Welcome, to the personal blog of James R Mortimer. Apparently, writing a blog about everything that happens to me will honestly help me.
But then nothing happens to me.
And so, in my void of nothingness, and on the first day of a holiday in Wales, yesterday I rewatched A Study In Pink, the first Sherlock episode. Normally when I sit down and watch something it won't take me very long to get bored. Or I'll get distracted. Or something will turn up on YouTube and I'll watch that instead.
I watched A Study In Pink in one go, non-stop. And it's amazing. It is an almost perfect episode, and it is one of the best pieces of TV drama - ever. Seriously. It's complex, yet completely logical and easy to follow. There's perfect dialogue between the characters, and Steven Moffat not only overcomes the tricky 'first episode' hurdle, but shows all the other writers how first episodes should be done.
I remember the first time I saw this - and it had me fooled the whole way through. Recently a friend of mine began watching Sherlock - and she's fallen in love with it as well. (Not just because of Benedict Cumberbatch, although that has something to do with it I expect.) Sherlock is a wonderful series, and its first episode paves the way brilliantly. There's enough in it to warrant a rewatch, as the conversations and the relationships between the characters make it a joy to watch the story over and over again. The plot, for someone who hadn't read the Conan Doyle story until afterwards, is surprising - but it's also conveyed in an inventive enough way to make it interesting for those who know what's going to happen.
There's only so much I can say about how wonderful it is. And so I'll pick up on why it's "almost" perfect. The scene with John and Mycroft, although full of tension and very interesting the first time you watch it, is just a bit of a bore second time around. There are moments when I enjoyed it - but the rest of the time it just feels like it's dragging. It's one conversation tagged onto another and then another, and it begins to get dangerously close to a "filler" scene. I realise that the episode had to be extended by half an hour and that the pilot is without this scene (the pilot has more problems though so we won't go into those yet), but in other moments, that half an hour is filled well. The episode is handled better as a longer story. It's just the Mycroft/John scene that interrupts this - and that's all it does, interrupt the story. (Although I will admit - I did wonder if they'd actually given Moriarty to Mark Gatiss.)
The other issue is a tiny, tiny problem. "Sorry sir, who's status?" the pointless character who John can flirty with says at the end. She delivers the line so poorly - and it's not a great line anyway. It's in there purely for the geeky "Sherlock Holmes & Dr Watson" moment - which might work if delivered well and vaguely realistically. But it's a cliche line played as a cliche - and it really makes the episode end in a bit of a cringey way.
But apart from those. It is amazing. And you know it's a good episode when how someone says a line is one of my only criticisms.
So overall - I'd give this episode a 95% score of awesomeness. It is THAT good.
A Side Note on the Pilot: The Pilot, or what was intended to be the actual Episode One, isn't good. Maybe because it doesn't even compare to the episode one that aired - but maybe because it's just not great. It feels wrong in some ways. Sherlock wears a forensic suit-thing, which feels wrong. He spends the whole of the confrontation scene drugged which completely messes up the tension. The dialogue is just so much better in the actual episode, and everything seems much more considered and real. It feels like a wider story in the actual version - and the Pilot is relatively one-dimensional.
So yeah - thank Goodness the BBC wanted three 90 minutes.
Sunday, 28 July 2013
Monday, 15 July 2013
The Day I Went 'Cuckoo'
I rather like that blog title.
As you must have heard in the news recently, JK Rowling published a book under the pseudonym 'Robert Galbraith' a few months back. The book, The Cuckoo's Calling, is a Private Detective Crime Thriller Thing, and it had received overly positive reviews. Some said it was exceptionally good for a debut writer, while someone else said how clever a man was to describe women's clothing... Swiftly moving on.
JK Rowling said that the experience of writing as Robert was "liberating", and the concept of writing under a pseudonym to avoid judgement from Harry Potter fans and general critics is a good idea. To get good feedback based on the story and not the name is kind of the point of being a writer. So good old JK (sorry for quoting Doctor Who then, it just slips out).
