markwilliams91983 Reviews

Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993–1999)

The Greatest Trek Series

[10/10 · 7 September 2007]

That above statement may be bold and as a confirmed TNG fan I never thought I would say it.

But I just watched the first three series of DS9 and realised it is the best Star Trek series. I was always sceptical because of the setting. Could a space station really be as interesting as the Enterprise? Turns out it can be; and sometimes even more so.

And that's not all. I for one am glad that Roddenberry didn't have a hand in this series. I liked TNG but I preferred the political edge that DS9 brought. In DS9 we learn very quickly that this is not a utopia like the Federation was always portrayed to be. The space station is wrecked, Bajor is in political upheaval and there are many personal and bitter divides between characters. All of which have quirks and past history that makes them real. Major Kira is one of most developed characters in Star Trek history because she has a back story. We learn that she fought against the occupation. We can sympathise with her position in the same way we sympathise with the stories of those who liberated others during the Nazi occupation of France and Eastern Europe. It works because we can familiarise with it.

And being a student of history and politics I find that aspect of DS9 fascinating. From the power struggles in the Provisional Government of Bajor to the uneasy relationship between the Cardassians and the Federation; a relationship which eventually descends into war. And many themes are addressed; including the spiritual. Some characters, like Kai Winn, use her faith as a bid for power, whereas others truly believe in it. That's what sets apart DS9 from the other series. People aren't necessarily evil; no-one is one dimensional. They just believe in different ways. Gul Dukat is probably the most character developed character in Star Trek. And thus we can't think of him as 'evil'; but just someone with a different attitude and customs to the Federation.

And the personal stories of the occupation show how the Cardassians had a lasting impact; even on their own people. A first season episode named 'Duet' is probably one of the best early ones as it shows a Cardassian who is willing to say anything to get executed because he feels guilty for what happened during the occupation.

Like the series as a whole that episode had substance, character developed and well-executed dialogue. All set in a complicated and enthralling post-war political climate.

Desperate Housewives (2004–2012)

What could have been great fell flat instead

[5/10 · 25 May 2007]

I live in the UK and when compared with our dramas the US is far ahead. Lost. Six Feet Under, Sex and the City and ER to name but a few.

So when Channel 4 began airing commercials for 'Desperate Housewives' I thought it would be a combination of Sex and the City, Six Feet Under and even American Beauty. It had the potential to be a great character-driven series like Six Feet Under with the suburban setting of American Beauty.

I thought the characters would be people we could relate and like, situations we, the viewing public, deal with in our lives. Something that would make people stand around the water cooler and talk about. Maybe I was expecting too much from a series that's pitch changed from a 'female driven comedy' to a 'nighttime soap opera'.

And I was. Desperate Housewives is flawed. But irritatingly so as it would take so little to bring it up to the standards of the prior mentioned series and films.

The characters are people you could never see being 'real' in the sense you could relate to; or even like. The only person worth the money she must be earning is Felicity Huffman. Her character is someone that most could relate to. She gets angry at appropriate situations, her marriage is flawed, she has fantasies and desires that never are fulfilled. As far as a person can be 'real' on screen she is the closest in Desperate Housewives.

All the other housewives are greedy, shallow, selfish and unlike able characters that act in a way which will never allow the viewer to empathise with them. There are exceptions of course and I for one wish the writers of Desperate Housewives would focus on the characters and their flaws rather than situations which are both unrealistic and over-dramatic; the recent 'Orson Hodge and his mother' being a perfect example of the latter.

Like I said there are exceptions: Gabrielle and losing her child in season two. When she let go of the balloon into the air it was a heading in the right direction for her character. We the viewer saw that she had emotions and was distraught at the loss of her child (which most mothers would be). But the balloon was given to her by a man who she thought had kidnapped her. Was it needed? No. It should have focused on Carlos and Gabrielle rather than a stranger and Gabrielle. Again the need for drama meant potential for characterisation lost out. And in season three she has turned full circle; just as materialistic and shallow as before.

Edie taking off all her clothes for Carlos could be seen as shallow and unnecessary but it allowed the viewer to see that she is a fragile human being with a past like everyone else; the scar she showed to Carlos. But again her character has seemingly ignored that and is now lying and cheating; another full circle.

Lynette is the only character a viewer can believe is real. The actions she takes because she loves her family are ones people can relate to. The sacrifice of her own happiness for her family is a choice many people make.

Bree leaving Andrew behind for what he'd done to her.

But despite the potential Desperate Housewives chooses dramatics, the focus on shallow characters and implausible situations. The Mike, Ian, Susan love triangle, the Orson Hodge and his mother story, and the family who kept their son locked up in the basement. Sure it makes for good viewing but in the end I feel cheated. Six Feet Under ended two years ago and I still reach for the DVDs. It is well-written, acted and each character has quirks and flaws that makes them real. Apart from the examples mentioned above Desperate Housewives fails and I doubt many will reach for the DVD's two years after it ends. Maybe because it has Susan Meyer as its lead, the most irritating, shallow and false character on television at present, or that it chooses dramatics rather than character-driven plot.

Grade: C

At times beautifully written with characters that stand out; the death of Nora, Lynette being told she may have cancer. But at other times filled with situations and characters that are unrealistic, false and impossible to side with.

The Sarah Jane Adventures (2007–2011)

Invasion of the Banal...

[1/10 · 7 January 2007]

I watched Doctor Who and thought it wasn't too bad. Then I saw Torchwood and didn't think much of it. Maybe because I never liked the character of Captain Jack and couldn't bear watching a whole series dedicated to that flimsy character.

So it was with caution that I sat down and watched The Sarah Jane Adventures. The pilot; Invasion of the Bane, was pretty poor and lacklustre; most of the last ten minutes spent laughing hard at the stereotypes of British youth and Samantha Bond's acting.

The acting was substandard; especially from the stereotype single dad who will no doubt form a love interest for Sarah Jane; which is quite likely as her only other companion is in space somewhere. I think it was explained but I wasn't paying attention. Samantha Bond; well we all know why she didn't have a large part in Bond. She hams it up more than Goldfinger ever did. And the less said about Harley from Footballer's Wives the better.

The local girl's acting was awful from start to end and it ranged from "I've got a hard attitude but I'm only 10" to "I'm going to turn on my mobile phone because I'm hard." yeah right OK. Whatever.

Then the archetype; another candidate for banality along with all the others. Actually no I take it back. There was a good character and it was K9. He was the only one with depth. It looks the BBC are trying to infiltrate the entire country because it's the first success they've had on a Saturday night since Strictly Come Dancing (and no I'm not going to mention Robin Hood). We have Doctor Who for the families, Torchwood for the mature audience and this for the CBBC gang.

Some other things as well before I forget: - Bubbleshock (SJA) = Slurm (Futurama) - Mrs Wormwood (yeah that was also Matilda's mum but no matter) - The map of the Milky Way; according to Wikipedia its from Star Trek: TNG. - In a vain attempt to look "contemporary" it referenced Jeremy Kyle and James Blunt. In two years when no one remembers who these two are it will just make the show look old.

And finally; no one seems to mention that the SONIC LIPSTICK and/or SCREWDRIVER is just the 21st century version of the Batbelt. It can do everything just at that time when it looks like there is no chance for the heroes. Damn. And they say entertainment is evolving.

Rating: F-

Star Trek: Voyager (1995–2001)

A very watchable, if inconsistent, instalment

[7/10 · 28 September 2006]

There are many criticisms of Star Trek: Voyager. There were numerous continuity errors and several episodes that should never have aired. And when compared with the political edge that Deep Space Nine brought to Star Trek it felt like Voyager became an inferior version of The Next Generation. Save for the location Voyager did, on occasion, feel like The Next Generation in the Delta Quadrant.

The pressures of being 70,000 light years away from the Federation were illustrated well to begin with (though overshadowed by the Kazon and that annoying Seska. Thank God she was never seen again after Season 3). Yet considering that the Enterprise in TNG saw a different alien almost every episode the Voyager only seemed to meet the Kazon and the Ocampa for the first two seasons. I know there were more aliens than that but it felt that the Kazon took over the first seasons and that good illustration of being far away from the Federation soon disappeared. In the first few episodes there were concerns about dilithium for the warp core. By Season 5 the Voyager can travel across the void for two months without concerns about power; hell the crew can use the holodeck whenever they want.

Further there were some episodes that never used the potential to show Voyager's unfortunate situation. There was an episode where the Voyager was split into two (one damaged, one undamaged) and the undamaged one soon becomes overrun by Vidians. Several plot twists later and Janeway (undamaged) decides to destroy her Voyager and save the other one (which is Vidian free). That's fine. Acceptable. Yet the damaged Voyager, which is now the only one remaining, is severely damaged. We never see the implications of this. It would have been interesting to see an episode dedicated to the repairs; something to show the perils of their situation.

However this is not all criticism. For all the faults mentioned above and more (how come Voyager used 92 torpedoes instead of its assigned 38?) it was a rather interesting and watchable series. Though it slips just beneath DS9 in quality it is a decent instalment. The casting of Mulgrew was inspired, far better than the Canadian-French actress (as seen in the Season 1 DVD extras) who was banal in every sense of the word. There were good episodes; Scorpion, Year of Hell, Caretaker, Author Author, Equinox and many others. These episodes showed the plight of Voyager in the delta quadrant and Author Author was TNG in its moral issues; whether the EMH has rights over his work.

Voyager is a watchable Star Trek series. There are problems with it; continuity, boring episodes and uninspired characters (Neelix was a real pain in the.....) but overall the screen presence of Captain Janeway, the EMH and his relationship with Seven of Nine made it a worthy and intriguing instalment.

At the time of writing Voyager has an IMDb rating of 6.9/10. Which is in par with Enterprise. That is the biggest mistake of Star Trek. How Voyager, which innovated in many ways can ever be compared to the mess that is Enterprise is beyond me.

The Charlotte Church Show (2006–2008)

Flat and uninspired, save for occasional moments

[1/10 · 8 September 2006]

Not being a fan of Charlotte Church I had never got the inclination to see the very first episode of this show which aired a week ago (time of writing September 9th 06). A few friends and colleagues told me that they had watched it and that I ought to do the same. So when it came around on Friday I sat down and cast aside my dislike for Charlotte Church.

Hating to admit that I enjoyed part of it (where she went undercover as an office worker who accused the office ladies man of being gay and throwing stuffed animals at her new boss) when the commercial came on I thought that this might be worth a look. Yet when it returned I realised that the undercover part (which on reflection is no different to other ones such as Dom Joly and Dead Ringers) was the only part of this show that would be funny.

There were two guest stars this week, Patsy Kensit (who looked as though she was hating every minute of it) and Ruby Wax (who just stared and laughed every now and then a light went on and off). There were moments of insightful questions here and there (and it actually held my interest) but there was a comedy sketch where she pretended to be Paris Hilton and from that moment on I turned off and switched over to BBC1 where the new series of Jonathon Ross started. A series which no doubt will do to Charlotte Church what the audience ratings did for Davina's show.

Rating: D-

By the way; perhaps it was unfair to criticise Charlotte Church for the fact that Patsy Kensit was looking miserable. From the work she has done on Emmerdale (that being the only work?) her face looks incapable of making any other gestures. Looks like a camel chewing a lemon most of the time.

Scary Movie 4 (2006)

Awful from beginning to end

[1/10 · 16 April 2006]

First of all I like the Scary Movie films. The first one was pretty decent, the second one was OK, the third picked up slightly but this one was terrible.

They tried to put too much in the film and it had no real plot. At least the first one was a horror film with spoofs throughout. We never actually knew who the killer was and the spoofs served the story. Scary Movie 4 spoofs films in the same way that a sketch show would do. It never forms a plot and therefore fails as a decent parody.

