TV that’s really going to suck.

Series 2 of The Musketeers.

For anyone who doesn’t know this series is a BBC production of the Alexander Dumas classic. Overall, I’d call it serviceable; it has the difficult task of matching adult themes, such as cut-throat political manoeuvring (with frequent assassinations)  and adolescent comedy. This means that it wasn’t really possible for the series to ever tackle the level of violence you’d expect from a programme about the King of France’s elite regiment. The only thing that stopped it from falling into the realms of awful was Peter Capaldi’s performance as The Cardinal. He did as all good antagonists should and made you really dislike him, balancing out the cheesy and clichéd parts of the main protagonists have to get through.

But then Capaldi went and landed what must be the best role in British television, the Twelfth Doctor. One thing that both Matt Smith and David Tennant have stressed in interviews and panels is that the role of the Doctor is liable to take over the entire life of the actor playing him. Capaldi it seems is no exception to this rule and has announced that he will not be able to meet the shooting schedule of both Who and Musketeers. So the Cardinal won’t be in the second series of The Musketeers. Without and strong antagonist the show won’t be able to compensate for the cheese and campness that it’s so fond of. Replacing Capaldi will not help either given the amount of loose ends they left attached to his character.

So yeah…that’s gonna suck.

Gotham.

"Before Batman there was Gotham."

A series about Gotham pre-Bat. Err not a good idea guys.

The primary thing that makes Batman so popular is (as though it needs to be said) BATMAN. From a story point, the only thing that anyone’s interested in watching Batman do stuff. Batman shows without Batman don’t work. Has anyone heard of “Birds of Prey”? Didn’t think so.

However, ironically, it appears the producers’ knowledge of this is what looks to make this show so bad. Rather than making a crime thriller set in Gotham, they are focussing on Bruce Wayne as a kid, just after his parents were murdered. Apparently the trailer for this show would have us believe that young Bruce met and discussed how he’s conquering fear with younger James Gordon.

Yeah, so first off they’re proposing to implicitly make Gordon seem even dumber than all before them have, as not only is he being played by Ryan from The OC, he will apparently one day become a lieutenant who can’t figure out who the vigilante with a seemingly endless supply of wealth and a desire to tackle low level crime is. Well James why don’t you start with the kid who you’re apparently quite close to now, with the endless supply of wealth, who used to regularly tell you about how he’s overcoming fear and has a vested interest in attacking low level crime.

And as if they don’t want to appear unconfident enough in their leading man’s ability to carry the show, they appear to have a pre-pubesant Selena Kyle hanging around. I’d say a production team that’s claiming to make a show about Gotham and not Batman isn’t doing a very good job if 90% of it’s characters are key players in Batman. You’re telling me a city that’s supposedly completely under the control of criminals by the time Bruce Wayne is 20, doesn’t have any other villains to offer than the ones that are popular in the established future events. I’m predicting that this will be the next Smallville; a cash-grab that relies solely on putting lots of pretty people on a screen while asking you to completely turn off your brain.

Wouldn’t it be great…

Smallville.

Wouldn’t it be great if Lex Luthor had only appeared in the last episode of the ever series of Smallville. What we got instead was a baby-faced Lex who went on a journey of dark side conversion that was so stupid that George Lucus could have written it.

But imagine if we had never seen Lex until the very last scene of the entire show; no need to even see his face. Clark accepts his destiny as Superman and then we see him flying around on multiple monitors, as the camera pans back to reveal that signature bald head. We all know who it is and it would have left the audience wanting more from the show. The actual show we got was one that ended because the audience was sick of it.

Miley Cyrus

Wouldn't it be great if no one had batted an eyelid at the “stunt” Miley Cyrus pulled –what’s it called “twerking”? all the public outrage from celebrities and member of the public alike is blatantly exactly what she wanted to happen. It was a textbook way of generating publicity (Justin Bieber did the same thing by tweeting a picture of himself holding a fake scrip for Batman vs Superman) and if you’re really offended by it the only way to make it stop is by ignoring it.

Doctor Who

Wouldn’t it be great if the Comic Con trailer for 50^th Anniversary Who was a massive red herring and deliberately edited (or even shot) to mislead everyone who saw it. I mean they could threaten their way to no one releasing illegal copies of it online, but they couldn’t stop people describing it. It would be awesome if the whole thing was intended to send the fandom in completely the wrong direction in guessing things story-wise. Plus, it would be just like Moffat to pull a stunt like that.

Batman Year One Review

To someone who hasn’t read the comics or graphic novels (such as myself) this movie comes across as Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Sin City and LA Confidential in a sandwich.

