A Review of 2018

A review of 2018

Books

10. I'm A Joke And So Are You by Robin Ince
Robin Ince is one of my favourite stand up comedians. He is incredibly clever, quick and interesting. A lot is said about his work with Brian Cox and popularising science but he is still an amazing comedian. This is a really interesting book about philosophy, science, psychology and more and how he relates to these things through standup comedy. You don't have to know anyway about standup to enjoy the book but it'll probably add more to it.

9. Best Served Cold by Joe Abercrombie
Joe Abercrombie has written a number of different fantasy books in the same universe including the First Law trilogy. Best Served Cold features mainly new characters and is an epic tale of revenge taking place amongst a vicious war for control of a country - it reminded me a lot of the era when Italy was split into many small states. The protagonist gets together a gang of unlikely allies and conspirators and stabs, poisons and burns her way through her enemies.

8. The Wall of Storms by Ken Liu
This is the second installment of Ken Liu's Dandellion Dynasty, a great fantasy that instead of using European history as it's template it uses Chinese history. The first book, Grace of Kings, took us from a single empire fractured into various different states and then brought it back together. The second book deals with the problems of this new empire and the unexpected arrival of a new and unexpected enemy.

7. Gnomon by Nick Harkaway
The main problem with Gnomon is that I think Nick Harkaway was too ambitious. This is a book with at least four separate stories going on at the same time which are completely unrelated. One story, the main story of the book, is an investigator looking into a death, they live in what to us would seem a dystopian nightmare of state intrusion but the main character - and people in general - are okay with it. The other three stories are fake narratives devised by the person who died to hide what was in her mind. There is the story of a stock broker who after surviving an experience with a shark becomes unnaturally good at his job. There is the story of a Roman philosopher-scientist tasked with solving an impossible crime. There is the story of an artist now living in Britain who had been born in Ethiopia who tells the story of his life and the recent struggles with prejudice. There is a lot going on in this book and it is hard at times to keep it all straight in your head. At the time I wasn't sure at all about it but after nearly a year of thinking about it it has risen in my estimation.

6. The Storm Before The Storm by Mike Duncan
Mike Duncan has actually had a very big effect on my life. He made a podcast called The History Of Rome and when I wanted to understand a bit more about Julius Caesar I started listening. This was one of, if not, the first podcast I listened to. It's a brilliant podcast going from the founding of Rome to the last Roman emperor. It not only started my interest in podcasts but my interest in history. The Storm Before The Storm covers the period of Roman history just before Julius Caesar and tries to explain how the Roman Republic got there. It's brilliant writing on a fascinating topic and would be a great book to get people interested in history.

5. Walkaway by Cory Doctorow
I'd read a couple of Doctorow books before picking up Walkaway. He is a very interesting writer but someone more concerned with making an interesting world than telling a structured story, which is fine, he's very good at that. Walkaway felt it had a little bit more structure just from that it had such a huge scope. Walkaway imagines a future where we're pretty close to being post-scarcity with energy and food for just about anyone wants it but much of the world still dominated by corrupt governments, large corporations and insanely rich individuals none of whom have much interest in a post-scarcity world. There is a growing movement of people who "walkaway" abandoning their old lives and jobs and just living together. This is leaving civilization but keeping the good stuff like electricity and many modern conveniences, not simply running into the woods. But the story isn't concerned just with economics but describes a new way for people to live. It's not exactly a guidebook to changing how we live, after all, we're far from a post-scarcity society, but there are lots of interesting ideas.

4. Venice by John Julius Norwich
John Julius Norwich, perhaps my favourite historian, died this year. He has written brilliant books about the history of the Papacy, the Normans who conquered southern Italy and the Byzantine Empire and more. He also wrote a two volume history of Venice. I think after the fall of the Roman Empire up till the nineteenth century if you'd asked me where in Europe I wanted to live the answer would have been Venice. A city founded by people fleeing barbarian invasions of Italy on a handful of islands was not a particularly promising origins story but the rise of Venice from small vassal of the Byzantine Empire to the most powerful naval force in the Mediterranean is a fantastic story.

3. Rites of Peace by Adam Zamoyski
This is a book about the fall of Napoleon and the Congress of Vienna - the meeting of European powers to decide how to restructure Europe (and territories across the world) and to prevent another war of such a scale. Napoleon's fall is a sad story of defeat which is interesting enough but the aftermath is even better. Ministers, kings and emperors behaving like rowdy children instead of world leaders. Diplomats more interested in their mistresses and parties than in their actual job. When I read it there was so many people in it that I just wanted to shake and get back to work and stop being so stupid,

2. Istanbul by Bettany Hughes
This is a book about Istanbul, or rather the three different cities that have occupied that space. First the Greek city of Byzantion, then when the Roman Emperor Constantine wanted to found a new city he remade it into Constantinople and finally the conquest of the city by the Ottomans who made it their capital. This was a truly fascinating book with amazing stories and unbelievable facts on every page and made an excellent case for this being the most interesting city in the world - in terms of it's history.

1. Night Watch/I Shall Wear Midnight/Thud! by Terry Pratchett
Despite reading Good Omens a LONG time ago it's only relatively recently that I've gotten into reading more of Terry Pratchett and I am rather embarrassed about this. Terry Pratchett is an amazing writer and not only that is pretty much nerd central. I read three Pratchett books this year and can't really choose between them. Night Watch is a time travelling tale of doing the right thing when it seems impossible, I Shall Wear Midnight is the story of a young witch who does immense good even when surrounded by prejudice and Thud! a story on how to avert war and fighting and realising people from diverse backgrounds can be neighbours and friends. Night Watch and Thud! are part of the City Watch books and focus on the Watch's commander Sam Wimes one of the most likeable and thoroughly decent characters in all of literature.

I Shall Wear Midnight - which is incidentally one of the greatest ever book titles - is about Tiffany Aching, a young witch working in her community. Witches seem to be part nurse/doctor/midwife/health visitor/therapist/social worker so she has a lot to do. Despite her good work there is a growing anti-witch feeling growing fuelled by prejudice (and some slightly more fantastical elements). Of everything I read this year there was a short line from this book that really stuck with me - "poison goes where poison's welcome" - and this was to explain that some people in the same community will be exposed to the same problems and pressures yet not all of them will fall back to prejudice and hatred, some people want the poison.


Television

10. Big Mouth
I remember seeing adverts for Big Mouth and being put off straight away. I just thought it was some disgusting new animation and was the latest of many diminishing returns of people trying to capture South Park's magic. I was wrong. Big Mouth is a show about children who are, or about to, go through puberty and I will say it is a thoroughly disgusting show but it's about puberty so it sort of has to be. But as well as being disgusting, it is very funny, very clever, and even, very, very sweet. I watched both seasons this year and loved every episode. Also Nathan Fillion pops up playing himself as the subject of one character's fantasies and is hysterical.

9. Black Mirror
I think technically this came out right at the end of 2017 but I'm counting it in 2018. By it's nature this sort of anthology show will be hit and miss, some episodes will work better than others, but I'd say every episode in Season 4 was great, with two highpoints. First there was USS Callister, an episode that in the trailer initially seemed to be a Star Trek parody episode which instead became one of the most sickening things I've ever seen. Secondly, there is the now regular "nice" episode, Hang The DJ, where nothing horrific happens at all and technology seems to be something positive. The year ended with the special Bandersnatch episode, a choose your own adventure episode about a choose your own adventure computer game. My advice would be don't read up about it, put a couple of hours aside and just watch it.

8. Stranger Things
Season 2 of Stranger Things had very high expectations. For me the first season was surprisingly great and I'm pleased to say the second season was also great. They added a few new characters who worked well particularly new kid Max and Sean Astin's likeable Bob Newby as a love interest for Joyce (remember when a show that had Sean Astin as a love interest of Wionna Ryder would have been ridiculous?). There are also the additions who are a bit less likeable, Billy Hargrave who's only role seems to be that he makes Steve Harrington seem borderline tolerable in comparison and Paul Reiser playing Dr. Sam Owens. Owens is the seemingly reasonable and helpful replacement for Matthew Modine's evil scientist and throughout the season the question is raised - is Dr Owens also evil? The casting of Paul Reiser was genius, usually Reiser plays nice guys but one of his most famous roles was as the greedy and evil corporate asshole from Aliens. Overall the season was a great follow up.

