Film Review – The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo

Disappointing that's what it is.

There was a book, a brilliant book, called The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and written by Stieg Larsson. Then there were some films made in 2009, Swedish films and in Swedish, based upon the book, they were pretty good. Maybe not classics but watchable, at least if you were a fan of the book.

Then there comes the new 2011 American film directed by David Fincher. What can we say about that?

In a word: disappointing.

The overwhelming feeling of this film is its perpetual drabness. The look, the scenery, the acting, the music, it's all nauseatingly drab. One drab scene is heaped upon another and more drabness added until your just sick of the… well… sick of the drabness. The main characters are drab and unconvincing. And the camera work, well its just sickeningly drab. The whole film looks as if it was shot in a disused Russian Gulag and has about as much sex appeal.

I wonder if the film makers have ever visited Sweden, or indeed Europe for that matter. I suppose they must have but there's no evidence of this in the film; none whatsoever. It looks like they have shot this film in a mud hut as you get no idea of the expanse or beauty of Sweden or the majesty of cold weather. Instead we have a perpetual feeling of claustrophobia. Hence this film starts off missing an essential backdrop to the narrative.

Noomi Rapace in the 2009 Swedish version was a believable Salander. Maybe not quite as I imagined this marvellous character after reading the book but plausible. In this film the part is played by Rooney Mara who is just dull, in fact there's not more to her acting then dullness, apart, that is, from long tiresome multitudes of drabness.

In the 2009 Swedish version Michael Nyqvist was an acceptable Mikael Blomkvist; well, just about. Whereas here Daniel Craig shows all the acting ability of a yawn and is just about as engaging. (I'm led to believe, or I assume, Mr Craig has some sort of reputation. Maybe he has, I'm not an expert on trashy celebrity hype, nor do I want to be, it's a subject that's totally uninteresting, and on the basis of this film a subject I'm really not bothered about exploring.)

Then there's the more minor characters who we'd better not say anything about; they prove even more disappointing – there's more excitement in a 50p tin of spaghetti.

Disappointing that's what it is, and I did so want to like this film.

Review – Ed Reardon's Week

Writing about writing is a bit like masturbating in public – more enjoyable for those engaged in the activity than any unfortunate onlookers.

Whenever I encounter a story/film/whatever where the main character is a writer past experience teaches me to expect nausea and self indulgence. The temptation for the off switch had always proved manifest.

The radio 4 series Ed Reardon's Week has hitherto been the exception that tested this rule to the limit. The series has proved funny and enjoyable. The self styled curmudgeonly author is a brilliant character.

So discovering a new series at least had me heading for the BBC iPlayer. With a back catalogue of seven magnificent series I was delighted to discover an eighth. Alas this time the rule about writing about writing seems to have kicked in. The authors having now run out of ideas are repeating themselves and, like most repeats, they've became tedious. Plots have become meandering and unfocused.

While series eight might not be so bad when compared with other comedy shows it's past its glory days. It's so sad for it to end this way – in such disappointment.

This new series looks like having a significant role for Jenny Agutter as Fiona. She does a sterling job but, great actress as she is, she cannot rescue the series from its oncoming mediocrity. She seems to have attached herself to the series just when it went past its sell by date. Most unfortunate.

Film Review – Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

I was not expecting much from the 2011 film version of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. The original 1974 John le Carré book; what can you say? Simply magnificent. The 1979 BBC TV version staring Alec Guinness as George Smiley: triumphant. Then there was the 1988 BBC Radio 4 version staring Rene Basilico: brilliant. How could anyone top that pedigree?

Well, maybe, the film didn't top that pedigree but it was certainly enjoyable. Unlike previous versions they went for a moody, bleak telling of the story. So there were long scenes with little in the way of dialogue. Inevitably this resulted in much of the story detail being left out. This along with the unavoidable constraint of film, that it has to be briefer, the story more compact, does worry me slightly. If you do not already know the story will you follow along? Somehow I have my doubts. Being so familiar with the story it is hard for me to tell; but I kept finding myself thinking, 'oh, that refers to…' or 'oh, that's the result of…' and referring back to source. The telling of a tale should be self contained. Was it here?

For me the stand out performance was that of Toby Jones as Percy Alleline. For most of the other characters previous exponents seemed superior. Not with Percy Alleline; here Toby Jones was clearly superlative. I would like to see him playing this character type where he has the substantial role. I hope he gets the chance.