Here arises the problem. JK Rowling has been exceptionally clever, and she is an exceptionally clever woman. Both "Hagrid" and "Dumbledore" were names from a classic novel that she adapted. The problem is that I just don't like her writing style. I've never got the Harry Potter hype, I'm not a huge Potter fan at all (although the films are good..) and JK Rowling isn't my cup of tea.
However, like the rest of the nation I expect - I downloaded a Free Sample (no way was I buying the book straight away) of The Cuckoo's Calling for Kindle. Just out of curiosity. Just to see how she wrote now, just to see what it was like - JK Rowling writing free of the reigns of popularity.
So despite my dislike of her works, there I was, the night of the 14th July, reading the first few chapters of the book. And I enjoyed it. It's not without it's faults, definitely, but it is very enjoyable. It's gripping, grown up - and it feels very real. I can feel myself in the places described, and there's all sorts of precise detail, dropped in to enhance the book. It never distracts. The book keeps one flow of thought, and as you turn to the next chapter, you desperately hope the scenario doesn't change. Thankfully, 'til the end of Chapter 3, it doesn't.
And obviously judging a book on the first three Chapters is odd - but that's the point of a Sample. I think it's the only Kindle sample I've ever finished, and the only time I've been tempted to buy a Kindle book based on whim. Most of my books I have a previous interest in, be it with the author or theme. This is JK Rowling. I should have no interest - yet it fascinates me. And the book is good.
The sentences are ridiculously long sometimes - and that can be annoying. It does work occasionally, even if it took me a few reads to get everything, and it is a clever way of showing quick action. But in a long sentence, small details distract. They should be saved 'til afterwards - sometimes it feels like three sentences in one. And sometimes, when there's not really much happening, long sentences are use for back story - which doesn't really work. So that is a flaw. And it could get quite annoying.
But all this leads me to my question - to the point of this blog entry. Have I gone Cuckoo? Because I actually want to buy this book. Should I buy this book? Maybe I should - you know, it's interesting, I might finish it, I do want to know what happens next. I could put up with the long sentences. Maybe I'd even lose the "This is JK Rowling, stop reading" thing in my head. Or maybe I shouldn't - it's £10, it's a risk, and that could be spent on Tom Odell's debut album, which I've been meaning to buy since it came out a few weeks ago.
So - yes or no? That's more a rhetorical question, and the answer will probably end up being yes.
Because taking a risk might be worth it. Maybe I will actually enjoy it. I have so far - so that's a good enough reason to keep going.
Or maybe I'll just give up. Either way, giving up or not - surely it's worth a go first?
As you must have heard in the news recently, JK Rowling published a book under the pseudonym 'Robert Galbraith' a few months back. The book, The Cuckoo's Calling, is a Private Detective Crime Thriller Thing, and it had received overly positive reviews. Some said it was exceptionally good for a debut writer, while someone else said how clever a man was to describe women's clothing... Swiftly moving on.
JK Rowling said that the experience of writing as Robert was "liberating", and the concept of writing under a pseudonym to avoid judgement from Harry Potter fans and general critics is a good idea. To get good feedback based on the story and not the name is kind of the point of being a writer. So good old JK (sorry for quoting Doctor Who then, it just slips out).
Here arises the problem. JK Rowling has been exceptionally clever, and she is an exceptionally clever woman. Both "Hagrid" and "Dumbledore" were names from a classic novel that she adapted. The problem is that I just don't like her writing style. I've never got the Harry Potter hype, I'm not a huge Potter fan at all (although the films are good..) and JK Rowling isn't my cup of tea.
However, like the rest of the nation I expect - I downloaded a Free Sample (no way was I buying the book straight away) of The Cuckoo's Calling for Kindle. Just out of curiosity. Just to see how she wrote now, just to see what it was like - JK Rowling writing free of the reigns of popularity.
