; she has to deal with some sexism in the workplace, and keep a professional attitude when her home life is falling apart. However, again, Cole's writing style puts me off all of her characters. Cole states outright the character traits she thinks her characters have, without letting the reader come to any of their own conclusions.
Kate's relationship with Patrick Kelly is almost believable, but they both have fiery tempers, and start monologuing at each other at the drop of a hat. The constant repetition of arguments and heart-to-hearts and soul-seeking on the part of both of these characters gets very irritating, and with every rehash of a sentence to the effect of “no matter what he did, Kate still wanted him,” makes me lose respect for the character and the author in the same moment.
All or most of my gripes with Martina Cole come to her writing style. She switches point-of-view repeatedly in the middle of scenes, and she tells detailed stories about characters that will only be in the book for one scene in an attempt to make you feel sorry for them when their ends befall them. Why not let you feel sympathy through the family that have been left behind? Cole leaves very little about her characters to the imagination, but an awful lot about the places and rooms.
As before, I am finding a lot to criticise about this book, and little to compliment. However, after reading eight Martina Cole novels, I find myself still unable to enjoy them. If you can, then you will probably enjoy 'The LadyKiller' but I did not. I'm afraid I have failed in objectivity.
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
Review of the 2004 film 'The Butterfly Effect'
The butterfly effect, also known as chaos theory, states that a small event (such as a butterfly flapping its wings) has knock on effects that can have very large-scale consequences. As a child, Evan has blackouts, with large hunks of time he cannot remember. A psychologist suggests that he should keep a journal, in order to jog his memory about the events. Later in his life, he re-reads the journals and finds that he can remember the lost sections of his memory. Soon afterwards he finds that he can change what happens.
Conceptually, this film is very interesting. By changing very small events from his past, Evan has huge effects on his 'present'. His future keeps changing, he completely alters the outlook for himself and his closest friends. Sometimes things work out better in some ways, but usually they end up worse in others. By trying to 'fix' one aspect of his present, he 'breaks' another.
In execution, this isn't a bad film; it is quite well acted, especially by the younger actors. I have often said that American children lose their ability to act once they hit puberty, and the adult (or rather late teenage) actors seem to prove this somewhat, although the leading lady, Kayleigh (Amy Smart) does a very good job of portraying her various different possible futures throughout the course of the film. The younger self of Evan and Tommy were definitely better than than their adult counterparts, however. The special effects used are understated but very effective, when they are used; more fancy cinematography than computer generated effects, but there are some clever moments that meant that the style of filming carried the plot well.
The reasons I didn't like this film were more to do with the bleakness of the whole thing. There are odd moments of romance and joy, but they are all quickly overshadowed by depression and destruction. Evan begins to realise that there is no way to make all of his friends have a happy ending, from the start that he has. It isn't one of those sad films that you enjoy because of the deep emotion, and there isn't enough action to make this into one of the bleak but dramatic ripping yarns. The film was impossible to 'enjoy', because it was so dark, and it wasn't quite good enough to forgive this, and right through the end it was incredibly bleak.
Perhaps the reason that I didn't enjoy this film was because of the time I watched it (late night on boxing day)... but I didn't particularly like it, and I didn't find it as gripping or interesting as the concept of the plot would have suggested. It was a very clever film, and thus it's not a film I would encourage people to universally dismiss. It wasn't a bad film, but as a subjective viewer, I didn't enjoy it. If you tend not to like dark, 'think' films, then I would recommend you find something less depressing to spend your time on.
Conceptually, this film is very interesting. By changing very small events from his past, Evan has huge effects on his 'present'. His future keeps changing, he completely alters the outlook for himself and his closest friends. Sometimes things work out better in some ways, but usually they end up worse in others. By trying to 'fix' one aspect of his present, he 'breaks' another.
In execution, this isn't a bad film; it is quite well acted, especially by the younger actors. I have often said that American children lose their ability to act once they hit puberty, and the adult (or rather late teenage) actors seem to prove this somewhat, although the leading lady, Kayleigh (Amy Smart) does a very good job of portraying her various different possible futures throughout the course of the film. The younger self of Evan and Tommy were definitely better than than their adult counterparts, however. The special effects used are understated but very effective, when they are used; more fancy cinematography than computer generated effects, but there are some clever moments that meant that the style of filming carried the plot well.
