Jonathan Creek star Davies bites tramp's ear

Personally, I was upset by the death of Verity Lambert and I do like Alan Davies quite a bit ... however, how drunk do you have to be for this to happen ???


By Richard Edwards
Last Updated: 2:41am GMT 12/12/2007

He is known as a genial comedian who in his many television appearances is often teased for being a vegetarian.

Alan Davies starred alongside Caroline Quentin in the BBC series Jonathan Creek
But when Alan Davies was confronted with an allegedly "aggressive" homeless person after a night out in London, his mild-mannered persona was lost in a moment of Mike Tyson-like madness.

CCTV footage emerged has emerged showing Davies biting the ear of a man in an attack outside a nightclub, sinking his teeth into him for up to 13 seconds and drawing blood before two women and a man pulled him away.

The victim claimed that he was set upon after he called the actor by the name of his most famous character, Jonathan Creek.

Mr McElfatrick, 40, a former shop worker who is trying to get a hostel place, told how the 2am attack happened last week outside the Groucho Club in London's West End.

He said: "His face darkened and he almost spat the words, 'My name's Alan. You know my name - Alan. What's my name? It's Alan'.

"Then he suddenly went for my left ear. It was incredibly painful. I shrieked and my eyes were watering. He hung on and drew blood."

After admitting to a "tussle", Davies, 41, said: "I'm really not normally an aggressive guy, honest."

He added: "I guess this isn't going to look good, is it? The last thing I want is another negative story about 'that obnoxious Jonathan Creek star'. What's this going to say?"

advertisementTold that the tabloid headlines would read something like 'Jonathan Creek bites tramp's ear' he said: "Oh God. I don't mean to laugh but that's funny isn't it? Oh God, what a nightmare."

Davies, 41, a panellist on the BBC's QI show, said he was emotional after giving the eulogy at the funeral of his friend, Jonathan Creek producer Verity Lambert.

"I was very upset and emotional," he told the Daily Mirror. "I had a lot to drink over many hours. Far too much really and a lot more than normal but it was an upsetting day."

Davies claimed the homeless man became aggressive after approaching him, and had abused him with obscenities.

The curly-haired actor said he did not realise the man was homeless and he texted his friend the next morning to find out what happened.

On Davies' official website, two people responded and their opinion was divided.

A woman who identified herself as Heleen addressed a message to "Alan". It said: "Don't worry about it, it happens to the best of them, and the people that matter to you won't take notice... Love, a Belgian fan."

However, Tara Oliver in France was less forgiving. She wrote: "Don't be so sure that no-one will take notice of it. I think it is absolutely despicable. There are no excuses. If grief made us all violent we'd live in anarchy.

"How can this man of obvious good fortune, be so nasty to someone who has nothing.

"Do something to try to make up for your behaviour Mr Davies, something that resonates, open your eyes up to the world outside of luvvydom, away from privilege and good fortune and do something positive."

Mr Davies' agent said he had nothing more to add.

Robyn Hitchcock - I Wanna Go Backwards

10/10 -

For the newbie and the die hard

I Wanna Go Backwards encompasses expanded editions of three of Hitchcock's best-loved albums, Black Snake Diamond Role, I Often Dream of Trains and Eye, along with While Thatcher Mauled Britain Part 1 & 2, a newly compiled two-disc collection of b-sides, outtakes and home demo recordings, many of them previously unreleased. All of the individual albums feature bonus tracks and enhanced liner notes, including Hitchcock's personal reminiscences on Black Snake Diamond Role and While Thatcher Mauled Britain, an extract from a novel in progress on I Often Dream of Trains, and several pieces of original poetry on Eye, along with previously unpublished photos and Hitchcock cartoons.

Robyn Hitchcock is one of rock's most prolific and long-standing artists ... and you've probably never heard of him.

Without recounting his long and prolifc career, Robyn is once again releasing some of his classic (and my favorite) albums into the market place from his new home on Yep Roc Records. I Wanna Go Backwards boasts a stunning array of extras and bonuses, but really does repeat many tracks from "Invisible" and the Rycko bonus discs. There are a few genuine extras and the remastering is very good.

If you've always been curious as to what all the fuss was about, however, this is where to start. Containing my very favorite albums from what was once the flowering underground scene of the 1980's (crushed by Nirvana and the alternative rock format.)

How to describe Robyn's music? From the late 70s, Robyn's previous band the Soft Boys were not well liked amongst their three chords punk contemporaries. They were loud enough and angry enough, but also melodic, complicated, and funny. In 1980, the Soft Boys broke up and Robyn worked on his first solo album. From the Yep Roc press release:


Black Snake Diamond Role continued the Soft Boys' legacy of warped jangle-pop, while introducing the moody, introspective side that Hitchcock would further explore in the years to come. The album introduced such enduring Hitchcock compositions as "The Man Who Invented Himself," "Brenda's Iron Sledge" and "Acid Bird," which are joined on the new edition by eight bonus tracks, most of them outtakes from the original album sessions.

I Often Dream of Trains, originally released in 1984, was a notable departure from Hitchcock's prior work, presenting his kaleidoscopic lyrical imagery and haunting melodic sensibility in spare, mostly acoustic settings that emphasize the material's intimate focus. The album balances the haunting introspection of such ballads as "Cathedral" and "Trams of Old London" with the barbed humor of "Sometimes I Wish I Was A Pretty Girl" and "Uncorrected Personality Traits." The new edition of I Often Dream of Trains augments the album's original 18 tracks with six bonus numbers.

1990's Eye was something of a sequel to I Often Dream of Trains, with Hitchcock returning to stripped-down solo approach as a low-key respite from the major-label rock albums that he was recording at the time. "I got to record Eye at a time when a lot of people were on my case," explains Hitchcock. "It had nobody else on it and no Alternative Chart expectations. It was luxury, a wide open meadow to kvetch in." Eye remains a fan favorite, thanks to such memorable tunes as "Glass Hotel," "Clean Steve" and "Queen Elvis." The expanded edition adds four bonus tracks to the original album's 17.


He's the Fella, the man who invented himself ...

Stanley Kubrick - Warner Home Video Directors Series

10/10 for style plus several million for good thinking …

Finally, at long last, anamorphic letter-boxed versions of some of the greatest films ever made. Kubrick is such an easy director to say, “Yeah, he’s a genius” and sound like you know something. But, as we all know, he really was a genius and left us some of the best films ever made.

The problem is these films are all so deep and open to interpretation that I cannot in all objectivity review them adequately. I’ll just give you my thoughts this time around.

