Change Your Image
Malcius
Reviews
Doctor Who: The Vampires of Venice (2010)
Somewhat hit and miss
I agree with the comments that this would have made a good two-parter. Throughout the Doctor Who revival many single episode stories have felt rushed and this is no exception. The lack of multi-part stories means that a staple ingredient of classic Who, the cliffhanger ending, has been reduced to an occasional tool, generally towards the end of a season story arc. Arguably this makes such cliffhangers more effective when they occur, but still, it would be nice to see a few more.
A bit more time would also allow the historical settings to be explored a bit more. The fact that the 'vampires' were in Venice scarcely amounted to more than costumes and architecture (and apparently this was actually Croatia according to a newspaper review), apart from a vanishingly short lecture by the Doctor on Venice's historical situation. In the early days historical episodes meant the Doctor and companions having misadventures in the historical context. In the revival (and, I think, later classic DW), it's always about some aliens/monsters with their own agenda, messing about with history (aliens in Vesuvius, Daleks in Manhattan, Daleks in WWII, Cybermen in 1850s London, etc.). It would be nice to have some genuine historical episodes again occasionally.
Concerning the comment asking why the vampires had to turn out to be aliens, this has always been the case with both new DW and classic DW. At the heart of the DW ethos everything has to have a scientific (or pseudo-scientific) rationale or, failing that, be left ambiguous.
One reviewer comments that the 'crack in the wall' references are too obvious. However, I like the way these are building up a sense of tension for the overall plot arc and possibly hide some more subtle clues that may lead to an explanation of the crack. Obviously, with such a progression, the season finale will have to deliver a suitably climactic resolution to the crack.
Lost in Austen (2008)
Fun but silly
This is a mixed bag. In some respects it is respectful to Austen's book. In others it seems like a parody.
The idea of a modern person being thrown into a historical or fictional context by mistake is a good, if not entirely original premise: A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court and a short story I once read about someone waking up on board Ahab's ship in pursuit of Moby Dick are two examples I can think of.
The opportunity is there to see characters through an outsider's eyes and to add depth, and in some cases this is interestingly achieved in Lost in Austen, particularly with the story of Wickham and Georgiana, although one wonders whether Elizabeth Bennet might not have discovered (and Jane Austen uncovered) such a history for herself if it existed. Similarly, the glint of steel added to Mrs Bennet makes the character more interesting, but one wonders whether it quite fits in with all her more predominant neuroticism. Whereas Mr Collins (like his brothers) became an even more simplistic caricature.
A previous reviewer suggested that the Amanda Price character might get suspected of Tourette's syndrome. At times it seems like she has a full-blown case, as she keeps on telling herself not to say something, but goes ahead and says it anyway. Also, for such an ardent fan of the book, Amanda seems to display a remarkable ignorance at times of what some characters are like.
It would have been interesting to see something more of Liz Bennet struggling to cope with modern day England, rather than presenting us with the fait accompli.
All these criticisms aside, the series was quite fun, but at times rather cringe-inducing.
Doctor Who: The Next Doctor (2008)
Good but not without flaws
Firstly, to respond to some of the previous comments:
I thought David Morrissey's 'Doctor' quite successful as someone thinking he was the Doctor, but not as a genuine Doctor, but as he was only playing someone who thought he was the Doctor, I think the verdicts as to what he would have been like as a genuine Doctor rather irrelevant;
regarding the stethoscope hypothesis, this was done, at least in the broadcast shown on New Year's Day, and if the memory issue had been caused by something like the Doctor's or the Master's fob watch human conversions, the lack of a second heart would scarcely be conclusive;
finally, children from orphanages/workhouses (I didn't quite catch which) were a better choice for workers because adults would have been more likely to be noticed missing.
I really enjoyed the interplay between the two 'Doctors' and this is where the episode excelled, along with the mystery of who Morrissey's Doctor actually was.
Whether the companion Rosita was any better or worse than other companions, her similarity to Martha was too jarring to allow for any real feel for her own performance. She seemed rather modern to be a native of the mid 19th century. However, as a foil for the Doctors' conceitedness she was quite successful.
Miss Hartigan was quite excellent, although I wasn't entirely convinced by the explanation of her motivation.
