Television programmes [2]

{{{I assume from that Azriel you liked the episode too- anyone had a chance to watch the first series stuff I uploaded to my online drive? Lots to talk about in these productions if enough folk have seen them to do the talking- here's some Cumberbum for you in the meantime and a scene where the newly crowned Edward takes the throne then follows his dick instead of his head when he is supposed to be marrying the sister of the King of France to cement his position.}}

I love history progs & Im fond of watching Crumblecracklebum do serious as I think he can. I wanna get a download of my own then I can relax one of these days & watch from start to finish

just watched the end of The Night Manager. it was a bit melancholic, not sure I liked the ending at all.

I loved MacGyver. I don't know what I think of this...

I'm happy to have a MacGyver reboot, but

- Macgyver should be a loner, NOT a part of a team.  Teams get support and gadgets, Macgyver has to make it up on the fly.

(though I like paul Eads , the CSI guy alot, so if there has to be a team I'm glad to have him).

- I'm not sure this new guy has the charisma of Richard Dean Anderson.  That's so fricking crucial.

I'm afraid this show was put together by committee, won't have the requisite quirkiness.

Amarië wrote:I loved MacGyver. I don't know what I think of this...

Nonoononono, this guy will never be MacGyver. If they got Richard Dean Anderson on the team to do voice-overs they might have something. Not watching this.

{{{Hollow Crown- War of the Roses- Richard III- fuck me that was stupendous! Cumberbatch, prepared to be awarded things!}}}}

Damn, that was incredibly good. It's reassuring to see what Cumberbatch can still do when given quality material. He knocked that one out of the park.

{{{It occurred to me if you give him a villian who is shittyly written and poorly conceived, like say Khan in the St reboot, he still manages, whilst saying the lines to make you forget how bad it all is, and its only afterwards you go, 'hold on a minute!!' and notice how appalling the material is.
But given him one of the greatest villains ever written, by one of the greatest writers to ever write, and WOW.
And whilst I could not recommend this any higher, do please watch the entire Hollow Crown War of the Roses Trilogy, Richard III is magnificent in isolation, but gloriously so in context}}}

{{{The template from which every movie that has a scene where the bad guy has all his people in a room and suddenly turns on one of them for saying the wrong thing derives from}}}}

A nice example of group cowardice.

Not sure Scorsese was thinking of Shakespeare when Joe Pesci started asking if someone thought he was funny, in fact for the Hollow Crown the inspiration for how it was acted may have gone the other way.

{{{Bit both ways Halfy. By the time Scorscee used it it had already been reused countless times in other mediums, and this version is then influenced by all those versions.

Mind you brilliant as it all is Shakespeare and history are at best passing acquaintances, as brilliantly demonstrated by the BBC kids history show, Horrible Histories}}

Eldorion wrote:Damn, that was incredibly good. It's reassuring to see what Cumberbatch can still do when given quality material. He knocked that one out of the park.

I also enjoyed it. The intensity of Cumberbatch's performance was, perhaps, not my favourite way for those those lines to be delivered: I sometimes think the drama of a scene is magnified too much when an actor really wants to dive off the deep end, so to speak.

What do you mean, Eldo, by "still do"?

Is the acting career of Benedict Cumberbatch undergoing a slow decline, in which his recent work has been sub-par, wherein he was not given quality material?

As I recall, his roles over the last few years have included: the role of Hamlet on-stage, The Imitation Game, Black Mass, the third Hobbit, Penguins of Madagascar, and a brief appearance in Zoolander 2. 

I liked him in Black Mass well enough, I loved him in The Imitation Game, and I haven't heard much about his role as Hamlet. The other roles are all relatively small, with two of them being animated. I mean, it's not like he's in some kind of dip in his career. He was nominated for Best Actor for The Imitation Game after all in 2014.

I think when actors become the flavour of the month they are seen everywhere, they seem to be given every big profile part even if its not stellar acting and then the flavour loses its taste and its on to the next big thing, Cumberbatch has been eclipsed by Tom Hiddlybum, he is now in everything, or that other guy Eddie Redmayne.

Forest Shepherd wrote:What do you mean, Eldo, by "still do"?

Is the acting career of Benedict Cumberbatch undergoing a slow decline, in which his recent work has been sub-par, wherein he was not given quality material?

The roles I've seen him in recently I wasn't too impressed by; can't comment on ones I haven't seen (like The Imitation Game) but to me this clip was a refreshing reminder that yes Cumberbatch is a talented actor and he's just been in some shitty productions (eg STID, The Hobbit) lately that weren't his fault.

Edit: I guess "lately" is kinda stretching it with STID/DOS being almost three years old...

Was watching this the other day. Still a very funny show.

I liked the one were Dawn promised to go to everyone at Christmas & she ploughed thru all those dinners !!! then she got a taxi to her home from next door !!!

{{{Ok just watched the BBC's A Midsummer Night's Dream written by Russel T Davies.

Mmmmm...not sure here as I suspect I am about to be accused of hating RTD- which would be unfair as I did not hate this at all, I overall enjoyed it, most of it, just.
But it is very RTD. What does that mean?
Well on the good stuff he pairs everything back (its only 90minutes long depending on your purism here he has either butchered the original dialogue or paired it down to the essential story, comedic and character elements) and in this he is ably abetted by the cast, outstanding among whom is Matt Lucas as Bottom.