2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) – What is astonishing about this film (and really, what isn’t) to me this last time round was the massive scale of the story. The obelisk (or teaching device) for the primitives in the opening dawn of time sequence is shadowing the human race to the point of contact. In this viewing, I felt that Dave had to pass the test of defeating the machine Hal in order to evolve into the next stage (the starchild.) Bowman in that sense is playing a character who is the most evolved human on the planet.

Of course, every time I watch this film I think different things. The pity now is that the first space shots tend to a look a little 2-d and the styles seem a bit stuck in the mid-60s, while the later Jupiter sequences look as if they could have been shot yesterday. The models have more depth and the fact that everything in the Discovery looks brand new.


A Clockwork Orange (1971) – As Malcolm McDowell himself says, there are some roles that an actor was born to play (that is Alex.) He is perfection itself in this role.

Of course, everyone knows this is a pretty controversial film. It is difficult to watch, but funny at the same time. I noticed this about 20 years ago the first time I saw it. I wondered why these scenes of horrible rape and violence seemed so funny … and that was the first time I realized that film could manipulate your feelings subconsciously. If Alex wasn’t doing “Singing in the Rain” while commiting what has to be one of the most horrendous acts ever depicted on screen, you would never watch it. Then, in the later half of the film, when justice is being served, in a reversal, Kubrick uses music make us feel bad for Alex. Alex the rapist, murderer, and theif.

This is a film more about what film can do to you then it is about the subject of teen violence. This must have been its intent because when Clockwork copycat style violence started erupting in England, Kubrick pulled the film from release. Clearly he'd created a monster.


The Shining (1980) – "Here's Johnny!"

Jack! Very few times in the history of Kubrick’s films do his lead actors seem to overtake his virtuosity. Jack Nicholson really goes way over the top in this and creates his most amazing movie role (which is saying a lot.) I don’t like horror movies. They don’t scare me; they don’t do anything to me. But, there are a few exceptions – mainly this and Psycho. Sort of the same idea – madness. Jack tears this movie to shreds just like that bathroom door.

Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, and Scatman Crothers (oh, Scatman!) are brilliant as well, but ... frankly, it is close to impossible to take your eyes off Nicholson.


Full Metal Jacket (1987) – I will admit that Full Metal Jacket did very little for me back when it was first out. I saw it because it was a Kubrick film, but I was in the middle of the “Platoon” Vs. “Apocalypse Now” argument (me coming down firmly on AN as the better film) and having yet another Vietnam movie come out just didn’t sit well with me. Add to that the obvious fact that it was shot in England and no where near the tropics, and you have a tough one to get through.

Upon this second viewing, I was pretty stunned by how good it actually was. The two “episode” feeling you get between the Paris Island basic training sequence and the subsequent “all hell is breaking loose” Vietnam was pretty shocking. Not being in the military, I was surprised at how loose these guys were after basic. You would have thought they’d be wound really tight. But, war is hell, I guess.

Eyes Wide Shut (1999) – I hate to dismiss this out of hand, but I do really feel this is a terrible film. Probably because Cruise and Kidman seem to dominate the thing so totally, that I find it hard to see the hand of Kubrick in it at all. Add to that the completely ludicrous middle section (the gothic sex orgy), excessive though not sexy nudity, and the murkiness of the character’s actions and you get something mildly uninteresting. I did give it my full attention this time through, but still felt it was far and away Kubrick’s worst film.

This is an excellent box set. Everything looks incredible and, for the fan, the bonus features are well worth the extra time.

Time-Crash

Just a couple of pics from Friday's "Time-Crash" ... and this does look pretty funny. Just look at Peter Davison's face!

No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace.

"No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace."
"No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace."
"No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace."
"No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace."

OK, first of all ... this is the dumbest slogan ever. And, these people are supposed to be writers!

I'm not sure how I feel (or not feel) about the writer's strike. Hollywood is a club (you have to a member of the unions to work, but work to be a member ...) that I really hate it. The industry is run by giant corporations instead of artistically minded individuals.

Anyway, the complete article from the NY Times is below:

HERE

November 5, 2007
Screenwriters Picket as Strike Begins
By DAVID CARR and MICHAEL CIEPLY
Hollywood writers moved to the picket lines this morning, as last-minute negotiations between the writers’ unions and producers failed to avert a strike over payments from producers for so-called new media, among other issues.

About 75 members of Writers Guild East set up a picket at Rockefeller Center, just above the fabled ice rink. Picketers chanted: “No money? No downloads. No downloads? No peace.”

Many of the writers said that they expected to be out of work for a while. The tourists and office workers who walked by rarely stopped at the curious sight of writers holding signs that read, “On Strike.” For a time, the pickets chants were drowned out by the roar of the crowd that was assembled for the “Today” show across 49th Street.

All of the trappings of a union protest were there — signs, chanting workers, an inflatable rat, and a discarded bag of wrappers and cups from Dunkin Donuts. The rat was borrowed from Local 79, an AFL-CIO laborers’ union, and commuted in from Queens.

But instead of hard hats and work boots, the people on the pickets had arty glasses and fancy scarves.

“A lot of the public probably feels like we are brats,” said Sarah Durken, a writer for children’s programs. “We are not hospital workers and firefighters, we know that — the world is going to keep turning. But I think everyone understands that the issue of corporate greed versus the needs of workers and their families.”

More than 12,000 movie and television writers represented by the Writers Guild of America West and the Writers Guild of America East walked out today, after three months of acrimonious negotiations proved fruitless. It is the first industrywide strike by writers since 1988; that strike lasted five months and cost the entertainment industry an estimated $500 million.

The sides have been at odds over, among other things, writers’ demands for a large increase in pay for movies and television shows released on DVD, and for a bigger share of the revenue from such work delivered over the Internet.

A federal mediator, who joined the talks last week, asked the sides to continue talking in a Sunday session, but neither a deal nor an agreement to keep talking was reached.

Writers in Los Angeles have also begun picketing more than a dozen studios and production sites in four-hour shifts, one beginning at 9 a.m. Pacific time, the other at 1 p.m.

Back in Manhattan, Charlotte, a small but surprisingly loud dog, barked in unison with the picketers’ chants.

“She’s mad because they didn’t have a shirt in her size,” said J. R. Havlan, a writer for “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” “She’s really angry that there has not been an agreement, but she is having a little trouble understanding the issues.”

She’s not the only one. No one, including the people at the bargaining table, is precisely sure what is being argued about, because many of the digital forms of entertainment at issue are in their nascent state.

“I can barely switch on a computer, but we all know what is at stake here, said Amy Sherman-Palladino, a writer who is working on a “Jezebel James,” her new Fox series with Parker Posey, and was the co-creator of “Gilmore Girls.” “We are taking a stand for the next 20 years, and what we do now is going to define the new business model going forward.”

