Hello folks, it’s been a while. While I used to hope to update this blog every week with a new movie review or discussion on film in general, I probably won’t be able to do that going forward, but I do want to write more frequently on here, so watch this space for a review on the new dragon age game, and other posts in the near future.
On a more exciting note, I have been trying to expand into writing more short-form fiction recently, including fanfiction for some of my favourite series, and so I have created a new blog, Words in an Order. This will be a place where I can focus on sharing some of the stories I want to tell, both original and based on works I enjoy! Please find the link below if you are curious about my fiction writing and want to support me in new direction. The first post is already live; the first part of a serialised story taking place in the Dragon Age setting.
Please take a look if you are curious, I hope you like it!
The prequel to Mad Max: Fury Road, starring the character of Furiosa is out now, which has left me feeling drawn to the Mad Max franchise once again. The story of Mad Max is an interesting one, both behind and in front of the camera. The character has gone through so many shifts and continuity changes, and yet curious things stay the same in each instalment. The series was created by a man with an eclectic career history and has inspired several of my favourite series of all time, Fallout not least among them. There is a lot to say about this wonderful and bizarre collection of media and I’m about to explore it all, because no-one can stop me.
Mad Max
The film that started everything. The first time I watched this I was surprised by several things. When I was young, my dad had a habit of describing classic movies that I was often too young to watch to me. I would always be incredibly interested in seeing these, and we eventually sat down to watch most of them, such as the Terminator, and of course Mad Max. From the description I was prepared for a post-apocalyptic revenge movie, but that isn’t at all what the first film is about.
The story doesn’t take place in the aftermath of an apocalypse; it happens in the build up to one. The tone throughout is the idea that everything is near the breaking point. The MFP cops are spread too thin and risking death every day. The country is overrun with lawless biker gangs terrorising normal citizens. The little we learn about the state of the country is that everything from gas to water is running out fast. Max himself is worried about his own mental state. He has terrible dissonance between his violence towards the gangs and his tenderness with his family. He quits the force halfway through the film in a panic, telling his CO he feels he is close to cracking and becoming just like those he fights. The film feels as though we are waiting for the inevitable collapse, everything is filled with tension, even the quiet moments. The more time we spend with Max and his family, the more we worry about what is going to happen.
The costumes are mostly regular clothes, although the MFP and gangs get nice bold looks. The MFP wear armoured leather jackets which are crisp and uniform. The gangs get a bohemian mish-mash of leather, canvas and sashes of many colours. The main villain, Toe-cutter is memorable and suitably threatening, although he lacks enough interactions with Max to feel like a true threat.
The story is not free of issues. Some scenes are quite generic feeling, and there are a few too many minutes spent on a long vacation. The pacing is about what you would expect from a new director; George Miller had been an ER doctor before making the film. There is a limit to the action that comes from having a severely non-existent budget. But the concepts are incredibly interesting. The tone seems similar to books coming out at the time written by Harlan Ellison, particularly the film adaptation of A Boy and His Dog. Miller even cited that film as an influence on his work. But, as thought-provoking as Ellisons work is, Miller has a unique style that lends something to his debut film. Much like Sergio Leone he has a tendency to cast people with striking features to play many of the characters; populating his world with instantly identifiable people. Miller also knows how to up the ante, as can be seen in his later entries.
Road Warrior
The sequel, made several years later is a very different beast. Instead of a revenge drama with action elements, this is a full-on wasteland western, complete with tense action throughout and a much higher budget. We join Max several years after he gets mad, struggling to keep surviving in an Australia that has completely collapsed. Folk have regressed into tribalism and gang warfare. All our hero wants to do is keep running. He will slowly become tangled up in a conflict between a local warlord called Humungous (let no-one say the Mad Max series isn’t funny), and a town trying to protect their supply of gas.
The tone feels oddly lighter in some ways. There is a sense that in such a brutal world, the worst has already happened. The stakes are real and life is a constant fight but now that the world is completely ruined, it feels less tense to watch. The world building is starkly different to the first film. Despite this Max seeming not that much older, it feels as though it has been a lot longer since the apocalypse. People seemed to have all settled into the order of things remarkably quickly. This will only get more noticeable with each new instalment.
Max as a character has become disinterested in personal motives. He tries very hard not to care about anyone beyond himself and his dog, not wanting to suffer in the same way again. He is motivated by survival, getting gas for his car and moving on, but is constantly dragged into defending the town more and more with the promise of reward. Along the way he can’t help but pick up sympathy, especially for a feral kid who tags along. I’m a sucker for this type of character, which is cut from the same cloth as Clint Eastwood’s Man with No Name.
The costumes are much more vibrant in this film. The townsfolk tend to prefer white and beige, to blend into the sands. They wear loose fitting or padded cloth, though the warriors have some armour. Max’s outfit is the best it ever looks to me. It is clearly the remnants of his MFP uniform, and Miller takes care that no one wears anything that looks like it, setting him apart. One sleeve has been lost and a new shoulder pad is stitched in, showing how he has repaired it over time. He wears a leg brace from when he was shot in the first film, and has an array of tools looped onto his belt. The effect of all this is to show that while has adapted to the new world, he is still holding onto his past in some ways.
The followers of humongous wear outfits straight out of a bondage shop, and makes you wonder if everyone scoured Ann Summers the moment water ran out. Not to say they aren’t intimidating, arrayed with spikes and black leather. The man himself is somewhat lacking as a villain to me, his voice a bit too growly and his acting hindered by his full mask. However, the real antagonist trophy goes to Wez, the right hand of Humongous. His sadistic glee and delightfully hammy performance steal the baddie show.
The action is much more engaging and the many chase scenes are an upgrade on anything in the first film. Every aspect feels like what Miller would’ve liked to do if he had the experience and money last time. The story is paced much better and never wastes a moment. It flies by and leaves you wanting more.