The reasons I didn't like this film were more to do with the bleakness of the whole thing. There are odd moments of romance and joy, but they are all quickly overshadowed by depression and destruction. Evan begins to realise that there is no way to make all of his friends have a happy ending, from the start that he has. It isn't one of those sad films that you enjoy because of the deep emotion, and there isn't enough action to make this into one of the bleak but dramatic ripping yarns. The film was impossible to 'enjoy', because it was so dark, and it wasn't quite good enough to forgive this, and right through the end it was incredibly bleak.
Perhaps the reason that I didn't enjoy this film was because of the time I watched it (late night on boxing day)... but I didn't particularly like it, and I didn't find it as gripping or interesting as the concept of the plot would have suggested. It was a very clever film, and thus it's not a film I would encourage people to universally dismiss. It wasn't a bad film, but as a subjective viewer, I didn't enjoy it. If you tend not to like dark, 'think' films, then I would recommend you find something less depressing to spend your time on.
Wednesday, 24 December 2008
Review of 'War of the Worlds' by H.G. Wells
This is probably going to be a long review, as I have quite a lot to say about this book... so buckle in folks. War of the Worlds probably falls into the reviewing category of 'books I shouldn't touch with a 20 foot long barge pole', but I've opened the door on reviewing classics, now, so I'm taking the plunge. And because this is such a classic (and it's Christmas), I'm allowing myself to be a little bit more self-indulgent than usual (hoho).
After seeing two movies and hearing the musical radio adaptation of this book, the plot was not a surprise to me: In the late 19th century, a series of cylinders are shot from Mars, landing in and around London, containing the dreaded Martians and their unstoppable Heat Ray. Thus begins the slaughter and subjugation of humankind.
Style
This book kick-started a whole genre, and so it had to have been very good, and very powerfully written. However, by contrast with today's standards of 'powerful' this book was not filled with flowery prose and jarring statements. In fact, the most remarkable thing about the style was how plain it was. Written in a down-to-Earth journalistic style, War of the Worlds, tells the tale of the Martians from the point of view of a middle class man, a philosopher and writer. He could be virtually anyone, safe and secure in his post-Victorian steam age existence. Then the world he knew was stripped away, and he happened to be near the centre of it. He was not the first to discover the Martians' arrival, nor the first to see them; but he was among the crowd. It's an incredibly powerful story because it is so easy to relate to this incredibly ordinary protagonist and his plight.
One of the things that I found very odd about this book was that none of the main characters have names. The narrator refers to himself only as 'I' or 'me'; the other major characters are simply 'his wife' 'his brother' 'the artilleryman' and 'the curate'. While cameo roles are given names and explanations; the celebrities of the day; it is possible to put any name or face into the lead role. I have not read enough fiction from this era to know if this is normal, though I do know that referring to the reader directly was quite common at the time, but it struck me as both strange and a very useful literary device. By not naming his main characters, it is much easier in some ways for the reader to slip into their heads; to follow them without the separation of knowing that this is an entirely different person. Wells' oddest choice is also one of his most noticeable and powerful devices.
It is occasionally amusing how very last-century the writing style is. Sometimes the references to 'pop-culture' of the time fall flat on the modern audience, but the descriptions of the damage and desolation of places that are still thriving holds of civilisation in the modern-day never fall flat. In fact, I found descriptions I didn't quite understand much less annoying than the constant references of the edition that I had.
The Science
I never expected a 19th century writer to get all of the science correct, and knowing all that I did about the plot of the War of the Worlds, I knew there were many ways in which Wells got it wrong. For a start, we all know now that Mars is barren and probably lifeless... at least if there is life it is small, and almost certainly not intelligent. There is no 'red weed' giving the planet its colour. The Martian atmosphere is considerably different than ours, with almost no atmospheric oxygen. We also know that there are no current rivers or oceans, and that the ice caps are primarily frozen carbon dioxide, rather than water ice. Early on in his descriptions of the Martians, Wells mentions that there is no bacteria on Mars. From our current understanding of molecular, genetic and macro-evolution, it seems nearly impossible that life could evolve without this primitive first step, and nowadays we are no closer to eradicating bacteria than we are to snuffing out the sun. Also, what are the chances of life evolving on two separate planets that are compatible enough for them to use our blood as an energy source? What are the chances that bacteria that attack, disease and decompose human flesh would have such an effect on an entirely alien physiology?
