soupin Reviews

Hercules: The Legendary Journeys (1995–1999)

Ultimate Tongue-in-Cheek

[17 February 2012]

You mean this show was produced by Sam Raimi? The same horror loving, cheese flaunting, camera angle loving, wire fu abusing, low budget utilizing, Bruce Campbell toting, Ted Raimi killing, Spiderman trilogy directing machine? Yes.

I have to admit, when I first saw this show I thought it was one of the worst shows I had ever seen. It was always on right before the show I would want to see and I would catch glimpses of the cheesy graphics, strange camera angles, insane dialogue, etc. and would laugh at how bad it was. However, the moment I discovered that Sam Raimi produced the show, it was an instant "OOOOH, so the show is SUPPOSED to be that way!" and I gave it a chance. The more I watched the show, the more I realized how amazing the show was. While the cheesy graphics were a result of the times and budget (keep in mind, though, that the same company who did the graphics in the show would go on to produce the award winning graphics for Lord of the Rings), Sam Raimi uses his trademark skills to make this show thoroughly entertaining.

The intentionally over-acted, pun-ridden dialogue, extensively choreographed action scenes, fun costumes, and crazy myth-based story lines make this show a delight, but I think it's the visible enjoyment of the main cast that makes this show really great. Everybody, from the reoccurring characters to the show's main stars are obviously having the time of their lives enjoying every single line and action sequence. It helps that the producers allowed the actors to adlib a lot of the dialogue and physical gags.

As for the show's cast, I couldn't imagine anyone better to play Hercules than 90's Television's straight lead man, Kevin Sorbo. Sure, he oftentimes just stands there with clothes that conveniently reveal his always sweaty muscular chest, but he fit the role to a T. He did a great job playing the almost sickeningly perfect half-mortal Hercules (something they joke about continuously in the series) and obviously enjoyed himself in the fight scenes. Other notable mentions include Bruce Campbell (of course) whose smarmy portrayal of the King of Thieves is priceless (he even directed a number of the best episodes of the show), Kevin Smith (no, not THAT Kevin Smith) who was priceless as Ares, God of War, reveling in over-the-top testosterone and much improvised humor, and Alexandra Tydings as Aphrodite, God of Love, who played the part of a ditsy blonde perfectly.

However, probably THE most talented actor in the Hercules/Xena troupe was Michael Hurst, who portrayed Hercules short and peppy sidekick, Iolaus. In order to be noticed or successful as an actor here IN New Zealand, theater is still the primary form of entertainment. Well before Hercules, Hurst was already a renown New Zealand Shakespearean theater actor, director, producer, dancer, and singer, in addition to a championship fencer and acrobatic stage-fight choreographer. If I could choose anyone to compare this guy to, it'd be Britain's thespian Kenneth Branagh...if he could do gymnastics and was on speed. His energetic talent was so well known in the country that he was literally the first person to be cast in Hercules (BEFORE even Kevin Sorbo got the part as the lead). He stole the show with this energetic and over-the-top acting style for Iolaus and choreographed/performed most of the Hercules/Iolaus fight scenes and stunts. While he never really got a chance to exhibit his true acting prowress due to the light nature of the show, he came close with versatility. Presumably bored with his role, Raimi and the producers found every excuse in the book to allow Hurst to exercise his acting - by the time Hercules ended, he had played about 12 different characters in addition to Iolaus ranging anywhere from a drunken writer to a reoccurring woman dance instructor. There's no question that this show wouldn't have been as successful if Michael Hurst hadn't contributed his talent. I've always been kind of upset that Hurst will never be recognized outside our country (beyond "that short hyper blonde guy from Hercules") due to his extensive involvement with New Zealand theater - this guy could have easily gone on to do Broadway in the States or the Royal Shakespeare Company in Britain. However, I'm pleased to hear he still works on Sam Raimi projects when not doing plays, directing episodes for Legend of the Seeker and, more recently, Spartacus - both of which we get down here, yay! So, in sum, Sam Raimi is insane but incredibly brilliant for producing this show. I highly recommend it for those of you that "get" Raimi's unique direction or if you have any sense of humor whatsoever. It's extremely addictive. Do NOT take it seriously, or you will be disappointed - it's supposed to be campy. If you are a fan of anything Sam Raimi, entertaining fight sequences, Kevin Sorbo or Michael Hurst (if you happen to be from New Zealand), or enjoy watching actors have WAY too much fun for their own good, then this is a show for you.

Performance: The Widowing of Mrs. Holroyd (1995) Season 5, Episode 2

A well acted play

[3 June 2010]

This play is a tough one to do. Without spoiling anything (not that there's anything to spoil), I've always thought that it never had a good resolution to bring everything to a close. BUT, now that BBC's Performance version of the play is out on DVD, I was able to inspect the play a little closer.

The play is about Mrs. Holroyd's life as a mother of two young children and a wife of a drunk (Charles Holroyd) in a run down shack in the middle of a coal-mining town. She has recently inherited some money from her uncle and starts having reciprocal feelings toward another man, Mr. Blackmore (or as a tipsy Firth calls him, "Mr. Blackymore"), who obviously loves her and often comes over to help with chores. She becomes fed up with her husband's drunk antics and is pressured by Mr. Blackmore to leave Charles and run away with the children to start a new life with him.

Sound happy so far? Ya, it's rather depressing. BUT, the performances are where this play shines.

Zoe Wanamaker does an excellent job portraying a verbally (and physically, as the play implies) abused wife who is on the verge of leaving her husband. Stephen Dillane is amazing as the lover - he gives an intensely realistic performance of someone who is fully in love. Wanamaker and Dillane's interactions are gripping and had me actually tense with anticipation to see how she would react to his attraction to her.

Colin Firth doesn't disappoint as the drunk husband, although Pride and Prejudice fans might be shocked into realizing that Firth DOES do other characters besides the quintessential stuffy English gentleman (yes girls, he's actually a fantastically trained classical actor - not just a dripping white shirt sex symbol). His disheveled hair and bushy mustache make him almost unrecognizable, and his accent is extremely thick (which adds to his overall disheveled condition). He is always either tipsy or on the floor, but still must convey his side of the story through his progressively drunk demeanor.

At first, I didn't understand the point of this play, but upon closer inspection, I realized it was actually more about a lack of communication and a forgotten love than anything else. Mrs. Holroyd has all but given up on her drunken husband. Meanwhile, although mostly incoherently drunk, Firth uses his trademark eyes and twitch of the face to show that Charles Holroyd is almost apologetic in some scenes which leads the audience into believing that Charles was once a good man. Although the beginnings of his alcoholism is never elucidated (so we don't know who drove who to do what), he is slowly sinking into a hopeless realization that his wife is in love with another man (and you can't help but think that his realization of his wife's attraction to another man has played a part in his drinking problem by creating a positive feedback loop). After the events of the play, Mrs. Holroyd remembers this "good" side of her husband and the reason why she married him.

With such great performances and the claustrophobic atmosphere of the set, I felt like I was really in a London theater watching three of my favorite actors perform on stage. If you're expecting to see amazing period sets and awesome camera angles that Masterpiece Theater is known for, then you will definitely be disappointed by this. BUT, if you're watching for the sake of a character drama (which is really the only reason they even made the BBC Performance videos), then you will be quite pleased.

It definitely helps to watch this one more than once though. The subtle nuances of Colin Firth and Stephen Dillane's performances can then be better understood and the point of the play will be revealed.