7. The Good Place
I watched two and a half seasons of this show this year. It is one of those shows that you just have to see the next episode. The Good Place is about Eleanor who wakes up the aforementioned "Good Place" which is like Heaven, a place where good people go. We find out in the first episode that a mistake has been made, Eleanor should be in the Bad Place and the show goes from there. Eleanor relies on Chidi, another resident of the Good Place and a philosophy teacher, to teach her to be a good person. This is a show that regularly discusses philosophy. I don't want to say more about the plot but the entire cast is amazing and everyone should definitely watch this show.

6. Daredevil
It was recently announced that Daredevil has been cancelled which many are putting down to behind the scenes shenanigans with Disney, they want to have their own streaming service. Whatever the reason and cancellation of Daredevil is a tragedy. In my opinion this the best thing in Marvel Cinematic Universe and season 3 was a great continuation to the story. The third season moves onto more grounded territory that season 2 and the Defenders, with Fiske again becoming the main antagonist. A slight problem I have is the ease with which institutions are compromised and people fall into line behind Fiske, surely he's not the first person to try and corrupt the FBI? Aside from that minor gripe it was great from start to finish.

5. Preacher
This show has not had the attention and praise it deserves but I love it. One of the craziest and oddest things on television with a phenomenal central cast of Dominic Cooper, Joseph Gilgun and Ruth Negga. This season starts with Jesse going back home in an attempt to save Tulip's (Ruth Negga) life and we see the highly unusual background Jesse is from. It is weird and out there but brilliant and has some amazing set pieces - including one of Ruth Negga beating up Nazis which is a big tick for me.


4. Better Call Saul
It's looking distinctly possible that Better Call Saul might outlast Breaking Bad (currently standing at 50 and 62 episodes respectively. Being a spin-off of one of the most critically acclaimed tv shows ever was not supposed to be easy and many expected failure but now many argue it's the better show. Personally, I still favour Breaking Bad but undeniably Better Call Saul is an amazing show. One of the curious things about the show is that as interesting as Jimmy's descent into Saul is, Mike's descent from a good cop to drug dealer enforcer is even better. This season saw a crucial turning point for Mike as the show explained how Gus Fring's underground drug lab was built. What was probably a red line for Mike that separated him from your common thugs was crossed.

In Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul a lot is made of family obligations. Initially Walter White explained his actions as being about providing for his family although this was shown up later as a lie. For Mike, however, it does seem to be about family and providing for his granddaughter. Not to  excuse his actions but he isn't doing it for his own enrichment.

3. Bojack Horseman
Bojack Horseman may very well be the best original Netflix show. It's a programme with emotional depth and range of something like Six Feet Under but has lots of silly puns. Bojack's life continues it's downward spiral and there is more tragedy on the way. There is an episode worth singling out where the entire episode is Bojack giving an eulogy at a funeral.


2. Ozark
When I told people about Ozark season 1 I described it as a poor man's Breaking Bad, but the genius worked on the money side of things rather than the drugs. Describing it as a poor man's anything is no longer fair. The second season of Ozark is amazing and incredibly tense. Jason Bateman is perfectly cast as financial genius and money launderer Marty but he, and everyone else, is acted off the screen by Laura Linney who has really come into her own. Apparently Skylar in Breaking Bad got a lot of abuse from fans because she was opposed to her husband's drug empire (as if she should have supported his murderous insanity) but it is revealed in Ozark that she is far from innocent.

1. Killing Eve
One of the most frustrating things about this year was that America got this show months before Britain did, despite being made by the BBC (okay, BBC America). But it eventually it got here and it was amazing. Based on Luke Jennings Codename Villanelle books the show is essentially about two women - Eve Polastri and Villanelle. Eve is a hardworking security services agent but works from a desk, she is not a James Bond type. Villanelle is an assassin and likely psychopath who takes a lot of pleasure in her work.

When Eve realises that several high profile murders were carried out by the same person - Villanelle - she is put on a team to track her down. This is nothing that I've not seen before but it's so much better than what you might imagine. First of, it was adapted for television by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, creator and star of Fleabag, and her writing style goes right through the script. Secondly Sandra Oh (Eve) and Jody Comer (Villanelle) are both excellent in their roles, I really cannot praise either of them highly enough. Finally, the twist in the story is that it seems Eve is actually obsessed with Villanelle, and not in the way a determined detective could be obsessed with a criminal, there is something more going on. Even more interestingly when Villanelle learns about Eve she too becomes obsessed with her. This extra layer makes things more interesting and certainly more volatile.


Films

Two films which didn't make the top ten but were also great - Widows and Sorry To Bother You

10. Hereditary
Quite frankly the trailer scared me. Normally that would mean I would never watch it (this happened with the film Audition) but I was so intrigued I had to check it out. It was a very good film with some truly shocking moments that stuck with me for a long time. I know there was a backlash against it after some compared it to The Exorcist but judging it on it's own merit it is still a great film.

9. Cam
This is the first of three Netflix films that made it onto my list. I listen to a podcast called Switchblade Sisters, the host April Wolfe is a film critic and she interviews women in the film industry. For one episode the guest was Isa Mazzei - the writer and co-creator of Cam - who would be discussing Jennifer's Body and her own film - Cam. After listening to that I decided to watch Cam and really enjoyed it. Cam is about Alice, a young woman who works as a camgirl (women who perform live shows via webcam, usually, but not always, with a sexual side to these shows). Alice is gradually working her way up the charts and building a fanbase. One day Alice tries to log in to her account only to be told she is already signed in, checking her page online she can see that a show of her is broadcasting - a show she never made. This doppleganger has completely taken over her camgirl life. Alice tries to complain to the company, to the police, but no one wants to help her and she gets more and more desperate to find out what is going on. The film is a great thriller and handles the identity-crisis side of the film expertly and I genuinely had no idea how the film was going to end.

8. Annihilation
The second of the Netflix original films on this list. Annihilation is an odd but brilliant film written and directed by Alex Garland and based on a book by Jeff VanderMeer. The film stars Natalie Portman whose husband unexpectedly returns from the army one day acting very oddly. Not long after his arrival the military show up and bring him into custody. Portman is told that her husband was part of a team of soldiers sent to investigate an anomaly and he is the only who came back. Portland being a scientist and former soldier then volunteers to lead a team into the anomaly to find out what happened. What follows is a trippy, tense and inventive scifi film, the kind we don't see much of. It's worth pointing out that the team Portman leads are all women meaning the four main characters are all women. The fact that they are all women is incidental as the characters are picked as they are the best available. I can't think of another film that is not aimed specifically at women where the four main characters are women whereas that would be easy for men.

7. Lady Bird
This is the first film Greta Gerwig has directed and it is really, really good. I felt particularly attached to this film as it is set in 2002 when Lady Bird is seventeen, when I was nineteen. And, of course, Greta Gerwig is only a month older than me so something about the setting stuck with me. It also helped that Lady Bird is played by Soarise Ronan one of the best actors working today. The film is a coming of age story, Lady Bird is a teenager, struggling at high school for various reasons. She has friends, boyfriends and activities at school that all come and go and have good and bad patches. Laurie Metcalfe is very good as Lady Bird's mother but I felt - and a lot of people have said this - why wasn't Allison Janney playing this character? Well, she was busy on her Oscar-winning performance in I, Tonya.

6. The Ballad Of Buster Scruggs
The third and final of original Netflix films on my list. This is the latest Coen Brothers film and is an anthology of six western stories. Now with any anthologies there are going to be some that are better than others but all of them are at the least very good with several brilliant ones thrown in. The tales move easily from humour to pathos to outright tragedy and back again.While all the stories have stuck in my mind it is the final story, of five people sharing a long stagecoach ride, that has been the most present.