However, from a century of extra knowledge it is very easy to focus on the negative. That's what suspension of disbelief is for. In the story, it only detracts from the events and the realism for a hair-splitting second, and it doesn't matter a jot in terms of the emotion and the tone of the whole story.
So I shall focus for a moment on all the things that Wells got right. This is a man that clearly did his research. He knew that the gravity on Mars was much less, the air necessarily less dense, the geology long since quiet and stagnant. The technological descriptions are at least conceivable, and his descriptions of the Martian's appearance and physiology is incredibly detailed, imaginative, alien and most importantly almost believable. The Heat Ray and the poison gas speak to a great imagination deriving from what was already known. From what we know now, the Heat Ray could be a very powerful infra-red LASER. The poison gas, though said to contain an unknown element, could be any one of a number of nerve gases or poisons discovered since then.
The Fiction
In my opinion, a lot of modern science fiction suffers a lot from too many scientific ideas, and fails to focus on the plots and the characters; the things that a reader can get their teeth into, and draws them into the world and its ideas. Wells does not suffer from this at all. His narrator describes all he knows of the Martians, but he does not let it draw too far away from the fact that the invasion is the important plot point. At the heart, this story discusses the human suffering, surprise and fighting spirit.
The main character spends much of the novel running and hiding; he is no hero. At times he is as far from the stereotypical hero as it is possible to be, but he recounts his every movement with supreme honesty. The War of the Worlds is more a story of survival than of warfare. Early on, the narrator and the reader both come to the conclusion that the technology of the day could not stand up to the Martian invaders. Though I knew how it was ended; though I even recognised many phrases that were used verbatim in the musical adaptation, I was nonetheless completely absorbed in the story.
The Conclusion
It is not surprising that Wells, among others, sparked the science fiction revolution. With such imagination and intensity and reality of these stories, if only one or two other novels at the time made this kind of grade, then it would prompt many other writers to at least try. With the next generation, the Asimovs and Arthur C. Clarkes, came a new degree of science in fiction, but War of the Worlds was one of those that sparked the revolution. Its pedestal is justified, and I would recommend it to you all as a literary and science-fiction master-work.
If you've read this far, I thank you... and a Merry Christmas to you. May it be altogether Martian free.
After seeing two movies and hearing the musical radio adaptation of this book, the plot was not a surprise to me: In the late 19th century, a series of cylinders are shot from Mars, landing in and around London, containing the dreaded Martians and their unstoppable Heat Ray. Thus begins the slaughter and subjugation of humankind.
Style
This book kick-started a whole genre, and so it had to have been very good, and very powerfully written. However, by contrast with today's standards of 'powerful' this book was not filled with flowery prose and jarring statements. In fact, the most remarkable thing about the style was how plain it was. Written in a down-to-Earth journalistic style, War of the Worlds, tells the tale of the Martians from the point of view of a middle class man, a philosopher and writer. He could be virtually anyone, safe and secure in his post-Victorian steam age existence. Then the world he knew was stripped away, and he happened to be near the centre of it. He was not the first to discover the Martians' arrival, nor the first to see them; but he was among the crowd. It's an incredibly powerful story because it is so easy to relate to this incredibly ordinary protagonist and his plight.
One of the things that I found very odd about this book was that none of the main characters have names. The narrator refers to himself only as 'I' or 'me'; the other major characters are simply 'his wife' 'his brother' 'the artilleryman' and 'the curate'. While cameo roles are given names and explanations; the celebrities of the day; it is possible to put any name or face into the lead role. I have not read enough fiction from this era to know if this is normal, though I do know that referring to the reader directly was quite common at the time, but it struck me as both strange and a very useful literary device. By not naming his main characters, it is much easier in some ways for the reader to slip into their heads; to follow them without the separation of knowing that this is an entirely different person. Wells' oddest choice is also one of his most noticeable and powerful devices.
