emrys-948-238958 Reviews

The Diplomat (II) (2023– )

Excellent, but too much dangle

[9/10 · 27 May 2023]

This was an excellent series that I thoroughly enjoyed watching over 2 nights. It does deteriorate somewhat in the later episodes, but "the Diplomat" bumping in the Prime Minister when they are raiding the kitchen/wine seller etc. Is good stuff. There's a lot of that.

It was marred buy the final episode, which was just ridiculous. The right way to end a series is with a satisfactory conclusion. Then for series 2, you go back, find a loose end, unpick it, until everything you knew in series 1, isn't. And on from there.

Ending the last episode with a big explosion is crude and boring. What were they thinking?

Eiffel (2021)

Don't bother

[3/10 · 14 September 2022]

It's not about the building the Eiffel tower, a major engineering achievement in its day. It's mainly a day-time soap about the un-interesting love life of Mr. Eiffel. Even his reasonably interesting daughter barely gets a look in, the Eiffel tower under construction is mainly confined to back-drop, to provide variety from the over-long close-ups of faces with 'emoshunal' expressions.

What a wasted opportunity. Just tragic. The actual mechanics of the team that got this done, which would have been interesting, is un-touched. How they dealt with problems that occurred and differences of view during construction ... nothing.

Belgravia (2020)

Very well done

[9/10 · 6 April 2021]

I have enjoyed this. A good historical drama that stays the right side of 'soap', which is quite unusual these days. Good acting, good characterizations, good contact with history, credible and interesting story lines. And, my bete noir, no modern Americanisms foisted into 19th C London society. The dialogue is properly done.

I would welcome a 2nd series. The story is complete, and so it should be. I hate the series where the last episode is all dangle for series 2 and no denouement. But life goes on, there is no reason why there shouldn't be a 2nd series of what happens next for them all.

Pixie (2020)

Men stupid, women clever

[2/10 · 8 March 2021]

If you are a fan of sexist stereotypes, this is the film for you. The men are without exception morons, they might be nasty violent morons or they might be blokes who think like women (as beloved of soaps), but still morons.

The women are clever, unscrupulously manipulative, have zero warmth or generosity and are just all around nasty. The main character Pixie is not someone a rational person would want anywhere near their life.

Oh, and "Come to Ireland". What on earth for, if they're like that?

The Queen's Gambit (2020)

Best I have seen in a very long time

[10/10 · 23 December 2020]

It's gentle, it's subtle, it's engrossing, the cinematography is glorious, the editing is just right, and the ending is beautifully done. No 'dangle' for the 2nd series - a proper, lovely, ending.

BTW, I am miserable old git, I don't do 10s, but this is a 10.

The Highwaymen (2019)

Thoughtful and enjoyable

[9/10 · 8 October 2020]

I don't see why this is rated so low. It has a good plot, the historical effects are good, there is a good emotional exploration of the damage a violent life does to a man. OK, no love interest but I didn't miss it.

I found it easy to watch all the way through, when many films get burdensome and need a break. The two main characters are very successful in their roles, as is the Governor of Texas.

I thought it was a very good, one that I will watch again some time.

Squadron 303 (2018)

Very good

[8/10 · 12 June 2020]

A good film, and a serious attempt to represent 'how it was' for Polish pilots in the Battle of Britain. The flying sequences are excellent, and they correctly portray the stupid Fighter Command early tactics, finally moving to 'finger 4' formation late in the battle.

One gripe. "The Battle of Britain" 1967 started the idea that Polish (and other) squadrons were kept out of the battle because of racism. That is not correct. It was Dowding's decision and he wouldn't have them because of sloppy R/T procedure, which the film highlights BTW. Going into the battle Dowding had a very clunky radar (far, far behind German radar although he didn't know that) which meant that the battle had to be controlled from a battle control room that collated the information. That was entirely new, but turned out to be a huge strength. The battle control room controlled the battle over radio, again entirely new, one voice channel for the whole battle. If any pilot left his R/T on send it jammed communication and control was lost, battle control lost communication with their pilots in the air. The Poles were wonderful pilots and very brave, but they wouldn't shut up, they kept leaving their R/T on send in training. So they were kept in reserve until it got desperate, then we saw what they could do. They still didn't shut up.

