Change Your Image
mbayley-76831
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Toll (2021)
The Toll
I am sure some of the scenes were filmed at RAF St David's. My honeymoon was spent at Caerfachel just a few hundred yard away from this old airfield. I well remember forty two years ago walking down the lane from our cottage, a newly married man of 26 to look at this deserted old RAF field. Memories abound from those far off days. The sense of unreality that I had, after fi.be year finally persuaded this lovely woman to tak me as her husband. The amazement that we had gone through a ceremony, she hadn't run away and we had made it to Pembrokeshire. A wedding followed by a tremendous storm. A wedding night in a remote Herefordshire inn, totally celibate I'm sorry to say. And, finally, to our honeymoon cottage. Again,I'm sorry to say. Celibate. However, the scenery was lovely.
Tales of the Unexpected: Back for Christmas (1980)
Orchids can be lethal
What is not to love about this marvellous episode? Sian Phillips, Richard Johnson and the voluptuous, gorgeous Lynne Ross, who always makes me think of Gabrielle Drake. A twisted, turning tale of lust, deceit and cunning with added 80s ambiance such as shoulder pads, big hair, an MGB with rubber bumpers and a gorgeous mustard yellow Rover SD1. Marvellous!
A venal corrupt surgeon lusts after his lusty nurse (Ross) and bumps off his elegant yet spiky wife (Phillips) in the most brutal yet surgical way.
Unfortunately for him, retribution is just around the corner in a most unexpected way.
Wonderful.
Tales of the Unexpected: The Flypaper (1980)
A young girl, a bus and a lonely bus stop
A most disturbing yet balanced episode. A young girl hears of a maniac loose in the locale and begins to imagine herself a victim. A strange man inveigles himself into her company, Her surrogate mother - a grandmother- seems unaware of her granddaughter's worries The byplay with a young and handsome vicar serves to emphasise the shallow relationship between the girl and her career.
The girl takes refuge from Burke's intrusions but her refuge is deeply flawed.
The players make the most of the script and the cinematography, with long shots of cathedrals, empty fields and lonely bus stops works very well in establishing the atmosphere of fear. An excellent exercise in paranoia and fear.
Tales of the Unexpected: Taste (1980)
Bad taste in my mind, but brilliant all the same.
Ron Moody must have been specially chosen for his elegant seediness, such is the character of Richard Pratt. Set in a perfectly arranged 1980s dinner party (ask my wife, a doyenne of the genre in the 70s and 80s) in what one is asked to accept as a Belgravia - or nearbyes - mews house, this is a biblical tale of just rewards.
Pratt is a celebrity bibber, connoisseur and top hole creep who zips from TV studio to his host Mike's house where a bow tied, long dress dinner party is underway. Pratt is the guest of honour, but note the gross imbalance of personae - an American literary couple, Mike and elegant wife, typically attired in the 1980s fashion of evening dress (male) and long, burgundy dress (female), their beautiful, long dressed, RP spoken daughter, and greatly moustachioed Pratt.
As Max Boyce would have it: "I know, because I was there".
Pratt takes Mikes bet - where Pratt has to identify a Bordeaux wine on pain of losing a case of said plonk, and pushes the wager into intolerable territory.
First, a case of the wine becomes fifty cases, then ten thousand pounds, then the situation degenerates into horror.
Pratt bets his two houses, one "country" and one "town", by town one assumes he means "London".
Mikes bet is his (rather gorgeous yet young and virginal) daughter, Louise. Unbelievable, in that had if Mike lost his daughter he would submit to marrying Pratt and presumably submitting to his obvious carnal lusts. Mind you, I don't blame Pratt, Louise is very desireble.
As one expects of Dahl's plots, it all goes Teat Soup and Pratt receives his just deserts.
Excellent episode and one I can watch again and again.
Great Expectations (2023)
Small expectations...
Several contributors have used the word "dark" in their reviews which is precisely the word I was thinking of when writing this modest contribution.
"Dark" because the novel, upon which I hoped the production would have been respectfully based, as with many of Dickens' works is bleak and overshadowed with the darkness of Victorian Britain. I will come back to this later..