Just then, the chant switched to “No money, no funny,” a reminder that many of the people on the picket line on New York make their living writing for the various talk/comedy shows.

Ms. Sherman-Palladino continued, “I was telling my husband” — Daniel Pallidino, her writing partner on the new Fox show and on “Gilmore Girls,” and a fellow picketer — “that we need some new and better chants, but he reminded me: ‘No writing. None.’ ”

Jonathan Bines, a writer for the “The Jimmy Kimmel Show,” felt that the producer’s unwillingness to compensate for digital use of their work defied logic.

“I’m surprised we are out here.” Mr. Bines said. “I thought the producers would come in with some ridiculously low-ball offer on a percentage of new media and that we’d take it and it would be over. But they have offered us nothing.”

On Sunday, the union dropped a demand for increased compensation for DVD sales, with the expectation that it would create some movement around the digital issue, but no counteroffer was forthcoming, and the strike commenced at 12:01 a.m. today.

At either end of the picket line in Manhattan, newly underemployed writers handed out leaflets that said: “We are the Writer’s Guild. We write your favorite sitcoms, dramas, late night shows, soap operas, movies and more. We work hard to bring you our best in entertainment.”

As with anyone who is trying to handout leaflets to New Yorkers in full stride, it was very slow going. Tourists look down from a passing Gray Line tour bus wondering what all the fuss was about.

“Don’t worry, we won’t hurt you,” said Andrew Smith, who writes for “The View.” “It’s hard for the public to understand. Writers going on strike sounds like shepherds staging a walkout or something. The general public has no understanding of the issues that we are facing, but we are here because the producers will take as much as they can unless writers stand up for themselves.”

The Two Doctors .... again

Peter Davison and David Tennant will star in a Children in Need special Doctor Who!



From the BBC " ... Fifth Doctor Peter Davison, who played the part in the classic series from 1981 until 1984, will reprise his role alongside current Doctor David Tennant in the forthcoming Children in Need scene. The mini episode, entitled "Time Crash", was written by award-winning Doctor Who writer Steven Mofatt, and will be transmitted as part of the Children in Need fundraising evening on Friday 16 November 2007.

"It is an honour for me to be able to make the connection between the Fifth Doctor and the Tenth Doctor," noted Peter Davison. "However, now is not the time for sound-bites. I can feel the hand of history on my shoulder, even if I can't do the buttons up!"



Of course, that's not altogether fair, as David Tennant is thinner than all of his female costars, let alone his male ones. And, Peter still holds the "record" for youngest Doctor (he was 29 when he took the part) and Tennant's portrayal undoubtably owes a lot to this incarnation. Well, as a bonofide Doctor Who geek, this is kind of one of those moments when you have to question your sanity. Sure, it's for charity, so there are going to be some forgiving feelings about it.

The question is ... how will it be treated? Will it be a joke or a semi-real episode?

Elizabeth: The Golden Age

6/10 – Nice Video, Shame about the Truth ...

Well, what can I say that you haven’t already read somewhere? The movie isn’t historically accurate at all and that is sad because the real history is far more interesting. I know many people think it doesn’t matter, but then again, many people think most of Braveheart is true. That’s the problem; no one bothers to find out history in any other way. If the movie is out (and it’s new) that’s enough. People don’t go and look it up and films should at least give some idea of what really happened. Especially if you have the mighty acting powers of Cate Blanchett playing the title role.

Come on!

No Robert Dudley … instead, the film absurdly replacing his “love of her life” status with Walter Raleigh? That’s just ridiculous. Raleigh was not in the battle against the Spanish Armada, nor did the English burn many of the ships (the weather got them in the end) … I mean, they didn’t even get the Tilbury speech right, leaving out her most famous line of rhetoric (of possibly the first great speech in modern English)

"I know I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a King, and of a King of England too! And I think it foul scorn that Spain or Parma or any prince of Europe should dare invade the borders of my realm".

For all that, it is well realized and filmed beautifully.

So, I’m one of those annoying people who think that history is actually more important than a good story. In this case, there truly is no excuse for it as the history of Elizabeth I has been such good source material for many, many adaptations. In the last two years we’ve seen two different (and far superior) television adaptations. The BBC’s “The Virgin Queen” is best one I’ve seen and seems pretty historically accurate, while the Helen Mirren version is merely OK. She may have gotten Elizabeth II right, but nowhere close on the original.

I’ve read Antonia Frasier’s biography and I will tell you, for those that are interested … it is very readable, interesting, and frankly relevant even now and to Americans, as well. America is an extension of English history, just as England is of ours. It’s important to know where we come from.

Random Notes at the Beginning of a Season …

Heroes – Season Two

Aintitcool.com has a headline that reads “Can Sylar save Heroes?”

The answer is, it seems, no.

The first three episodes of season 2 seem resolutely determined to undo all the damage that the ending of season one did – namely kill off a lot of characters and change the entire direction of the program. Unlike the truly twisted twists of “Lost,” “Heroes” doesn’t feel designed to be that kind of animal and now we are finding out just how a heavy story arc can damage a new season of a television program. So, all the characters we thought were dead in the big epic battle are not … and then we have some new characters that seem very, well, uninteresting to say the least.

If it sounds like I’m being harsh, well, I’m not. The new era of television is much improved over the crass awfulness of the 1990’s. I can honestly say I don’t remember a time when TV seemed so good. The shows I watch now are an odd assortment and come from all sorts of places:

- “Heroes”
- “House”
- “Boston Legal”
- “The IT Crowd” (just ended)
- “Sarah Jane’s Adventures”
- “Doctor Who”
- “QI”
- “Dexter”
- “Weeds”
- “24”
- “Lost”

That’s actually quite a bit for right now and are in no particular order. Compare that to the 1990s when I was actively avoiding shows because I found them particularly crass and aggravating. Even the end of the 80s saw even my favorite shows (“Doctor Who” and “Star Trek”) bastardized and cheapened to extremes. In fact, with the death of the Next and Previous Generations of the original Star Trek, it seems that some cool breeze is blowing back into the world of entertainment.

So, that is my ramble. I didn’t give away any “spoilers” as such.

The IT Crowd – Season Two

Well, let’s face it … it was a disappointment. Not only did season two NOT do anything that writer Graham Linehan claim it was going to do in the commentary tracks (plural) of season one, but it utterly failed to deliver even on the most basic expectations of its own premise. It was … oh, I don’t know … almost like Graham was too pre-occupied making some other show in another country like America to be bothered with writing something worthwhile. (Yes, that’s a joke. Development of the US It Crowd is well underway and will, no doubt, remove any qualities from the original series worth seeing.)