The Murders at White House Farm (2020)

Excellent

[9/10 · 1 March 2020]

This is superbly well done, and does not pull its punches over the incompetence of the Essex Police.

Just one point. The DI in charge of the case is supposed to be from South Wales. He's got a Liverpool accent you could make tea with, on the rare occasions be tries a bit of Taff it is painfully bad. Bit it's more than that. He's an aggressive individual and he does it with that particular Liverpool style. South Walians are much more laid back than that and when they get nasty they do it in a completely different way. It like watching John Wayne cast as the Duke of Edinburgh. Just painful to watch.

World on Fire (2019–2023)

What is this about?

[1/10 · 9 October 2019]

It is clearly not a series about WWII or anywhere near that time. The social style is entirely modern, there is absolutely no respect for how women felt about the war, there is precious little respect for the men who found they had to go and fight. Schmalz is not respect. There was no Jingoism, just an oppressive sense of duty and deep fear. They knew what was coming, and they hated it.

The settings are wrong, a lot of the props and wardrobe are wrong and that is the one thing BBC/ITV usually get right in historical dramas The dialogue is utterly hopeless and bears no relation to how people spoke in the 1940, and that means that the emotional expression is all wrong too. The manners are wrong, any man who behaved as the men do in this serious would have been considered an utter troglodyte by those of all classes. Manners were important, and not optional. Women who behaved as the women do would have found themselves ostracized.

So what is it? A series about a WWII that took place in an alternate universe perhaps? That's the only idea I can offer.

The Murder of Jill Dando (2019 TV Movie)

Very poor

[1/10 · 12 April 2019]

This was a very poor "Barry George dun it reely" effort. The single particle of gunshot residue of which so much was made, they forgot to mention that the coat had been in a firearms lab for 3 weeks before it was found. They also forgot to mention that it was the most common type of residue with a 1 in three probability not 1 in fave.

Then you have the bullet. Fabricating a depleted round of this type requires skill. Barry George had never been around firearms, every gun club he approached wouldn't touch him, and shot of him holding a Starting Pistol to establish some kind of connections with firearms - for heaven's sake, a Starting Pistol?

They could have made an interesting program on this; they didn't. They just dressed up a lot of weak arguments as certainty, arguments that were shown to be false at the re-trial, which they hardly mentioned. It was very, very clear at the re-trial that George didn't do it.

This is what the BBC has sunk to..

Last Chance Lawyer NYC (2018)

Superb hatchet job

[8/10 · 27 October 2018]

The first episode very neatly shows him up for what he is. The NY police officer on a charge of discharging a firearm is not offering any credible defence against the charge, and it is obvious that she was always going to be convicted. Under those circumstances a good lawyer would advise her to either find a better defence, or plead guilty and do the time.

But no, he carries on, taking her money, for every implausible trick and maneuver, none of which work and were clearly never going to work, while she sells everything she has and goes broke. When she has no more money, not a cent, he introduces her to the public defender. He really really cares, but only when you have money to pay him to care.

Peaky Blinders (2013–2022)

Gone to the dogs

[6/10 · 9 April 2018]

I have just started series 4, and it is awful. The 1st series was excellent, the men of the British Army of 1918 (arguably the best army Britain ever put in the field) coming home and applying their discipline and attitude to criminal endeavour. It really worked.