Its also modern- there are ipads and the like, its fast paced but never loses focuses of the characters.
All RTD strengths in writing.
And then there is the other side of his writing- its been rewritten so they there is now a lesbian kiss in there for Hermia and Titania, and he kills off a character who does not die in the original, and he changed the ending because he felt it was disrespectful to Titania because Oberon essentially gets off with his jokes on her, and instead, in true RTD style he makes a big camp dance number instead- no really. Some might argue this therefore misses the point Shakespeare was making.
Its this last bit I have the biggest issue with here. Its like the end of the Who episode where he has every companion he can muster all flying the TARDIS together and there is no much cheese the TARDIS looks like a fondue set. Only more so here. So if that Who scene gave you a heart warming feeling rather than a queasy one, then firstly you are probably American and get your schmaltz by the bucket load, and secondly you will like this ending too.

Talking Who its quite Who in feel and look at times rather oddly, especially the opening, which I read another reviewer comment, with its Genesis of the Daleks not-Nazi Nazi's look, that you got the impression there was a Dalek hiding round the corner and everyone was waiting on a blue box to turn up. Its a feeling it took until they reached the woods for me to shake off and then an sf x lightening duel between Oberon and Titania made me think it was Who again.
There are a lot of special effects in general in this one- Oberon looks like he walked out of Pan's Labyrinth and is played brilliantly, the Faerie Queen Titania I was considerably less taken with, looking like a pict reject who escaped from the Braveheart set and I was not convinced by the performance either, but the rest of the faeries are constantly turning into things, zip about as sparks of light ect, lighting blast fire from fingertips and the cgi Athens and forest in the wide shots and overheads are frequent and effective work. Its certainly visually lively.
And one odd thing, Lysander, for some reason, they cast a Harry Potter lookalike then dressed him up exactly like Harry Potter- and I am still not sure why.

But its a very gay version of the play, there is no other way to put it, ok you could say I suppose it was a very camp version of the play- what with its musical number finale, lesbian kiss, and that other attribute so often associated with gay men- over the top flamboyance- and there is a lot of that- too much for my taste- in the opening scene instead of the evil dictator seeming evil it all felt a bit camp parody to me and when they wheeled in Hippolyta on a Hannibal Lector style trolley complete with Lecter face mask I burst out laughing. Its so over-the-top. Everything is dialled up to max here, or possibly even a Spinal Tap 11.

So overall- its very entertaining, there are some great performances and some less so, Titania mainly, (and he reunites a lot of actors from his Who years in this one- Tennant only didn't direct it because of commitments elsewhere) and that's appropriate as like his Who where its best is dealing with the characters and the down to earth mundane stuff, and where its weakest is in his inability not to rewrite even adaptations to make them gayer, and in how over the top everything is. And he still cant do good endings! }}}}

I love RTD when he does Who. But I thought this was horrible. It was about as pleasant as having your face rubbed in the underside of Pettys kilt.

Mrs Figg wrote:It was about as pleasant as having your face rubbed in the underside of Pettys kilt.

I have never read or seen any shakespeare so I have no interest in watching it, but it certainly looked like an odd mix from the trailer...

I thought this was horrible- Figg

{{{And there was me trying to be polite! But you seem to have disliked it more than me, though I did find some of it quite laughable for all the wrong reasons, I did overall enjoy quite a bit of it. I thought the young new actors playing the lovers did a very good job, particularly Helena.
There was a touch of Shakespeare meets pantomime about the whole thing to me. Which sort of saved it from dislike as it was hard to entirely take it seriously, and I dont think it was taking itself that seriously. At least I hope not.}}}

'I have never read or seen any shakespeare so I have no interest in watching it'- Malick

{{ That's a real shame Malick, you are missing out on some great stuff and the inspiration of great stuff. }}

Reading Shakespeare can be kinda lame; it's meant to be experienced as a performance. A Midsummer Night's Dream is really good though. In general, I mean; I know nothing about this specific version other than the reviews in this thread.

Eldorion wrote:Reading Shakespeare can be kinda lame; it's meant to be experienced as a performance. A Midsummer Night's Dream is really good though. In general, I mean; I know nothing about this specific version other than the reviews in this thread.

Well, 'never' isn't enitely accurate I read Macbeth in school and I've seen a couple of adaptions (years ago) but I can't really remember any of it, and due to the association with schoolwork etc it's not something I have any pressing desire to revist, culturally it's important sure, but would it actually be enjoyable?

{{He is my favourite author- I am stil earning things form his work now, and yes, ina fun way! A good starting place in terms of film adaptation is Kenneth Brannaghs Henry V.
Don't worry if you lose the dialogue here and there or are not sure what the buggery someone means, its a bit like doing crossword puzzles, they start of seeming impenetrable and after a short while it all seems completely natural and you start having fun. Another thing people tend to forget when viewing Shakespeare is he is often taking the piss when modern audiences take him seriously- therefore to the modern eye something can seem a bit dull- say the priests long list of who married who in his explanation at the start of Henry V justifying the war- this is Shakespare piss taking long winded priests, bureaucracy, and relevant to say the Iraq war- that you can justify anything with the right words including invading someone elses country (France in Henry's case). So bear in mind if that sounded like a satirical quip or a very blue joke for Shakespeare- it probably was- he had the groundlings to keep happy as well as the nobs, and we groundlings can therefore still enjoy his work and his satrical or smutty humour }}}

{{Here's a good clip- Henry, famed in his recent youth for basically being a right scoundrel, drunkard, shagger and scallywag, and now King, having been petitioned to go to war and claim France as his own by the Church and nobles, now receives the Ambassador from the French King and the Dauphin (Prince of France) }}}



{{And the reply- quite possibly the most trouser browning experience -Brian Blessed delivering an ultimatum wearing full plate body armour }}




{{And this cause it happens to be a fav scene of mine- Henry having set thing sin motion to go to war in France prepares to embark, but he has uncovered three traitors working secretly for the French in their midsts and has called a meeting, at which the traitors will attend, with only them in the room not knowing everyone else knows they are traitors-which is a delightful setup}}}