It is occasionally amusing how very last-century the writing style is. Sometimes the references to 'pop-culture' of the time fall flat on the modern audience, but the descriptions of the damage and desolation of places that are still thriving holds of civilisation in the modern-day never fall flat. In fact, I found descriptions I didn't quite understand much less annoying than the constant references of the edition that I had.
The Science
I never expected a 19th century writer to get all of the science correct, and knowing all that I did about the plot of the War of the Worlds, I knew there were many ways in which Wells got it wrong. For a start, we all know now that Mars is barren and probably lifeless... at least if there is life it is small, and almost certainly not intelligent. There is no 'red weed' giving the planet its colour. The Martian atmosphere is considerably different than ours, with almost no atmospheric oxygen. We also know that there are no current rivers or oceans, and that the ice caps are primarily frozen carbon dioxide, rather than water ice. Early on in his descriptions of the Martians, Wells mentions that there is no bacteria on Mars. From our current understanding of molecular, genetic and macro-evolution, it seems nearly impossible that life could evolve without this primitive first step, and nowadays we are no closer to eradicating bacteria than we are to snuffing out the sun. Also, what are the chances of life evolving on two separate planets that are compatible enough for them to use our blood as an energy source? What are the chances that bacteria that attack, disease and decompose human flesh would have such an effect on an entirely alien physiology?
However, from a century of extra knowledge it is very easy to focus on the negative. That's what suspension of disbelief is for. In the story, it only detracts from the events and the realism for a hair-splitting second, and it doesn't matter a jot in terms of the emotion and the tone of the whole story.
So I shall focus for a moment on all the things that Wells got right. This is a man that clearly did his research. He knew that the gravity on Mars was much less, the air necessarily less dense, the geology long since quiet and stagnant. The technological descriptions are at least conceivable, and his descriptions of the Martian's appearance and physiology is incredibly detailed, imaginative, alien and most importantly almost believable. The Heat Ray and the poison gas speak to a great imagination deriving from what was already known. From what we know now, the Heat Ray could be a very powerful infra-red LASER. The poison gas, though said to contain an unknown element, could be any one of a number of nerve gases or poisons discovered since then.
The Fiction
In my opinion, a lot of modern science fiction suffers a lot from too many scientific ideas, and fails to focus on the plots and the characters; the things that a reader can get their teeth into, and draws them into the world and its ideas. Wells does not suffer from this at all. His narrator describes all he knows of the Martians, but he does not let it draw too far away from the fact that the invasion is the important plot point. At the heart, this story discusses the human suffering, surprise and fighting spirit.
The main character spends much of the novel running and hiding; he is no hero. At times he is as far from the stereotypical hero as it is possible to be, but he recounts his every movement with supreme honesty. The War of the Worlds is more a story of survival than of warfare. Early on, the narrator and the reader both come to the conclusion that the technology of the day could not stand up to the Martian invaders. Though I knew how it was ended; though I even recognised many phrases that were used verbatim in the musical adaptation, I was nonetheless completely absorbed in the story.
The Conclusion
It is not surprising that Wells, among others, sparked the science fiction revolution. With such imagination and intensity and reality of these stories, if only one or two other novels at the time made this kind of grade, then it would prompt many other writers to at least try. With the next generation, the Asimovs and Arthur C. Clarkes, came a new degree of science in fiction, but War of the Worlds was one of those that sparked the revolution. Its pedestal is justified, and I would recommend it to you all as a literary and science-fiction master-work.
If you've read this far, I thank you... and a Merry Christmas to you. May it be altogether Martian free.
Tuesday, 23 December 2008
Review of the 2004 film '13 going on 30'
The concept behind this film is incredibly silly, and another play on 'be careful what you wish for'. After a terrible embarrassment, Jenna Rink ends her thirteenth birthday party wishing that she was 'thirty, flirty and thriving,' like one of the models in her favourite magazine. The next morning, she wakes up as a thirty-year-old editor of the same magazine. Theoretically she has everything she dreamed of...
When I heard about this film, I never expected I would enjoy it, but it's actually quite amusing. Jennifer Garner plays the thirty-year-old Jenna expertly, acting in many ways like a gangly, growing thirteen year old that's just woken up in a grown woman's body. As she makes her discoveries about the world she finds herself in, she comes to face some harsh truths about what she's done to get where she is, and she deals with it admirably; trying to make the best of where she is and perhaps set right a few wrongs.