5. Bad Times At The El Royale
This is the latest film by Drew Goddard (probably best known for directing Cabin In The Woods), I really liked this but feel it got passed over by a lot of people. The film is about titular hotel, the El Royale, which sits on the border of Nevada and California so you can have a room in Nevada or California. Importantly this did mean that if you went to the Nevada part you could gamble. The hotel has seen better days and they seemed quite surprised by the influx of guests. The narrative of the splits to follow each of the characters - Jon Hamm's salesman, Jeff Bridges' priest. The film is set in 1969 and this is evident as much from the hotel's decor to what is happening with the guests so they face problems with violent hippy preachers, the Vietnam War, J. Edgar Hoover and so on. The film was tense and had at least one genuinely shocking moment.

4. The Shape Of Water
First off and most importantly the fact that Sally Hawkins now has a successful Hollywood career has been one of the highlights of the last few years - she is truly amazing. Sally Hawkins appears in a film with Michael Shannon and is the best actor in it. I honestly don't know how many actors would have the range to play Elisa Esposito in The Shape of Water, Mrs Brown in Paddington and Poppy in Happy-Go-Lucky. Anyway, in this film she plays Elisa, a cleaner who works in a secret government facility. We see glimpses of her life, we see her going to the cinema, her spending time with her neighbour played by Richard Jenkins, and so on. Then along comes the newest addition to the secret government base, the unnamed amphibian creature. As amazing as it sounds the two manage to build a relationship. Importantly, Elisa is mute but to the creature this is irrelevant, they could not have verbal communication even if she wasn't. A lot of Guillermo Del Toro's work is clearly inspired by fairy tales, as is this film, but the monster in this film is not the amphibian creature, but the human who captured it, Richard Strickland (played by Michael Shannon). The film is beautiful, both in the story it tells and the way it looks. It sounds impossible but as the relationship between the amphibian creature and Elisa deepens it doesn't seem odd or fantastical, it just seems right.


3. Three Billboards Outside Ebbing Missouri
I am a huge fan of Martin McDonagh. In Bruges is one of my all time favourite films and I really enjoyed Seven Psychopaths. So when word of his new film reached and I learned it was starring Frances McDormand, Woody Harrelson and Sam Rockwell I was intrigued. It is a film that handles a very difficult topic - the rape and murder of McDormand's character's daughter. This film is primarily a comedy but I never thought that it played this awful event for jokes and I thought it handled it sensitively. This is a powerful film and as well being funny it's very emotional.

2. Hostiles
Christian Bale stars at an army captain tasked with escorting a Native American tribal leader back to his homeland and years in prison. Bale's character does everything he can to get out of this duty and his hatred of Native Americans is clear and he has spent years fighting and killing them. It is also suggested that even by the standards of the time Bale went too far. Bale takes a team of soldiers, a small group of Native Americans and Rosamund Pike, who only barely survived an attack by Native Americans. Bale is fantastic in this film and goes on an amazing journey with a deep analysis about what he - and America - did to the Native Americans.

1. I, Tonya

I saw this film at the beginning to 2018 and it has been stuck in my mind for the whole year. I, Tonya is the story of brilliant figure skater Tonya Harding and her career, including an infamous incident. If you're American you probably know what this incident was as it became the biggest story of the year but I won't go into that now. The film has an amazing central performance by Margot Robbie as Harding who maybe even deserved to beat Frances McDormand for the Oscar. I don't care about figure skating at all and know nothing about it but the film draws the viewer in regardless, even spending time explaining just how amazing a figure skater Harding was.

Star Wars & Star Trek - Remakes, Sequels and Re-Imaginings

SPOILER WARNING - This blog post contains HUGE spoilers for The Force Awakens, The Last Jedi, Solo, Rogue One, the original Star Wars trilogy, Star Trek:Wrath of Khan, Star Trek, Star Trek:Into Darkness, Star Trek Discovery



I am a huge Star Wars fan. I love the original trilogy and despise the prequel trilogy and most Star Wars fans would broadly agree with that view - original trilogy great, prequel trilogy bad. Things have got more complicated with the new Star Wars films. So far in chronological order of release we've had The Force Awakens, Rogue One, The Last Jedi and Solo. When I first saw TFA I liked it and enjoyed it more the second time I watched it. I loved Rogue One from the beginning and is my favourite of the new films. Solo I enjoyed while watching it but haven't given it too much thought since (apart from L3-37 - from the trailer I thought Lando Calrissian would steal the film but it was L3-37). Observant readers amongst you will notice I missed out The Last Jedi.This film has proven exceptionally divisive with many Star Wars fans demanding it be deemed non-canon (and so wouldn't really count in the story) and more recently have started a petition to get it remade. Some people just didn't like the film and Star Wars is very important to them so they made quite a bit of noise about it but it seems undeniable that some of these people don't like the fact that the Star Wars cast has become more diverse. There was a joke in the Family Guy Star Wars episodes where Mon Mothma appeared and it was explicitly stated that she was seemingly only the second woman in the entire galaxy and that was fair criticism at the lack of women in Star Wars. I can think of three female characters who have lines in the original trilogy - Leia, Luke's aunt Beru and Mon Mothma. Kelly Marie Tran (who played Rose Tico in TLJ) has deleted her instagram account because of the months of online abuse she received, purely because she dared to appear in TLJ.

Kelly Marie Tran hugging Star Wars fan
who had dressed up as her character

Personally, I was disappointed by TLJ. I think there are plot holes, there are whole sections of the film that could be cut, that the motivations of many of the characters made no sense, small things about how things would logically work annoyed me. But overall I liked it. And there are great parts in it. Daisy Ridley as Rey was again great and the best character in the new films, her deepening and increasing complicated relationship with Kylo Ren was handled brilliantly, her relationship with Luke Skywalker was really interesting (I also thought Mark Hamill and his portrayal of Luke was fantastic, with Luke being shown to be an imperfect and flawed person). So ten out of ten for Daisy Ridley and Rey.

TFA had also set up the possibility of an interesting backstory for Rey, left for years on a planet by her parents who Rey was sure were coming back - not unlike what happened to Luke Skywalker. There were many fan theories - was she Obi Wan Kenobi's child or grandchild, what about Qui-Gon Jinn's child? Kylo Ren revealed that her parents were, in terms of the larger story being told, insignificant - alcoholic bad parents who sold her and were of no consequence. This has again divided many fans but I loved it. Star Wars could be seen as the tale of the Skywalker family - Anakin Skywalker; a youngling with amazing potential who was brought into the Dark Side, killed his friends and helped set up a dictatorship where he was the enforcer of the evil Emperor and assumed the name Darth Vader. Vader's two children are taken away and hidden and ultimately return to bring down the Empire and help redeem their father. Obviously in TFA and TLJ the Skywalkers were still present (and with Kylo Ren essentially as the villain) but the main character was Rey and she is just a random person who became involved in the war. Kylo Ren explicitly stated that she had no part in this story and to the people watching the film this meant that you don't have to be a Skywalker to be part of the story and that's a good thing.

Oscar Isaac, John Boyega and Adam Driver all excel in their roles - if Poe is a bit annoying at times and Kylo Ren a touch too moody. Kelly Marie Tran as Rose was a thoroughly likeable character who reinforced the previous message that anyone can be a hero. I am completely at a loss as to what anyone can have against her but that's not to say there would be any justification for the way she has been treated.

Then there are just some of the cinematic victories - the final battle on the salt fields that throw up red clouds, the battle between Kylo Ren and Rey against Snoke's guards, the fight between Finn and Captain Phasma surrounded by fire and explosions all looked amazing. And let's not pretend there was nothing to keep fanboys happy - they mention Admiral Ackbar, you see Nien Nunb hanging around, Finn still has the jacket he got from Poe in TFA and you can even see where it's been sewn up after Kylo Ren slashed it with a light sabre.