"Dark" because, and here I'm going back to a previous review of mine of a Dr Who BBC production, "dark" because the SET LIGHTING IS AWFUL. I possess a fairly good television set which usually has no trouble reproducing tones, shades and colours - even for one of Michael Winner's offerings (and they often feature shockingly bad lighting) but BBC take this to a new (low) level.
It was fully 25 minutes into the first episode (there is the measure of my determination to watch this 'classic') before Pip moved out into sunlight, probably to the great relief of the cameraman but that did not last long, and we were soon back to sets lit by candlelight.
I cannot even congratulate the BBC and producer on his respect for the novel because..., wait a moment: "producer"? According the IMDB this 6-part crucifixion has 13 - yes 13 'producers'! How can even the Bloated Broadcasting Corruption justify 13 people with the title of producer?
Back to the review.
Where was i? Respect for the novel? Oh dear, the BBC have done it again. Taken a well-known and respected novel and - well - ignored it. Dickens wrote rather good, very dark stories however even though he is credited, I rather suspect Charles would be acutely embarrassed and annoyed at this travesty, at what the unmentionable shower who butchered, bowdlerised, and bent his story into this shamble of a production.
My title was "Small expectations..." and I am afraid the BBC lived down to my expectations, yet again.
Review: a pitiful 1 out of 10.
Cross-Roads (1955)
Christopher Lee in a little gem
A delightful little ghost story
How can one write a lengthy review about a short film? Well, I am not going to try even though there is a great deal to say about such a marvellous little gem from 1955.
The short story to this short is given in the IMDB introduction.
Christopher Lee dominates this little film, supporting cast are excellent and the premise - a vengeful brother returns from the dead to take revenge against the perpetrator for his sister's disgrace and suicide is well imagined. The social values of the 1950s are honestly portrayed and all the better for that.
The music ('The Shadow Waltz') is rather soulful as well, adding to the atmosphere.
Just a 'short' rant about cinematography. Everything is as it should be. The lighting is crisp and clear. I could actually see what was happening. The sound is crisp and clear, I could actually hear what everyone said. This, my friends, made a wonderful change from today's productions with their mumbling, dim lighting and jumping camerawork.
I must say I enjoyed this little gem tremendously and could watch it again and again.
Finally, a big thank you to Talking Pictures TV for unearthing and showing this lovely 'short'.
Thriller: If It's a Man - Hang Up! (1975)
Suzyyyyy...... but help, what IS Constable Veneer's car?
Here we have an excellent plot, a great cast, competent filming and just a hint of creepiness. Lovely Suzy Martin is terrorised by a telephone perve. Just the sort of incident the Telecommunications Act 2003 was meant to address. It didn't, and it has been misused by police and courts ever since. However, that's another freedom rant altogether.
The plot follows the gorgeous Suzy through a series of incidents, culminating in a set piece encounter with several suspects, and of course that swine Clements leads us astray again and again. The climax is well done and we are left with the feeling that, once again, Thriller has lived up to its name.
Tom Conti portrays a well-mannered Sicilian with suave aplomb.
Gerald Harpers character Greg Miles is delightfully over the top.
My request for help in regard to the car used by Constable Venner may appear trite but, as a long standing owner and player of the excellent Network box set, every time I watch 'If it's a man, hang up' I try to identify the obvious BL ADO 18 derivative. Help!
Doctor Who: The Timeless Children (2020)
Please BBC listen to your audience...
I wrote a review that was declined so here goes again - with a few omissions...
Why one asks, is this current series so loathed and ridiculed? A few thoughts:
Jodie Whittaker is uncharismatic, untalented and simply unable to play such an important role. Her inane faux Victoria Wood gurning is simply laughable.
The 3 companions are devoid of charisma or interest and seem to be there just to fill the plot with a pompous BBC-standard cast mix of genders and races.
The TARDIS interior resembles an explosion in a jelly factory.
The stories in Season 12 (38) have been superficial, political and proselytising.