There are some incredibly funny moments in this film, and some lovely poignant moments. The inevitable love-story is delightfully underplayed, and doesn't end how you might expect it to. Though the ending is predictably cheesy, it didn't quite follow the overused route, and I found myself pleasantly surprised, and nicely warmed by the happy ending, rather than choking.
While the plot of this film is reasonably predictable, as most such comedies tend to be, it was dealt with quite well. There were moments when it broke away from the main plotline and focused on small aspects of Jenna's realisations about her age and status... these were, for me, the best parts of the film, and definitely the most funny, because I think if I was transported from my thirteen-year-old mind into my current body and life, I would have reacted to many things in a similar way.
This film wasn't a perfect rom com, and it wasn't a perfect cheesy teen movie; it had aspects of both, and of neither. It was not the most original, or the best acted story I have ever seen, but it was a lot funnier and more enjoyable than I thought it would be when I saw the trailer. I liked it a surprising amount, and I would recommend you to not count it out.
When I heard about this film, I never expected I would enjoy it, but it's actually quite amusing. Jennifer Garner plays the thirty-year-old Jenna expertly, acting in many ways like a gangly, growing thirteen year old that's just woken up in a grown woman's body. As she makes her discoveries about the world she finds herself in, she comes to face some harsh truths about what she's done to get where she is, and she deals with it admirably; trying to make the best of where she is and perhaps set right a few wrongs.
There are some incredibly funny moments in this film, and some lovely poignant moments. The inevitable love-story is delightfully underplayed, and doesn't end how you might expect it to. Though the ending is predictably cheesy, it didn't quite follow the overused route, and I found myself pleasantly surprised, and nicely warmed by the happy ending, rather than choking.
While the plot of this film is reasonably predictable, as most such comedies tend to be, it was dealt with quite well. There were moments when it broke away from the main plotline and focused on small aspects of Jenna's realisations about her age and status... these were, for me, the best parts of the film, and definitely the most funny, because I think if I was transported from my thirteen-year-old mind into my current body and life, I would have reacted to many things in a similar way.
This film wasn't a perfect rom com, and it wasn't a perfect cheesy teen movie; it had aspects of both, and of neither. It was not the most original, or the best acted story I have ever seen, but it was a lot funnier and more enjoyable than I thought it would be when I saw the trailer. I liked it a surprising amount, and I would recommend you to not count it out.
Sunday, 14 December 2008
Review of 'Diaspora' by Greg Egan
Generally I don't read hard sci-fi. While I appreciate that many of the ideas that take place within the more rigidly scientific framework are extremely clever, I am much more of a fan of novels that have believable and entertaining characters and stories, regardless of how scientifically accurate the world is. I find that a good story can make fantastical science completely acceptable, and as I read for fun, I feel justified in this opinion. Generally, what I read is space opera or at least 'soft' sci-fi, somewhere between the hard-science and story-based adventure.
Diaspora is the exception that proves the rule. It is an absolutely exceptional work of science fiction, that develops and explores incredibly complicated scientific ideas while remaining rooted around characters (albeit AI characters) that are very relate-able and likeable. This story uses complex ideas, but remains a story. In that, I feel, it is quite lonely in the hard sci-fi field, but it is a wonderful and shining example of what happens when someone does it right.
The world of Diaspora is set in the far future. People found a way to make themselves into sentient, practically immortal software by means of the 'Introdus' software. After this, they split into fleshers, remaining in human form, Gleisner robots (sentient software in hardware bodies), and the polises: supercomputer homes for the sentient software. Yatima is an 'orphan': a piece of sentient software created by the polis mind without input from any of the other intelligent software. The story describes the process of the orphan's growth through 'childhood' and 'adolescence', and then it shows what choices Yatima takes along vis path.
Through Yatima, we discover the world of the polises, fleshers and gleisners. It's an incredibly rich world, which has obviously had a great deal of thought put into it. When disaster strikes, Yatima's choices leave us in the centre of the worst of the storm, watching the devastation surround him. And then we follow Yatima as he leaves his birth-polis for a polis that is bound for the stars, in its diaspora, hunting for a world where such a disaster will never strike again.
In terms of story, I cannot fault Greg Egan for his imagination. His descriptions of the way his AIs are born is sublime, and incredibly realistic. It drew me in from the very beginning and I was hooked as Yatima grew up and discovered the world, even as I did. Later, Egan's descriptions of his more 'out-there' scientific ideas are clear, and almost comprehensible... he invents a science that feels like a logical extension of our own. Throughout the book, Egan describes the indescribable, making it almost possible for us to view the world in 5-dimensions, and to understand the complex physics that drives his world forward.
Where I would fault diaspora is that in trying to explore a head-full of ideas, Egan seems to split the book a little too much into separate stories. There is Yatima's growth, then there is the discovery of the disaster, then there are three stages of the diaspora. Perhaps it was because I read this book over a very long period of time (unfortunately being too busy to read much, this last month), but there was a certain amount of disconnectedness between the plots, especially as the central part of the novel seems to drift away from Yatima somewhat. The plot centralises around equally brilliant characters, but my familiarity with Yatima made me want to follow the developments more through ver eyes.
Finally, the ending seemed a little rushed, and a little too keen to wrap up all the remaining loose ends. It's as if Greg Egan was approaching a word limit, and had a certain amount to say before he got there. However, this is a common fault in many books, and it did not detract at all from my enjoyment of the rest of the book, or indeed of the ending itself.
I would recommend Diaspora to all devoted science fiction fans. It is brilliantly written, and even in its more self-indulgent scientific moments, the writing style has clarity and comprehensibility at its heart. Even if you cannot begin to fathom the ideas (and I think we're not really supposed to), then the story behind Diaspora is wonderful, and brings to life the superb hard sci-fi ideas that live within it.
Diaspora is the exception that proves the rule. It is an absolutely exceptional work of science fiction, that develops and explores incredibly complicated scientific ideas while remaining rooted around characters (albeit AI characters) that are very relate-able and likeable. This story uses complex ideas, but remains a story. In that, I feel, it is quite lonely in the hard sci-fi field, but it is a wonderful and shining example of what happens when someone does it right.
The world of Diaspora is set in the far future. People found a way to make themselves into sentient, practically immortal software by means of the 'Introdus' software. After this, they split into fleshers, remaining in human form, Gleisner robots (sentient software in hardware bodies), and the polises: supercomputer homes for the sentient software. Yatima is an 'orphan': a piece of sentient software created by the polis mind without input from any of the other intelligent software. The story describes the process of the orphan's growth through 'childhood' and 'adolescence', and then it shows what choices Yatima takes along vis path.
Through Yatima, we discover the world of the polises, fleshers and gleisners. It's an incredibly rich world, which has obviously had a great deal of thought put into it. When disaster strikes, Yatima's choices leave us in the centre of the worst of the storm, watching the devastation surround him. And then we follow Yatima as he leaves his birth-polis for a polis that is bound for the stars, in its diaspora, hunting for a world where such a disaster will never strike again.
In terms of story, I cannot fault Greg Egan for his imagination. His descriptions of the way his AIs are born is sublime, and incredibly realistic. It drew me in from the very beginning and I was hooked as Yatima grew up and discovered the world, even as I did. Later, Egan's descriptions of his more 'out-there' scientific ideas are clear, and almost comprehensible... he invents a science that feels like a logical extension of our own. Throughout the book, Egan describes the indescribable, making it almost possible for us to view the world in 5-dimensions, and to understand the complex physics that drives his world forward.
Where I would fault diaspora is that in trying to explore a head-full of ideas, Egan seems to split the book a little too much into separate stories. There is Yatima's growth, then there is the discovery of the disaster, then there are three stages of the diaspora. Perhaps it was because I read this book over a very long period of time (unfortunately being too busy to read much, this last month), but there was a certain amount of disconnectedness between the plots, especially as the central part of the novel seems to drift away from Yatima somewhat. The plot centralises around equally brilliant characters, but my familiarity with Yatima made me want to follow the developments more through ver eyes.