So despite my dislike of her works, there I was, the night of the 14th July, reading the first few chapters of the book. And I enjoyed it. It's not without it's faults, definitely, but it is very enjoyable. It's gripping, grown up - and it feels very real. I can feel myself in the places described, and there's all sorts of precise detail, dropped in to enhance the book. It never distracts. The book keeps one flow of thought, and as you turn to the next chapter, you desperately hope the scenario doesn't change. Thankfully, 'til the end of Chapter 3, it doesn't.
And obviously judging a book on the first three Chapters is odd - but that's the point of a Sample. I think it's the only Kindle sample I've ever finished, and the only time I've been tempted to buy a Kindle book based on whim. Most of my books I have a previous interest in, be it with the author or theme. This is JK Rowling. I should have no interest - yet it fascinates me. And the book is good.
The sentences are ridiculously long sometimes - and that can be annoying. It does work occasionally, even if it took me a few reads to get everything, and it is a clever way of showing quick action. But in a long sentence, small details distract. They should be saved 'til afterwards - sometimes it feels like three sentences in one. And sometimes, when there's not really much happening, long sentences are use for back story - which doesn't really work. So that is a flaw. And it could get quite annoying.
But all this leads me to my question - to the point of this blog entry. Have I gone Cuckoo? Because I actually want to buy this book. Should I buy this book? Maybe I should - you know, it's interesting, I might finish it, I do want to know what happens next. I could put up with the long sentences. Maybe I'd even lose the "This is JK Rowling, stop reading" thing in my head. Or maybe I shouldn't - it's £10, it's a risk, and that could be spent on Tom Odell's debut album, which I've been meaning to buy since it came out a few weeks ago.
So - yes or no? That's more a rhetorical question, and the answer will probably end up being yes.
Because taking a risk might be worth it. Maybe I will actually enjoy it. I have so far - so that's a good enough reason to keep going.
Or maybe I'll just give up. Either way, giving up or not - surely it's worth a go first?
Tuesday, 2 July 2013
I Don't Like The Daleks
But that's ok - because The Caves of Androzani isn't my favourite episode either.
The Daleks have never really captured my imagination. The entire nation seems to be in love with them, even now, and especially after their first appearances in the 1960s. There was huge uproar when Moffat, Gattiss and the design team decided to "mess" with their iconic look in Victory of the Daleks. The thing is - I like the Rainbow/Power Ranger/Parody/Paradigm Daleks. I like the fact that they have roles, I like the fact they have designated colours. To me, the new Daleks (and the moment they destroy the old ones I hated) was the best thing about the episode.
So does this make me a Doctor Who fan with a flaw? Does it even make me a fan? Yes. It just means I'm a fan with an opinion that dares to be different. For me, the Daleks ran out of stories after The Daleks' Master Plan. They can beat the Thals and Terry Nation could preach some anti-War messages, they came to Earth, they chased after 'Doctor Who'. Oh and then they killed people in a twelve-part epic - that is supposedly epic. Then that's it. People are in love with Power of the Daleks, but it's still using the same ideas. You give the Daleks no power, they get power, they kill people - yawn. Lots of people say it's the character in Power of the Daleks that makes it so good. That's fair enough. I'm quite a fan of Mission to the Unknown, and the majority of that is character based.
So the Daleks vs the Humans might work, as a series. Terry Nation attempted this - and maybe that would've even been interesting. But he failed so we'll never know. The point is - Daleks vs the Doctor and the TARDIS crew has been done to death. Pardon the pun. There are some amazing Dalek moments, even now, and I'll explain those later - but the fundamental idea of the Daleks is old. And, sorry guys, it's exhausted. The Cybermen you can reinvent and make supposedly scarier. You can always push them - they have a human connection to us. The Daleks can invade our planet as much as we like - you can show them killing as many people as they like - the fact is - they are boring and overused.
If we look at Asylum of the Daleks. It's a fantastic episode for one reason. Oswin. She is what makes it good. Without her - it would be boring, with too many scenes of Amy and Rory stupidly arguing, and people constantly looking for deactivated Daleks. "Ooh, is that from The Chase?". The other good thing about Oswin is that she is a Dalek. So there's a new idea there with the Daleks, something pushing the idea forward, something interesting about these ancient and irritating pepper pots. The idea of a Dalek Asylum is awesome too. The idea of the Special Weapons Dalek was awesome (and should have been Oswin, in my opinion). There are ideas that push the creatures in new directions - it is possible. It just doesn't happen enough. And it wouldn't be long until even these ideas are exhausted.
