zelmaree Reviews

Dampyr (2022)

Respectable Adaptation - a sequel might need a bit more detail & polish

[7/10 · 9 February 2024]

I hadn't read the popular Italian comic series this movie's based on, but I figured I had an easy watch on my hands- it's only a vampire movie, after all.

Yet there are also emotional complexities to the story; a child forced into adulthood, in a war-torn world - a man who goes from cynical shyster, using local's superstitions to make a living- to understanding that there's more to him, & to life- thus growing into both a capable warrior, & a better man - & the seething resentment Tesla has for her master, Gorka- having been given no choice in being turned- & she seems to have had no option but to serve him, up to this point: sires & progeny do not appear to have the same kind of familial (or romantic) bond an audience might have come to expect, from other offerings of the genre.

There's also less romanticism in the setting (the war-torn Balkans, of the 90's), & in the relationships between humans & vampires in this story- but it's not quite black & white; while Gorka & the majority of vampires have no regard for humans- however recently they were turned, & little more for his vampiric progeny - Draka's relationship with his dampyr son (&- according to what I've since read- humans) is a tad more complex, & yet- Draka, like Gorka is also a vampire - it will be interesting to see a sequel tackle that dichotomy...

One can also hope that a sequel can address at some point, the biggest questions I had: if he was taken by the three witches, did they not raise him, too? Did they not teach him what he was? He treats being a 'dampyr' as a grift to scam people, 'til he realises that he actually *is* one- & it comes as a shock to him.

That was something I feel like I missed scenes or conversations of- Harlan speaks very, very little about his upbringing- so did they immediately dump him at an orphanage, or did they do a 'Sleeping Beauty' with him, & just raised him in total ignorance of his heritage?

I'm also curious if they will make further appearances in Harlan's journey.

But the bigger questions; did Draka *know* what his relationship with a human could create?

Did he actually *intend* to create a dampyr? I feel like he must have.

Did he intend to raise his child? How - given he's half-human?

And why- when he has the ability to kill vampires? Did he want a weapon against other vampire lords?

Where does Draka fit in the hierarchy of this universe's vampire society? What does him having dampyr offspring mean for- & to- him?

Does he have 'political' motivations for wanting a relationship with Harlan?

Will his friendship with the vampire Tesla affect his potential relationship with his father?

Are there other dampyrs in this universe? What relationship do they have- if any, with their parents?

I hope to see more exploration of this world...

7.5/ 10.

Roman Empire (2016–2019)

Wow, is this a mixed bag...

[6/10 · 30 September 2023]

For something called 'Roman Empire'- it doesn't exactly cover a lot, jumping around from Commodus, back to Caesar, & then forward to Caligula.

This could have been so much more than what it was- I mean they had Sean Bean as the narrator for the first season!

I feel like the concept of a docu-drama is a bit of a problem-child in media, because the drama is interrupted by talking heads- & the in-depth information of the documentary, isn't always matched by the on-screen action & dialogue- or lack thereof... There _are_ good things to note: the leads were certainly all serviceable in their roles- Aaron Jakubenko, as Commodus- Ditch Davey, as Caesar- & Ido Drent as Caligula (the former two being 'Spartacus' alums*; Sabinus & Nemetes, respectively)

However, it very much feels like shallow, 'pop-culture history'- mostly hitting all the familiar beats, with the odd surprise thrown in- to keep the audience paying attention (if they can).

But it's exceptionally lacking in depth- for instance, there's no references to the seminal events that shaped both Caesar's childhood & adolescence, & Roman history at-large - & him being a 'lowly soldier' early on- is just wrong; he'd been elevated to a special priesthood by the order of his uncle-by-marriage, Marius- *the* Marius: the Marius who reformed the Roman military, who won an unprecedented **7** consulships - & he was then robbed of it by Marius' erstwhile ally, & later deadly rival, Sulla- the loss of this priesthood is what made it possible for Caesar to begin his military career, in Asia Minor & Spain, as a junior officer- thanks to his mother's family's connections (Caesar's family _were_ noble on both sides, after all) - had Sulla not done this, Caesar may well have ended up a historical footnote.

What's that saying? 'Congratulations- you played yourself.'

I also find it a crying shame that his non-military life got so little attention. No mention of his studying rhetoric, his time as a prisoner of Cilician pirates? No...? Nothing...?

At large, there's no lack of repetitive cliches; gladiators fighting to the death - the grubbiness, just in general (weird choice for a culture that loved bathing - to the point that, in a bid for popularity, ambitious Roman politicians would pay the days' fees for the baths- which were not super-exorbitant anyway, & well within the means of the average citizen, to use regularly - & considered the unwashed to be 'barbarians') - neither the structure of the Roman political system, nor the army get any detail- so the audience doesn't understand how things changed between the three periods of time, nor why it mattered for people to make political alliances, or military arrangements the way they did.

In some respects, the producers went for the most salacious angles of history- & yet avoided it in others (compare Caligula's relationships with his sisters, as opposed to the rumours surrounding Caesar's early love-life, which get nothing here).