Where to start with the problems:

• Tracking ships through hyperspace - it can't be done and it doesn't make sense and this technology would completely change everything in their galaxy. It would have been much easier to say they had planted a tracking device on a ship or had a spy.
• Leia floating in space and using the Force to pull herself back inside was silly and looked ridiculous.
• The casino planet - completely bizarre sequence that while fun served no real purpose and raised so many questions about space travel - Rose and Finn have time to leave the fleet, go to a planet, spend a while there and get back all before their main ships run out of fuel.
• Snoke - it makes perfect sense that Rey kills him but I think it's weird to introduce him and then kill him without explaining who he is, where he came from and more.
• Admiral Holdo & Poe's mutiny - overall Laura Dern was really good but I think Poe causing a mutiny made sense, she seemingly had no plan. I agree that an admiral doesn't need to tell everyone what is going but these were special circumstances and without Holdo explaining there was no reason to think they weren't all going to die.
• Flying the ship at lightspeed into another ship - the real question is if this was always an option why have they never done it before? Couldn't they have destroyed the Death Star (and indeed lots of other things) this way?
• Finally, there is the big problem - and this was true of TFA - the story is very similar to the original trilogy. TLJ heavily relied on the escape from Hoth in The Empire Strikes Back, both for the opening scene - escaping from the First Order - and the end battle which mirrored the Empire's attack on Hoth. But the state of affairs at the end of the film feel very much like the start of the original trilogy, a small group of rebels taking on a mighty empire. I was hoping that rather than seeing a rebellion it would be more like a war between two nations. The First Order is practically identical to the Empire in every respect and that did feel repetitive.  

So there are a lot of problems and I was disappointed, but it's not a bad film and like I said there is a lot of stuff to love in the film.

As I was writing this blog Ahmed Best, the actor who played Jar Jar Binks, spoke of how he actually contemplated suicide because of the backlash to The Phantom Menace, which is just awful. Jar Jar Binks was one of the worst things about the prequels but that really was George Lucas's fault  and not Best's (not that he should be persecuted either). Lucas himself has previously talked about how making Star Wars was no longer fun.

Lucas directing Ahmed Best as Jar Jar Binks

Star Wars is really important to me. Films are really important to me. But let's keep things in perspective. A bad sequel or remake doesn't ruin the original thing you loved, you can ignore the stuff you don't like. It's okay not to like something but it's a shame to have something you love but spend more time being angry than happy about it.

That said, as much as I annoyed by the level of hate directed at TLJ, my feelings about the recent Star Trek films - and possibly Discovery - are quite volatile. I could write whole blogs just about the problems I have with Chris Pines' performance or how the best thing in them is when Khan is beating Kirk up*. I have seen Star Trek and Star Trek:Into Darkness - both were terrible aside from aforementioned Khan fighting Kirk. In my opinion there are only two genuine Star Trek characters in it: Scotty and his little alien pal, whose name is apparently Keenser, these two are the only ones who object to the terrible mission they were to be sent on. Scotty, rightly, pointed out that Star Fleet were explorers, not soldiers. Then there are the things that break all the rules set up in previous Star Trek shows - you can't teleport while at warp, you can't teleport halfway across the galaxy, it may sound like nitpicking but in scifi and fantasy you need to have rules about what technology and magic can or can't do otherwise you can do literally anything. The rules around teleporting fed into plots and how they were resolved and I would argue the inability to solve issues just by teleporting made for better storylines.

Then the things that don't make sense at all - why do they hide underwater at the beginning of ST:ID when they can teleport? When Kirk is kicked off Enterprise his escape pod just happens to land not only on the planet Spock was stuck but in the vicinity of him? Why on Earth does Khan's blood bring Kirk back from the dead? And don't get me started on twisting the ending of Wrath of Khan so it is Kirk who sacrificed himself.

But most importantly - Star Trek has a philosophy. Humans in Star Trek are better than humans are in real life. They don't have money because their society has evolved beyond that. On Earth there is no crime, no poverty, people live in peace and not only is humankind united dozens of other alien races have joined them in a Federation. Star Fleet, the closest thing they have to a military, is explicitly not a military. Exploration, science and helping people are seen as equally as important as defence. They worry about what the right thing to do is and whole episodes are devoted to thinking about the morality of their actions. But the new Star  Trek films have abandoned all that for blowing stuff up and lens flare. I often like reimaginings where the things are made darker and grittier but I don't want a Star Trek that is dark and gritty I want one that is hopeful, where being kind, compassionate and thoughtful is not seen as weak. Problems in Star Trek were not usually solved purely by violence but by cooperation, intelligence and trusting others and that is something that is very rarely shown in Hollywood.

I found this picture online and I'm convinced it must
have been edited to put in more lens flare

Even so if they are bad films and if they have changed what I see as the "philosophy" of Star Trek it's not the end of the world. Star Trek V doesn't make a lick of sense and less said about Star Trek: The Motion Picture the better. I'm watching Star Trek - Discovery right now and have similar concerns about abandoning the Star Trek philosophy but have been told by many people to stick with it and it'll be alright in the end. I have never tweeted JJ Abrams or Chris Pine letting them know of my disappointment and I think complaints that are limited to a boring plot, or breaking the "rules" of the universe or something like that need to be kept in proportion and not bombarded at the people who you hold responsible. Maybe save actual angry campaigns for some of the many things Hollywood has done that are really wrong and there are a lot of those.

* I tried to find a picture of Khan and Kirk fighting from ST:ID and well, there aren't any. There is footage of Kirk attacking Khan and Khan just letting Kirk hit him and there is a long fight between Spock and Khan so have I just invented this fight?

My Favourite Films Of 2017

I've decided against doing a top ten films released this year as it was getting to hard to rank them and ten would have limited my options too much. These films aren't even all films I saw in the cinema, one I watched on dvd and the other was a Netflix film. So in no particular order...

Logan

Be really careful holding his hand

This film is supposed to be Hugh Jackman's last time playing Logan, a character he has been playing for nearly eighteen years. If it is his last time then it was a very good ending. To me part of Logan's problem as a character is that he is too good, his healing powers and skeleton made him practically immortal surviving point blank gunshots to the head, numerous stabbings and even an atomic bomb, at some point it loses the sense of jeopardy. But early on in Logan it is shown that Logan isn't as strong as he used to be, his powers don't work like they did before, not only is he older, he's weaker. Logan starts the film as a driver, trying to keep a low profile, while he saves up money to buy a ship. Some recent disaster has seen the X-Men and Xavier's school destroyed and Logan now takes care of a very ill Charles Xavier. Xavier seems to be suffering from some sort of dementia and for a man as powerful as he is that is extremely dangerous. For a couple of decades, mysteriously, no mutants have been born.

Then someone tracks Logan down, a woman, who asks for his help, mainly for her "daughter", Laura, who is being hunted by a distinctly sinister organisation, and Laura has eerily similar powers to Logan and even an adamantium skeleton. Logan, who had done his best to avoid conflict, puts himself right in the middle to help her. The film is very violent and really shows what a fight with Logan would result in - missing limbs, torn out throats and more. The film shows the toll a life like Logan's can take, and not just his unusually long and bloody life but anyone who gets involved with conflict. At one point the characters watch the film Shane and we see the scene with the line, "there's no living with a killing" and Logan has killed so many. And it's not just even the people Logan has killed and the friends who have died but the innocent bystanders unlucky enough to cross paths with him who wind up dead.

In short the film is brilliant, going into areas most superhero films are unwilling to go, and not just the violence but the ideas of ageing, death, guilt and more.


The Babysitter

An odd Netflix film that I really, really enjoyed, it's a bit of a cheat putting something I didn't see at a cinema but it's my list so I can do what I want. I didn't realise until the end that it was directed by McG - which was probably for the best as that would have put me off - but looking back that makes sense. The film is about a nerdy youngster, Cole, who is perhaps a little too old for a babysitter, but still has one - the extremely cool Bee. Cole is somewhat infatuated with her. Determined to find out what happens after he goes to sleep Cole stays up and sneaks downstairs - to see Bee and her friends sacrifice someone to the Devil. What follows is a desperate battle for Cole's survival, fighting Bee and her deranged friends.It was a surprise just how good this was.