Beyond Thunderdome
Now we come to a divisive entry. Many were unpleasantly surprised by the changes in Beyond Thunderdome. However, while I think this isn’t as good as the previous film, I still really enjoy this movie. In many ways it feels like a natural progression of the series. We once again return to the wastes of Australia to a world even more removed from our own. Most folk seem to not even remember how things used to be, suggesting either that Max ages really slowly or people are dying quickly. Maybe both. Max has lost most of what he once had. The patrol leathers are even more worn and covered by robes. His hair has gone wild, the car he drove in the first two long since destroyed.
Vehicles are still ridden, but there are less action scenes involving them. In this world, gas has become so rare that few want to waste it. Max travels to the Thunderdome to get access to gas and food, and fights for sport as a neo gladiator. During this story he must rediscover morals he long ago laid aside, especially once he discovers a tribe of children in great danger. This Max has fallen far but rises further than in either of the other two films. The film feels like a natural conclusion, and there is a faint degree of hope running throughout. Despite the harshness of the world, some new generations can survive and perhaps find a new life. Not everyone turns into a monster when the world burns.
The costumes are becoming more abstract, less obviously made from old clothes. Many characters wear homemade tunics and clothing made whole cloth from scraps. There is a strong desert theme, many wearing robes and other loose-fitting items. The residents of Bartertown who follow Aunt Entity (played by Tina Turner), still dress in leathers, but with a much more tribal, almost Conan the barbarian style. Entity wears a chain tunic and shoulders that looks fabulous but incredibly pinch-y. Max wears loose black robes over his leathers and long hair for most of the film. Many parts of his leathers have now been replaced after wear and tear.
There is a lot to love in this film. The side characters, like Jedediah are wonderfully entertaining, and the sets are always great fun to look at. The plot is good fun, although a bit cornier than the previous film. But I love corniness so that isn’t a bad thing inherently. Tina Turner does fine as the villain, but I was spoiled after Wez. The various child actors are a different story. Some are pretty great and others are irritatingly bad. That does drag the film down a bit, although I enjoy the allusion to the lost boys of Peter Pan.
Ultimately, Road Warrior was a tough act to follow and I think the best way to enjoy Thunderdome is on its own merits. Although it is inevitably going to be compared to its predecessor, I think that it does its own thing enough to not feel like a downgrade. It would’ve aged far worse if it attempted to replicate Road Warrior and failed. Thunderdome has some great new ideas and explores them in a unique way, and that is enough for me.
Mad Max Video Game
I’m sure you expect me to talk about Fury Road next, but in the chronology, there is one more piece of media that comes next, and I think it’s worth discussing. Just after Fury Road released, we got a semi-prequel game named after the character. I played through this game and was struck by how much it replicates the tone of the first two movies in particular. Despite being a loose prequel to Fury Road, it was clearly made in the model of Road Warrior.
The early game follows a plot that mimics the best parts of the film, from Max befriending an unhinged side character to him approaching settlements to do tasks in exchange for rewards. In that way the quest system of a typical video game suits the narrative of Mad Max down to a tee. The design of the wastes is varied and harshly beautiful, and the costumes take elements from each of the films.
The combat is mostly an Arkham style fighter, which is always enjoyable, and the action involving cars is exhilarating, and a great chance to play out scenes from the movies with our own version of Max. Driving up to a raider convoy and taking out each spiky death machine one by one at top speed will never not be entertaining.
The game is let down by a forgettable story focused on building a car that isn’t the interceptor, whilst saving another woman and child. While this harkens back to the first film, the damsel in distress is such a tired plot point and the game does little to make these characters engaging enough, leaving the whole story feeling extremely generic. The game also struggles to make the optional content feel that way. Since the main driving point is to upgrade our car, we need to get scrap, and in the late game we still only get scrap in tiny amounts, forcing a dedicated player to try to complete everything. This sapped a lot of my enjoyment, but the early to mid-game is fun enough for me to recommend, especially to fans of the franchise. If you’ve played Fallout and Rage to death, then this is a welcome chance to get into Mad Max’s shoes for a few hours.
Fury Road
What an unexpected film this was. Decades after the last one, after Miller had gone off to make Babe 2: Pig in the City and Happy Feet. Many younger viewers might’ve only known those two and never heard of the Road Warrior. Miller seems to have been content to make whatever he felt in the mood for. And after over twenty years making kids films, it seems he felt a yearning to return to the road. No-one was prepared for just how hardcore his return would be.
Fury Road caused me to hold my breath for much of it. The first time I saw it in the cinema the lightning-fast pacing and near constant action left me gripping my coke so tight I spilled it. It takes many elements from the previous films, but Miller utilises new crew and decades of experience to make a much more confident film, wholly interested in visual story-telling. The script was secondary to the story board, and many new elements of the world are introduced visually, which means that the dialogue is minimal and very little of it is wasted on exposition. The characters are too busy trying to survive.
We rejoin Max what must be decades after Thunderdome, though he still hasn’t aged. He has somehow regained his interceptor, or else rebuilt it from similar cars. He’s clearly been alone in the wastes for so long he is close to being feral. His hair is unkempt and he eats lizards without even cooking them first. Within minutes he has gone through hell as he is captured, his car destroyed, his hair and blood stolen. Even his iconic jacket is taken away. He remains in this captive position for the first part of the film, and has to fight intensely hard to regain what he lost. This works to parallel his personal arc. Max is more animal than human, haunted by the many he failed to save, and through his alliance with Furiosa he gets a chance to regain his human connections. He works not just to live but to help others to be free and as this happens, he gets bits of his old gear back. Piece by piece the man he used to be returns.
The costumes are incredible. The makeup for the war-boys is striking, Furiosa has a wonderful prosthetic arm fashioned from junk. The various gangs all have such distinct looks that telling the different factions apart is simple. Max still wears his old leathers, but so worn and faded they bear little similarity to the first films crisp uniform. Max has now taken to hanging useful items on his jacket, which makes for a much more layered look.
I love every aspect of this film. Every character, especially Charlize Theron’s Furiosa, is perfectly performed. The villain, Immortan Joe is the most memorable and despicable monster in the entire series. His horse teeth mask and stark white skin, along with the see-through armour creates a character with the same presence onscreen as Darth Vader. The action is fast paced and edited incredibly well. Unlike films that shake the camera around, the movement is always tracked really well, so that the eye can follow everything with ease. If someone rides a car offscreen to the left, the next shots movement will start on the left side of the shot. In a sea of underwhelming CGI, Miller uses practical effects for the majority of the set-pieces. They drive real cars, blow up real cars and have real people on stilts on top of those real cars. This makes the whole experience grounded, even as the characters spray silver food mist in their faces. The actors also can react much more organically to what is happening around them.
This film feels almost like a distilled version of everything that came before, and is such a complete story that finishes in such a satisfying way, that I can’t really imagine how another Mad Max film would top it. But I have yet to see Furiosa and so I’m sure I’ll be returning to the Australian wastes on this blog soon.
This series is a unique experience. It is a beautiful chaos of loose continuity, myths and legends and action scenes so fun they ruin other films for you. Miller builds a different story with new themes in each version and yet retains the core identity of the series. It comes across in each instalment how much fun he must have had making them. And it would be hard to deny the influence these films have had on popular culture, and the post-apocalyptic genre. Each film has its own highlights, and they have all gotten me very excited to see Furiosa, when I get the chance.
One of the most wonderful things about watching films is being able to discuss them with the people around you. I love the experience of sharing ideas and reactions to movies, and we can now do so to a much wider array of people thanks to the internet. Unfortunately, in today’s film discourse, especially online, it can be hard to prevent coming across as either pretentious or wilfully obtuse. The problem with arguments about art is that there is a lot of subjectivity and personal feelings connected to a person’s experience. How something made you feel is an important aspect of how you may judge a piece of fiction. Everyone has access to art like films and tv, and as such it contributes to a wonderful communal experience. At its best, what I love about cinema is the potential for anyone to discover something new, and to discuss and learn as a group.
However, the way we talk and think about films often can get more divisive in practise. A popular talking point currently floating about online is the idea of media literacy. Simply put, some folk online talk about films in a rather shallow way, often making criticism of media that ignores or misses points the film itself makes. These themes are often presented implicitly or even explicitly. A good example is the latest Dune instalment, which uses Paul as an illustration of the dangers of trusting in charismatic leaders. Denis Villeneuve brings to the front themes that are explored in the books by showing the character manipulating and using an entire people’s religious beliefs to gain power for himself. Many who don’t pick up on the critical tone the film uses make the argument that Paul is an example of the harmful white saviour trope.
This archetype is a well-documented part of cinema. Films like Pocahontas, Dances with Wolves and especially Avatar and its sequel are led by bland white men who enter an indigenous culture and effortlessly take a messianic position after learning everything about the culture within an unrealistic timeframe, often earning the love of a native woman in the process. They then usually single-handedly lead the people to salvation by fighting their battles for them. it’s a condescending story idea that has been done to death, and at first glance Paul Atreides does seem to fit the bill. However, the film continuously presents his infiltration and co-opting of the Fremen has an extremely harmful thing. For one, his love interest Chani is constantly pushing back against what he is doing, alongside several of her friends, showing that the Fremen are not a monolith in their beliefs. Furthermore, during Paul’s speech to the Fremen where he declares as their saviour, the music is ominous and foreboding, not triumphant.
There are many other ways in which the creators behind Dune Part Two make it apparent that Paul is leading these people to destruction, not salvation and it begs the question of how people missed this. A common response is to say that people with opinions like this lack media literacy – that they do not have a diverse enough taste in films, or else have not studied film in a way which others have. Many will bemoan the idea that more people are lacking in media literacy than ever before, but this can be a bit of a dismissive attitude in my opinion.
First of all, people have been misunderstanding films right since the very first movie-goers panicked at the sight of a train coming towards them onscreen. Bad takes have existed since the first days of cinema. It’s a common joke that test audiences who watch many famous movies come away with horrendous takes. Every test viewer hated the brilliant original ending of Little Shop of Horrors, in which Audrey-two took over the city in a wickedly funny montage. and that led to the film being given a worse ending in its theatrical release, with a saccharinely happy ending, undeserved by the murderous main character. Most people watching today tend to agree that the first ending fit much better. So, if we count those test audiences as having no media literacy, then this in no way a new phenomenon.
Secondly, the idea smacks of not allowing people room to respond emotionally to films. Sure, Dune may be intended to come across as a critique of the cult of personality, but if someone watching feels as though it has some suspect themes, then that shouldn’t be discounted. If the film may not always be clear, then how someone responds to it, especially on the first viewing, shouldn’t be dismissed. A person expressing what they got from a film is an invitation for a conversation, not a chance to dunk on someone for not ‘knowing better’. Tell me how a person is meant to gain literacy if they get ridiculed for trying to engage? That kind of behaviour is just going to cause people to get defensive and shut down.
Having said that, it can’t be ignored that there is a growing subset of people online who make very sweeping statements based on almost wilfully ignoring nuance. I am not a fan of all or nothing attitudes towards artistic works. There is always room for both praise and critique and it is equally dismissive to make such statements. Such people will often deride others for reading into movies and coming away with any deeper or subtextual meaning, a popular phrase being, “Sometimes the curtains are just blue”. These are the sort to watch Saltburn and rather than conclude it might not be for them personally, decide it must just be a weird sex movie that has no value. They take the surface and refuse to see any deeper. I want to make it clear; it’s fine if you miss a deeper meaning when you first watch something. I do all the time! But don’t get defensive if others pick up on it.
Part of the problem is that expertise is not always respected in art in the same way as other subjects. A trained scientist or electrician might talk about their chosen field, and although you will get contrarians, most people accept that they have more weight behind their words thanks to their experience. But film scholars are almost seen as snobs for taking a passionate interest. People see Austin Butler naming a favourite movie that they haven’t seen and instead of seeing it as opportunity to expand their taste, they label him pretentious. There is nothing wrong with only watching popular films. Or not watching films at all. But when someone who has studied film, or is a seasoned filmmaker has something to say it might be worth listening to. Art is open to all and everyone responds to it in unique ways, but as with most things in life the people who engage the most, and with an open mind will inevitably learn things. It isn’t snobby or classist for those people to speak with confidence on their chosen subject. Mostly someone becomes pretentious when they grow dismissive and close-minded.
Films are full of nuance. Many ideas about them can be true all at the same time, and just because one person interprets something one way, doesn’t mean there isn’t room for discussion. The best stories are deep and full of potential meaning. If you only look at the curtains, you’ll miss the sky outside.
Since I was a teenager, I have loved the Fallout series. I started with the third game way back in 2014, and steadily made my way through the series. New Vegas was a highlight, with the sheer depth of storytelling and roleplay options, but each instalment of the franchise has something to offer. The first two are incredibly deep and filled with great worldbuilding, the third game has some amazing quests and a world that feels truly post-apocalyptic, and the fourth game made power armour feel like something straight from Iron Man.
But since Fallout 76 and its many launch-day faults, the enthusiasm for the series has been ebbing for me. With no new games on the horizon, I was content to move on to other titles like the Outer Worlds, and leave the wasteland with a fond goodbye. But producers Jonathon Nolan and Lisa Joy had other ideas. This new TV series, set in the world of the games, is a welcome return to the story. It seems a great fit, given that Nolan also created Westworld, a western themed story about a dystopian future involving synthetic humans. A match made in the Mojave.
I’m happy to report that as a fan of the games, the series is incredibly satisfying. Forgetting for a moment the obvious inclusions, like seeing the Brotherhood of Steel onscreen for the first time, the show is also fantastic at including many little details. These small things add up to give the show a unique tone and it feels endlessly rewarding to spot them. For example, I love the way most of the sound effects for caps, stims and computers are directly lifted from the game. Another nice detail is the way that the script makes every persuasion attempt from the protagonists feel like an in-game speech skill-check. Just the way they pace the conversation mimics the experience from the games.
One of the best aspects of this show is the original story it tells. The writers bring in new concepts to the Fallout universe whilst paying homage to what has come before. There are references and allusions to the events and locations of every game in the series, but none are overwhelming or hard to understand for someone who hasn’t played the games. They are treated like casual parts of the world and history that the characters would naturally bring up. Showrunners Geneva Robertson-Dworet & Graham Wagner both know how to pace a story. The narrative focuses on a trio of characters that are nuanced and interesting, but still represent archetypal playstyles of the game series. Nolan utilises the flashes to multiple points in time that worked so well in the first season of Westworld, but this time it is clear where and when we are, showing up the world in the build up to the bombs dropping and how it shapes the wasteland even 219 years later. The character that anchors this narrative shift is Cooper Howard/The Ghoul, played to perfection by Walton Goggins.
I have nothing but good things to say about all of the cast. Ella Purnell is a perfect encapsulation of a sheltered Ingénue with a can-do attitude who has to adapt in a tough environment. Maximus played by Aaron Moten is a great example of a selfish person trying to be better, and the performance allows him to still be relatable even as he does dubious things. And on a side note, his lust for obtaining power armour is very relatable to game players. But for me the breakout, as for most fans is Walton Goggins. I’ve been a fan of his for years, from his supporting appearances in the Hateful Eight to Justified, as well as many other great characters. However, it is very refreshing to see him in a major leading role alongside the other two. His Ghoul and Howard are two distinct characters with starkly opposed attitudes and morals, but both are recognisable as the same person at wildly different stages. He is charming and humble, then spiteful and cynical. The actor Howard baulks at playing a character that kills people, then the Ghoul shoots actual giant holes into people’s chests. Nothing demonstrates the new world created by the old one better.
I have endless praise for the production. The costumes are wonderfully designed, the sets are accurate and unique, and the focus on practical effects gives everything a much more tactile feel. Actors respond better in their performance to things they can actually see, who knew? The power armour could easily have been a CGI creation and I am infinitely glad they instead decided to make them physical suits. I especially enjoy the way the show makes the suits seem heavy via sound effects and feats of strength, yet makes the actual costumes light to show off the boosted strength given to the wearer. The shots are very creative, especially the sequence in which the bombs are dropped, which for me is highlight of the entire show.
Overall, this TV series has given me a new love and appreciation for the Fallout universe and I am waiting raptly for when the second season comes out. I came away from my viewing feeling like I had watched a show which, whilst being intensely cool and entertaining, also had plenty of interesting things to say for itself. The themes will stay with me for a long time, much as the best games in the series have done. War may never change, but Fallout certainly does, and for the better.
At what point do film and TV franchises stop being worthwhile?
Lest someone use the title to suggest I’m a snob, let me be clear. I love franchises. I love Star Wars and Trek, Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, Doctor Who and many, many more. I’ve been watching franchises my whole life as most people have, and I resist the idea that these films/tv lack artistry. I’m not one to suggest that nothing in the MCU is art and then insist you go watch Eraserhead instead. Not that I hate more niche or arty stuff either. My love is broad and there is room to enjoy a wide variety of art without devaluing any of it. What I want to discuss now isn’t that franchises shouldn’t exist at all. Often a particular setting is really fun and we want to see more stories in it. Many writers come up with incredibly enjoyable universes full of great lore and ideas, and it would be a shame to only have one story set in them. Shared universes are really cool and can reward fan engagement.
While I don’t love everything in the MCU I love the fact that there is so much going on in different corners of its universe. Star Wars is such a genre bender that exploring different aspects of it can be really fun. Space westerns for the Mandalorian fans, space fantasy for the jedi fans. But fatigue can often set in. A good example is Stranger Things. While the show has had many quality moments past season one, a lot of people watching will admit that the stakes of the show have lessened greatly, partly since none of the main cast have died in four seasons. The threat seems to diminish with each new season and I personally am getting tired of the formula where each series starts with the characters all separated and they remain so until the big finale. No season has topped the first in terms of stakes or quality of writing.
Imagine if it had ended after the first. It would be remembered like Firefly as a perfect season of television. The continuation of the story has felt less like a creative choice and more as a response to the immense popularity of the show. Is it a problem to continue making something really popular? I wouldn’t say so, but only if the vision for the story is strong going forward.
One of the best things about Breaking Bad is that they decided to end it at season five. Vince Gilligan and the other writers had a general idea about where to end things and they stuck to it. Breaking Bad feels like such a complete story and I doubt many would argue that it should have kept going any longer. It rode its popularity while the writers had strong ideas, they kept going to a natural end and then moved on. While they made a spin-off, they did so based on a character that had enough behind him to create an arguably even better follow-up. And they didn’t sacrifice the story to prolong the show. They did six seasons, building to a great conclusion and then they finished it. People look back fondly on both shows because the writers knew when to end things.
Conversely, even dedicated fans will look back on shows like Supernatural with a mixed attitude. While there are many seasons that hold up, the show just kept going. The show kept going so long that every previous story arc ended up feeling small and invalidated as the stakes swelled to ridiculous heights. The main characters both died and went to several different forms of hell multiple times and then came back. At that point, things stop mattering to the audience. Who cares what the Winchester brothers will face next, when they can literally come back from the dead? The show went through many showrunners and writers, purely because it was so popular that the studio wouldn’t let it end. And when it finally ran out of steam, the finale left pretty much everyone cold. I’m sure there are people out there who found it satisfying, but many were angry at how the show treated characters like Castiel. There are definitely many earlier season finales which would’ve been a much more natural and enjoyable stopping point. The legacy of Supernatural is now incredibly spotty and it can be argued that the show long outstayed its welcome.
I love much of Star Wars, and while writers feel they have something to say, or a good story to tell using that universe, I’ll be happy to watch it. But let’s not forget that Disney resurrected Star Wars. George Lucas told a story. He took six films to do so, and then felt that it was finished. He might have sold the franchise, but he only felt the need to make six films before feeling as though he was done. Disney started making Star Wars stories because they wanted to make money. I love some of the Disney Star Wars content, but it clearly wasn’t a creative choice that brought them to us, and more often than not that shows. The sequel trilogy is inconsistent because there was no vision for them as a trilogy; each film feels as though it was made in a vacuum. The recent TV shows have felt mixed in quality because often it feels like Disney just want to keep Star Wars in the cultural Zeitgeist. I’d rather wait longer for something Star Wars related to come along, if it meant that someone made it because they had a strong idea. And honestly, I wouldn’t weep if Star Wars took a break or even ended. We have a lot of really cool stuff in this franchise, and the original story is told in full. Everything else is just gravy, but if Disney keeps pushing things, they might end up evaporating the audience with oversaturation.
People have a limit. Audiences can start to notice if a franchise keeps releasing instalments purely for the sake of making more money. That’s starting to happen with Star Wars, and it’s very noticeable for projects like Rings of Power. That show is all over the place, because the creators were hired to make the show after the fact, rather than showrunners having an idea and pitching it. Does this mean I think we shouldn’t get more stories set in Middle Earth? No but that doesn’t mean we have to have them either. New stories and new settings are just as exciting, and if studios don’t get on board with that, then they are doomed to keep selling us zombie franchises until they collapse under their own weight.
Ultimately, I don’t think there is a moment when any franchise has to end forever. But concluding one and moving on to something new is always a smart move. It can be comforting to keep watching something familiar, but sticking with a comfort franchise at the expense of trying anything new can lead to frustration and entitlement. A shared setting can keep going for a long time if there are fresh new ideas, but if there aren’t any it’s better to let go and take a break from Star Wars, to go and make Knives Out.
There was such a long wait for the second season of The Witcher that I had rewatched the first one many times over, yet was still a bit hazy on the plot. Thankfully it begins with a recap to help catch us up on the highlights. Covid has screwed a lot of TV productions over. With the limitations on budget and the amount of extra effort shooting during a pandemic requires, not to mention rewrites and reshoots when a cast member is ill, it’s actually a miracle that they managed to produce the show at all. But not only did they achieve this, I believe that they also managed to improve almost every aspect from the first season.
The writing is more coherent, especially the story pacing, now that the action is all taking place in the same timeline. It is a lot easier to follow the plot right away, and there is a stronger focus on a core storyline, with many threads running alongside. Geralt and Ciri’s relationship takes centre stage and gets plenty of time to develop. By the end it was a constantly heart-warming aspect of the show. The dialogue can be slightly clunky at times, and personally the amount of modern swearing in a fantasy show can get a bit jarring, but otherwise there are a huge amount of standout moments. Many of the scenes feel emotionally weighty and seem destined to end up on YouTube compilations very soon. There are some choices for characters which will piss off fans of the games, like what happens to Eskell, but as someone who hasn’t read the books, but played the games I can say that I appreciate the show isn’t trying to be carbon copy of either. That would lead to a worse experience that would leave no-one happy. The books, especially the short stories, make for a strange pace for a TV show, and it’s inevitable that things need to be altered and moved around.
The costuming is much stronger this season. Much like the Wheel of Time, it feels like the showrunners realised that colour existed. Suddenly characters wear reds, purples and greens instead of every shade of black and grey. The wigs are much more convincing and Nilfgaardian armour no longer looks strange and wrinkled, but golden and glorious. On top of this, some of the composition this season is much more varied. The colour grading is less murky than season 1 and it is easier to see what is going on. The location shooting features much more interesting scenery and shots. Kaer Morhen in particular is an excellent set, that evokes the imagery of the games but has enough of its own character not to be a poor copy.
The direction of the show seems greatly improved. There were some great set pieces in the first season, but a lot of the camera work seemed a bit too static. Now the camera seems to move much more organically, especially when following the point of view of monsters. The added light also means that much more of the shots are easy to see, so the camera work is no longer hidden under a darker filter. Even though the story has stayed as dark and dangerous, the show feels much more vibrant and less bleak than before.
The musical score is a bit more mixed. There are some really well scored scenes that lend dramatic weight, but other than the main theme which is still really strong, it feels a little underwhelming at times. There seemed to be less Slavic inspired sounds in the tracks this time. I’m not saying the score was bad by any means but I definitely preferred season 1. However, Jaskier’s new songs were a perfect addition, and I hope they find reasons to have Joey Batey sing every season from now on.
Speaking of the cast, Joey Batey was a highlight as he was last season. He manages to be a compelling character with a lot of empathy and a never-ending source of humour at the same time. Each moment he is on screen he brightens the mood. His singing also provides the show with a lot of personality. Henry Cavill was born to play Geralt. He understands the character intimately and seems to live and breathe the life of a Witcher. The writing also allows him to soften up Geralt quite a bit as he cares for Ciri and reconciles with both Jaskier and Yennefer. He has much more dialogue, and even cracks a smile on occasion. Anya Chalotra continues to be amazing as Yennefer, embodying the perfect mix of vulnerability and abrasive strength. This season gives Freya Allen a much stronger arc for Ciri, and allows us to see her really make the character her own. Freya is a very talented actor and the struggle Ciri goes through this season to deal with her dark side and fear allows for a lot of powerful moments. Allen rises to the occasion. The many additional side characters introduced this season are all strong choices, although some need more scenes to really shine in the future. Kim Bodnia provides an interesting take on the old witcher Vesemir; he seems weary of the deaths of his younger charges and almost as if he is struggling with depression. Overall, the cast is stronger than ever.
My impression finishing this season was that everything felt more confident. The actors felt more confident in their roles, the story choices seemed bolder, the visuals were massively improved. If it continues like this for each season, I’m excited. A show that gets better and better is infinitely preferrable to one that starts out perfect and slowly gets worse (cough, Game of Thrones). The wait for the second season of the Witcher was well worth it, and I’m eager for the next one. Hopefully it’ll be a shorter wait.
I love the Wheel of Time book series. I am most of the way through the books written by Robert Jordan and I was stoked to watch the new show on Amazon Prime. It had been just long enough since I read the first book, Eye of the World, that I was unlikely to remember too many details. Thus, I wouldn’t be so annoyed at the necessary changes the showrunners would have to make to massage the plot into a workable eight-episode season. Having now watched the whole series, I can say that on the whole, I was not disappointed.
There are plenty of aspects of the show I would rather have been handled differently, and inevitably flaws that usually crop up in a first season of any tv show, but none of these things were enough to ruin my enjoyment and the parts that I loved more than make up for them. All credit should go to the writers, to the fantastic cast, the ingenious production designers and of course the show creator, Rafe Spall. Together they managed to make a truly visually stunning show with a whole heap of potential for the future.
I mean what I say when I call the show stunning. I have often complained, on this blog and to my long-suffering friends that many TV shows and films these days have a subdued, almost monochromatic colour palette. Visual media seems to be going through its goth phase. Game of Thrones went from red, gold and green to black, black and blacker for its last season. Every character’s costume seemed to be a darker shade, and the lighting followed suit, making it genuinely hard to see what was happening in most scenes. The same is true for countless other detective shows as well as most DC films. It is really refreshing to see a show like Wheel of Time come along with many brightly coloured costumes, vistas full of beautiful and colourful scenery and well-lit sets that we can actually see. I can’t remember squinting at the TV once during the entire runtime. On top of that, the various directors frequently used gorgeous composition and interesting shot angles, making the feel of the show distinctive to any other, and highlighting much of the symbolism that the story contains.
There wasn’t a single actor I felt miscast. Every character felt true to their book counterpart, even if the script often moved around aspects from later books to allow us to grow to like them earlier. A book has the luxury of letting you slowly get to know characters; a TV must leave an impression quicker by necessity. In particular, Rosamund Pike was perfect as Moiraine, bringing a strength of character, and natural power and authority, as well as an undercurrent of vulnerability that makes her relatable. Barney Harris was hilarious and engaging as Mat, bringing all the best aspects of Mat’s character through much better than the first few books did. The fact he did such a good job has made me incredibly sad, as he will not be returning for season 2. I’m sure both he and the showrunners had their reasons, but it is a blow nonetheless. I could go over each actor individually and tell you exactly why they were amazing in their roles, but that would take forever. Suffice to say no-one was poorly cast, and a few stand-outs beside the main cast were Sophie Okonedo as Siuan Sanche and Álvaro Morte as Logain.
The musical score was appropriately epic, and involved a surprising number of modern instruments and styles. This was unusual but fit perfectly, and the opening theme was a brilliant piece. There were distinctive leitmotifs for many characters and groups, and this all contributed to the setting feeling distinct from other fantasy properties. One of the things I was worried about was the show feeling too much like another European medieval fantasy, when the books are so heavily inspired by many eastern cultures. Fortunately, the distinctive costumes, music and the hints to a more futuristic world in the distant past made the Wheel of Time feel very much like its own thing. In particular the costuming did a great job at showcasing each character’s personality in a very striking way, from shepherd Rand’s shearling coat, to Moiraine’s functional travel robes.
I did have a few issues with the way in which the story was paced, especially given the budget the show had. Eight episodes is a very tight space to fit such a long book into. And of course, a first season has to spend its time very wisely. The first three episodes rush along at such a speed that it’s a bit jarring when things slow down in the middle of the season. Two more episodes would have solved a lot of these problems, and made room for a couple more important scenes which had to be cut. It is also very clear that the finale had to be partly reshot thanks to the departure of Barney Harris, which probably stretched time and money quite far. The fact I still enjoyed the finale despite this is a testament to the showrunner’s skill because some of the action scenes looked slightly unfinished. There are also a couple of story choices the writers have made which confused me and make me wonder how they will be resolved in future series. I don’t hate what they have chosen to do necessarily, but I think they could easily turn into bad choices later if they aren’t paid off properly, especially with Perrin’s wife Laila.
However, none of the flaws I’ve mentioned have stopped me from reacted like an excited child each time a fantastic moment from the books is brought to life. Each episode has had several of these moments which remind me of the first time I read the books all over again. Some reviewers have taken to calling the show a poor copy of Game of Thrones, based mostly on Jeff Bezos asking for Wheel of Time to be his version of it. Many of these reviewers seem to forget natural similarities that shows in the same genre usually have. They love the newest grim detective show with no colour palette and a depressing story and will rave about how original it is, whilst dismissing Wheel of Time. I am glad that despite these early reviews the Wheel of Time has been a huge success, and that we are getting a second season. The show has adapted the world and characters of this book series I love better than I could have hoped, and I can’t thank everyone who made it enough. I cannot wait to see what they do next.
Denis Villeneuve is a fantastic director. I have yet to see a film of his that is not visually stunning and filled with meaning and character. Sicario is an incredible tense thriller with some fantastic acting. Blade Runner 2049 is a worthy sequel that at times outshines the original, certainly in terms of consistency. Dune is no different.
Frank Herbert’s book has had an extremely rocky history in film. So many people have tried to create a live action adaptation and yet few have succeeded. Even the few versions we do have are heavily flawed. David Lynch’s movie is faithful, yet makes some bizarre choices that leaves the final film hard to enjoy. For instance, every character’s inner monologue is spoken out loud, and the film leans heavily into strangely gross imagery. Both issues alienate the viewer. There was also a 90’s mini-series which stayed relatively close to the books but just didn’t have the budget to do the concepts of the book justice, leaving the series feeling amateur and goofy.
With all that behind him, it is a miracle that Villeneuve even managed to get any studio to agree to make Dune, let alone film and edit the entire thing through a pandemic. The story is a sprawling and unwieldy beast that resists being shaped into a film structure. He, Eric Roth and Jon Spaihts all deserve credit for mostly making a well-paced film that is satisfying, even if it definitely feels like the start of a saga. There are of course clunky moments, but nothing that ruins the pace or lessens the story as a whole. Dune is a worthy adaptation and certainly the best one we have gotten so far.
One thing that struck me first of all was the amazing visuals. Denis and his director of photography, Greig Fraser have composed some wonderful shots, full of incredible scale. There is a great blend of close-up intimate moments, and cosmic wide shots that show the frailty of the characters against Arrakis itself. There is great use of a moving camera and interesting angles that all give us a unique view of the characters. Villeneuve excels in particular at letting shots carry on. He allows moments to breathe and so we have time to drink in the scenery or focus on the performance of the actors. As a director he trusts his audience to have patience and be able to pay attention, which is refreshing when compared to many other current filmmakers.
I have also recently begun to pay closer attention to the sound design when I watch films. Blade Runner 2049 had very visceral foley effects for action scenes, and this has carried over to Dune. The action sounds incredible. When the sand worms vibrated the desert I could feel it, partly due to the excellent sound system in my cinema. Quiet moments have clear and crisp sounds for the small noises going on in the background. My only real complaint is the number of main characters mumbling their lines. It doesn’t help when Dune is a plot with a lot of new concepts and characters. Alongside the sound the score is also superbly well put-together by Hans Zimmer as always.
All the cast gave stellar performances. I have no complaints about Timothée Chalamet; he was a solid Paul. The character isn’t the most complex but Chalamet gave him a good amount of vulnerability, which is important for the audience to relate to a “Chosen One”. Most of the Fremen had little screentime but were very good in the few scenes they had. Zendaya clearly had a couple of extra dream sequences dedicated to her in order to pad her screentime. A stand out to me was Oscar Isaac as Duke Leto. He played the Duke has a relatable leader, weighed down by the moral dubious nature of politics. He added nuance to a character that is often left as a rather one-note do-gooder. Considering the character really exists to die and motivate Paul, Isaac made him a very watchable and charismatic person. I was legitimately sad to see him go.
Rebecca Ferguson was appropriately badass as Lady Jessica, while portraying the constant worry and concern for Paul in a very heart-warming way, that brought a new dimension to the character. Stellan Skarsgård was the most terrifying version of Baron Harkonnen onscreen so far. If I had to nit-pick I would say that apart from the cast already mentioned, a lot of the side characters get barely enough screentime to shine in any way. I hope that sequels dedicate a bit more to them. There is also a missing character who I think will hurt the story slightly for being left out, even if Villeneuve means to include them later on.
Story-wise, I think it will be important for viewers to know going in that this is really only a part one. The marketing could have made this clearer, but the title clarifies. As such it does suffer to a small degree with what Harry Potter suffered from; structural issues. The build up is very long and then the action really starts almost an hour in. As a consequence, the obvious climax of the fall of House Atreides feels like a natural stopping point. However the film keeps going for another 45 minutes. While I didn’t mind too much as I was enjoying everything enough to get over it, the point of the story where we finally end up is an odd choice to finish. But the plot is largely faithful. This feels like Dune.
I ultimately loved my experience watching this film, and although there are several problems with the film, they don’t amount to enough to ruin my fun. It feels great to watch a slower paced, more cerebral action Sci-fi. It feels even better knowing the film has made enough money for sequels, which is a first for Villeneuve and for Dune. It is simply the best adaptation we have been given so far and it was a great time. You can’t ask for more.
Two months ago I released the sequel to Senlac Hill, Winter War. This short novel was previously only available on kindle, however I have released it in paperback form, so if you were waiting to get a physical copy of the book, now is your chance! I hope you enjoy.
Taking a look at the Dracula film which isn’t about Dracula…
In the spirit of Halloween, I thought it would be fun to take a look at one of my favourite classic horror films. My first exposure to Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror was at an open day for a local college (for the non-UK readers, I mean the two-year college that comes between regular school and university). I wandered into a film class presentation while taking a look at the campus, and on the projector was a truly chilling image. On a silent screen accompanied only by eerie music, a young man hid in his bed. Through a castle door, a creature glided along a corridor towards the viewer. It was a strange bald man, with long fingers and wide, piercing eyes. Those eyes stared through the screen straight at me, and I was mesmerised. It was such a striking image that even though I didn’t have time to stay and watch the rest, the film stuck with me. I asked the teacher what it was called and eventually tracked it down so that I could watch the entire thing.
Since studying at film school I’ve learnt much more about Nosferatu and the genre it belongs to, but even before that I considered it an amazing piece of early horror. I never expected to find a silent film from the 20’s particularly scary, but it turns out the right imagery can leave an impact without the need for dialogue or sound effects. Nosferatu is a German expressionist film, which means it is part of a genre of early films made in Germany that rely on heavy contrast and shadow to create striking images and fantastical stories. These films usually focus on symbolism and are usually heavily stylised. The style lends itself well to a certain style of horror. While Nosferatu isn’t particularly gory or suspenseful, especially to a modern audience, it does leave a huge impact. Many of the shots are bold, and between the excellent makeup and heavy shadow, as well some interesting locations, each frame seems to stay with me long after I watch it.
The film has an unusual history. The director, F. W. Murnau wanted to shoot an adaptation of Bram Stoker’s book Dracula. However, Stoker’s widow wouldn’t sell him the rights and so he simply altered the plot slightly and renamed all of the characters. As such Count Dracula became Count Orlok, and Johnathon Harker became Thomas Hutter. If you have watched any film versions of Dracula and/or read the book, the similarities are easy to spot. Stoker’s estate still noticed the film and didn’t think the changes were enough, so after a legal battle most of the copies of the film were destroyed. The only reason this film has become such an influence is thanks to a few copies surviving and making their way to the USA in 1929. Personally, I’m very glad that someone saved the film. It might be copyright infringement but it is nonetheless a damn good silent film.
The cinematography is not as surreal as other expressionist films like The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, but the emphasis on shadow and contrast leads to some excellent gothic imagery of castles, empty towns and dark corridors. Murnau seems to want to make the scene around Orlok seem normal and comforting; shots of nature and comfortable houses. This creates greater horror when we are taken to the castle, filled by clocks with skeletons and other strange architecture. The makeup for Count Orlok is brilliant. The strange tufts of hair, the pointed ears and teeth and the heavy eyeshadow all frame a strange face that is downright unsettling to look at for too long. Max Schreck, the actor playing Orlok has amazing eyes that seem to be tailor made for this kind of role. He stares unblinking and often seem to hold other characters spellbound. If you wanted to argue that the film is not a rip off of the book, the character of Orlok is where you could make your case. Unlike the intelligent aristocrat of the book, who looked mostly human with a few strange differences, Orlok is a monster. He looks like some kind of hellish rat who never takes off his clothes. His character is a leering sadist who spreads like a plague to Hutter’s home town to give his curse to his wife. Schreck is fantastic in the role. His expressions seem almost inhuman, twisted in hatred or hunger. If there is one plot hole in the film, it’s the fact that Thomas Hutter doesn’t run the hell away the second he sees the Count for the first time.
“May I take your coat sir?”
The film is hugely influential, having several remakes and reimagining over the years, including one directed by Werner Herzog and a fun meta horror starring Willem Dafoe. It demonstrates how important stylised and gothic imagery would be to many films in the horror genre and in particular, vampire movies. The film created a creeping tone and unnerving atmosphere in a way that no other medium could achieve. Apart from the style and genre, Nosferatu would also have an enduring legacy in vampire fiction. Before this film, vampires could go out in the sunlight without dying. Dracula himself had no issue walking down the street on a sunny afternoon, albeit without his powers. After Nosferatu ended with the Count being destroyed by the light of dawn, most vampire fiction, including future adaptations of Dracula would make sunlight the vampires most potent weakness. I think that tells you just how inspiring this film has been over the years.
This strange silent film is a testament to visual storytelling. It has survived through the years because the imagery it presents is striking and refuses to be forgotten in a hurry. Thanks to a superb performance from a character actor, unnerving makeup, strong emphasis on lighting and an eye for unsettling scenes, Nosferatu is a unique experience to watch. If you’ve had enough of vampire films that lean into the sexy image that has become so prevalent then I have just the film for you. You definitively shouldn’t find Orlok sexy, although I won’t judge if you do (I will). Happy Halloween everyone!
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69612922/Screen_Shot_2020_09_09_at_12.21.44_PM.0.png)
Major Cinephile 