The opening hanging scene of series 4 gives fair warning. It is inaccurate at every point. By 20th century the 'noose' was a brass ring woven into the end of the rope (not a rope knot as shown), then positioned under the left ear so when it tightened it ended up under the chin forcing the head back and snapping the neck. For multiple executions prisoners were executed in separate jails, always. The prisoner's arms were strapped behind their back to a belt around their waist, they then prepared by the priest in a separate room, lead to the gallows at the last moment, timed very carefully to be seconds before 8am (outside London). At lightening speed they were led in to the gallows chamber, hustled up the steps, the knees were strapped together (no standing legs akimbo), simultaneously the hood put over the head (prisoners were always hooded in the 20th century), the noose fitted, everybody stepped back and the lever was pulled as the clock struck 8. The prisoner was never left standing on the trapdoor, waiting, and professional hangmen were used to ensure it was all done quickly and smoothly.

Collateral (2018)

Morality play?

[7/10 · 28 March 2018]

Many reviewers have criticized this production for its heavy handed socio-political message. On the other hand if you regard as a morality play on the awful consequences of being afflicted by Leftwing, it really works.

As the story develops you are shown how this affliction will cause you to constantly sneer at all around you, only laugh to underline your innate superiority; you will be betrayed by all your friends and colleagues, and you will betray them. Self pity will govern your life, and so on. There are dangers in putting across a political message in drama, it always risks making the converse point e.g. Leni Riefenstahl who very efficiently demonstrated how awful it was to be a Nazi, although she didn't think that.

I am sure the author didn't intend this interpretation, nor do I like the message; but then Jean Paul Sartre was constantly told what his books 'really meant' when he thought they meant something else entirely.

If it wasn't for Carey Mulligan the whole thing would have been impossibly thin and wandering. Her part was the only one that really worked.

England's Forgotten Queen: The Life and Death of Lady Jane Grey (2018)

OK, I suppose

[6/10 · 29 January 2018]

You get fair warning right at the start, "The Tudors were are the most famous dynasty". Hmm, well Victoria was several lengths the most famous monarch, and few people outside the UK have ever heard of the Tudors, Henry VIII, yes, but not the dynasty. Lady Jane Grey "the first Queen of England"? Except in Castor's "She-Wolves: England's Early Queens" gives that title to Empress Maude, so the claim for Jane is contentious at best.

For some reason recent BBC documentaries, especially ones concerning women, have developed a disagreeable habit of 'improving' the facts. If you can't trust the facts quoted in a documentary it becomes worthless.

Another point. If presenters are asking us to look at them for the best part of an hour, I think they should have the courtesy to be reasonably well dressed. A tee shirt and ill-fitting jeans is slob kit. Lucy Worsley (are her co-presenters) are always well turned out, which makes things that much more easy on the eye. It is also important to pick co-presenters who understand the basic rules of TV presentation. If they can't help wildly waving their hands around in conversation, then have them tie them to their belt or something. I got so bad that one lady was waving her hands across the shot of Ms Castor - a low point in BBC documentary production standards.

At Home with the Georgians (2010– )

Not very good

[1/10 · 24 March 2017]

I rented this after seeing the reviews on Amazon. A mixture of rave reviews and others that pulled it a apart. In hope rather than belief I tried it. The people who pulled it apart were right. It's not good.

Strange to relate; when I happened to see the reviews recently, all the negative ones had disappeared, leaving only the enthusiasts. Very telling.

It was full of interpretations that are just not supported by the facts, a presenter who is insufferably full of herself, and is casually rude to some of her guests. I thought it embarrassingly bad.

Europe's Last Warrior Kings (2017)

Bland, heavy handed, pedestrian

[3/10 · 22 March 2017]

I was looking forward to this. It was dreadful.

The central problem is the style of direction. It is in the mold of 'making history exciting', and as usual with this style falls flat on it's face. It wanders between the pretentious, the pompous, and the over hyped.