Atomic Blonde

Apparently Theron wouldn't be
a convincing superhero

Charlize Theron is one of the best actors in the world and is also quickly becoming an action superstar. Theron was the real star of Mad Max: Fury Road and I'm reliably informed was good in whatever number of Fast and Furious she was in. And then Atomic Blonde. I loved this film. I have always been interested in the Cold War and in particular the curious arrangement of the city of Berlin and how it became split between different superpowers and a venue for their war to be fought. Theron plays a British spy, sent to Berlin on a dangerous mission to retrieve stolen information, she must work with fellow British agent, and loose cannon, James McAvoy. Interesting as the setting is the film comes alive in first-rate fight scenes, and the already famous stairwell fight scene is unbelievably good. Incidentally Charlize Theron was considered for Captain Marvel but was thought to be too old (I mean she's only ten years younger than Robert Downey Jr) and while Brie Larsen will be fantastic it's a great what-if example of casting. An interesting feature of the film is that while Theron is very good at fighting she is not shown as indestructible, the film is told via Theron's recollection of events and the film starts showing Theron's battered and bruised body. While not for everyone I thought this was a really enjoyable film, if you like this sort of thing, see it.

Wonder Woman

I was worried about Wonder Woman. It's unfair but the film existed under a lot of pressure - basically would a superhero film centred around a female character be successful? Not would it be good...but successful - a successful film would help support the idea that such a film can draw a big audience. Would a commercial flop put an end to a Black Widow film or Captain Marvel or a stand alone Harley Quinn film and any other potentially interesting film based around a female character. It does feel ridiculous to even be thinking about this in 2017 when to me the obvious answer is make a good film and it will get an audience. So there was a lot of pressure. Fortunately Wonder Woman was amazing, Gal Gadot was great and most surprisingly of all I didn't hate Chris Pine. The film captured a lot of the pointlessness of the First World War with Gadot furious at the casual slaughter and disregard for soldiers lives - even from their own generals. The film has some astonishing scenes, Gadot venturing into No Man's Land and the subsequent battle being as good, if not better, than any action scene from another superhero film. The ending of the film is a bit of a letdown but that is a failing common on many superhero films but I would definitely watch the sequel.

Prevenge

I've loved Alice Lowe since Garth Marenghi's Dark Place and kept an eye out for her, she's popped up in all sorts of things from Sherlock to Hot Fuzz to Sightseers, always very good. Then she made Prevenge, a horror about a pregnant woman going on a revenge killing spree. It's worth pointing out Alice wrote, directed and starred in Prevenge while really pregnant. Lowe's character is pushed to commit these murders by her unborn child urging her on, demanding that she kill these people, the audience hears the voice of the unborn child and it is genuinely creepy as well as being "very articulate". The film is very good but the image of Lowe dressed up for Halloween to complete one of the murders will stay with me for a long time

Free Fire

Ben Wheatley is a very good director and has pretty dark sensibilities. This is undoubtedly the lightest of his films in terms of tone, despite virtually all of the film being a protracted gunfight. An illegal arms deal between visiting IRA members and weapons dealers goes badly wrong - for an unexpected reason - and all hell breaks loose - at one point one character shouts out that he has forgotten which side he is on and that is not surprising. It's an ensemble cast of very good actors - Cillian Murphy, Sharlto Copley, Brie Larson, Armie Hammer and Wheatley alumnus Michael Smiley. The film is pretty much shot in real time and while this is fun it does limit what can actually happen and I would say is my least favourite of Wheatley's films but one of the more enjoyable to watch (while it is brilliant you do not enjoy watching High-Rise).

Baby Driver

Jon Hamm isn't the star of the film or the best person
in it but he is still Jon Hamm so he gets to be in the picture

Possibly the best comedy film ever made. Easily the greatest action film in British film history. An insanely good geek film. A wonderful and poignant sci-fi comedy. These are my feelings of Edgar Wright's previous films (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz, Scott Pilgrim Vs The World & The World's End) and if we also include Spaced - perhaps my favourite sitcom ever - my expectations were pretty high for Baby Driver. And it had Jon Hamm in it as well. Baby Driver is a brilliant film but, perhaps inevitably, I was disappointed.  The film is meticulously well made and this is not just limited to car chase scenes, the matching of visuals and audio is amazing and I am looking forward to watching it again to see all the things I missed.


Kong: Skull Island

One night I chose between seeing Kong: Skull Island and Get Out. I chose Kong: Skull Island and history will judge me accordingly. Having subsequently seen Get Out it is undoubtedly the superior film, I say superior, as I did enjoy KSI. It is extremely over the top and silly fun but I liked some of the things it said about Vietnam War (Samuel L Jackson's character is clearly struggling with America's defeat) and was interesting to see Kong shown as, effectively, a good guy. I also enjoyed John C Reilly's stranded American pilot. And yes Brie Larsen was great...she usually is.

The Death of Stalin

In my opinion you can make a joke about anything, no topic is off limits, but that doesn't mean there are no consequences. You take on a sensitive issue you have a duty to think about what you're doing, what point you're trying to make, and be prepared for criticism and saying "it's just a joke" is a pretty poor defence. That said, The Death of Stalin, is hilarious. The aftermath of the death of one of the world's worst tyrants does not immediately suggest comedy but it is easily the funniest film of the year and even manages to convey the terror and absurdity of living under Stalin. From the impossibility of finding a good doctor for Stalin (as he had all the good ones purged) to the horror of a radio producer being forced to create a recording for a concert no one recorded it was funny and terrifying. The cast is brilliant but it's hard not to single out Jason Isaacs for a brilliantly over the top performance as General Zukov, no one speaks in a Russian accent in the film, with Isaacs adopting a thick Yorkshire accent to, presumably, convey Zukov's place in Russian society. The film is a triumph from start to finish.


The Big Sick

This was the sort of true story of Kumail Nanjiani and his wife's relationship - specifically how quite early on in their relationship she ended up in a coma and how Kumail has to then deal with Emily's family. Kumail Nanjiana is a stand up comedian and actor, probably best known for being in Silicon Valley. The film is very funny and emotional, Emily's parents are played by the always wonderful Holly Hunter and usually terrible Ray Romano (who is actually very good in this). the relationship between Kumail and Emily's parents is strained from the beginning, this being the first time they've met. The film is a brilliant look at family and relationships - as well as dealing with Emily's parents Kumail has to deal with his own family who want him to marry someone from their community, to the extent that they cut off relations with another family member who didn't do this. There are interesting insights into what it's like being a Muslim in America, from the outright racist comments when Kumail is performing stand up comedy that he should join ISIS (to which Holly Hunter's character perfectly responded why are you recruiting for ISIS?) to the less overtly aggressive Ray Romano's character asking what Kumail thought about 9/11.  The film is a joy to watch and I would highly recommend it, it's better and more interesting that most romantic-comedies.

Blade Runner 2049

I love the original Blade Runner. I think I have seen two of three existing different cuts. It is a great film and one of the most influential sci-fi films ever made so I was a little anxious when I heard that a sequel was being made. First off, sequels happening decades later are rarely good and Ridley Scott has a bad record with his prequels to Alien. But when I heard it was Denis Villeneuve who was making it I felt a lot better. I love Sicario and Arrival and have heard good things about his other films. Then I heard it was to star Ryan Gosling who is an amazing actor and I began to think it might it good. I really enjoyed Blade Runner 2049. Gosling played K, a replicant working for the police as a blade runner, hunting down rogue replicants. K became involved in the hunt for a particular, a possibly miraculous replicant. I don't want to say too much as there is a lot of potential for spoilers but everything in the film is great from Gosling's portrayal of K to the extended cast (including Dave Batista who has made a very successful transition from professional wrestling to serious acting). Jared Leto is suitably inscrutable and sinister as Niander Wallace, the owner of Wallace Corporation who have taken over the manufacturing of replicants, Robin Wright is a great tough police boss and I especially liked Sylvia Hoeks playing Luv, Wallace's replicant assassin and fixer. The film looks amazing and isn't just retreading the same dystopian urban landscape of the original with K at one point visiting an abandoned city with toppled statues and fallen monuments. The resolution of the film is very satisfying and left me thinking about the film for days afterwards.



