|
|
Post by fenris on Oct 14, 2006 15:26:29 GMT
Anybody else watching Logan's Run on Fridays on the Sci-Fi channel at 21:00? It's a series from the late Seventies (a spin-off from a hit film which starred Michael York and Jenny Agutter, neither of whom reprise their roles here) and this is the first time it's been repeated in the UK for a couple of decades.
I'm enjoying it so far. Yes, it has dated, but that's unavoidable. Most of the cutting edge TV series we're enjoying now will no doubt look embarrassingly twee and extremely dodgy in 25 - 30 years time.
One fascinating aspect of the show is how it reflects the generally-held view in most science fiction from the Sixties and Seventies that the future (even after a nuclear war!) would be clean, sterile, brightly lit, and mostly orderly. In genre movies and TV shows produced nowadays, the common belief is that the future will be crowded, cluttered, chaotic, and polluted. It's an interesting contrast.
I'm also enjoying the look of the series: Logan and Jessica's hovercraft, the helmets, costumes and laser rifles of the villainous Riders - they would have seemed slightly retro even back when Logan's Run first aired. It's as though you're watching a bigger-budgeted version of the classic sci-fi cliffhanger serials of the 1930s, such as Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, Undersea Kingdom or The Phantom Empire. I'd love to see a Battlestar Galactica-style modern day reimagining of this show.
|
|
|
|
Post by kittygobonkers on Oct 31, 2006 19:05:11 GMT
Most Haunted Live......you gotta love it hehehehehe last night people were getting deep scratches inflicted by some unknown force....woooooooooo! Actually it can be a bit scary when you're watching all by yourself hehehe  |
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Dec 29, 2006 17:20:22 GMT
Watched the BBC adaptation of Dracula (screened on 28/12/06) and quite liked it. Spoiler warning if you're not seen it.
Okay, so there were changes made from the original novel, but that's something all the various TV and movie adaptations are guilty of (even 1992's Bram Stoker's Dracula - the most faithful version made so far - took liberties with the character of Dracula himself, trying to turn him into a sympathetic, romantic figure).
At least this time, most of the changes served a purpose, as they were perfectly in keeping with what this particular adaptation was trying to achieve. Sex has always been one of the major themes of Dracula and the vampire myth. Vampirism is a blatant metaphor for the sexual act (they're both forms of fluid transaction) and the Count represents pure, animalistic, sexual liberation at odds with the extremely repressed attitudes of Victorian society.
Having Holmwood suffering from syphillis and unable to consummate his marriage to Lucy was an extremely clever twist. She grows increasingly frustrated and in doing so, subconsciously and unwittingly invites Dracula into her bed (the scene in which the Count seduces her while her husband lies asleep next to them was surprisingly twisted). A key scene that foreshadows this is when news reaches the Holmwood household that the storm-tossed Demeter is going to run aground on the beach below, and Lucy tells Mina that she wants to "see death". Lucy is so stifled and empty without physical love, that she's even prepared to experience the only thing that might match it's intensity. To her, life without passion is no life at all.
In contrast, Mina is the polar opposite to her friend, even confessing to Lucy that she has no desire to "touch" her fiance, Jonathan Harker. This is why Dracula actively pursues Mina after casually killing and vampirising Lucy - he represents both the life-affirming and destructive aspects of open sexual behaviour and obsession. He is both liberator and destroyer. Lucy gave herself to him freely, so she is ultimately of no great interest to him - just another casual conquest. But the virginal, closeted and repressed Mina represents a greater challenge - his corruption and degradation of her will be far sweeter than the uncomplicated seduction of Lucy.
The fate of the two friends is intriguing: Lucy pays for her sexual awakening with an early death, but she has experienced the pure, undiluted passion that she so desperately wanted, and without which she regarded her life as worthless. Compare with Mina, who (even though the story concludes with a hint of a possible romance with Seward), will forever be pining after her dead fiance, and apparently has nothing to look forward to but a long, lonely and passionless life as a spinster.
Regarding the cast, Sophia Miles was the perfect Lucy, and helped make her far more rounded than the usual spoilt, flighty character seen in most other adaptations. Stephanie Leonidas as Mina was often eclipsed next to Miles, and struggled to make much of an impression. Marc Warren skillfully underplayed the Count, suggesting a constant brooding menace just under the surface, threatening to erupt.