The series' finale was a self-indulgent, unnecessary shambles which attempted to drive out all that went before (apart from Season 12's shambolic plots) and replace Dr Who with Dr Everywoman.
Many devotees have stated they are so angry and disappointed in with the current mess and will no longer watch Dr Who
This flood of criticism would - in an ideal world - give the current writers and production team nightmares and we should by now be hearing of their deep concern and an explanation of how they intend to address these fundamental problems. Instead we hear of their (self) satisfaction with their efforts, the view that the fans are quite simply ill-informed in their silly opinions and that we should await an even more 'exciting' Christmas special.
The unspoken inference is that Dr Who is now simply a vanity project under the control of people who genuinely do not care and, protected by the BBC licence fee feel free to continue with their destruction of what has been up until now a worldwide and greatly loved sci-fi phenomenon.
Unlike many of my fellow fans I will continue to watch. I stopped watching during the awful Tennant era. I thought he was bad enough until Miss Whittaker's attempt made me realise the barrel's bottom hadn't yet been scraped. I missed the show and once it became apparent that Tennant was a temporary lapse when Matt Smith took over I started watching again.
I sincerely hope that the BBC will eventually take note, especially if they are fearful of their licence fee being taken from them and will have to then recognise that the viewers are more important that a few arrogant, self-obsessed social and political manipulators.
Doctor Who: The Haunting of Villa Diodati (2020)
I thought I was watching Eastenders on a flickering 1950s television.
I wrote that heading as a joke because the whole feel and pace of this episode felt eerily like a stock production of one of the many UK soap operas but from reading some of the reviews on IMDB I see that the writer was one Maxine Alderton, who is apparently best known for her ... soap operas. That explains a great deal.
Like many of the current Dr Who series, the basic plot had a great potential (spoiler here: the Cybermen were witnessed by the poet Shelly's future wife Mary and became the inspiration for her novel 'Frankenstein') but I'm afraid it required far more writing ability and imagination than Miss Alderton could muster. I have to say that Messrs Gatiss, Mofatt (or even the awful Russel Twerp Davies) could have done better.
The gurning Miss Whittaker was her usual irritating self and as for the three stooges - the less said about their shambolic performances the better. There was a lot of rushing about, odd characters popping up here and there and a general feeling of everyday domestic soap opera tripe. Heavens above, when considering a Victorian Gothic horror story, even Frankie Howered's 'The House in Nightmare Park' turned in a better performance than the current Dr Victoria Wood and her PC Collective.
The overwhelming problem however was that I struggled to see much of the non-action because of the awful lighting. Yes Miss Alderton I understand the need to give the sets a Victorian overbearing and cloying horror feel but heavens above Paddy Russel managed to do that with Tom Baker in the 'Horror of Fang Rock' and even the intriguingly named Euros Lyn allowed us to see what was happening with Chris Eccleston in the 'The Unquiet Dead'. Some reviewers on IMDB have called this a "dark episode" presumably referring to the plot however the only darkness about the whole thing was the utter LACK OF ANY DECENT LIGHTING.
Therefore, I cannot write any more about this episode purely because I was so annoyed at the shoddy lighting making it incredibly hard to see what the hell was going on that I gave up after 25 minutes.
Doctor Who: Praxeus (2020)
All boxes ticked...
I really loved this episode; I was enthralled by the writers' convoluted ability to cram in almost every single PC topic they could. Let's see now: environmental paranoia, race equality, sexual diversity, autistic sensitivity, relentless expositions of the supposed stupidity of men (especially OLD men) and many uplifting sermons from supercilious women - all present and correct and nicely jollied along by Miss Whittaker's engaging faux Victoria Wood gurning.
To be serious for a moment - the production unfortunately made little attempt to provide inventive scriptwriting, inspired (or even just plain average) acting, interesting characters, continuity or any acknowledgement of the series tenets but so what, this was a fully PC-compliant BBC production.
I was going to write "Spoiler" here but in all honesty the plot is so poor that I'm
not spoiling anything by telling you.