Dunkirk

I am a huge fan of Christopher Nolan. He is one of the few directors I can think of who hasn't made a bad film and even the worst of them - Interstellar in my opinion - is a really good film. I also feel Christopher Nolan has been consistently overlooked in terms of Oscars (the recent change in the Academy increasing the number of Best Picture contenders has been attributed to some by the shock in The Dark Knight not being nominated) and it will be somewhat annoying if Dunkirk wins as it will add further evidence to the idea that the academy does not respect sci-fi. Anyway, Dunkirk, a film told in three different perspectives - 1. Soldiers waiting to be evacuated from the beach  2. One of the "little ships" sailing to Dunkirk to help the soldiers 3. A RAF fighter pilot providing air support. The cast is first rate from Nolan regulars Tom Hardy and Cillian Murphy to newcomers to Nolan Mark Rylance and Kenneth Branagh. Interesting the German soldiers attacking the British and French are never really shown but the impact of their attacks certainly are. The film is an amazing spectacle but the acting is also brilliant and Nolan's film is not so simple to show the British as heroes. There are moments of cowardice, betrayal, anger and worse, showing what can happen when your survival is on the line. Particularly memorable were Mark Rylance and Cillian Murphy's performances, Rylance captaining one of of the little ships and Murphy a soldier who he rescues. Rylance is all stoic bravery while Murphy is suffering from shellshock and only wants to escpe. Even if it might annoy me, it would be a worthy Oscar winner.

The Last Jedi

In the few weeks we've had since the release of The Last Jedi there has been a lot of discussion about the film with a petition to have the film stricken from the Star Wars canon garnered thousands of signatures, something that none of the prequels did and they are all terrible films and a million times worse than The Last Jedi. I enjoyed the film but didn't feel it was as good as The Force Awakens or Rogue One. I had some problems with the film but don't understand the hatred that some people have shown towards it, the relationship between Kylo Ren and Rey was very well done, and I liked the portrayal of Luke as a real person, not some omnipotent super being who is always completely right and moral. The battle scenes were impressive and there were some very good visuals, and I liked some of the nods to old Star Wars characters like Admiral Ackbar and even Nien Nunb. I won't go into too much detail about some of the things I liked and didn't like as that would lead to a lot of spoilers but overall it was good, not great.

Get Out

A last minute New Year's Eve viewing for Get Out, a film I had wanted to see for a long while. Get Out was written and directed by Jordan Peele who is not very well known in the UK but is part of a very big sketch comedy double act with Keegan Michael Key in America. I've watched some of their sketches and like many sketch shows are hit and miss, my favourite of their sketches is the discussion on a news programme between the two white news anchors and the black weatherman and reporter about the dangers of black ice, it quickly becoming a thinly veiled argument about race. Get Out is a horror film that is about racism in America, Daniel Kaluuya plays Chris Washington, a photographer who has been dating Rose Armitage for several months. Chris is black and Rose is white. Rose is taking Chris to meet her parents and at the beginning of the film Chris is anxious about how her parents will react to her having a black boyfriend. The trip does not go well for Chris beginning with an unpleasant encounter with the local police and things just get worse, and weirder, from there. At first the only black people Chris sees are those who work for Rose's family. While Rose's parents don't seem overtly racist they do make things tense, the father telling Chris how much he liked Barack Obama and things like that. When more guests arrive it gets worse. Then there are also odd things, like who is continually unplugging Chris's phone when he is trying to charge it? I can't really say too much more but it is a great film. There is an alternate ending on the DVD which is definitely worth watching with the commentary as Peele talks about how Trump's election changed how he wanted the film to end.

So those are my favourite films of 2017 and I think my favourite and best is probably Logan. There are lots of good films coming out soon I'm particularly excited about The Shape Of Water and The Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. 

Bleak Pop Culture That Is Still Enjoyable - Children of Men, Never Let Me Go and other bleak things

Massive spoilers for Children of Men, The Road, Stephen King's The Stand, Never Let Me Go, Utopia and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia

Children Of Men is a great film, released in 2006 based on the novel by P.D. James, it is about a near future where no children have been born for nearly twenty years. The world has been ravaged by terrorism, war and disease, leading to huge numbers of refugees who are brutalised by the government, with the end of the human race in sight a terrible and awful sadness had seized the world. Clive Owen played Theo, a former political activist who, like nearly everyone else had given up. Reconnecting with his old activist girlfriend Theo met a young woman, who amazingly turned out to be pregnant, and the film became about safeguarding this woman and her unborn child. Despite having about as an upbeat ending as this story was going to get the film was incredibly bleak. But here's the thing - it was incredibly bleak back in 2006, a world still reeling from 9/11 and the War On Terror but in 2017 with a refugee crisis gripping the world, Brexit and, of course, Donald Trump, it is about the bleakest thing I've ever seen.

Clive Owen's Theo barely missing being killed by a terrorist bomb

Time and politics have made Children Of Men a bleaker film, the previous holder of the title of bleakest film in the world was The Road, and it's odd that it lost it's title to a film I saw before it. The Road, based on Cormac McCarthy's novel of the same name was about the apocalypse and focused on a nameless father and son trying to survive in this world. As apocalypses go it's about as bad as it gets and while it's never explained exactly what happened all the animals and plants have died, leaving only scavenging humans, this, of course means, that once there is nothing left to scavenge that will be the end. The other alternative was, to be blunt, cannibalism and there was a fair amount of that going on. Again, the ending of the film was about as happy as it was going to get, after the father died the boy was taken in by another family. Stewart Lee and Richard Herring used to have a joke on one of their shows, about the secret final scenes of films that were cut, such as in Trainspotting where Renton spent all of ten minutes off heroin before buying more and I think The Road was perhaps another such film, where this new family are actually cannibals and kill the son but that was just too much. I should read the book and see how that ended but I can't bring myself to do it. The film was chock-full of bleakness, from what happened to the mother, to the fact that the father had saved his last two bullets to kill his son and then himself before things got too bad and let alone what they find in the basement of a supposedly empty house.

Viggo Mortensen trying to decide whether or not
to use one of his last two bullets on an enemy or save them

Bleak books are harder than bleak films. There's something in the act of reading that you, as the reader, are active in the process, whereas watching a film is more passive. I am currently reading The Stand by Stephen King, another apocalypse scenario, and a foreword by King explained that this was the extra-long version with even more bleakness. It's an odd book in that there's a lot of time spent on boring things, people alone or in small groups, trying to get to other places. Then every so often there is a well-written truly horrific event, getting into the truly awful things that would happen in this scenario. Nothing, from The Walking Dead, The Girl With All The Gifts or Mad Max: Fury Road has come close to The Stand in capturing how bad things could get.

Stephen Kin'gs level of success means his
name gets to be really big on the cover

But for bleakness in books  the winner for me was Never Let Me Go, written by Kazuo Ishiguro, the book was the story of an odd boarding school with children seemingly without parents, where their schoolwork is carefully assessed by visiting dignitaries and there was some awful and huge secret lurking in the background. Slowly, over the course of the book it was revealed that these children were created to serve as living organ donors, once they reach adulthood they are gradually harvested for their organs. The creeping knowledge that these intelligent, thoughtful children, who have the same dramas and worries of any children, exist only to give up their bodies to others is devastating. The final quarter of the book where the characters are aware of what is going to happen to them but don't rebel or try to escape was unbearably sad. What was perhaps worst was that they didn't meekly accept it their fate, it was more that they made a conscious decision that they were okay that this was going to happen, As well as being bleak it made me incredibly angry, with every page I willed them to rebel and try to escape. But they don't.

Made me sad AND angry 

To end with how about two bleak television shows. Utopia was a very weird thriller on Channel 4, where a secret organisation moved forward with their sinister plan. At first the assumption was that their plan was to unleash a plague that would kill most of the population and they are frighteningly effective and ruthless in carrying out this plan. They are happy to murder innocents, including children, undertake horrific torture and corrupt every institution they encounter. And then you find out that their plan isn't to kill most of the population, no instead, they want to make most of the population infertile. Back in the day a few clever scientists realised the problem was that there was simply too many people as one particularly brilliant scientist put it in 1900 there were a billion people on the planet and in 1980 it was up to six billion, how would the world cope with more? They see their plan as the only alternative to the wars, starvation and other destruction that would come as the world's resources ran out. It's pretty bleak when you realise you sort of see their point. It also featured Arby, an emotionally flat assassin who looked a little ridiculous but was so terrifying that even seeing his distinctive bag was enough to induce fear.

