Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
QI (2003– )
9/10
The epitome of the comedy quiz show.
23 May 2014
Back in the 60s this genre was handled best on the radio by I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again. There have been several TV attempts to revive that format and this one gets it absolutely right. The best description I have seen is like a really fun dinner party. The quiz part is still central, the questions are real, the answers are real, the points scored are real, but the time is largely taken up by the banter triggered by the questions.

The questions frequently have obvious, "everyone knows", wrong answers which receive a klaxon and a big forfeit and triggering this is occasionally the point of the question.

You're sitting down for an evening with 5 really smart, really quick witted, really comical people playing the pub quiz from hell and you're along for the ride. Wonderful, and archetypally British, entertainment.

Some adult humour, some disrespectful humour, some irreverent humour, lots of good natured teasing, and you still learn something. Great.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wyrd Sisters (1997)
4/10
Disappointing
12 November 2010
I wanted so much to like this movie but I can't say that I did.

Terry Pratchett's book is wonderful and the film follows the plot pretty much exactly and for that it gets four stars. The characters are drawn reasonably and are not jarringly different from how I would imagine them.

That's what's good about it but everything else was disappointing.

First of all; a great deal of TP's humor lies in imaginative similes that do not translate visually at all. "Lighting stabbed at the mountains like an inefficient assassin" how do you visualize that in a cartoon? It just becomes lightning. In the books the weather is cast as if it were a character but it has no lines so the film ignores that running gag and the Shakespearean parody aspect of that completely.

Perhaps more important than that, though, is the cartoon style. My problems with that are difficult to describe but try to imagine the difference between Scooby Doo and The Simpsons. The Simpsons doesn't try nearly so hard to be drawn in any detail however the faces, stances, and expressions are carefully drawn to help convey the emotions of the characters, with excellent comic timing for adults. That's what is missing. This film has no comic timing whatsoever. None. Expressions of surprise, for what they are worth, appear on characters faces a full second after the surprise has passed and dissipated. Other expressions likewise don't convey any useful information or emotional content. Like a Scooby Doo cartoon.

Voice acting likewise appears uncoordinated. Although the voices individually aren't bad (except for the actors - especially Tomjohn and Vitollier who sound embarrassed to be on stage) - in concert they do not sound at all natural. Real conversations overlap. This sounds like everyone is reading a line and then pointing to the next person instead of acting out an entire conversation. Example in point when Magrat and Granny are arguing and Nanny is "coo cooing" the baby... The baby talk is a separate line, spoken in isolation, while the arguers wait for it to be spoken. That's not how people argue. That's just bad acting. Very, very, bad acting.

The opening dialog of the book, "When shall we three meet again", "Well I can do next Tuesday" is a good joke when handled well which the film spoils by putting another scene in between the lines.

I'm sorry, but this just is not good.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Avatar (2009)
7/10
Yes, and yes.
1 June 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Yes. It is visually stunning. Absolutely wonderful rendition of the world of Pandora and of the people places and creatures and plants. It is easy to believe even the fairly ridiculous because it is so beautifully and realistically rendered.

Yes. The characterizations are cartoonish and the plot is positively childish. Unsubtle to the point of laughable and to the point where you could pretty much predict who was going to live and who was going to die and how - long before any serious fighting started.

What I noticed most though was just how much opportunity was wasted.

The entire plan of both sides - and the director - was "shock and awe" either in numbers or machinery or CGI. Someone, somewhere, should have discussed tactics, and a simple 20 second discussion of tactics would have made the tension that much more dramatic in the big set piece battle.

Someone, somewhere, should have actually tried to negotiate... to at least try to find a way that both sides could get what they wanted.

Everything about the storyline looked rushed except for the set piece battles and fantastic graphics and the battles got boring because there was no plan to them to provide "is the plan working" tension and no real surprises as to how it was going to go.

In summary very good in a rather childlike way with enormous wasted potential to be truly, magnificently, great.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hey Cinderella! (1969 TV Movie)
3/10
Loved it growing up but production values spoil it badly.
7 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
When I was growing up I saw this movie every Christmas for a decade or more and loved it every time.

I'm not 100% certain that I'd still enjoy it as an adult, but I did as a teen and my parents and uncles and aunts did so I'm guessing it can stand the test of growing up.

The most amazing thing about this little movie is that, for all that it featured muppets in many of the key roles, and for all that the story was full of sarcasm and humor and misadventure, the whole thing has a much more human and realistic feel than any other version I've come across.

******** Not a plot spoiler but could be considered a joke spoiler **************

When Kermit gripes about Cinderella not wanting to kiss him because of species prejudice ... When Cinderella flees the ball and the prince steps on and crushes the glass slipper ... When Cinderella, in her grief, has the footman bury the 2nd shoe, the last vestige of her time at the ball, in the certain knowledge that he's too scatterbrained to find it again...

They all seem so much more down to Earth and real than Disney's twinkly fairy story.

I think I would very much enjoy seeing this again.

****************** Aaaarggh **************************

How could I have been so wrong!

Yes, as written it's quite a good parody. Yes the muppets' parts are actually quite good.

But NO! The human acting is terrible. The sets are cheap, flimsy, and badly painted. The production values make it look like it was filmed on a broken shoestring budget. My memory has this at a 9. My disappointment gives it a 3, one for the plot, 1 for the jokes, 1 for the muppets, Nothing for anything else. This is ONE film that could NOT be damaged by a remake.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed