Change Your Image
biffo2
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)
Doesn't compare to the book
'Memoirs of a Geisha' is an amazing novel, and having heard it was going to be made into a film starring Zhang Ziyi and Gong Li (one of my favourite actresses) I was very excited. What I found was a very stylish, beautifully shot costume drama that ultimately didn't have a lot to show for itself.
The novel has a brilliant story and wonderful characters, but in this film the whole story was rushed and condensed, big parts of the novel were missing, and generally the way it was filmed seemed more focused on beautiful imagery and fancy direction rather than intimate storytelling. As a result, it didn't create anything like the drama of the book and I just felt that it was all style and no substance.
In terms of acting, I feel that the film would have been better if they'd had Japanese actresses speaking their own language, or possibly Asian actresses who at least had a good grasp of English. It's not a great thing to say, but the fact is with acting you need to be able to use language effectively, and none of the actors in this film could do that. Their speech was slow, stunted and often mispronounced or misinterpreted words. I'm sure they're good actresses, but just the difficulty with which they spoke the language came across heavily on screen and I felt this crippled the drama somewhat.
That said, I feel that 'Memoirs of a Geisha' is a very mediocre film. If you haven't read the book, than you may like it, if so, then you're going to be seriously disappointed. This is an artistic, elaborate showcase of a film - it's not about people, the story is a very mellow version of the book and the characters are spoilt by actresses who communicate badly. This film is all about pretty costumes and make-up, and I left the cinema feeling very disappointed.
The Virgin Queen (2005)
Mainstream entertainment, not necessarily a good drama
It has been said that when making a courtly, historical drama, once of the most important things you need is austerity. The audience have to be able to glimpse the past and be enraptured by the drama without necessarily being aware that it's being filmed. Coky Giedroyc's direction mainly consists of a fidgety, over-active camera that makes almost every scene dizzying to watch. No doubt the idea for this eccentric direction is to put some excitement into the drama, however, after such repeated use it quickly loses its effect and becomes very intrusive. I found the direction of 'The Virgin Queen' to be unsubtle, totally lacking in any poignancy and solely aimed at creating an over-the-top, unsophisticated sense of melodrama wherever and whenever.
As for the acting - with a part like Elizabeth I, comparisons between this and other performances of the Queen are inevitable, yet Anne-Marie Duff, who by her own admission had a rather shaky knowledge of the subject beforehand, somehow decided it would be best not to view other performances, wanting to 'portray the part for myself', which unfortunately (for the rest of us) wasn't that good. Although I don't think Duff was the right choice for Elizabeth anyway, her performance would have been greatly improved if she'd looked at what other actresses had done. As it was, her Elizabeth lacked substance, she had no 'presence' or ability to rouse, she talked in a southern, middle-class accent and never seemed to age or mature. When I was little I watched bits of 'Elizabeth R' and was totally enchanted by Glenda Jackson. In contrast, when watching this, I felt disappointed by Duff's weak, lacklustre performance.
Thinking about the drama as a whole, it's fair to say that the effort went into it. The production values are there, although when looking at it, the words 'lavish' and 'big-budget' cry out louder than 'real' - the characters in their flimsy, satin costumes stand incongruously next to each other. The writing, I didn't find to be as bad as other areas - the main problem being that it compromised historical accuracy. I actually thought there were some really cool lines, although most of these were wasted on Duff who, having not done enough research, delivered them badly (eg, when Elizabeth plays with language in front of the Spanish ambassador).
'The Virgin Queen' is a BBC production and I watched it with high expectations. What I found was that it was neither stimulating as a historical biopic, nor particularly engaging in its overblown love story. It is often said that audiences are more sophisticated today, yet the BBC seems to respond to that by pouring millions more into producing dramas, whilst drastically lowering the standards of acting, direction and especially writing. 'The Virgin Queen' has nothing to show for itself; it is cheap entertainment and trash - a worthy successor to the equally dreadful 'Henry VIII'.
Edward the Seventh (1975)
A very restrained, conservative drama
Upon seeing this drama, I found the first few episodes to be really slow - a step-by-step account of the birth and childhood of the prince, containing all the dry and mundane details of the politics of the time and a lengthy show of his education. The young prince is portrayed as a sensitive, handsome boy under too much pressure from his parents and tutors. Whether everyone would agree with this representation I don't know - we never see him having fun with his brothers + sisters for example, and his natural apathy never comes across. Personally, I skipped the early episodes and only watched them after i'd watched the rest of the series, as I wanted to get on with the story.
Although the drama picks up after the death of Prince Albert, the main problem with it is that is that the writing is so restrained. We see much of Bertie as a respectful son, husband and a cheerful friend, but NEVER as an adulterer (we never see any first-hand evidence of this, although his 'letters' are sometimes alluded to), we seem him playing cards a lot of the time and being a nice brother to Vicky. Too many scenes are devoted to sympathising with him over his mother's refusal to give him any real duties (She says he is too frivolous and irresponsible - though we don't SEE him doing anything very bad so this totally UNBALANCES the drama).
As the lead, Timothy West portrays Edward as an intelligent idealist, not a reckless, fun-loving rake, and this, combined with the rather one-sided writing, means that West doesn't nail the character, and as a main character Bertie is rather bland. Annette Crosbie is a formidable Queen Victoria, we see how she jealously coveted her beloved husband and deeply resents Bertie - but this is about as much scope as the writing gives to her, so we are again denied a fully rounded character.
By far my favourite portrayal was that of Queen Alexandra - the only character who the writing gave full justice to. We see her in-depth as a wife and mother, her tact and ability to dispel a bad atmosphere, her kind but simple nature, and her close bond with her sister Dagmar. Helen Ryan's performance is brilliant, she really gets Alexandra's personality off to the audience, even in her speech and movements. She is the only character with whom Bertie has a deep, complex relationship.
As you can imagine, most of the series is filmed on tape in a studio, though the sets and costume are all very fine and sumptuous. The direction is generally okay, although sometimes I found that emotional scenes (still playing music in the background) would abruptly cut, and then we'd be on to the next scene, which seemed a bit crude.
One of my main problems with the series is the concept itself. Of all the many Kings and Queens of England, why make a 13HOUR long series on... Edward the Seventh? It seems a bit of an odd choice to me. And then to subsequently leave out controversial aspects of his life just takes out all the fun and action. The King himself was a very lively, adventurous personality with a strong need for sexual and emotional fulfilment - I think he's be bored to pieces watching a drama like this.
Ultimately, if you like history and have the time, 'Edward the King' is a quiet, compelling drama and will give you something decent to watch. Despite its flaws, you cam see they have taken the time and effort to recreate the Victorian age. However, it's not big on action and might not appeal to many of a younger generation. Though it lacks the dramatic intensity of dramas like 'Elizabeth R' and 'I, Claudius', anyone with an interest in the era and some patience will enjoy this.
Mary, Queen of Scots (1971)
"Project Vanessa Redgrave"
Whereas most actors and actresses have to work hard to gain recognition for themselves, a select few are lucky enough to be the children of famous actors and have big budget films custom made to launch their Hollywood careers (with the clear expectancy of bagging the appropriate Oscar nomination at the end of it). This is a clear example of this, and it's painfully obvious before, during, and after watching the film.
It's a bizarre case of Mary Queen of Scots being chosen as the subject of Vanessa Redgrave's sweeping epic, rather than finding the best choice to play Mary and this leads us to the first problem - the casting of the main star. Historically, we're told that when Mary first arrived in Scotland, she got off the boat as a beautiful, impetuous young woman full of confidence and determination to triumph over the challenges that lay ahead.