But, still it wasn’t as bad as say … the American version of the Office. The beauty or should I say simplicity of “the IT Crowd” is the surrealistic tone of the show and sometimes that still shines through quite well in season two. It seems, as with Black Books, Linehan has trouble sticking to the reality of his premises and that is his virtue. Sometimes it is his weakness, but mostly a virtue. Let’s face it, how many geek/IT jokes can you squeeze out before it gets tired or worse, hateful?

So, instead of reprising the set-up of the IT department as social outcasts, the first episode finds them all off on Jen’s date with a man who may or may not be gay. He knows people in a musical … called “Gay” … and by the end of the episode sees Roy in a wheelchair being hauled off to Manchester with gay cripples, Moss working as a bartender in the theater, and Jen’s potential date admitting he’s gay and saying, “I thought it would work … since you look like a man!”

The other stellar episode is “the Dinner Party” where Jen has to invite the IT department gang (including the goth Richmond) to replace three men for her couples dinner party. Each is paired up – Richmond is paired off successfully with a rather socially awkward woman who makes comments on how socially awkward things are, Roy with a super model who’s been in an horrific car crash, and most strangly, Moss with an alocholic lush who is so convincing as a divorcee that Moss thinks he needs to divorce her (despite the fact that he isn’t married.) Richmond has a tremendously funny spider-man moment and Jen’s new boyfriends turns out to be named – Peter File – with rather hilarious consequences.

But, in the end, the series of six ended and it seemed like it wasn’t really over. Worse, there isn’t any assurance that there will be a series 3. Like Coupling before it, there is a suspension of activity surrounding the program due to the possible success of an American(ized) version … which is just simply not going to go in the same direction. In fact, the entire premise will no doubt ground the show back to “let’s make fun of geeks” and leave the surrealness on the floor. Richmond certainly won’t be in it. And, even though Richard Ayoade has been brought over to play Moss, this too totally reeks of the dreadful “Red Dwarf” pilots attempted in the U.S. … I predict an instant death, mostly because even the few sentence description on the NBC site doesn’t seem to understand the point of the program

http://www.nbc.com/Fall_Preview/The_IT_Crowd/cast_credits.shtml

And, this is sad, because we’ll have to wait for Graham Linehan to come to his senses again and write a series three of the “good” version …

if....

Criterion brings us another classic here with Lindsey Anderson’s “if ….”. Starring Malcolm McDowell as Mick Travis (in his first major role) the film is set in the God Awful world of the British boy’s school. Here is, I must say, first hand why I would not wish to have grown up in England. Appearantly Anderson’s depiction of this world is so complete and realistic, that the public and even the actors and crew found some of it almost primordially terrifying. This world of “authority” and “class structure” is so thoroughly despicable and demonstrably bad, even the horrific ending seems somehow justifiable.

Mick Travis arrives at school after his summer break and, with his friends, set about being the school trouble makers. The film is broken into episodic sequences with titles (very similar to what Monty Python would later do in “The Meaning of Life”) and then further broken down into realms of hyper reality and surreal unreality. The film switches between color and black and white (because they ran out of money … though some on the dvd that it was because it was too difficult to light the school in time) to great affect. It is, as with so many things of the late 60s, informed coincidence. Once Anderson knew he would have to film in black and white, it is incorporated into the narrative to give us distance during the more dream-like sequences, while the color comes back to provide us with reality.

The film is best remembered for two sequences. The first is the beatings that Mick and his cohorts received (as object lessons because of their attitudes.) Mick is the only one who is actually shown being beaten and, as the leader, he is given more than his friends. This is a pivotal moment when the viewer knows … something will have to happen. And, it does. During another punishment cleaning out the storage areas, Mick and his friends discover all the live amunition that the school uses for military training … and they decide to go up to the roof and shoot everyone, including the head master. It is a startling ending even now, but at the time it rang everyone’s bell – positively or negatively. Before the film even reached the theaters, the Paris riots exploded in 1968 making the masacre far more realistic than it was initially thought to be.

As usual, Criterion are really putting in some good work and you can bet any dvd that lists a bonus feature called “Graham Crowden Interview” is going to be very high on my list. The main bonus feature is an interview show (with Kirsty-Dead Ringers Loves you baby-Wark) with many of the principle crew and some location interview footage with Malcolm McDowell (who says it made his career.) The film itself looks good, considering how it was made. The sound is a bit chaotic and uneven. I found myself turning the volume up and down a few times during the piece.

Frankly, this is a very 60s film in a lot of respects, but unlike things like “Blow Up” or “Alfie,” it doesn’t necessarily seem so rooted in its time. In fact, the school system depicted is so backward that you could be forgiven for thinking it takes place just after World War I. And for that timeless quality, “if….” Remains very powerful.

Sarah Jane Adventures - Revenge of the Slitheen

Well ... er, it's Slitheen and Sarah Jane. Equals farting school headmaster. I mean the math is simple enough. What I truly don't understand is why this is actually better than the blatantly over-hyped (and more expensive) Torchwood. It's stupid, childish, and all those other words you can think to describe it. In fact, it makes K-9 and Company look like I-fucking-Claudius!

It is EXACTLY everything you expect. We knew the title, and even if you didn't, that's the first thing you see, so no surprises. Sarah's surrounded by children ... so school is kind of an obvious start ... A strange remake or mish-mash of School Reunion and WWIII ... with cheaper costumes and a lower budget. And, yet ... even though I'm very tired from a long day of stuff (a 12 hour one, almost) I still watched it all the way through. Honestly ... whatever it is that fuels the new Doctor Who with energy is present in the show (again, the way it is not in Torchwood.)




And, perhaps that is the reason ... the ultimate reason why Doctor Who really works ... when you compare the two spin-offs: the family and child oriented program fairs better than the unbridled sci-fi-fuck-fest. It's not really nostalgia that brings the audiences to Sarah Jane (it's a children's show full-on.) So, clearly the mixture of adult-to-children themes favors the child in us all.

Lesson to Mr. Davies.

Yes, definitely not Doctor Who. But ... not Torchwood.

Peter Askew T-Shirts

The Peter Askew T-shirt is ready for your enjoyment. Promote the book, be a walking billboard ... for me.

http://www.cafepress.com/Landru




If you have read the book, please visit Amazon.com and leave a review. I would like to myself, but that isn't really fair is it?

Random Task

Well, the weekend was a bit lame. I watched the first few James Bond films and they are fun. I will admit that I have mixed feelings about the franchise. Even the first few films, while great, are a sometimes too outrageous to believe. Not just the outrageousness of the plots and gadgets, but the sexism. I realize that these films were meant to be viewed as “adult” but they seem as adult as cartoon women in comic books. It’s a special brand of male chauvinism that comes from adolescent fantasy.