Dalek 'Golden' moments cover a range of things. When I first saw Resurrection of the Daleks, I became obsessed with the creatures for the first time ever. Watching it back, I'm not sure why. I mean assassinating Gallifreyan people - what? But it inspired me, I wrote Dalek things, I came up with new Dalek ideas. Then I got bored. For me, they always get boring. Revelation of the Daleks pushes them in another new direction, but again, for me it's the setting that works better than the Daleks themselves. Genesis of the Daleks is amazing - probably because they do hardly anything! Davros is awesome in it - but even he gets boring. Remembrance of the Daleks is a fantastic episode - and the Dalek battle is awesome, and there is a real sense of mystery. Mystery & imagination are brought to the Daleks and their methods, and it's interwoven with a really human story - so it works.
In an attempt to push the Daleks in new directions, because everyone realises new ideas are needed, there seem to be a few standard "new directions" that writers use. One of these is the "let's turn them into a cult thing". I haven't listened to too many Big Finish stories, but I saw a DWM cartoon of one (back in the days DWM did that), and the Fifth Doctor picked up a toy of a Dalek. This kind of 'mocking' the icon the Daleks have become is a little bit too much for me. It's just as boring as the idea of the Daleks in the first place. The stories become predictable.
The other "new" direction that people use, and the one that prompted me to write this blog in annoyance, is the attempt to make the Daleks good. EVERYONE DOES IT! "Dark Eyes", Big Finish's landmark Eighth Doctor box set, had some really good ideas. One of these was initially to make the Daleks good. It is a genuinely creepy idea - except it gets boring. They have to be revealed to be evil, the humans have to act all innocent til the point someone dies, and the Doctor has to get angry. It's predictable. The Dalek Generation by Nicholas Briggs, as far as I know, does the same thing. And today (2nd July), the Seventh Doctor Short Story was released. It's written by Malorie Blackman! Wow!
Oh - but it's about the Daleks.. turning good?
It annoys me that all Dalek stories now, and there are an increasing number, make the Daleks good in order to try and push these creatures in a different way. But it doesn't work. The new ideas are getting boring.
Unless someone can reboot the Daleks, unless someone can make them appealing all over again - or unless they have a REALLY REALLY REALLY long rest without the entirety of fandom going "OH NO MOFFAT'S GIVING THE DALEKS A REST", then they might work.
But for now - the Daleks deserve to be exterminated. Along with all these ideas of making them 'good' for the five minutes.
The Daleks have never really captured my imagination. The entire nation seems to be in love with them, even now, and especially after their first appearances in the 1960s. There was huge uproar when Moffat, Gattiss and the design team decided to "mess" with their iconic look in Victory of the Daleks. The thing is - I like the Rainbow/Power Ranger/Parody/Paradigm Daleks. I like the fact that they have roles, I like the fact they have designated colours. To me, the new Daleks (and the moment they destroy the old ones I hated) was the best thing about the episode.
So does this make me a Doctor Who fan with a flaw? Does it even make me a fan? Yes. It just means I'm a fan with an opinion that dares to be different. For me, the Daleks ran out of stories after The Daleks' Master Plan. They can beat the Thals and Terry Nation could preach some anti-War messages, they came to Earth, they chased after 'Doctor Who'. Oh and then they killed people in a twelve-part epic - that is supposedly epic. Then that's it. People are in love with Power of the Daleks, but it's still using the same ideas. You give the Daleks no power, they get power, they kill people - yawn. Lots of people say it's the character in Power of the Daleks that makes it so good. That's fair enough. I'm quite a fan of Mission to the Unknown, and the majority of that is character based.
