LunatickNick Reviews

Robin Hood (2006–2009)

Pretty People, Shame about the script

[3/10 · 7 December 2006]

"What else do you expect in the Saturday night Dr. Who slot!! " as one positive commentator puts it (after doing the kid thing and slagging off all the people who don't agree with his view...). Rather than join in the mudslinging, I'll tell you what I'd expect: first up, a better script - of the type created FOR Dr Who by Russell T Davies; something witty, sharp, well observed and relevant; not one that is wooden, laboured and so embarrassingly PC it comes across like an advert for the 'Nanny State'. Second, a bit of direction for a cast that has promise: Richard Armitage is wasted (he looks more like a panto villain from amdram land most of the time - and he is a LOT better than that!) and Keith Allen - an actor with great presence (watch him as a devil worshipper in a Morse re-run to see evil incarnate), needs more to do than a walk-on imitation of Alan Rickman's sheriff! Third: a better costume designer - some of Marion's kit looks like it's straight out of Grease, not the 12th century! The story lines don't even have to be that realistic to make the show watchable (and in spite of myself, I have watched most of it; perhaps hoping for better things?) - remember Robin of Sherwood, which got heavily into the mystical side of the legend (Herne the Hunter, etc). At times very silly, but they got away with it because they had a great cast well directed and the whole thing had an air of authenticity about it without being bogged down by a script that tried, by turns, to be trendy and hip one moment and woodenly medieval the next. And for those who can't remember the early 80s, that show went out in an earlier time slot (albeit on ITV).

In the end, I'm not sure the writers know what they want from the hero's latest incarnation: is this a preachy, morality play for the 21st century? A period swashbuckler? Or simply an attempt to cash in on the renewed success of Dr Who by filling the post dinnertime slot with this cheesy salute to pop culture? I leave it to you to decide...

Yes, Dear (2000–2006)

Undemanding comedy that's surprisingly watchable

[16 May 2006]

It's nearly two years since I last saw this show – it doesn't appear to air here in the UK, and I picked it up whilst travelling in Portugal in 2004. In common with a lot of TV shows there (the ones that aren't cheesy Brazilian soaps, that is) that are sourced from English speaking countries, this one was not dubbed but subtitled. Great if, like me, your pet rabbit speaks more Portuguese than you do!

I agree with most of the positive comments: this fairly laid-back comedy is surprisingly watchable. Maybe it was a paucity of 'quality' TV (if there is such a thing these days) in my 6-week trek; more likely it's that the undemanding stories were carried off with some aplomb and good timing by a generally likable cast. I got more laughs from this than from My Family, a UK show that many people rave about, but which, in my opinion, is a criminal waste of some talented actors

Rome (2005–2007)

Great fun - and don't get so wound up by the accents and the history!

[3 November 2005]

I'm amazed, in 2005, that people can get so annoyed about accents (in this case, mostly English ones). Why should the actors put on fake Italian accents? Come on, wakey wakey! As a viewer you are cast in the role of an observer 'on the spot', which means you're expected to understand the language. It is *not* authentic to make everybody sound like something out of a very poor sword and sandals movie from the 60s. And we've had enough of 've hath veys off making you spik' in war movies, too. Enough.

This series attempts to show Rome, warts and all, for the first time on the small screen. Foul language, violence, sex. Add drugs and you have the 21st century right there. And maybe that's the most important point: the human race hasn't really changed that much in two millennia. The dialogue gives the action an immediacy, a relevance and a familiarity that draws a modern audience into the story.

And a final word on history: sure, they've played around with dates and characters; but this is a *dramatic* interpretation, not a documentary. As it happens, I have a degree in modern history, but I'm happy to suspend disbelief for what promises to be an entertaining TV experience! More please HBO/BBC.

Dick Turpin (1979–1982)

Not the best

[29 July 2003]

Okay, so the other comment about this show may be partially right: this is pretty bad; but it sure doesn't represent the best of British tv in the 70s. Perhaps the writer was confusing it with some of his own, homegrown tv: like the Dukes of Hazzard, which was foisted on UK audiences at about the same time as this was airing.

Turpin had its moments - oh and it was nothing to do with Napoleon or the 1800s, either (hence the reason you didn't see any Frenchmen...); it was set nearly a century earlier and Turpin was returning home from the War of the Spanish Succession - same enemy, of course, but then, some things don't change. I believe the series was replaced in the schedules (in the UK) by Robin of Sherwood - that's the one without the American accent.

The Mighty (1998)

Moved to tears...

[8/10 · 22 April 2003]

Perhaps I'm a wuss for admitting it, but I blubbed at the end of this movie, even though I should have known what to expect. I guess I'm just a sentimental kind of guy, but this movie does have the power to move - unless you have a heart of stone, or are so taken up with 21st century 'cool' that you don't feel anything anymore!

This is a beautifully acted, unsentimental piece that is principally about friendship. But it also deals with finding hope where none exists; a desire to reach out for the stars that is fuelled by hopelessness and loneliness.

Perhaps billed as a children's film, this is one for any adult seeking inspiration.

But beware: have the Kleenex close at hand!