By way of a synopsis, the film opens with the return of Bruce Wayne, to his home city of Gotham, after twelve years in self-imposed exile. At round about the same time, Lt. James Gordon is transferred to Gotham P.D following troubles in his last stationing.  

The majority of the film’s exposition is dealt with through first person internal monologues from the perspectives of Wayne and Gordon. While Gordon’s monologues give far more insight into the character’s motivations and background, Wayne’s come across a bit one dimensional, the resounding message being “I don’t like crime” (which happens to be true of most people). The only significant thing we see about Wayne from the what he tells us, is the suggestion that Batman as a concept is less about imparting his own fear onto others and more about the damage present in his own psyche. There’s even the suggestion that he believes that his father is directing him to become Batman from beyond the grave.

For me, the most interesting thing in this film, was the focus; the primary enemy in this film being Police corruption, with the Mob taking the role of secondary villains. I can’t help but compare this to the Nolan trilogy, where this is more or less reversed.

The further difference shown are in the personalities and abilities of the characters. While Gordon remains incorruptible in terms of your typical bribes and heavy handedness criterion, he’s certainly not the faithful husband and father of the Nolan films. He also happens to be a badass, capable of beating guys twice his size into unconsciousness.  

Batman too is very different, not possessing nearly as much confidence as any of his live action counterparts. At one point he even has trouble taking down three simple crooks, seemingly through sheer inexperience, something I don’t see the Christian Bale version ever falling victim to.

If nothing else, this film is a great comparative piece, allowing us to see perhaps how many liberties Nolan took in his trilogy. Gordon’s partner (Detective Flass) for example; in Batman Begins, he’s a fat incompetent, who moonlights as a Mob enforcer, in this he’s a former Green Beret, who seemingly makes enough money through taking bribes and enforcing the private interests of more senior (and equally corrupt police officers).

Eliza Dushku is pretty awesome as Selena Kyle and her back-story of – spoiler warning  - being a prostitute and possibly having a lesbian relationship with her friend Holly is somehow more believable than the Anne Hatheway version in "Rises" and definitely the Michelle Pfeiffer version in "Returns."

There are a couple more differences that really shine through, but overall it follows roughly the same ground as the Batman Begins.

This might not be for everyone; some may question why it even needed to be made, in light of the live action films, but this film really gets to grips more with the characters. It also manages to bring the grit of Gotham to life at least as much as the Nolan films, which is saying something.

It’s good, but if you haven’t read the comics or novels, you’ll find yourself retreading bits of old ground and kind of wishing Morgan Freeman was there

Dark Knight Rises Review

Good, but not nearly as good as the other two. I found this film pretty awesome, but some major issues stuck out for me.

So this is a weird one to react to. The film was good; good story well put together, well acted, but there was something lacking.

After much time spent thinking in my procrastination cave, I’ve come to the conclusion that this film essentially lacked the underlining message of it’s predecessors. Now I’m not saying that the fist two Nolan films had the same message, but that they both had a message that manifested by the end of them. Batman Begins was about how Bruce Wayne had to learn that it wasn’t who he thought he was on the inside that mattered, but what he did about it that was his defining feature. The Dark Knight was about, seeing oneself become a villain or symbol thereof and by extension the dangers of power.

In this film, we get kind of half a message of not giving up in the face of a set back or initial failure, but that runs thin so quickly that by half way through the film, Batman has to be re-crippled so that he can seemingly learn the whole lesson all over again. This comes at the expense of the second act of the film, which, in itself, is the reason that this one drops below the other two on the quality scale. Too much time is spent retreading old steps and literally learning the lessons that have been learnt four seconds ago.

Another thing that really bugs me is Catwoman. Anne Hatheway does a sterling job in the role, but the problems come in the love interest element to the character. Namely that she’s more of a friend/begrudging enemy of Batman, up until the end where she suddenly decides she’s a love interest. Given the pretty significant reveal about the other main female of the film, it’s clear why she had to step up to the plate, but the rate that she goes from using Batman for safety and snogging him seemed a bit contrived, as though it’s been tagged on to the script very late on.

Christian Bale continues to deliver as both Batman and Bruce Wayne, bringing new elements to both. For example, he frequently dials back the Bat-voice while in costume, to be more recognisable to those who already know his secret identity, which, incidentally, seems to be almost everyone, and shows a far more damaged version of Wayne to the world.

YAWN….tired now, this is a good film, but the second act lets it down royally, but other than that, it does a fine job of completing the Nolan trilogy. Performances all round are good. Actions good and gadgets are AWESOME!