Admittedly, I will watch Bond movies when I just don’t want to do anything at all and can’t bother to think. There is a reassurance in them for children of the 70s. Those ABC Sunday night movie events are a part of the landscape of my childhood. I remember sneaking out to the hall and watching the premier of “You Only Live Twice” in the early 70s (being past my bedtime) and loving the whole gyrocopter sequence. Or later actually sitting through the whole of “Goldfinger” and being certain that it was the greatest film ever made. It really isn’t, but it is good. I still can’t sit through “Diamonds are Forever.” I have no idea why. Sean is back, but the film just seems so at odds with the James Bond culture.

Doctor No – 8
From Russia With Love – 9
Goldfinger – 10
Thunderball – 6
You Only Live Twice – 7
On Her Majesty’s Secret Service – 5
Diamonds are Forever – 4

“How Do You Want Me” – watched this short-lived late 90s series starring Dylan Moran. Wow, just so dreadful and hard to sit through. It just wasn’t funny and the sort of dry, dead humor that centers around the main character going through pure Hell. It was produced with such on odd sensibility. They clearly didn’t know what to do with Dylan Moran (who is, in my opinion, one those unique comedy voices that come along every generation), the sound track (and ghostly harmonica and toneless dreadful theme tune), and just a general malaise about the whole piece. Even though it was only 6 episodes, it felt like struggle to watch.

“The IT Crowd” – after that I rewatched the episodes of season 2 thus far and I have to say … it’s still really great. Sure, it’s a sitcom and is very silly sometimes, but there is something really likable about all the characters (especially Moss and Richmond.) I laughed and laughed. I then rewatched the season one dvd and laughed and laughed. Frankly, the real sad part of this show is knowing that there will be an American version (like the Office) that will completely erode the original.

But, this cheered me up a lot on Sunday and I was feeling a bit more normal.

James Bond “Casino Royale” and “Live and Let Die”

I’ve been reading the original Ian Fleming James Bond novels in the original book order. Far less preposterous then the film version, but no less misogynist and racist, the books do give the reader a better glimpse of a hero that has, arguably, gone on to cast a massive shadow in both post-war literature and film. In fact, other than the Beatles, James Bond is Great Britain’s greatest export. Even watching the films is worthy of writing about, but let’s take a step even further back in time to look at Ian Fleming’s books.




Beginning in 1953 with “Casino Royale” (exasperatingly the last film in the series to date … but there is tons about that story on the internet) Royale does an early mystery genre (was spy thriller even a genre in ’53?) does best: sets up the characters, plots, and motivations. With James Bond in book form we are not given a character we have come to know from the films (no matter which actor plays him.) He is described as brutal and harsh, takes great pleasure in little details because he never knows when he might die, has a scar down the side of his face. There is very little of the debonair bon vivon, but more of a man of the edge of death.

If you’ve seen the film, then you know that the plot essentially revolves around Bond trying to outplay an international agent (in the book working for the Russians) to ruin and discredit him. The central action of the novel is in the casino and hotel, with the rather cruel torture happening just outside of the vascinity. The end seems a bit quick, but oddly leads us on to the next story (even though, at the time, Fleming had not thought to write one.)

“Live and Let Die”


1954 saw the character return and this one is kind of a powder keg if you don’t read it with the right eyes. The racism of the 1950s is really right up front as Bond journeys through the black underworld of Harlem, down to St. Petersburg, then on to Jamaica. Most of the film version is radically different than the book, but there are still a great many similarities. Bond never seems to be quite as racist as the book’s author (the, pardon me ... “nigger” descriptions are rather constant and there is even a chapter called “Nigger Heaven.”) But, I say Bond isn’t racist because he never seems to use the term and is in fact very much in awe of Mr. Big.

Mr. Big is running a rather sophisticated operation of removing buried treasure from Jamaica, getting it through customs in St. Petersburg, FL, and up into Harlem. Bond arrives in New York and is instantly embroiled in Mr. Big’s massive black spy network throughout Harlem. This is where Mr. Big puts the first squeeze on Bond, breaking his finger (Bond kills three of his guys in return.) Mr. Big’s power is largely created through his supposed voodoo connections and the superstitions of others. His affect is so powerful that even Bond gets a little freaked out (especially after his CIA pal Felix Leiter is disfigured in Florida.)

Since I used to live in the Tampa Bay area, I found the descriptions of the area remarkably similar to those I’d known in the 70’s and 80’s.


I’m currently reading “Moonraker” and it is far less ridiculous than the eventual film …

Peter Askew hits Amazon

Well, here is the weirdest site I've seen in a while. Peter Askew on Amazon.com.

Buy it HERE

I know its a self-published book and I literally paid to get it on Amazon, but it still feels like its out there. I don't know how to promote it, but its there ...

Heroes – Season One

Heroes – Season One

OK, first of all I don’t have HD yet and probably will be one of the last to do so. It’s just a question of waiting until the technology is right. (Hey, at least I have an ipod.) Point is I cannot review the HD version of “Heroes” which apparently has some different bonus features. But, then again … I didn’t really watch the bonus features. Lately I’ve come to think a lot of bonus features are kind of lame. Actually, I hate several things about DVDs … the first one is menus … hate menus … the second is non-anamorphic behind the scenes featurettes that last about 4 minutes and talk about nothing … the third thing is … well, let’s face it, we already know where going to buy this crap again.

So, really let’s talk content. The series “Heroes” turned out to be quite a crazy, albeit intermittent ride this last year. I think it off the air more than it was actually on the air, but in the Tivo age that means you can catch up during baseball playoffs or whatever. Re-watching the series in its entirety I was afraid that it wouldn’t hold up as an overall story. Its patchwork attitude seemed to be a bit too much “make it up as you go” but I was impressed that, overall, the series does hold up well. Sure, there are a few massive plot problems that don’t make sense (like what the “company” actually does, did do, who runs it, and why?) and there are many times during the series when a big cliffhanger is set-up only to be put off for a week while we wonder around endlessly with Nicky and Mica or Claire. But, again, it’s all part of a larger picture. When viewed as a whole, the season seems to work. It makes a kind of sense.

Again, as usual, I’ll skip a lot of the plot. You can look that up anywhere. My favorite moments of the series where generally the Hiro and Ando segments – especially “Five Years Gone” and “Landslide.” If someone had said to me ten years ago that there would two major characters on a primetime network show speaking almost exclusively in Japanese, I’d have said they were crazy.