All the 'revelations' which were supposed to come from an effectively new source were things I was taught in secondary school when I first heard of the Battle of Hastings. 'Revelations' that are anything but are extremely tiresome in documentaries. I thought Dan Snow was better than that, but apparently not. The only thing I remember as new to me from the whole 3 hours was the claim that Harold was killed by a Norman hit squad on the battlefield. But that was a standard Norman tactic, a standard tactic of the time, as was feigning flight. They all did it, not exactly surprising.

There was no analysis offered of the central question. Suppose the Shield Wall held, what then? Suppose the battle had gone into a 2nd day? Could the Saxons have destroyed the Norman heavy cavalry? Could they have won? Or not.

One thing that has always irritates me about Dan Snow documentaries is the liberal sprinkling of "don'cha think I'm sexy" moments. No Dan, I don't, but then I wouldn't whatever you did. And not that many women watch war documentaries so what's the point? I wish they would re-show the analysis of the Battle of Amiens that Dan Snow did with his father. That was excellent.

The Man in the High Castle (2015–2019)

Very good, but slipping

[8/10 · 12 February 2017]

I am enjoying the 2nd series at the moment and I don't agree with other reviewers who say the series has descended into soap. I'm very sensitive to the soap infection in TV drama, and this hasn't contracted it. However it is not as focused as the first series and Fast Fwd starts to be useful. Not a huge criticism. I am never shy of using Fast Fwd, and films over 2 hours rarely escape it. Philistine or wot?

One thing. Rufus Sewell as Obergruppenfuhrer John Smith is always ridiculously over made up. He looks quite camp. Strutting about in his NAZI uniform I constantly find myself half expecting him to break out in pastiche of the Monty Python "Squad, camp it up" sketch, with the British Army's finest (well, no) mincing across the parade ground. As a sly way of taking the mickey out of the Nazis it's quite effective.

Six Wives with Lucy Worsley (2016)

Henry's wives, a very dubious account

[7/10 · 31 December 2016]

I generally like Lucy Worsley's stuff, and certainly the theatrical device of having standing by as an ignored servant during the imagined conversations works well. The idea of life from Henry's wives point of view is excellent, but the program isn't really that. Rather it concentrates on some highly contentious views of the history, views that are barely supportable. OK as an academic thesis, not good for a documentary.

Anne Boleyn is presented as losing her grip on Henry and then being stitched up and executed. But it is known that Henry, only two weeks before Anne was arrested, engineered an encounter with the French Ambassador where he was forced to acknowledge her. Anne had long craved this acknowledgment - France and Spain made no secret of their view that she was little more than a whore. If Henry had become dis-affected, why would he have expended diplomatic capital on her behalf in this way. Definitely not his style. She wasn't losing her grip on him.

It is hard to escape the conclusion that something very serious came to light between that meeting and her arrest. Would the 'treasonous' light hearted conversation with Norris that touched on Henry's death (hence treasonous) have been enough? It seems unlikely. Given the suddenness and ferocity of Henry's reaction you have to think he felt deeply insulted. Proof of adultery is the more likely explanation, and her brother is a very good candidate.

Again the love letter from Catherine Howard to Thomas Culpepper is brushed off; the explanation from Worsley is just not credible. Yes, Howard was seduced by Culpepper and had an affair with him; the letter makes it crystal clear she was a willing participant. If as Worsley says "she was only writing what Culpepper wanted to hear", she would not have put her heart into it as she did, she would have written the words, but without passion. Yes, she was abused as a child, yes she was seduced, but she knew the rules. If you marry the king, falling in love and having an affair carried the death sentence.

There were other things I noticed, but enough is enough. It is all a bit "Henry's wives according to the women's pages of the Guardian"

Victoria (2016–2019)

Good, but not that good

[7/10 · 23 October 2016]

It starts very well. They give a nice insight into an 18yo girl, totally protected and kept from everything except her family, suddenly dropped into the position of Queen of the most powerful country on the planet. Not unexpected, but completely unprepared. The early episodes are very good. Melbourne and Peel are both very well done and the drama does what it should do, it breathes life into history.