When Vanessa Redgrave gets off the boat, she looks exactly what she is - 30odd years old, gaunt, pale, and a bit funny-looking with ash-blonde hair. There is NO resemblance between her and Mary, and almost instantly she starts behaving like a moron with no control over what's going on. It would have been so much better if they'd hired someone younger and gutsy, with a bit more oomph and presence. As it is, Redgrave's neurotic, wailing portrayal is unsympathetic, and she allows Mary's fatal flaws (which could have been confined simply to the character's instances of bad judgement) to be ever-present by behaving like an imbecile, always wavering and incompetent. To the audience, this babyish Mary looks as though she could never rule in a million years and it's difficult to rally round her when she gets booted off her throne as she quite frankly doesn't seem fit to sit on it.
The highly anticipated confrontation between those 'two titans' Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson (ermm... Mary and Elizabeth was it?) fails, basically because one character is so childlike she's no match for the other, while Glenda Jackson plays Elizabeth with a general lack of seriousness or depth, carelessly overacting and making the most of her comedic turns. The scenes in which they appear together are not particularly memorable and add nothing of value to the film. They also effectively reduce the two queen's relationship (which has so far been comprised of suspicion and fear of their distant rival) to nothing. Moreover, the fact that they do meet (when so famously they didn't) seriously affects the film's historical accuracy and is probably the most commonly criticized part of the film.
The depiction of Lord Darnley as a secret homosexual, complete with a repulsive femininity (another invention in the script) I found to be a cheap way of not bothering with the necessary character development to explain his awful personality and the failure of his marriage to Mary. Moreover, I found the negative depiction of homosexuality to be a bit politically incorrect (after Darnley, Mary gets herself a REAL MAN), and although the film is hardly radical in any of its views, it did bother me.
While most of the character depictions are all to hell, the script does follow the general flow of history and is at least watchable it's not nearly as silly as most modern historical dramas and has some measure of plausibility. Being a major film, the production values are good, there being some fantastic scenery and settings with very good, accurate costumes. The music is very spirited and atmospheric, somewhat spurring the film along and adding feeling in areas where script and acting fail.
All in all it is a shame because the subject matter is so rich in material, full of vibrant characters just waiting to brought to life but instead of utilizing this, the script writer just has the entire supporting cast tip-toeing around Redgrave as she hogs the screen. Although it is by far superior to Jimmy McGovern's very bad 'Gunpowder, Plot and Treason' (2003), 'Mary, Queen of Scots' hardly stands out as a work of any great ingenuity or greatness (especially considering how many great films came out in 1971) and, set against the backdrop of other historical epics, the film is easily swamped and very easy to surpass.
Sengoku musô (2004)
One of my favourite games
One of the things I love about the KOEI games is the way they always combine deep story/history and really cool characters with a fun, easily accessible action genre.
This game, I found, is far more story-orientated than the Dynasty Warriors series. You follow the 15 characters through each of their own story lines, with some amazing FMV sequences and interesting cut-scenes, and the characters themselves are all very diverse and unique, with a wide range of abilities.
In each of the battles you are given (and also have to find) certain complex missions which you must fulfil in order to affect the outcome of the battle. The missions you accomplish often affect the path you're character takes, and they generally give the battles more of an aim than in previous KOEI games and are usually a lot of fun to do and quite intriguing. At the end of each battle you are given a grade based on you're timing, the amount of people killed by your musou attacks (which isn't very fair as some characters have far better musou attacks than others), items collected and missions completed. In between battles you can use experience points you have earned to buy new skills for your characters, which is a really rewarding process.
The main problem with the game is the sound. The in-battle music is awful, made up of annoying, repetitive low-beat rock tunes, and would really suit something sounding a little more authentic and climactic. The voice acting is a mixture of very good and very bad, with a few characters sounding horrible and some others really miscast, although I did enjoy the voices of Nobunaga, Noh, Hanzo, Yukimura and Mitsuhide and thought they added a lot of personality to their characters.
All in all, Samurai Warriors is experimental in its combination of action and strategy and if its a very sophisticated action or strategy game you're looking for, then you might not be entirely satisfied with this game. If however, you appreciate fun, interesting characters and a dramatic, interactive plot with lots of Japanese history this is the game to play.