Change Your Image
Maylar
Reviews
Doctor Who: The Angels Take Manhattan (2012)
Exceedingly good, but
This particular episode, for me, had only one truly big flaw: it followed "The Power of The Three". And in that episode, we learn how much Doctor really depends on having both Amy and Rory close to him and how Rory's father depends on Doctor to keep them both safe.
Well, to follow that episode and that message with the, if not death, then disappearance of these characters for good, is by me a huge flaw in the complete series timeline.
That said, I consider this to be a very good episode, with here and there lacking that certain "something" most of us was expecting to see, I believe.
Into its favor, this episode has a certain flavor of "unusual" even for this series (for which I think the interesting use of filters and wide shots can be "blamed" in the first place).
I personally like the back and forth moments, that keep the viewer on his toes...one moment things are progressing in the desired order, the very next there are as bad as they can be. Maybe Moffat used this here a bit more than usually, but I liked it. Hope never leaves the viewer until the very end and when it does, it does in style. Moffat is known as "no one ever dies" writer and stays faithful to that title here, as well.
Which didn't stop him from removing not only one, but two of much beloved characters from the series. Which, I think (and only speculating) is only the innuendo for removing River and regenerating Doctor by the end of this season (something I will regret with passion when it happens, but is beyond the subject of this review).
The episode has an interesting idea and brings up the new concept of angels and their behavior, telling the viewer more about their nature. It also has one of the most interesting cliffhangers ever made on television, right in the first few minutes. I won't tell you what this is, if you haven't seen the episode, go and check it out. You won't be disappointed.
There's few very emotionally heavy moments, but here I find the episode a bit lacking, in comparison to some other episodes. I'm not quite sure why...perhaps, it is just a matter of editing and quick jumping from shot to shot. Matt Smith is (I firmly believe, whatever some fans opinions might be) an excellent actor and I could easily picture him giving much more than he gave here. Why that wasn't given or used, I can't comprehend. But Doctor giving up on both Amy and Rory with one angry cry isn't enough for me. The complete ending gives me much of a "meh" feel from precisely Doctor.
Perhaps, it was meant to show us how Doctor is starting to come into terms with losing his companions. The parting wasn't worse than some partings in the original series...I just think that we, people of the 21th century, kinda needed more. But I might be wrong or to subjective at this.
For me, the shiny star of this is River. She was...River. And again for me, that was enough to carry much of the episode. She's a character with no weakness but one and since that one is Doctor himself, any fan would forgive. But seriously, her strength is once again underlined. If you like River, you would love that...if not, bad luck.
In general, this episode has it all: action, emotions, horror, suspense, humor. For some reason, it still does not develop perfectly as it could have. But it is still much above the average episode (which says plenty) and is one of the "must see", surely. Not only because of the ending, but also because it has much to give, despite the occasional flaw or two.
Son of the Dragon (2006)
One word-stupidity!
Yeah, stupidity! I just finish watching and I still have bad taste in my mouth. Too much colors, too much unnecessary "addons" to a story, too much stupid characters (I presume they wanted to achieve comic relief, but I only wanted to cry)... too much of everything. Shame to spoil one of divine stories from "Arabian Nights" like this. Childish, naive (both on a bad way) and with lot of magic-breaking mistakes, I don't think this could keep a child of five for more then ten minutes. Princess is lovely, but should be tongueless, cause actress don't know how to carry a role. Rest of the cast is even worse...our "bad guy" is REALLY bad. Shame that the "good guy" is not better. Only light in this dark is, of course, David Carradine, who goes unfortunately deeply down under his level with this, but at least keep his actor/"fighter" skills at top. I'm still sorry to see him in a thing like this, but glad that I had something to watch in whole charade, so thank you David. Only, ONLY, for him, I give this 2 stars to this fiasco...I would give more for him, but that would rise final score to entire movie. The rest is so bad, that I would, maybe, like to grade it, but there is no grade lover then 1 here, and I think that would be too much.
Conviction (2002)
For a "feel"...
The point of this film is not in great picture and light,or a sound,or directing...not even about lead actor,as many movies this days are.No,the point is a man,a man who this movie is about,and his work and dedication to make this world a better place.Movie carries his message,his strength and his believes,his weakness and power and will to menage them,to deal with them...It tell us about strength of faith,and love.It feel very strong,and right,even lead actor sometime pass to leave same impact.But it can be forgiven,and cut some slacks,cause impression and general "feel",movie itself made,is strong. So,I give this movie a 10,not for picture or a sound,not for light or a directing...just for "feel" that world can be better if we all do our part and try harder to make it better,if we all do our chores and believe,if we find that strength,courage and light inside us.That impact this movies had on me.As to a great man about who is the movie,rest in peace,Carl Upchurch and thank you for your light,that made darkness around us less dark.Peace.