Change Your Image
alarchdu
Reviews
Midsomer Murders: The Sword of Guillaume (2010)
A pivotal episode
This is one of the most excellent episodes of the series, and entirely watchable. It is very revealing, in that it not only introduces Nettles' replacement, but gives the first solid idea as to Midsomer's location. And watching it again, after seeing later episodes, and then reading other reviews, gives it more depth.
It has been long-clear that Midsomer is located somewhere south of London, and it actually filmed using several adjacent villages (shot from different angles) in that region. In this episode, the location of Causton is clearly given as north of Crawley, about the same distance from it as Crawley is from Brighton (and within commuting distance of London). The area was also one of the first conquered by the Normans during the 11th century (not too far from Hastings), which may give some explanation for why it is one of the most violent, psychotic and deadly locations in England.
Most reviewers have commented that the episode is unusual in that it takes so long for the first murder to occur. But the opening scene shows the removal of the future murder weapon a Norman sword - from the tomb of the founder of a local noble who died 900 years earlier. Symbolic.
The sword itself is anachronistic, not typical of the swords used by the Norman conquerors. Although the murder (or the later usual murders) is revealed to actually have the strength to wield such a sword, the weapon itself would not have been able to inflict the death wounds shown (implied, actually)as the episode unfolds (a blunt, rusty soft-steel sword designed as a thrusting weapon would not see good service as a weapon on decapitation).
The juxtaposition of Tom and John Barnaby is impressive. The new Barnaby, Tom's younger cousin, is shown to be more thoughtful and analytical, less impulsive and opinionated, and more eager to do well than his older cousin.
I think everything in the episode showed no obvious signs of being rushed or of threads left hanging, as I have seen in many previous episodes. Scenes I thought were missed I now realize could not have been shot easily in the time allowed, and without slowing the pace.
This is a "must see" episode, that shows Jones losing his cool, and the differences between the two Barnaby's (and why John is less a replacement for Tom, but a different view of a similar and younger personality.
Midsomer Murders: The Sleeper Under the Hill (2011)
Different views see different things
I had reason to see this episode again recently, and then happened on the three reviews of it on IMDb, and am writing to highlight some errors apparently seen by the reviewers; The plots of the episodes are complex, often too complex to survive the final editing without some errors creeping in. In this case, I see the local police sergeant's role not ringing true to the life of a local (I can't see him being so readily bribed in a way that leaves witnesses). The use of the theodolite in both cases was correct (although the use of a telescope would make more sense). There was no need for the use of a datum point since the sole purpose of its use was to show that the stone circle was not actually on the ley line. The reason for the murders was caused by the finding of the relics. The main antagonist would have his historical significance diminished if he was shown to be in error, while the other murders were partially caused by the value of the relics found, as exemplified in the last scene when Barnaby apparently walked off with a million pounds of relic in his pocket. The fact that the modern-day druids were described as peaceful could have merely been used as a plot device, or it could have been the writer commenting on the fact that modern re-enactors of the druids ignore the fact that the religion was quite bloody in its practices.
American Sniper (2014)
Understanding why.
The movie is not anti-war, as some have argued. It is anti-warmonger, and definitely shows many of the hassles a sincere warrior must endure, especially the misunderstanding received at home and in war. My only real criticism of this movie is that, like "The Mockingbird Part 1." it is screened in a slightly vertically compressed form, making vertical dimensions at least 10 per cent less, making most of the actors seem stocky, and scenery heights with characters in the shot seem lower than scenery without characters. Jason Hall is not that buff, in spite of working out for the part. In one scene, in the Iraq base, one character is seen lifting makeshift weights. Unfortunately, the weights shown are about twice the weight lifted during the Olympics, and this attempt to depict the SEALS as brawn not brain is misguided. Overall, Hall plays Kyle in a very understated way, showing much of the ingrained humility and humanity of the few true exceptional warriors I have met or commanded. How action affects warriors, and how non-combatants misunderstand them or simply do not care, comes out strongly. The movie is slow, much slower than (say) "The Hurt Locker" or "The Green Zone" but manages to maintain interest. It is good that it was made soon enough after Kyle's death to be released while the relevant combat is still underway, to show those who claim to support war that there are severe effects on the humanity of all involved, and that these effects do not vanish when the troops come home.
The Sky's on Fire (1999)
Poor plot, sick science and questionable continuity
I watched this film by accident (a slow Monday afternoon is my excuse). Overall, it doesn't make even B-grade. I've never condemned a film because it is cliched, but in this case I will make an exception.
My only question is: did the producers run out of film and shoot the last third on video? That is the only reason I can think of for the change in film quality.
The Keep (1983)
For its era, a very good adaptation of a complex novel
I was reminded of "The Keep" after watching the DVD release of "Silverado", and decided to check out the IMDB listing. Reading the comments brought home to me the problem of making a movie from a book that satisfies both those who have read the book, and those who have to watch the movie "cold."
Virtually all of the strongly negative comments were made by people who hadn't read the book. Because they lacked the information included in the novel, they didn't understand the importance of most of what the director of "The Keep" brought to the screen, and didn't understand the movie at all.