Finally, the ending seemed a little rushed, and a little too keen to wrap up all the remaining loose ends. It's as if Greg Egan was approaching a word limit, and had a certain amount to say before he got there. However, this is a common fault in many books, and it did not detract at all from my enjoyment of the rest of the book, or indeed of the ending itself.
I would recommend Diaspora to all devoted science fiction fans. It is brilliantly written, and even in its more self-indulgent scientific moments, the writing style has clarity and comprehensibility at its heart. Even if you cannot begin to fathom the ideas (and I think we're not really supposed to), then the story behind Diaspora is wonderful, and brings to life the superb hard sci-fi ideas that live within it.
Saturday, 13 December 2008
Review of the 1982 film 'Tron'
It's not often I review films that were released before I was born, or films that are cult classics, but I feel I owe Tron a word or two, seeing as I had the audacity to review 'Do Androids Dream...'.
Tron, alongside the book 'Neuromancer' should be listed under a definition of 'Cyberpunk'. The film is about computer programmers, running around trying to bring down 'The Master Program'; an AI that seems to have sprung up somehow. In the process, Flynn (Jeff Bridges) is dragged into the computer world, where he meets up with Tron, a program written by his real-world friend Alan (both played by Bruce Boxleitner), who has the potential to finally stop the master program.
Unfortunately, from the perspective of a 2008 film reviewer, this film sounds cheesy and cliché, but it's much easier to swallow when I realise that this was one of the films that invented the cliché itself. It's also quite easy to mock the special effects, which are funny if not spectacular, even by the standards of the time. However, in terms of story, the film makes up in entertainment, action and variety what it lacks in believability.
I enjoyed Tron, and not just because of the amount of giggling I could do at the scientific 'advancements' and silly 80's haircuts. It's very easy to see why it has become such a cult classic, because within the confines of this film, there lies the groundwork for a lot of similar themed stories that coped far less well with the restrictions of the genre. Throughout the film I found myself saying that it was a cross between two other films; which is fine until I realised that every one of those films (except Star Wars) came afterwards. And the obvious parallels between Tron and Star Wars are more amusing than annoying. I kept thinking of the 'Recognisers' as AT-ATs, and singing the imperial march whenever the Master Program's direct underling came onscreen, which just added to my personal entertainment.
If you call yourself a science-fiction fan, and you haven't seen Tron, it is a *requirement* that you do so, in order to retain your credibility. For sheer hilarity it is worth watching, but also take into a account all the limitations they were dealing with, and recognise that in 1982 this was a pretty amazing piece of cinema. I enjoyed it on several levels, and I was very glad that I got to see it.
Tron, alongside the book 'Neuromancer' should be listed under a definition of 'Cyberpunk'. The film is about computer programmers, running around trying to bring down 'The Master Program'; an AI that seems to have sprung up somehow. In the process, Flynn (Jeff Bridges) is dragged into the computer world, where he meets up with Tron, a program written by his real-world friend Alan (both played by Bruce Boxleitner), who has the potential to finally stop the master program.
Unfortunately, from the perspective of a 2008 film reviewer, this film sounds cheesy and cliché, but it's much easier to swallow when I realise that this was one of the films that invented the cliché itself. It's also quite easy to mock the special effects, which are funny if not spectacular, even by the standards of the time. However, in terms of story, the film makes up in entertainment, action and variety what it lacks in believability.
I enjoyed Tron, and not just because of the amount of giggling I could do at the scientific 'advancements' and silly 80's haircuts. It's very easy to see why it has become such a cult classic, because within the confines of this film, there lies the groundwork for a lot of similar themed stories that coped far less well with the restrictions of the genre. Throughout the film I found myself saying that it was a cross between two other films; which is fine until I realised that every one of those films (except Star Wars) came afterwards. And the obvious parallels between Tron and Star Wars are more amusing than annoying. I kept thinking of the 'Recognisers' as AT-ATs, and singing the imperial march whenever the Master Program's direct underling came onscreen, which just added to my personal entertainment.
If you call yourself a science-fiction fan, and you haven't seen Tron, it is a *requirement* that you do so, in order to retain your credibility. For sheer hilarity it is worth watching, but also take into a account all the limitations they were dealing with, and recognise that in 1982 this was a pretty amazing piece of cinema. I enjoyed it on several levels, and I was very glad that I got to see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)