It may have looked good, being the first shot in high-definition, but it could have been better. The jokes also wore too thin; it relied on slapstick humour which is awful at the best of times. The ending has no purpose than to inform the viewer that Tom Ryan is Tom Cruise. WE KNOW. ITS SO OBVIOUS THROUGHOUT THE FILM WHO TOM RYAN IS SUPPOSED TO BE. WE Don't NEED AN OPRAH SHOW - WE GET IT.

Rating: D-

Wolf Creek (2005)

Without doubt one of the worst films I have ever seen

[1/10 · 27 February 2006]

This piece of rubbish came out in the UK in September 2005. Having never heard anything about the film me and a mate of mine went to the local cinema to see if it was any good.

The film opens with a little bit of trivia about 15,000 people going missing in Australia every year. This film suggests that they are either eaten by dingos or murdered by a manic crocodile Dundee. Some people are calling this the greatest horror film ever made. Sorry; The Shining, Halloween, Scream, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, The ORIGINAL Texas Chainsaw Massacre are all far superior. Actually this movie plays out like the Texas Chainsaw Massacre in the Australian outback.

Anyway moving on; the film starts off with some pretentious young tarts and a stereotypical Australian surfer dude. I do not hate Australians at all but this movie really annoyed me. Soon after they go driving around the Australian desert; like we all do and then their car breaks down.

Uh-oh. The car has broken down and the sun disappears. Out of nowhere comes Paul Hogan after weight gain and pot smoking. He offers them a lift. Without noticing the manic look in his eyes which suggests that he may kill you as soon as look at you they get in.

So they drive along for a bit; playful insults and so on. They wake up and they are tied up. He is being cruel and sadistic threatening to kill him.

And then... well we left by this point. For several reasons: - There was no true horror - it was a maniac with no motivation - It has been done before; The Hills have Eyes - It was full of bad stereotypes. Crocodile Dundee and Home and Away reject come to mind - Does anyone accept a lift from a stranger in the middle of the night - I have forgotten the character's names. Just kill them - no-one will really care. We do not even know what they are called

Good point: great shots of Australia. THAT IS IT.

Rating: F+

Footballers Wive$: Overtime (2005–2006)

Inferior show

[24 February 2006]

Footballers Wive$: Extra Time is the unnecessary cousin to the superior Footballers Wives. It seems like a collection of deleted scenes that ITV did not seem good enough to put on the main show. Characters are poor, including those god awful twins belonging to Bruno, and the story lines are mediocre at best. Seb Webb (great name there) is a miniature version of Bruno Milligan with same mannerisms and vacant look. Anneka or Anika or however you spell her name is a diet version of Tanya Turner but crap. The first episode of the second series had a psychotic nurse called Jeanette Dunkley hitting a coma patient's genitals in order to gain a response. She said it was part of "special treatment" - surely the NHS has not gotten that bad? Watch it if you have not got a total fix of Footballers Wives but do not expect anything of the same quality.

Rating: D

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)

Without doubt, the greatest ever Star Trek movie

[10/10 · 20 October 2005]

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country is without doubt the greatest ever Star Trek movie. Everything that made the original series so popular, a classic villain (in the name of General Chang), a sense of familiarity and chemistry between all the cast members - even Lt. Valeris turns in as a worthy supporting character - is here with the added bonus of a plot that does not wear thin when stretched across the running time.

The way the movie develops is flawless with not one moment of boredom. The movie is entirely watchable from the beginning to the end (which is unusual in Star Trek movies with scenes on a planet = usually these are tedious and over-stretched) and the music adds another level to the film. The main theme (a theme used frequently throughout the running time) never loses its effect.

All in all, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country is simply one of the greatest Star Trek movies. With a sense of familiarity between the cast members (to the extent they are all comfortable with the characters they play), to the space battles between the Enterprise and the Bird of Prey; Nicholas Meyer has created a Star Trek movie that has yet, and probably never will be, equalled.

Rating: B+/A-