Speaking of Caesar's love-life- it turns out to be another cliche-riddled snooze-fest on that front: the scenes with Cornelia were probably the best - but the appearance of Cleopatra is beyond underwhelming; there were some moments, but not nearly enough to make up for my disappointment - & why does she look like a Middle Eastern model? She was of a Macedonian-Greek inbred royal family- with only a little Eastern blood, & there's *multiple* accounts that depict her as having auburn hair (which was styled in a very particular way), & yet we have _yet another_ depiction from an average, black-haired actress with beach-waves/ hair down, & a strong tan- even if I were to ignore that - she's entirely lacking in the imperious & powerful presence that the historical Cleopatra would almost certainly have had.

I didn't need Cleopatra to be a super-model, but I *did* need to feel that she was intelligent, ambitious- someone that could truly draw the attention of the man who'd gained control of the Roman Republic, almost entirely by the power of his personality & unprecedented military victories- & yet it feels like the most boring part of his story...

Without going into detail, the costumes, makeup, hairstyles, & armour are largely anachronistic, cliche, & more than a little cheap-looking- owing more to a budget-'Spartacus'-look, than a more accurate-to-history appearance.

I'm also pretty certain that there's reused footage in this...

*On the Spartacus comparisons - there are numerous other actors from the Spartacus Quadrilogy:

• Craig Walsh-Wrightson, Tiberius (Solonius, Prequel/ S1)
• John Bach, Marcus Aurelius (Titus Calavius- Illythia's father, S1/ S2)
• Steven Lovatt, Pompey (Tullius, Prequel)

On the plus side, all these seasoned actors were quite decent in their roles... on the downside; when was Pompey ever bald & bearded...? Did Lovatt need the look for another role, or did no one care...?

Actually, hair is a problem all over the series- the Roman men have 5 o'clock shadows outside of mourning, the only time when it was appropriate - & are clean-shaven when it was fashionably acceptable/ historically accurate for the time to have a beard (ie. Marcus Aurelius & Commodus).

And don't even get me started on the women....

I'll give it a generous 5.5- for decent actors in most of the main roles, somewhat accurate elements of history (though there should have been *far* more)- & Sean Bean narrating in s1.

African Queens: Njinga (2023– )

For a show that has 5 episodes...

[1/10 · 5 June 2023]

... it manages to be remarkably superficial - there's a distinct lack of detail, of character, of personality, of context, & analysis.

The poor-quality dramatic sequences also do nothing for the supposed exploration of this figure, her culture, & her times.

Everyone is shallowly sketched, & details are glossed over with great regularity

It's astonishing that Ms Pinkett-Smith gave this first entry 5 parts- & yet the very format has limited the ability to go deeply into the subject...

The drama & scope is limited, cliche, & trite- I found myself more drawn to books on the subject - where the character of Nzinga, her spirit, & sense of self comes far more alive, ironically, than in this live action docu-drama...

Kill Ratio (2016)

Ehh- it's a movie...

[5/10 · 5 June 2023]

I'd give it a generous 4 & 1/2 stars It's not the most complicated of plots; a fictional Eastern European state's emerging out of the old Eastern Bloc mentality, reaching for Western democratic values & aiming to improve their international standing- encouraged by an American interest.

But, there's a hardline group, with military backing- who like 'the old ways' (with their own shadowy foreign interest) - obviously, the two will clash...

Tom Hopper, bless his cotton socks- he really does try in the role. He certainly fits the physicality of his character, but he can't exactly blend into the background- not at a whopping 6' 4''.

He's also not really a self-actualised character any more than any of the others; it's only that he's slightly less shallowly drawn, as the MC- having moments of humour & humanity.

But John Wick he's not- being almost super-hero-like, in how little he's affected by anything.

The next best character is the new President Petrenko- & to be honest, that's not saying a lot - from the good guys to the bad, these people are shallow as a puddle- & the bad guys are pretty much the worst kind of cardboard cutouts & oldschool stereotypes, across the board.

The action ranges from mediocre to just above average- & there's an actual swordfight near the end.

What can I say? I killed some time with it...

Miss Fisher & the Crypt of Tears (2020)

A Stunning Labour of Love!

[9/10 · 3 March 2020]

I was thrilled to hear about the crowdfunding campaign to bring Miss Fisher to the big screen, but in truth- I wasn't holding my breath; people know these things can fall over.... Imagine my surprise when it proved a success & the first trailer dropped! Everything that makes the Miss Fisher series addictive viewing- from the characters & cast- to the locations & costumes is here - & like the show, every cent of the budget can be seen on-screen. Essie & Nathan light up the silver screen with just as much barely restrained sizzle as they do the small screen- the cameos of familiar favourites; Dot, Hugh, Bert, Cec & the redoubtable Aunt Prudence were a treat for fans of the show, but most of our time is spent in Palestine, at a lavish estate on the outskirts of London & the city itself with the Lofthouse & Abbas families- & their actors are a brilliant addition to the cast- especially the young lady who plays Shirin. I waited until the end-credits to see how many locations the movie was filmed in- to my surprise, it was only two: Melbourne & Morocco.

If I had one real complaint, it would be the fact that Phryne seemingly forgets the what impact word of her 'death' for *the second time* , had on Jack- & her attitude, as well as the conflict that followed felt strange.

Word of her having married also came out of nowhere.