Ivanhoe (1997)

Great medieval adventure

[7 August 2002]

This BBC mini-series was tremendous fun, with a lot of attention to period detail and an outstanding cast. Highlights for me were the castle attack and another wonderful performance by Ralph Brown (surely the definitive Prince John?). Move over Niccolo Machiavelli!

Orca (1977)

A memory of a long-distant summer...(***SOME SPOILERS***)

[15 September 2000]

As far as I can remember, I've only seen this movie once, and that was way back on its release in Britain in '77. Maybe it's because we've had a similarly abysmal summer this year that brings back thoughts of traipsing through the rain to see this. Maybe it's because I've never quite forgotten Morricone's score.

The fact that very few people have bothered to comment on Orca may say enough about it; but there is a little more to it than the negative reviews suggest. Sure, the storyline of a killer whale seeking vengeance is absurd; but how often have outwardly ridiculous stories been used to frame a concept more subtle and important?

This one could be called an eco-thriller, with the early death of female whale and her unborn calf an indictment of the whale-trade. But the way the film is developed provides a simple truth: there are always two sides to an argument. By the end of the film we have sympathy for both the excellent Richard Harris, and the vengeful whale. The one living a tough and bitter existence in the thankless business of arctic fishing; the other denied its right to an undisturbed existence.

It may be daft. But it is incredibly haunting, with, for me, the last scenes being the most poignant. Ennio Morricone's score has stayed with me, as the whale, vengeance complete, swims to an inevitable death under the pack-ice. A story of lost love and revenge, packaged as a horror movie, from the unusual angle of an aquatic lifeform.

Check it out.

The Celebration (1998)

A Hand-Held Treat

[21 August 2000]

Please don't derive the wrong meaning from the title of my (very brief) review! This is an astonishingly powerful piece of film-making, which I caught rather by accident on UK terrestrial tv last week. By turns harrowing and funny, it's not the sort of story that would normally draw me (affluent family disintegrates under the weight of revelations made by its adult children, during a weekend celebration of the father's sixtieth birthday); but I was spellbound by the acting, script and grainy, naturalistic camera work (and NYPD fans, please take note: THIS is the way to handle the 'moving camera').

If thought-provoking film is what you're after, please try Festen. Even if, like me, your first language isn't Danish, you won't be disappointed.

The Blair Witch Project (1999)

Be Afraid...be very afraid? Nope!

[17 November 1999]

I went to see this with an open mind, and to support a film which has threatened to turn Hollywood on its head (no bad thing). I think I have the sort of imagination which can cope with the 'suspension of disbelief' required to enjoy most fiction/horror.

But sorry folks. It just *is not frightening*. Nope. No siree. Not even the finale rescues it. Sure, the potential for tension and fear are there, but the best ingredients are not played up enough, not allowed to development. And though there are brilliant (and totally convincing) scenes of the group's developing hysteria (the actors, especially the girl, give creditable performances), the whole is somehow soul-less.

I'm fascinated by the supernatural, and have seen films which leave me feeling pretty vulnerable and uneasy. But not this one. The required suspension of disbelief isn't enough to make you feel sympathy for the group (maybe it's the fact that they're so ill-prepared for what happens? I don't know).

Full marks to the marketing men; this might have been a good 20 minute short. But if it does force a re-evaluation in Tinsel Town then maybe it will have done some good (apart from to the pockets of the producers...).

If anyone out there really fainted with fright whilst watching this movie I recommend they find a boy scout to help them next time they try to cross a busy main road. Now that *is* scary!

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

Nice graphics...shame about the movie

[5/10 · 13 August 1999]

What a waste! Take some of the best actors around - Neeson, McGregor, Jackson, and the excellent McDiarmid - and virtually ignore the fact that they can act. In this instance, who takes the blame when the performances are wooden?

In the old days only the backdrops were supposed to be wooden; but in this film they are the best thing. The stunning scenes during the pod-race; the computer generated climax battle (fought between some odd sounding '70s retro types wearing flares and a huge army of undernourished 'droids). The finale is reminiscent of Part VI, with the three-way split between Jedi duel, land battle and space fight. Yet it still lacked the urgency of Return's climax.

The graphics are undeniably superb. But please, give us some credit for enjoying a good storyline too! Only in one or two scenes is the breathless pace and excitement of the original trilogy attained, and the bits in between just drag. As a 'scene-setter' for Episodes II & III it's fine...but did it really need an entire movie to do this?

The revamped, re-released IV, V & VI were far better, still showing how far ahead of their time they were. Part of that has to do with the way sympathy is built for the characters - we really care about these guys! In Episode I it was difficult to get above polite indifference for the fate of the principal players (consider Neeson's demise in comparison to Alec Guinness in the first film...).

I really wanted to like this film, despite all the luke-warm press (perhaps because of it). But it just doesn't have a soul...Please Mr Lucas: we love you really - you've done some great things. Just don't serve up any more glorified computer games or extended 'you've-seen-the-movie-now-buy-the-toys' adverts and call them films...Your company makes brilliant computer games; but this movie was a bit like sitting through someone else's game for two hours... ...oh, and how about this for a plotline for Episode II: have Jar Jar Binks die a glorious (and preferably messy) death for the Republic in the first scene...that way we won't have to put up with the most annoying computer graphic ever programmed in the history of sci-fi...!