I saw this movie not long after reading the book, and my only serious objection was to the climax. I preferred F. Paul Wilson's upbeat ending, something more in tune with the "light eventually defeating the darkness" philosophy that permeates all his books. Otherwise, I thought the movie captured the philosophy and feeling book well, including the misdirection by the ancient evil. The parallel of the plot to that of Old Testament struggle between God and the Devil was more obvious in the book, but from the comments I have read, some people who watched the movie without reading the book were as misdirected in the same way were the Jewish archeologist and the German officer.
I would classify "The Keep" as an unrecognised classic, just as the much misunderstood "The 13th Warrior" is also a classic. It is a cinema great, and I would award it at least 8/10.
The 13th Warrior (1999)
A Classic
It was only by accident that I purchased the video of The 13th Warrior, and I had to force myself to watch it. But by the end of the first 30 minutes, I was hooked, and to date have replayed it five times. Even after six viewings in total, I am still noticing new minor but significant details.
I have no doubt that The 13th Warrior will one day be considered as one of the best films of the 20th century, ranking alongside The Seven Samurai, 2001: A Space Odyssey and The Great Escape (to name just three movies that share some of its characteristics) as a cinematic landmark action/adventure. Michael Crichton has served a long apprenticeship as an author, and is renowned for the detail and accuracy with which he fills his books. In The 13th Warrior, he borrows on the directional skills of luminaries as diverse and notable as John Ford, Howard Hawks, Alfred Hitchcock, Akira Kurosawa, Stanley Kubrick and George Lucas to design a film that fully utilises the visual medium. The 13th Warrior is so heavily packed with visual and verbal detail that the viewer cannot afford to be distracted for even a moment.
This movie is not one that will appeal to everyone, and is definitely unsuitable for anyone who will not give it the undivided attention it needs to be fully understood. Banderas is perfectly cast as the exiled Arab diplomat, Ahmed Ibn Fahdlan, experienced in verbal skills and subtle but complex political intrigues. He performs well in his role as the counterpoint to the Viking warriors, typified by the Viking leader Buliwyf (played by Vladimir Kulich), complementing their skills understanding the visual and the simply obvious. This complementary difference is probably best explained by Ahmed when he explains how he learned his companions' Norse language: "I listened!"; Buliwyf responds by explaining how he could write a complicated Arabic phrase after seeing it just once, weeks earlier: "I watched!"
The basic plot of the movie is simple: Banderas is chosen as the non-Norseman member of a mystical party of 13 warriors who are needed to combat an invasion by a mystery horde of flesheating invaders, the Wendol (who seem to be modelled on the ancient Picts). It is his different viewpoint that helps the small group to victory, and along the way this soft Arab diplomat suffers his rite of passage to manhood. The starkly realistic depiction of the harsh Norseman lifestyle, juxtaposed with the civilised culture Ahmed prefers, is portrayed without the cinematic excesses we have come to associate with action movies, and the total package of excellent acting, characterisation and cinematography easily earns a 9 out of 10 from me.
Screen One: Hostile Waters (1997)
While not true to the book, still a good movie
It is difficult to portray several days of events in two hours of TV, but "Hostile Waters" captured most of the emotions of the situation. It is not a documentary, nor even a docu-drama, but a dramatisation of events that actually occurred. Once again I was impressed with the quality of Rutger Hauer's craft in his portrayal of the Soviet captain who earned the respect of his crew by simply being "the Captain" in every respect (in fact, since the film did depart from the real events far enough, it might have better been titled "The Captain"). I was not wildly impressed by the character portrayed by Martin Sheen: either the director deliberately portrayed the pampered US nuke drivers as insecure martinets, or Sheen acted badly. The juxtaposition of the living conditions aboard the US submarine and the Soviet submarine was obviously done to make a point, but what that point is I do not know, and this is what will make this film a classic for those who want to interpret characterisations in the light of the director's perceived aims.
Babylon 5: In the Beginning (1998)
A good movie that adds important detail missing from the series
As with most TV movies that are effectively a story arc, "In the Beginning" is only attractive to fans of the series. But for these people, this movie adds critical background information only hinted at in the series, and as well, casts one of the significant characters of the show into a different light. Now we can see a little of why the first four Babylon stations were destroyed, and how Sinclair and then Sheridan were fated to be the keystones in the development of Earth-Mimbari relations.
Finally the linked histories of Delenn, Sincliar and Sheridan that are alluded to throughout the series are explained, revealing some of the deep background created by J. Michael Straczynski that helped add to the series strength. The acting is well crafted, highlighting the depth of skills in their craft of the major cast. What I found particularly intriguing was the manner in which Straczynski rounded out the character of Llando by having him slightly distort the historical events covered in the series (only apparent to someone who had paid particular attention to the original TV screening).
Babylon 5: The Gathering (1993)
One of the better attempts at a pilot for a new series
"The Gathering" comes as a complete surprise unless you are aware of the process of the development of a TV series for sale. For anyone who has not seen Babylon 5, "The Gathering" is a reasonable telemovie, but only of strong interest to serious science fiction fans. But for fans of the series, this movie is an excellent example of how the storyline for the series was originally conceived and then modified when its limitations became obvious. The changes in the characterisations of Delenn, G'Kar and Llando can, in the retrospect provided by the later release (and viewing) of this pilot, be seen as significantly adding to the strength that made the series the classic it has become.