The main downsides to the episode were the CyberShades and the CyberKing. The CyberShades were rubbish and could have come out of the very first season of the Hartnell era (except that they were trying to avoid the monster concept). The CyberKing (or giant robot) seemed completely out of character for the Cybermen as it would hardly be an efficient means of subjugating the world. It would have been more at home in a cartoon or Godzilla movie.
However I am willing to forgive the flaws for the sake of the Doctors' character development.
Doctor Who: The Doctor's Daughter (2008)
Cue another spin-off?
In response to a previous comment, I thought Jenny's revival was ambiguous, rather than being definitely down to the gases or down to re-generation. The gases we saw come out of her mouth were rather reminiscent of those we saw come from David Tennant's Doctor when his re-generation was faltering. It might be that the gases, in triggering evolution on the planet, managed to trigger Jenny's body into becoming full Gallifreyan. Maybe we'll find out in a later episode. I personally see no problem with any of these possibilities, even if the Terraforming gases as corpse re-generator concept has been done by Star Trek.
As for the episode being anti-war, it reminds us and the Doctor that despite his avowed pacifism, he is not (or has not always been) so very different from the soldiers himself.
All in all I thought this was quite a good episode although Jenny was a bit too bubbly and chirpy for credibility, given the circumstances. I wonder if another children's TV spin-off is in the cards.
A solid 7.
4: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
Not so fantastic
Just saw this in a rather bizarre "regional Premiere". The film had its good moments, particularly Stan Lee's cameo and some of the other lighter moments which continued to establish the camaraderie of the Four, whilst some of the stunts and special effects were sufficiently spectacular.
The early build-up in the film was reasonably well-paced as the enigmatic surfer wreaked havoc over much of the globe, but the climax failed to build up adequate tension and ends with something of an unexplained deus ex machina.
Finally you end up being left with a feeling of "so what?" There is some light entertainment in this film but little emotional involvement, as the short run-time (less than ninety minutes) scarcely allows for more than by-the-numbers plotting.
Doctor Who: Smith and Jones (2007)
Exciting enough, but too rushed
As an introduction to Martha Jones "Smith and Jones" worked well. As a science fiction action show this was fairly good. As an episode of Doctor Who this was passable.
Firstly, a brief rant about the recent two series of Doctor Who as a whole: too much action not enough build-up. The old serials of Doctor Who often had 3-6 episodes to build a story. In the modern era we get the occasional 2-parter. a single episode is seldom enough to build emotional involvement in the story. It is not enough that the individual stories may fit into an all-encompassing series arc.
"Smith and Jones" fit this category, in that the storyline felt rushed with events contrived to propel it along and to introduce the new assistant. The Vogons (sorry, I mean the Judoon) seemed to be very patchily characterised. The aliens in Doctor Who and other SF shouldn't just be comical caricatures (longer or slower-paced story lines might help). Similarly the villain of the piece never really gets more than a couple of brush-strokes of characterisation.
That said, David Tennant still seems to fill the Doctor's shoes brilliantly and the new assistant looks promising. The relationship of these two was convincingly scripted as were Martha Jones' family ties, and the Doctor's encounter with the villain was typically very clever, albeit a little broadcast to anyone with more than a minimal knowledge of SF.
I hope for improvement as the series gets into its story arc and the longer/slower-paced story lines start to appear.
Verdict: solid enough start but could do better.
Alex Rider: Operation Stormbreaker (2006)
James Bond for kids? - I doubt it
What can anyone see that's good in this film? Plot: basic - could possibly have been made into a better film if the villains' motivation could be made convincing Characterisation: virtually non-existent. Everyone was a broad caricature.
Acting: overacted or non-existent. May be the fault of the director and/or the script. Particularly, what was with the villainess's accent and snarling expressions? Or were they meant to be facial twitches? The best bit was Robbie Coltrane doing a Tony Blair/David Cameron impression.
Action was functional but no tension was built at all. So much of it made me think it was a spoof but it lacked the humour.
I understand that the film is aimed at teenagers (or at least that the books were) but I had been led to believe that it was reasonably entertaining for adults as well. This was definitely not the case, and I find it hard to believe that teenagers would like it either. Maybe it's for younger children.
It would be interesting to see the reviewers' ages to find out whether it is young people who have given this film the ridiculously high scores that it has.
For the record, I am 30 and I watched it with my 23-year-old fiancée, who also thought it was the worst film she'd seen for a long time.
In short, I recommend you not to watch this film.