This version is not without problems. The pacing works well throughout most of it's running time, but the last twenty minutes is incredibly rushed. As a result, the heroes' confrontations with Lucy and subsequently the Count are just too brief and therefore not very satisfying. Lucy in particular doesn't put up much of a fight, and basically just lies down and allows herself to be staked. And the final twist - revealing Dracula still alive on the streets of London - is underwhelming, because it was so clearly foreshadowed (after the Count is staked, then collapses and begins to dissolve into smoke, an anxious Van Helsing repeatedly asks Seward if he's sure the heart was pierced). It would have been far better to have a glimpse of a still-active Lucy, especially as Holmwood appeared to have botched her staking (the stake seemed to be buried in her midriff instead of her heart).
|
|
vogue_groupie
Newbie Hexen
Are you still beautiful in Los Angeles?
Posts: 2
|
Post by vogue_groupie on Jan 2, 2007 5:23:58 GMT
Considering I live in America, I watch...well, pretty much all American shows. Although I do like to catch some British shows on BBC...Coupling, although that one is over, I think. Hex, of course. And Eastenders every now and then.
But mainly...
Sex and the City (Best show ever, hands down.)
Entourage
Weeds
House M.D. (Best show airing new episodes on television, hands down.)
The Hills (Laguna Beach sucks next to this show.)
Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County (But that doesn't mean that I don't still watch it.)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Angel
Veronica Mars
The O.C.
And my guilty pleasure...
Desperate Housewives
|
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Jan 3, 2007 20:02:25 GMT
Considering I live in America, I watch...well, pretty much all American shows. Although I do like to catch some British shows on BBC... Coupling, although that one is over, I think. Greetings vogue_groupie. Always glad to welcome another Coupling fan. Yes, the show came to an end after four series, all of which I believe have been screened in America. Prior to Coupling, the show's writer, Steven Moffat, had scripted another two sitcoms, Joking Apart and Chalk. They're both worth seeking out. Have you ever read Moffat's official explanation of what happened to all the main characters in Coupling after the fourth series? |
|
|
|
Post by DreamDangerously on Jan 4, 2007 18:55:09 GMT
I have just caught up with some shows I recorded over christmas. Dracula I thought had great promise but was ultimately stunted by it's running time and so I agree with Fenris that the big showdown was underwhelming and made the relationships and characters suffer as a result, Jonathan and Mina especially and the count's lust for Mina was reduced to a fumble in an alleyway. I think it would have been better served by two parts. Marc Warren was great though. Well played. Holmwood was struck down by a serious case of shouting and shuddering which put me off him completely. Van Helsing became a non-sensical character shoehorned in there.
Personally as someone who's read Dracula countless times I didn't enjoy all the changes made. For once I'd like to see an adaption of Dracula certainly sans campness (which this adaption pulled off) but also that gives time to the story in all it's glory. Seward for example is a fascinating character and actually the quiet hero of the piece in many respects but here he was another stroppy, shouting male character. Mina, given when the book was written, is an amazing female character who's strong and fascinating even when in the thrall of Dracula.
(On a side note, if like me you sometimes find the sex/vampirism analogy a little tiresome, read up on the original eastern european mythology, very very far from sexy. There's a great childrens novel My Swordhand is Singing that's based on original vampire myths. Dirty bloated walking corpses are the order of the day. Much more like it.)
Not bad but certainly not brilliant either.
The Ruby in the Smoke suffered from the same kind of problems. A long complex story shoved in to a far too small time slot which rendered the plot pretty trite and almost incomprehensible at times. Billie Piper was also extremely out of place and ill suited to Sally Lockheart. Shame because I love Phillip Pullmans books and again it could have been great.
|
|
|
|
Post by orokiah on Jan 4, 2007 19:36:25 GMT
The Ruby in the Smoke suffered from the same kind of problems. A long complex story shoved in to a far too small time slot which rendered the plot pretty trite and almost incomprehensible at times. Billie Piper was also extremely out of place and ill suited to Sally Lockheart. Shame because I love Phillip Pullmans books and again it could have been great. Couldn't agree more: I was really disappointed by it. Far too rushed, and I thought Hayley Atwell in particular acted Billie Piper so far off the screen she was practically invisible. Julie Walters rocked though.  |
|
|
|
Post by DreamDangerously on Jan 4, 2007 20:10:43 GMT
Julie Walters was awesome! Like I said, it had so much potential and, apart from Billie, an amazingly strong cast. I wonder if they'll adapt any of the other books?
|
|
|
|
Post by orokiah on Jan 4, 2007 20:29:55 GMT
According to the Press Pack they're doing The Shadow In The North next. All these adaptations make me want to go back and re-read the books! |
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Jan 21, 2007 14:02:14 GMT
Although I found the Blade movies fairly entertaining, I wouldn't say that I'm a fan of the character. Even so, I thought I'd give Blade: The Series a try, and I watched the first episode on Bravo last Monday (15/01/07).