If you do view the film then please also take the time to indulge in at least one, preferably all, of the versions indicated in the opening paragraph. You will pick up so much more of the story and, possibly, appreciate the film more.

Review – A Week in TV Comedy

If there is one rule in comedy it is a very simple one: be funny. So much can be forgiven if you get this basic guideline right; from non-PC stereotypes to ill-judged satire. Ricky Gervais and Co. Inc. seem to have forgotten this. Rather they think their self proclaimed super start status and large pay packet will automatically guarantee success. If anything proves their egos wrong it is Life's Too Short. The lack of humour exposes Gervais nasty side. In Gervais previous shows you laughed, mostly, at the Gervais character; here you are expected to laugh at disability. But the writing offers nothing funny so the result is, at best, simply embarrassing. From the trailers the program looked as if it would be dire. The only reason for watching was the previous success of The Office and Extras. And presumably Gervais had to do some work to make these so amusing. Now he assumes his mere presence will guarantee an audience; no longer is there the need to think things through. The rubbish presented proves this is not true.

On Thursday night, prior to the sad Gervais, was another new comedy. Rev is about a hapless vicar. It was conventional, contained the occasional laugh and was not wildly exciting. It was the best thing reviewed here largely because everything else was so disappointing.

After Mr Gervais we had Mr Frank Skinner apparently being opinionated. There was the occasional smirk here but the program was largely nondescript. Skinner presents himself edgy and topical; largely achieved by being safe and trivial. I shall not be bothering next week.

Overall comedy seems to by playing it safe theses days; so safe that it does not deserve to call itself comedy. Hopefully if there is a rising tide of anti-capitalism, growing protest against the cuts, Tories, banks and establishment then a few comedians will have the courage to buck the corporate quagmire.

Film Review – The Long Good Friday

I will admit I hardly recognised the name of the director John Mackenzie when I recently heard his obituary while driving. I will also admit his film The Long Good Friday had passed me by, unnoticed, both in the late 80s and ever since – despite it, apparently, being quite well known. However the obituary did make this film sound quite intriguing and the sort of thing I might find interesting. It promised (not in exactly these words) a gritty comment on Thatcherism and all its horrors. So something that now seems very modern, what with the current financial crisis, government meltdowns, and hard right wing cost cutting agendas. I wonder why I never noticed this film before? All I can claim, in mitigation, is that I looked upon Bob Hoskins, who plays the lead role here, as, shall we say, overrated.

Before we get to the above film lets have a little aperitif. I first watched Just Another Saturday. This was part of the BBC Play For Today series, in 1975, and written by Peter McDougall and directed by John Mackenzie. There is not much of a plot: a young protestant lad goes on an Orange order march in Glasgow with his lodge band; he encounters some protestant verses catholic violence and becomes disillusioned; at the end he desires to escape Glasgow. Still it shows a slice of working class life and has both humorous and gritty moments. In the film's final scenes father and son talk of how these conflicts divide and rule the lower orders. I agree with the political point being made here but felt it was put across in a far too didactic form. Even so a film worth watching.

So after all the hype what was The Long Good Friday like? It's not a bad film, watchable, but overall a bit of a disappointment. It started with a long menagerie of disconnected scenes where you're not quite sure what is happening. Having such an opening is not in itself a problem; it's just here it goes on too long before the main story starts.

Also the film appears to have no protagonist with which the viewer is supposed to identify. Who is the protagonist? If it's Harold Shand, the character played by Bob Hoskins, are really supposed to root for this gang land thug? Having an despicable character as the lead can make for a good film, but when there are no, absolutely zero, characters with redeeming features then you have a grim time of it as a viewer.

Again Bob Hoskins as an actor is allright but I did not find him that exciting. He only appears able to play himself which leaves this character somewhat insubstantial.

I wish I could say better of a film I watched as a result of hearing an obituary. It wasn't a bad film, better than many, possibly better than most, but hardly a great film. Of these two films you should only watch Just Another Saturday.

Film Review – Dr. Strangelove

I watched the Stanley Kubrick 1964 film Dr. Strangelove last night. And when you start to watch a classic like this again you wonder if it will live up to your expectations and memory. It sure did; it was thoroughly enjoyable. There is a wonderfully witty script with some brilliant one liners. (There's no point in listing them here as they are best first heard from within the film.)

Peter Sellers is the star for sure. But this time around I was equally impressed by some of the other performances. After all the Dr. Strangelove title character did occupy less screen time than I seemed to remember. For example George C. Scott is just wonderful as the maverick General "Buck" Turgidson, and there are many other intriguing characters.

The really terrifying thing about the film is that the kind of buffoons lampooned here are still in charge of the military. Details may have changed, such as the Russians now calling themselves capitalists, but fundamentally we still suffer the same insanity. And still the lunacy of nuclear weapons is with us. It always was criminal to build these monstrosities and it is even more pointless today. After all these years isn't it amazing: we haven't learnt anything. Or at least the military types haven't, the proof: just take a quick look around the world.

Film Review – The Gravy Train by Malcolm Bradbury

The 4oDDrama YouTube channel allows you to watch the The Gravy Train (I'm not sure how well this link will work for viewers outside the UK). This 1990 TV mini-series was written by Malcolm Bradbury and first shown on channel 4. From the first of these links you can also view the sequel series: The Gravy Train Goes East. As a YouTube movie it has not had many views: some 430 at the time of writing. And that's for episode one: only 89 bothered to see it through to the final episode four. This might give some, daunting, indication of what to expect.

Alas for Malcolm Bradbury's renown, this series is packed with clichés about foreigners, the EEC and bureaucrats. All good stuff, no doubt, for a knockabout romp. Here we have the politics of the gutter press rather then the writing of someone with the reputation of Bradbury. It's such a pity the author did not put a bit of effort into producing something better.

Christoph Waltz plays the lead as Dr. Hans-Joachim Dorfmann. Now I can see Waltz is a very good actor, and I would be happy to see him in something better, but here he just seems miscast. Waltz was, apparently, born in Vienna, Austria, even so he sounds too English, in fact all his mannerisms are too English – including that irritating pipe. Maybe this fault stems with the director or producer or maybe the character Dorfmann, as written, is not convincing; whatever it is, this character does not work. And given that the whole crux of the drama is built around this character it's a fundamental and irretrievable flaw.

Ian Richardson plays Michael Spearpoint and is the best thing in the drama. He plays the same character type as Francis Urquhart in the more successful House of Cards trilogy (1990, 1993 & 1995) and this is the acting Richardson does so well. However here the plot is sometime plain silly and so the result is less successful. The rest of the acting and production is good – so there is no need to dwell on this.

I guess some scenes are supposed to be funny, at least that's the impression I get from occasional slapstick moment and the description of this grand opus as a comedy. But the humour, such as it is, is very heavy handed. The best I could muster was an embarrassed wince, and never once managed even a knowing smile.

In an agonising moment you might want to watch it; or you might be tempted if you had a particularly masochistic aberration. Otherwise – well... don't bother.

Midsomer Murders: The Unbelievable Evidence

Midsomer Murders is one of those programs you either love or love to hate. It full of that quaint, old fashioned, never was, Englishness some dream of returning to. This is somewhat ironical given the programs celebration of murder, family feuds, and the inbred upper class; among many other less desirable qualities. Still the programs always finishes with conflates resolved; hence the less discerning viewer can comfort themselves that all was just a minor blot on the English character.

The program excludes a lot and has particularly coveted controversy after a recent interview in the Radio Time where the programs long time produce Brian True-May boasted of his whites only policy regarding character and casting. This lead to True-May being suspended by All3Media.

True-May suspension was quite justified in my opinion. But surely some in the British independent television industry must have known of True-May opinions long before and despicably done nothing. Just like with John Galliano rant and subsequent sacking, Dior would have known all along of Galliano offensiveness. These management types feel it's better not to rock the boat and keep the cash flowing than do the right thing. Until it all becomes public that is; then we have the obviously insincere shock and horror.

In the past I have only watched Midsomer Murders when other family members have inflicted it upon me; when there's been no escape. Following this controversy I decided to break with tradition and watch a few episodes willingly. It did not reveal much that was surprising, new or, indeed, appealing, so I will forgo the boredom of a review. Some parts of were tolerable and long stretches proved agonising; enough said.

True-May, however, utterly failed in one respect. And in the (admittedly not very good) image above we reveal the 'unwelcome' truth: minorities do indeed exist in Midsomer. The following shot is from Midsomer Murders Days of Misrule (Christmas Special – 2008). There he is approximately 1 hour 9 mins in.

Of course the token minority did not get a speaking part or have any kind of personality; that would be too much to expect. He was forced to stand in the background and look obsequious while the great and the good paraded before him. Even so, this evidence does prove minorities exist, even in Misomer.