The motley Who Crew encounter and conquer an alien plastic virus with much use of shouting, empathising, proselytising and patronising drivel sheltering under the cloak of the BBC's superb artistic and CGI production resources (well, be fair, praise where praise is due).
As for the plot's theme, well the BBC's archives have been well and truly raided again but not the Dr Who catalogue this time, something far more educated and engaging was consulted: the much-praised TV series 'Doomwatch' and its inaugural episode: "The Plastic Eaters" where the environmental dangers of plastic were recognised and tackled (and this boys and girls was a BBC production from exactly 50 years ago). Aahhhh - now I SEE, this is an underground, maybe subversive 50th anniversary tribute to the 'Doomwatch' inauguration, a sideswipe to the past as it were. It is 50 years, almost to the day when 'The Plastic Eaters' was transmitted. Devious old BBC eh? Greta wassername is actually 50 years behind the times... Sorry my dear, the baby boomers got there first!
I think a few cinematic tricks were also snaffled from Mr Hichcock's "The Birds" but apart from that the rest of the plot was fairly typical 2020 Who i.e. pretty bloody awful.
'BluebonnetWhovian' summed it up in her YouTube review by saying:" Don't
watch this people.... it's just a *hit show".
I'm afraid I agree and to be honest, I was so disturbed by watching this dross that I had to retreat into the den and cleanse my mind by watching some early Hartnell just to remind and reassure myself that Dr Who is (was) actually a rather splendid science fiction show.
After watching this very first Dr Who episode, I had a mad idea for all you Season 12 (Season 38) writers and 'showrunners' (what the actual heck is that) to consider. Just for a laugh (and let's be fair, living off the BBC licence fee, you are having a laugh); go and remake 'An Unearthly Child' with modern funds (budget) and your gorgeous CGI technology. Stick to the script and cast actors as closely as you can to the original. What a feast that would be to see that truly original and innovative BBC production remade with all the advantages of 21st century resources.
Taking this further into weird imaginings, If you ask Makeup to age Miss Whittaker by a just few years and let her hair grow a little (keep the awful clothes of course) she could be a fair facsimile of William Hartnell - provided of course she doesn't speak. Get someone else (who isn't pretending to be Victoria Wood) to do the voiceover.
Go on, do it BBC. Given the state of the current series you obviously have time and money to waste and at least you would have the satisfaction of producing something worthwhile for the public to see.
Dracula (2020)
2/10 A complete travesty has risen from the grave.
Gattis and Moffat have been up to their old tricks again. Look chaps, if you are so "talented" as some reviewers seem to suggest then go away and write something new; impress us all with your inventiveness but please stop meddling with classics like Dracula or the works of Arthur Conan Doyle and M.R. James.
I agree with most reviewers who found this 3-part series deteriorated from episode one onwards however I can't agree that the first episode was as good as suggested, to me it was only fair, the second overblown and the final was unwatchable.
Many of the cast were not at all suitable for their parts especially the strange decision to use a Danish actor for an English language production. Mr Bang struggled to pronounce his dialogue with any degree of conviction and was unable to manage anything other than weak puns and hammy looks, giving us the distinct impression that The Count was, in reality an Essex insurance salesman with an unfortunate side-line in gore. He was as wooden as his casket.
Additionally, the - inevitable - inclusion of actors and actresses just because of their skin colour was deplorable even if it is now standard practice for the Bloated Broadcasting Corporation. The final bizarre change to the story was to make Van Helsing a woman. There was no need to do this at all but I'm afraid it is just another BBC obsession infecting most programmes (including Dr Who) to which Gattis and Mofatt duly pandered. Miss Wells made a brave attempt to inject some life into her character of a sarcastic nun but I'm afraid her acting abilities were not able to overcome the limitations of the cliché- ridden script.
I should imagine once Bram Stoker has finished turning in his grave, he will instruct lawyers to sue for reputational damage as the credits have the temerity to mention his name as though he bears any responsibility for this travesty.
With the funds and technical support now available to the BBC this could have been so much more. Please BBC, if you are unable to match the high standards of your more talented predecessors then at least refrain from meddling with the classics.