The writers have been smart, and you don't need to have watched the films to understand what going on (although things will be easier if you have). Blade himself remains as one-dimensional and arrogant as ever, and - as in the movie trilogy - it's the supporting characters who are the most interesting. Blade now has an Asian techno-geek sidekick who's not the least bit impressed with the Daywatcher's tough guy act, and Randy Quaid (always welcome) turns up in a cameo as a scholarly vampire expert. Best of all is new female lead Kristen, who - in a nice topical subplot - has just returned home to Detroit after being honourably discharged following a tour of duty in Iraq.
Particularly impressive is the actual look of the show. The sets, location filming, and fight set-pieces are up to the same standard as a medium budget Hollywood movie. However, when the series debuted on U.S. cable channel Spike last year, I heard rumours that the producers had blown most of the budget for the entire series on just filming the pilot episode (which Bravo are screening in two instalments), so I doubt the level of quality will last as the series progresses.
Blade: The Series achieved record-breaking ratings for a cable-only show when it started being screened in America, but the audience subsequently drifted away over the following weeks, and the announcement of it's cancellation came only a couple of days after the season's final episode was shown. Apparently the series ends in a cliffhanger, which will remain unresolved. Sound familiar?
|
|
|
|
Post by DreamDangerously on Jan 21, 2007 15:06:05 GMT
I've watched most of the series. To be honest one of the biggest problems becomes the lack of development of Blade and an over focus on Krista Starr who is actually quite dull as characters go, many of the vampires are far more interesting. The episodes don't suffer too much from a lower budget to be honest and the action sequences remain good throughout.
A big plus for the series is a focus on the ongoing struggles for supremecy between the different vampires 'houses' and the divide between the pure-bloods and the vampires that were turned. Theres some interesting back-story stuff on Blade and nice sideline on dusted vampires being sold as a new drug.
I think the best performances come from Neil Jackson (Kim's mothers builder boyfriend in Sugar Rush) as Marcus Van Sciver and Jessica Gower as Chase - vampire bitch extrodinare!
It's worth sticking with as long as you have your sense of humour engaged and you take it for what it is, cheesy, gory fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Jan 22, 2007 19:27:35 GMT
It's worth sticking with as long as you have your sense of humour engaged and you take it for what it is, cheesy, gory fun. Thanks for the advice, DD. Will keep watching it with that frame of mind. |
|
|
|
Post by orokiah on Feb 1, 2007 19:52:53 GMT
Waking The Dead. Trevor Eve is brilliant as Boyd (even though he stomps around SHOUTING every OTHER word and has become a bit of a parody of himself as a result), and I love the way he and Sue Johnston spark off each other. I like my TV dark and complex, but the plots are tending towards a bit labyrinthine this series; I always end up recording it just so I can watch it when I've got the time to work it all out properly. Still immensely watchable, though. [And Odyssey 5 on DVD. Just awesome. Shame it's yet another show that ends on a whopping great never-to-be-resolved cliffhanger.  ]
|
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Feb 25, 2007 15:22:46 GMT
Came across a bizarre and totally unexpected sight this morning. Had just watched the movie My Name is Modesty, having taped it when it was screened on BBC2 last night. As the end credits rolled, I switched the recording off and my TV reverted to BBC2, which was showing the early morning childrens' programme Smile. I was promptly greeted with the sight of the show's female presenter, the extremely pretty and shapely Kirsten O'Brien, throwing karate chops, doing high kicks, and repeatedly running towards the camera and headbutting a telephone placed just in front of the lens - while wearing a very tight-fitting Batfink costume, complete with wings of steel and all-covering furry head (!)
That image is going to be in my head for days now. Apparently it's a weekly quiz slot called 'What Do You Fink?' I've have to remember to watch next Sunday, just to make sure I didn't imagine it.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenris on Mar 4, 2007 23:11:15 GMT
Well, I remembered to watch Smile again this morning at the relevant time, and no - I didn't imagine it.
Who needs mind-altering substances when you can watch Kristen O'Brien in a lycra Batfink costume, performing high-kicks and headbutting a telephone early on a Sunday morning?
|
|