George Takai as Hiro’s father (showing up in the same episode Christopher Eccleston pops up in) was a laugh out loud, “oh, look at his license plate” moment (the plate was the Enterprise registration.) Christopher Eccleston’s appearance seems to elicit the same fan gene response (he says “fantastic” and the word regenerate is used and an episode is called “Run!”) However, both characters become their own after the “geek” homage moment seems to pass. Takai especially redeems himself in “Landslide” during Hiro’s Kensei masters session.

In fact, there isn’t a single character that doesn’t undergo some sort of change. What is a question, however, is how the next season will even … work. It appears some of the cast are dead and the mystery is certainly out of the bag … Can Heroes survive a second season?

Strange Days

Currently reading “Break on Through: The Life and Death of Jim Morrison” by James Riordan and Jerry Prochnicky.



Yet another biography of Jim Morrison. I know, I know. I read “No One Here Gets Out Alive,” I’ve read Desnmore’s book, and I’ve read the not too great “Jim Morrison: Life, Death, Legend” by Stephen Davis. I even have, but haven’t fully read, Manzarek’s rather biased book. So, why bother digging into the very old story of the Lizard King again? What’s new? He’s still dead.

Well, I guess that depends on where you stand with old Jimbo. Frankly, the Doors are a band you either love or hate. Seems to be no middle ground with them. It all comes down to Jim. And, the authors – after a very long and frankly fictional account of Jim’s trial by fire on the rooftop after UCLA film school (or his “dance with the spirits”) – admit that he was a dual personality and split opinions right down the middle. The minute the Doors hit the scene that was the case. Those that hate the band tend to do so on very superficial grounds (Jim’s looks, the dated organ sound, the pretentious poetry.) The fact is they aren’t that bad. Those that love the band tend to go with flights of outrageous fancy (electric shamanism, possessed by ghosts of dead Indians.) The fact is … they weren’t that great (cause its absurd.)

Finding the middle ground and the true facts about the Doors and Jim Morrison is difficult if not impossible based on the lies and mythos applied to them by these various factions. But, one thing is totally clear – 40 years after appearing on the music scene The Doors are still one of the biggest American rock bands of all time. The music, if you like it, is so strange and dramatic that it often seems hard to believe that the band weren’t created by a super-manager. In fact, they luck factor and reliance on “vibe” or whatever is so prevelant within the groups formation and their sound that it isn’t any wonder why fans often ascribe supernatural qualities to the Doors and, in particular, Jim Morrison … who, it must be said, is the absolute perfect frontman for any band.

Riordan and Prochnicky seem to be doing a good job of balancing the yin and yang of the Morrison myth and fact. I read a good chunk of this last night while listening to the newest archive concert recording “Live in Boston.”




Recorded in 1970 during the many recorded gigs for the “Absolutely Live” album (which means, though it was Absolutely Live … it wasn’t absolutely the same show) many bits clearly are taken from the two shows presented here. It is also very clear why this has been held back in favor of many of the other archival shows … the technical quality varies. It seems to vary during the first disc … clearly getting better. What is also true is that these shows were really good doors gigs. Fresh from his Miami bust and ban … then a decent success with “Morrison Hotel” the band seem to be looking for a new way to do things. While I think some of these later gigs do not stand up to something like the Hollywood Bowl show, the Amsterdam TV show, or “The Doors are Open” Roundhouse gigs in ’68 … it is only because the mood and attitude of the band are different. No longer playing with dramatic tension of image and audience, the band at this stage was redefining its own image and getting back to a grounding with the audience.

Obviously, if you hate the Doors, then the essential live tracks “When the Music’s Over” and “Light My Fire” will drive you mad, but as a fan these tracks almost always seem to work (even if I am a bit sick of “Light My Fire” I still know when that first snare snap will hit.) Well worth a listen.

I went to the same junior college Morrison went to: St. Petersburg Junior College and hung around those old stone buildings and the library where he must have been (they certainly weren’t very modern when I was there.) He was there in early 60s and I was there in the early 90s. In fact, I was there when the movie came out. And even though I’ve been to other schools, no school has left such a indelible image upon me. It was probably because I was dying to get the hell out of there and away. My life was on hold, much the way Morrison’s was during his time there 30 years before.

And, much like those dead Indians dying beside the road, I think Morrison’s soul leaped into my childish eggshell mind.

Well, maybe only a little. ;)

"The Bourne Ultimatum" and "The Simpsons Movie"

Catch up ... a few more today. Some brief thoughts on them (in no particular order).

The Bourne Ultimatum (8/10)



Matt Daman is back as Jason Bourne in the 3rd installment of the thriller series. CIA trained assassin whose lost his memory but not his touch, Bourne is still struggling with inner demons and an even deeper mystery about his origins. Like all the Bourne movies, the plot is fairly high octane without being too moronic or preposterous. It has some slick action and usually at lease one “gotcha” moment. In many ways, this film is superior to “The Bourne Supremacy” as it fills in much of the time gap at the end of that previous film and doesn’t saddle us a lot of the emotional baggage Marie’s death did in the 2nd film.

The Simpsons Movie (6/10)

The problem I have with the Simpsons as a feature is quite simple … after 23 minutes you can’t help but think “Hey, when is this episode going to end.” Still, there plenty of good gags … as only big money and Harvard graduates can deliver …

INLAND EMPIRE

OK, I admit it; I never really liked David Lynch or his films. There was a brief period of time when I liked or tried to like “Wild at Heart” because it at least had a sense of humor, but even that has worn very thin over the years. For his die hard fans, I’m sorry, but his latest is easily the most obnoxious, pretentious, unintelligible thing I’ve ever forced myself to sit through. There is really no excuse for this exercise in confusion.

What is this film about?

OK, er ... Laura Dern is an actress who gets a part in a cursed movie … and then all hell breaks loose. There are sequences of a Polish prostitute, a sitcom staring very stoic man-sized bunny rabbits, and Dern drifting between many parts (or what appear to be other parts) in a nonstop confusion of cheap stunts and general freakiness.



To say this is overrated isn’t fair because no one seems to know about it, but the reviews seem generally to support Lynch in his bid to be as insane as he can without having to give us any allegory or story to invite us into his twisted mind. Worse still is the use of rather cheap digital cameras to get the film. Are we saving money or losing our ability to get it, one asks. Dern is here, then she is there … she’s a hooker, she’s a movie star, she’s housewife to a Russian circus star …

Lynch’s only explanation of the film is … in the form of a quote from the Upanishad: "We are like the spider. We weave our life and then move along in it. We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives in the dream. This is true for the entire universe."

Sadly, even a spider has to live in linear time and only has one life.