I was originally put off by the bright
colour choices used in the adverts

The second tv show an arguably the bleakest of everything mentioned is cult American sitcom It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia and the only comedy amongst them. The show is about four friends Mac, Charlie Dennis and Dee (well, four friends and the dad of Dennis and Dee played brilliantly by Danny De Vito) who ran an Irish pub in Philadelphia called Paddy's. Most importantly the five major characters are amongst the most deplorable people ever shown on television. These are the sort of people who decide what side of a protest to join by working which will have more attractive women, or who discover that an old man was in SS and think about how they can profit from this information, or sell watered down overpriced beer to underage children and convince themselves this is them doing a good thing. The show is replete with characters whose lives they've ruined, the recovering alcoholic waitress they push back into alcoholism, the child they bullied who joined the priesthood and they then convinced to leave the priesthood leaving him with nothing, let alone the people who've actually died. Ten seasons of this programme are on Netflix and I used to watch them over breakfast but had to stop because it was just so bleak it was a really bad way to start the day(it is also very funny), Unlike the other films, book and tv shows I've mentioned there is an awful squalor in the bleakness and although the show has regular flights of fancy into unrealness there is something believable in their small-scale schemes.

Arguably the worst characters
ever portrayed on television

So some books, films and tv shows for when you want to feel really bleak.

Spies and the spying spyers who spy them - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Utterly Reprehensible James Bond and Sterling Archer, and Mark Gatiss' spy novels

Spoiler Warning - spoilers for a couple of episodes of Archer and some minor spoilers for both the book and film Casino Royale

I have just finished the classic British spy drama Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy - and I mean the old tv version with Alec Guinness and not the relatively recent film starring Gary Oldman (which I had seen first) - and I enjoyed it a lot. It is quite a change of pace for someone born after the start of MTV when it is assumed any slowness in the telling or portraying of the story will instantly bore the viewer and flashy editing is needed to hold their attention. TTSS was about the possibility that one of the leading members of the Circus - the term used for the British Secret Service - is actually working for the Russians. George Smiley, played by Alec Guinness, was then recruited by the government to find out who this spy might be. With Smiley having recently retired from the Circus he was the perfect man for the job, he knew everyone involved, had the requisite skills but as the Russian mole was still active was beyond suspicion.   TTSS moved at a snail's pace. It seemed to take an hour for four people to enter a room and sit round a table. The film version is two hours long and I wondered what they had cut out from the seven episode tv show; and the answer seems to be cutting out the scenes of people moving from room to room and the long____pauses____between____people ______asking_____and_____answering______ questions. TTSS even showed people sitting and thinking; just Alec Guinness alone, thinking about things with no voice over to tell you what was going on in his head. Even comparing the set of the film and tv show highlighted the difference in how things are made now - the film set looked period appropriate but it still looked like a cool spy office, whereas the tv show set looked like the dullest civil service office ever. The tv show demanded you pay attention and it will not make it easy for you and a lot of stuff has to be worked out by the viewer. None of these are criticisms of TTSS but it was certainly jarring. The only real problem I had with the series was that I because I had seen the more recent film I knew who the traitor was. I might yet read the book.

Seriously, it feels like it takes an hour for these guys
to enter a room and sit round a table

I've always had quite a fondness for spy films, tv shows and books and it's hard, if not impossible, to approach this topic and not to mention the most famous fictional spy of them all - James Bond. I have watched a lot of Bond films but not all of them and I must admit there are lots of the old ones that blur into one long film where a villain in a volcano lair kills people using golddust while a man with metal teeth fights James Bond on a fanboat on the moon. While I think all the different Bonds have something to offer I think my favourite is probably Daniel Craig followed by Pierce Brosnan and it might only be because those were the new Bond films for me, I see the rest as "classic" Bond films. I have never really had a problem with the constant reinvention with Bond, he started off being a British spy fighting the Cold War but when in reality the Cold War ended the films moved into that new world quite well. Goldeneye made a lot of play out of Bond being a Cold War dinosaur, someone stuck in an old mindset when the world had changed around them. Daniel Craig's Bond is very much the "War on Terror" Bond, where he no longer fights countries but sinister individuals or organisations. For a number of reasons I should hate Bond, in terms of politics (including gender politics) I am a million miles from Bond - I don't think someone should have a licence to kill, I don't think the way to solve problems with other countries is sending in a spy to kill people and I don't think that if you are given a licence to kill you should drink quite as much as he does. There is a scene in Skyfall which bothered me a lot, even though I loved the film overall, at one point Bond meets a woman who can take him to the villain, and it came out that she was essentially a slave, forced to have sex with people. On the journey to see the villain this woman takes a shower and Bond joins her, and they have sex. I can't be the only person who thinks that if you meet someone who has forced to be a sex slave you shouldn't try to have with them hours after having met them. I don't think the filmmakers intended the scene to read in a creepy way but once it had occurred to me it was hard to ignore. But despite all these reasons to hate Bond I usually like the character.

Some of these Bonds seem a little bit
too much in love with their gun

I have only read one Bond book, Casino Royale, which I read after I saw after the Daniel Craig film of the same name. Two things struck me - first, the stakes were much lower and second, Bond doesn't really do any fighting. For the first point, the villain in the film is Le Chiffre a mathematical genius, poker player and banker for terrorists, warlords etc. where he gambled with hundred of millions of dollars of said evil peoples' money. In the book they play for millions of francs (considerably less) and Le Chiffre was a union boss who lost money when brothels were made illegal. You might think that this smaller stakes affair would make it more boring but I enjoyed the book a lot and often find the huge stakes some films (including Bond films) insist on risking predictable and dull. If the stake is the destruction of the whole planet then you can be pretty sure the good guys will win. The second point - Bond doesn't really do any fighting or shooting, the fantastic fight scenes of the film have no place in the book. Again, what could have made it seem boring actually worked in it's favour. Bond is a spy and spies don't get in massive gunfights, they are discrete, quiet, unassuming.


There exists a parody of James Bond so brilliant that I think I like it more than the Bond films. Certainly I like the central character a lot more than James Bond. I'm not talking about Austin Powers or even Dr. Bashir's brilliant turn as a Cold War spy in that episode of Star Trek: Deep Space 9. I am of course talking about the animated tv show Archer, featuring the sort-of superspy Sterling Archer. There is so much of Archer that is lifted straight from James Bond - he is a womanising spy who drinks too much and exists in some nebulous ill defined time period, the genius twist being that the resulting character is what you'd expect a sexist drunk to be- an utterly reprehensible person. Archer literally does not care if a stray bullet he fired hits a colleague and this is just when they're in the office, not on a mission. One of Archer's defining qualities is how he constantly brags about being a spy, how he uses it as a line to impress women, playing on the frankly abysmal efforts Bond goes to to adopt any secret identity.

But for all his faults there are things to really like about Sterling Archer and I think there are two episodes in particular that show his good qualities. First, we learn that Archer's long-suffering Butler Woodhouse is involved in a tontine dating back to World War I and because of this is marked for death. In an episode that saw Archer giving a baby a cut-throat razor it also showed that Archer can actually care about another person when he rushed to save Woodhouse. The second example is in my opinion the best episode of the series. In one episode we learn that Archer has breast cancer - the next episode showed him receiving treatment which he soon learned was bogus - Irish gangsters had been substituting the real medicine for placebos to make money. In revenge Archer goes on a rampage against the Irish mob. Originally it was assumed Archer was angry purely because his health had been jeopardised but over the course of the episode we learned that Archer had become friends with a fellow cancer sufferer, Ruth, an old woman he met at the pharmacy, who recently died, who perhaps would have been saved by having actual medicine. Archer showed more feeling in this one episode than just about the entire back-catalogue of Bond films. Also, I've not really mentioned this, Archer is a comedy, and it is really, really funny. Aside from Sterling Archer there are a group of brilliant characters around him from possibly evil scientist and radioactive pig cloner "Dr." Krieger, to rival spy Barry Dillon who although has a list of very legitimate gripes with Archer we see as the villain even before he became a KGB cyborg killing machine.

There is another fictional British spy who I think is deserving of a mention. This is a creation of Mark Gatiss, who is more famous for the things he's done on television - he is a member of "The League Of Gentlemen" and has written for Doctor Who and Sherlock (although he has appeared in both - just one episode in Doctor Who but in Sherlock he played Mycroft Holmes - a spy himself) this spy is from a novel he wrote - The Vesuvius Club. Lucifer Box was a portrait painter and socialite who lived at 9 Downing street at the turn of the 20th Century but he was also employed by the British secret service. Lucifer was a charming, extremely handsome and thoroughly bisexual hero who appeared in three separate novels.The first - The Vesuvius Club - is a great spy novel  as Lucifer tears around London and then Italy trying to work out a series of murders and a plot against Britain.

The different covers do a good job of showing
 the different time periods of the books

The unusual thing about the series is that the next book took place in 1930s America and the whole tone of the novel changed, this time the enemy were fascists who were trying to raise the Devil and the different enemy and plot are reflected in the style of the book. In the intervening period Lucifer has changed somewhat and it was suggested that the First World War affected Lucifer quite deeply. The third book changed again, this time taking place in the 1950s when a sinister organisation - Scouts - are trying to take over world. As each book took place in a different phase of Lucifer's life - blazing youth, more mature middle-age and finally on the verge of retirement it gave a different version of the character.

So that was a quick run down of some of my favourite spy tv shows, films and books, from a old and slow British drama to the animated ridiculous hyper-reality of Archer.

In Defence Of Sci-Fi - Big Ideas, Oscar Hate, Unbelievable Non-Sci-Fi and What It's Really About

spoiler warning - minor spoilers for Arrival and major spoilers for one episode of The Twilight Zone from 1960


I recently wrote a blog about the best films of the year and another blog about being disappointed by a lot of films this last year. In the second blog I ran through the list of films that I wished I had seen and one of them was Arrival. Well, I managed to see that film the other day and have to say it would certainly change my top ten of the year, right now I'd say number two after Rogue One. It's rather fitting that my two favourite films of the year are both science fiction, but drastically different films. I love science-fiction and when I think of my favourite ever films there are lots of sci-fi - Blade Runner, Alien, The Empire Strikes Back, Dr. Strangelove, Aliens.  This blog is called Ninety Per Cent of Everything which is a reference to a quote defending the quality of science-fiction, basically that ninety per cent of it is shit, but it's equally true that ninety per cent of anything is shit.

Most convoluted rizla game ever

There has been a habit of taking books, films, television shows that are science-fiction and refusing to call them that - many people do not consider 1984 science-fiction, even though it is about how technology effects a future world, the very definition of science-fiction. Dr. Strangelove, I film I've already mentioned as one of my favourites is according to Wikipedia is a "political satire black comedy film" with no mention of science fiction, to IMDB it is only a "comedy". Whilst the film is certainly a satire and comedy the film revolved around two pieces of technology that did not exist so I would argue it's science fiction. To many people it seems that a "classic" by definition cannot be science fiction, and science fiction that spoils that view is quietly re-categorised.

While I am very discerning when it comes to specific films, I love just about every type of science fiction. I love big space operas like Star Wars or Guardians of the Galaxy. I love clever, indie sci-fi like Moon or Ex Machina. I love dystopias from The Hunger Games to Children of Men. I would categorise superhero films as a subgenre of science fiction (which I understand to be a somewhat controversial position) as they usually involve technology that does not exist.

Guardians of the Galaxy - enjoyably over the top

Arrival is very much the clever big idea sort of science fiction film, it's not about space battles or exploding cities. The setup is actually very much like Independence Day (a sci-fi film I don't like), where a number of huge spaceships have arrived, hovering, perhaps menacingly a short distance above the ground.

But that really is where the two films depart - it seems that the aliens wanted to talk. The US government assembled top scientific experts, specifically linguist Dr. Louise Banks (Amy Adams) and physicist Dr. Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) to help them understand what is going on. Why are the aliens here? What do they want? Are they a threat? A lot of characters talk about what happened when the Europeans arrived in North America and Australia, how the more scientifically advanced group drove the other group to near extinction, will the same thing happen with the aliens? The film is about a lot of things and like all good alien films it's more about the nature of human beings as it is aliens. Amy Adams' performance was brilliant and it's very much her film. Not giving anyway any spoilers I am looking forward to seeing it again to better appreciate the clever things that are going on in the film.

I hope to see Arrival getting a lot of nominations for awards but I'm prepared to be disappointed. The Oscars have a long history of snubbing science fiction. Heath Ledger won an Oscar for his performance in The Dark Knight in 2009 but the film wasn't nominated for Best Picture despite being hailed by fans and critics as a great success. Looking at the other nominations that year it was certainly much better than The Curious Case of Benjamin Button if nothing else. The following year in what might have been a response to people asking where was The Dark Knight's Oscar nomination the list of nominees was raised to ten with cult sci-fi hit District 9 and sci-fi blockbuster Avatar getting nominations alongside more predictable Oscar fare.

District 9 - One of the films that benefited from wider Oscar nominations 

In my opinion Christoper Nolan is one of the best directors working today but has not received the awards and critical acclaim he should have done because he has largely done sci-fi. A case in point, there is already Oscar buzz around his next film, Dunkirk, a big budget World War Two film about the evacuation of Dunkirk almost as if the moment he moves away from sci-fi people see his films as Oscar-worthy. Looking at Christoper Nolan's back catalogue the majority of his work is either sci-fi or has strong sci-fi elements, before Dunkirk only Memento and Insomnia are not science fiction. The Dark Knight trilogy of Batman films are the high watermark of superhero films, Inception is about using technology to enter dreams and Interstellar is a sci-fi epic of space exploration, time travel and using technology to save mankind. In my opinion Christopher Nolan has not made a bad film, something very few directors can say.

Looking back on the winner for Best Picture Oscar, I went back to 1950 to find a sci-fi winner and couldn't do it. The closest to sci-fi was it's genre cousin, fantasy, when Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King won, which was surely an award for the astonishing achievement of the complete trilogy rather than that single film. So why do the Oscars seem to hate science-fiction? Well, I don't think they take it seriously, presumably for the ridiculous reason that it's about stuff that isn't real. The Oscars had no problem rewarding Titantic, which while despite being based on real events was one of the least plausible films I've ever seen, which must be something of a challenge. This is even worse in television - plot devices that the worst sci-fi writer would be ashamed of are trotted out regularly in soaps and dramas with little said about their realness or characters so unbelievable they would make Zaphod Beeblebrox look innocuous, but Doctor Who is dismissed by many because "that couldn't happen in real life".

The comparatively believable Zaphod Beeblebrox

What many people don't appreciate about science fiction is that it's not really about the future or other planets or aliens, it's usually about this time, this place and us. The reimagined Battlestar Galactica had more to say about the War on Terror than any other programme on American television, writing episodes about suicide bombings, foreign occupation, torture, civil rights, religious freedom and religious extremism, topics most non-sci-fi wouldn't dare go near. By setting it in another time or place gives writers a freedom to discuss these issues. One of the most famous examples of this was an episode of The Twilight Zone about aliens infiltrating America and how a small town tore itself apart with accusations and witch-hunts, all the while the aliens watched from outside the town, barely lifting a finger and letting paranoia do their work for them. The episode was clearly about issues closer to home in America, with paranoia against communist infiltrators hitting fever pitch.

Arrival clearly has a message about human cooperation and trust, discussing how almost by default powerful countries don't trust each other, too concerned about losing their own advantage. At a time when the person poised to become the most powerful man in the world seems eager to restart the Cold War arms race it's something to think about and shows the power of science fiction and I suspect there is already a sci-fi film in the works about an insanely arrogant and ignorant politician elected to run the universe.