The problems start when Albert appears. Tom Hughes is simply dreadful as Albert, completely unconvincing. Albert was an intense, prickly and stubborn man. Hughes plays him as a sulky toy boy. It is awful. But then Hughes tends to play sulky toy boys so it is hardly a surprise. A better casting would have been Daniel Brühl who played Nikki Lauda in Rush, but there it is. I suspect Hughes was included as eye candy for the ladies, and certainly as a man I found Jenna Coleman very nice to look at, so I don't begrudge them that. The difference is Coleman carried her part well, Hughes was all wrong. By contrast, his brother Earnest is excellent.

It also gets increasingly soapy after Albert arrives on the scene, culminating in a final episode that is little more than an extended advert for the 2nd series. It gets quite bad. It is known that Albert was not that keen on Victoria and accepted her proposal because it was his duty to do so. He fell in love her, very much so, but after they were married. That won't do at all for a soap (it would be OK the other way around), so he has to be besotted from the start. It's hard to see the Prince Albert we are given by Hughes falling in love with anyone except himself, so it's all very false.

A Royal Night Out (2015)

It is actually funny, more so than most comedies

[8/10 · 4 October 2015]

In an era where you can sit through any number of 'comedies' and not actually *laugh* (the BBC is the worst for this) this film has a number of superb lines that are just simply laugh out loud funny.

It is a touch ribald, but there is a point to that. You have two girls aged 15 and 19 out on the town in the most raucous night of the century. Girls who have been kept completely cloistered and protected, somewhat adrift in this sea of sex and alcohol. The ways that they deal with it, understand it, fail to understand it, and protect themselves are very amusing to watch.

The reactions of the very strait laced, outright stuffy Queen Mary (she was), and the rather less so King George (who had after all been in the Navy) are equally amusing.

The Other Pompeii: Life & Death in Herculaneum (2013 TV Movie)

Excellent

[10/10 · 2 June 2015]

This is everything that a documentary should be. Detailed, properly argued, and with important points to make. Some of the star points are:-

1. The wooden furniture that has survived, including some with enough pigment to show how it was painted.

2. A marble head of a woman, with surviving pigment, showing how the statue was painted.

3. Documentary evidence showing that man who a arrived in the town as a slave rose to be the owner of one of the biggest houses.

4. Further analysis showing that the society had considerable social mobility, including slaves.

5. Analysis of ancient coprolites (fossilized feces) that challenges traditional ideas of the diet of less than rich citizens.

6. The proof that a popular modern wine is the same as that drunk in Herculaneum.

Prof. Beard's recent documentary on Pompeii is very good, but this is better.

The Cleopatras (1983)

Much maligned

[8/10 · 14 February 2015]

This was an interesting series, it made a real effort to re-create style and manner of the Egyptian court. I remember a lady professor (I think it was) at the time saying it was interesting to see professional dancers translating the fixed and stylized images we have from tomb paintings into actual dance. Did they have bare breasts? Yes, the tomb paintings do, so the dancers do. Every effort is made to keep the costumes match what we know of dress at that time.

The series set an entirely believable note of claustrophobic pomposity. We do know that the Egyptian court was remarkably insulated from the ordinary Alexandrians, whom they feared, and they had good reason to to. It was a very inward looking group.

The series is bedeviled by the occasional outbreak of truly dreadful acting, e.g. Caesar's reaction when Cleopatra is unrolled from her carpet - that is the clip that is always shown. But most of it was pretty good. The contrast between the straight laced, changing to thuggish Romans is nicely contrasted with the hedonistic Egyptians. Sadly, Cleopatra is all wrong. She is presented as a sort of precocious 6th former, a 17 year old convent schoolgirl, whereas it is quite obvious that she was in fact a very tough and ruthless survivor from an early age. More like Elizabeth I than some kind of ingénue.

I have long thought that the BBC should issue the series in DVD, but 1983 was in the early days of video recorders and the rights situation may just be too complicated.