Escape from ... not doing anything

Updates

Well, I haven’t been keeping up with this blog the way I should. I sort of realized that I am not the best person to write about media. I guess I’ve known it for years, knowing that it takes a special person to write record and movie reviews. The one that my friend Julie let me write for the Soft Boys reunion album “Nextdoorland” is pretty pretentious and a little fanboy-ish. I realize this now. I am the creator and therefore not qualified to critique as well as I’d like.

Be that as it may, I shall proceed here. Why? Well, it is a good place to keep up with the “media” or art that I perceive in my daily life. I know that any time I’m asked to give influences or say what inspired something else, there is a moment when my mind tries to draw all the points of influence together … recent and long-remembered … and vainly attempt to put together some sort of star map that would explain things.

… so, let’s try and get back on track.


“Escape from New York”



There has been a lot written about this little classic. Produced independently, starring Kurt Russell in his post-child star attempt to change his image, with “Halloween” and “The Fog” director John Carpenter also wishing to shed his horror film director image – “Escape” succeeds in giving us the first real post-apocalyptic vision in film. This is a point that could be argued, but even “Mad Max” didn’t make such a dramatic impression.

Plot - In the year 1997 Manhattan is turned into a maximum security prison (remember that … ah, those were the days.) The President’s plane is hijacked and he is forced to eject himself in an escape pod into the city. At the same time, Snake Plissken (Russell) has been captured during a bank heist. Former special services pilot and assassin, Plissken is recruited to fly a glider into NY, land on the World Trade Center, and find the president. For insurance, he’s injected with tiny explosives that will detonate if he’s not back in time.






It is, quite frankly, a movie that has aged very well. Both in terms of its dystopia, but also its naiveté. Sure, the world would get worse in the future, but as we’ve seen since 9-11 … it will be worse.

Kurt Russell’s performance is very cool and controlled, relying on tense action and reaction in his body to provide the necessary motivation for his character. His essential coolness is often undercut by the beatings, shovings, and general manipulation he is put through … that when he does “bite back” you know he means it. The only real character scene Snake gets is his introduction with Lee Van Cleef. When told that the President’s plane has crashed, he replies: “President of what?”

“Escape from L.A.”



A very much maligned movie. In fact, when I first saw it I was a little disappointed. Then the second time I saw it, years later, I felt even worse. This time, again another few years later, I love it. I get it. Finally. Perhaps it takes almost a decade to see the same dark humor of the previous film in the context of “modern day”? At the times it seemed very Hollywood and over produced. Kurt Russell didn’t seem as hard edged and every minute there was some star turn. The plot had the virtue or veracity to be exactly the same … so, why make it?

Well, first of all, the original film had as many star turns as this movie does. In fact, almost everyone in it is a star, so there is no real reason to use the “Hollywood” excuse for either film. Where LA differs is that it is no longer a satiric jab at the Nixonian era view of the Presidency, but the post-Reagan era of the Hollywood-Moral Majority President. Both offer excessive madness, but in profoundly different ways. This time the President’s own daughter is to be sacrificed as part of the job.

Kurt Russell, looking back on it, doesn’t look nearly as stylized as I recall him looking. He looks a bit older, but actually watching the two films back to back, I found that his performance as Snake was exactly the same. His ruthlessness is simple and immediate. He doesn’t have time to waste being clever and therefore, immediately proceeds to the action. In fact, rarely do movies get so visceral so fast. Both Escape films offer us a “hero” who doesn’t have time for James Bond niceties or cleverness. He’s just going to kill you before he gets killed.



Final thoughts – they are talking about a remake of the first film … I really hope they don’t do that. Let’s see one last Russell Snake film …

Slusho and beyond

Slusho

So good you can't drink just six ...

First off, let’s get right to this Slusho 1-18-08 thing … I don’t think it’s Godzilla. In fact the theory I like best is the one most discredited at the moment … that it was all a massive promo for “Lost.” That would be just the best idea ever. But, no, it seems unlikely at this stage.

Anyway, the apple trailer is up and it’s definitely a great trailer. HERE

Just some quick notes here –

1. No, I haven’t read the newest Harry Potter book

2. No, I haven’t seen the newest Harry Potter movie.

3. I haven’t seen Pirates or Spiderman 3

4. The only new music I’ve gotten is by old guys – Robert Fripp’s “Churchscapes” finally arrived. It is exactly what I expected, mainly because he's been releasing this material through his website during the tour.


I also got the most recent Church acoustic album of their older songs “El Momento Siguiente.” This pretty good and features a rather interesting "reading" of "Reptile." Despite Kilbey's amazing ability to shoot himself in the foot, I still like the Church.




So, what’s going on?

I'm currently in total Firesign Theatre mode and reading a rather ok biography about them. This started because of my annual listen to the greatest comedy album "Don't Crush that Dwarf, Pass Me the Pliers" ... still marveling at how much is crammed into that mere 40 minutes.

Well, I’m totally into Stephan Moffatt’s “Jeckyll” series and will definitely be buying the DVD. Part 6 is on this Saturday on the BBC. There are so many bad versions of “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” (modern retellings or classic adaptations) that it is truly wonderful to see it being taken seriously.




Double-Dipped



Well, despite my best intentions, I’ve been dipped. A couple of times recently. I allowed myself to be double dipped on the Clint Eastwood and Sergio Leone classics “A Fistful of Dollars”, “For a Few Dollars More” and “The Good the Bad and the Ugly.” “Fistful” is still a classic introduction to Clint Eastwood (and him to us in many ways) and is rather interesting remake of Akira Kurosawa’s Yojimbo (1961).



Sadly, though the films themselves are presented in excellent anamorphic glory, the extras aren’t distributed very well. Sadly once again suffering is the best of the three – the glorious “For a Few Dollars More.” It is the only film that has a moral backbone or a firm narrative. All are great, but this is pure genius. Lee Van Cleef has never been better used and Clint really seems have stepped into his own career before it had really happened.




“The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly” is massive gorge of violence, gigantic set-pieces, and odd characters. It is just too big and long for me (it takes 30 minutes just to introduce the main characters), though it is still a really entertaining film. Eli Wallach is so good as Tuco (the Ugly) that you sort of forget that he isn’t the star of the film.




Also, I got the box for Bob Dylan’s “Don’t Look Back (1965 Tour Deluxe Edition).” While it is a great film, the re-release seems really for the bottom of the barrel crowd. The film has been re-mastered and looks as good as this grainy b/w choppy documentary can (i.e., very impressive both technically and for Pennebaker’s ability to get the shot) but it really isn’t a vast improvement over the previous release. The silly book of the film and the flip book of the infamous “Subterranean Homesick Blues” film are really pointless. So, we are left with the bonus disc of outtakes and these are interesting as they point to even more depth in the “character” we call Bob. There is a wonderful moment when he lets the two girls from Liverpool (the ones he appears to be making fun of during the regular feature) into the show for free. He clearly remembers talking to them earlier, as well. Rather a different side of the enigma we see bouncing from pure iconoclast to jealous paranoid in the feature. All in all, Bob Dylan was an iconoclast and that’s what the film really brings out. If you can find it for a good price, I recommend the upgrade.

Voyage of the Damned pic

Kylie Minogue and David Tennant ... on the Titanic. Well, I'm already excited.

LANDRU

MISTER MEDIA ME>BLOG

If I were being very faithful with this blog and you my dear readers I’d try to keep up to date with my media immersion, but frankly … I just can’t seem to convince myself that it matters.

So what if I’m listening to the 3 CD Sergeant Pepper’s bootleg? Does it matter that I watched Tom Baker’s first season of Doctor who over the weekend? Or that I’ve been watching the brilliant Ian Richardson in the House of Cards series? Is it a crime to have down-time?

The truth is I am constantly immersed in media, as we all are if we’re honest, but I’m also participating in it … which makes writing a blog objectively reviewing things a bit distracting. Currently, I have a lot of songs and Spacefinger music written, a new Spacefinger “set” available on the podcast, and am trying to get some back catalogue on lulu.com in case one or two of you want to buy this stuff.

Not too long ago I self-published a novel (not too disguised to the right of this blog.) Of course, this was really just me being too lazy to go through the double-whore process of selling myself to a publisher. Believe me, unless you are well connected, that’s just harder than writing the novel in the first place. So, I went the self-publishing route. Vanity Press … yes, I know.

So, someone a few weeks back asks if I had copies to sell (not online.) Well, this is Print on Demand … I don’t have a few hundred sitting around. I have to buy them, too. So, I got a couple of copies … and no one is interested. They are just sitting here …. Even with signs up and everything … bastards.

And, then there is the short-story I just sent off to a science fiction magazine.

So, I’m a busy guy. I have a job, too, which is rather too dull to write a blog about. So, I’m a bit depressed. Just turned off the Beatles from the ipod monster. Not even the fabs can save me today.

“It’s only a Northern Song.”



ps ... this thing really isn't into using the Title box lately ...

Doctor Who “The Sound of Drums” and “Last of the Time Lords”

“Drums” – 10/10
“Last of the Time Lords” – 7/10

Rant and Review - Well, it feels wrong to review both here in one go, but I got lazy again. There was this thing that gets in the way (work, life, whatever) and there I go … forgetting to review stuff on a blog that no one is reading, anyway.

So, “The Sound of Drums” kicked the gears up a few notches from the spectacular “Utopia” but then lost its rhythm (and reason and rhyme) in “Last of the Time Lords.” This is the first season finale that doesn’t feel embarrassing in terms of the overly soapy emotional stuff … but still utterly failed to deliver the goods in terms of plot and story telling. And, shame on that for ending an otherwise nearly perfect season. But, it calls into question something else: do the emotional fireworks cover up really bad endings in the previous two seasons? It is obvious that Russell T. Davies does depend a lot on emotion and a lot less on logic. To be fair, this is the first 3-part story the new series has done (roughly equivalent to the old fashioned 6-parters in the “classic series” days) and it should be judged on overall story merit … but, somehow I cannot quite do it.

1. Because “Utopia” was directed by Graeme Harper (who directed for the classic series as well) and
2. Because Derek Jacobi was in it and not John Simm
3. Because it is so stylistically different than the last two parts



We left “Utopia” with Doctor, Martha, and Capt. Jack stranded while the newly regenerated Master (Simm) has stolen the Doctor’s TARDIS. We resume the story with the 3 getting away pretty quickly (and really, who wanted to see that bit go on more) to find that the newly elected prime minister Harold Saxon is in fact the Master … who taunts the Doctor with a speech parodying the now disgraced Harriet Jones “What this country really needs … right now … is a Doctor.” Ping. A nice big smile and the credits roll in pretty heavy.



What follows is a tour de force for Simm’s Master as he rounds up Martha’s family and plays cat and mouse with the Doctor. First, he blows up Martha's flat and then reports the three as terrorists.




It is really the best set-up episode in history, giving us not only two really great actors going for guts and glory, but also a lot of CGI Time Lord flashbacks (for the fans)




... some weird new aliens he calls “the Toclafane” (a Time Lord myth), and the ultimate spaceship in the sky. The Master has been setting this up all along for 18 months. After he announces the first alien contact with the Toclafane, he is met by an enraged, though thoroughly stuck up President Arthur Winters (played by Colin Stinton of A Very Peculiar Practice fame.) Of course, this is a British drama, so there are lots of pokes at Americans. “Shall I make the tea? Or isn’t that American enough? I could make grits? What are grits, anyway?” and then … has the aliens kill the President on world-wide television. It is, to say the least, outrageously funny.












By the end of the story, (the Master's quite insane "Here come the drums!" Voodoo Child moment is perhaps unforgetable as a climax) the Doctor is made very old and forced to watch the Earth being invaded by 6 billion spheres …

By the time “Last of the Time Lords” begins … Doctor Who has taken a big leap of faith by projecting the story one year into the future. Martha is wandering the world and … well … the Master has made the Doctor even older … Martha’s family are his servants … he appears to be in some drug stupor … and then the plot gets silly.







1. The Tinkerbelle moment … Yes, the Doctor saves the world by having everyone say his name at the same time (with the added benefit of the Master’s Archangel Satellite network.) This is of course not only absurd, but simply impossible to manage, let alone plan (which is what he claims to have done.)




2. The reset … the Earth goes back in time to just before the spheres appear. This is sadly the worst thing in the original Superman movie … it certainly doesn’t get better when redone in Doctor Who …

3. And, after all that, the Master inexplicably decides to die and the Doctor cries. It seems utterly absurd. (Although, there is a shot of a woman picking up his ring after his Jedi style pyre.)







4. And Martha leaves … Why? We like Martha.



5. Donna from the Runaway Bride is coming back? Why? We didn’t like Donna.

6. Jack is ... the Face of Boe ... What????



7. Kylie is on the Titanic ... which crashes into the TARDIS at the end of the episode.





In the end, my response is that someone slipped the entire production team some heavy hallucinogens at the same time … and they’ve all gone simultaneously insane. It can be the only explanation.

And so now we wait for next Christmas and ... watch thousands of people die in a story called "the Voyage of the Damned" ... I think I'm on pretty sturdy ground with my hallucination theory.