So the Daleks vs the Humans might work, as a series. Terry Nation attempted this - and maybe that would've even been interesting. But he failed so we'll never know. The point is - Daleks vs the Doctor and the TARDIS crew has been done to death. Pardon the pun. There are some amazing Dalek moments, even now, and I'll explain those later - but the fundamental idea of the Daleks is old. And, sorry guys, it's exhausted. The Cybermen you can reinvent and make supposedly scarier. You can always push them - they have a human connection to us. The Daleks can invade our planet as much as we like - you can show them killing as many people as they like - the fact is - they are boring and overused.
If we look at Asylum of the Daleks. It's a fantastic episode for one reason. Oswin. She is what makes it good. Without her - it would be boring, with too many scenes of Amy and Rory stupidly arguing, and people constantly looking for deactivated Daleks. "Ooh, is that from The Chase?". The other good thing about Oswin is that she is a Dalek. So there's a new idea there with the Daleks, something pushing the idea forward, something interesting about these ancient and irritating pepper pots. The idea of a Dalek Asylum is awesome too. The idea of the Special Weapons Dalek was awesome (and should have been Oswin, in my opinion). There are ideas that push the creatures in new directions - it is possible. It just doesn't happen enough. And it wouldn't be long until even these ideas are exhausted.
Dalek 'Golden' moments cover a range of things. When I first saw Resurrection of the Daleks, I became obsessed with the creatures for the first time ever. Watching it back, I'm not sure why. I mean assassinating Gallifreyan people - what? But it inspired me, I wrote Dalek things, I came up with new Dalek ideas. Then I got bored. For me, they always get boring. Revelation of the Daleks pushes them in another new direction, but again, for me it's the setting that works better than the Daleks themselves. Genesis of the Daleks is amazing - probably because they do hardly anything! Davros is awesome in it - but even he gets boring. Remembrance of the Daleks is a fantastic episode - and the Dalek battle is awesome, and there is a real sense of mystery. Mystery & imagination are brought to the Daleks and their methods, and it's interwoven with a really human story - so it works.
In an attempt to push the Daleks in new directions, because everyone realises new ideas are needed, there seem to be a few standard "new directions" that writers use. One of these is the "let's turn them into a cult thing". I haven't listened to too many Big Finish stories, but I saw a DWM cartoon of one (back in the days DWM did that), and the Fifth Doctor picked up a toy of a Dalek. This kind of 'mocking' the icon the Daleks have become is a little bit too much for me. It's just as boring as the idea of the Daleks in the first place. The stories become predictable.
The other "new" direction that people use, and the one that prompted me to write this blog in annoyance, is the attempt to make the Daleks good. EVERYONE DOES IT! "Dark Eyes", Big Finish's landmark Eighth Doctor box set, had some really good ideas. One of these was initially to make the Daleks good. It is a genuinely creepy idea - except it gets boring. They have to be revealed to be evil, the humans have to act all innocent til the point someone dies, and the Doctor has to get angry. It's predictable. The Dalek Generation by Nicholas Briggs, as far as I know, does the same thing. And today (2nd July), the Seventh Doctor Short Story was released. It's written by Malorie Blackman! Wow!
Oh - but it's about the Daleks.. turning good?
It annoys me that all Dalek stories now, and there are an increasing number, make the Daleks good in order to try and push these creatures in a different way. But it doesn't work. The new ideas are getting boring.
Unless someone can reboot the Daleks, unless someone can make them appealing all over again - or unless they have a REALLY REALLY REALLY long rest without the entirety of fandom going "OH NO MOFFAT'S GIVING THE DALEKS A REST", then they might work.
But for now - the Daleks deserve to be exterminated. Along with all these ideas of making them 'good' for the five minutes.
Friday, 14 June 2013
A Game of Thrones #1: pages1-100
A Game of Thrones is over 700 pages - and to review it at the end would be stupid. I may not even get to the end. Though I'd love to finish it and move onto the sequels. So here's a non-spoiler review of the first 100 pages.
I suppose I've got into A Game of Thrones for two reasons. One; there's been a buzz about the TV series from the end of the first series, and even more recently from the ending of Series Three. So it's something that's always been in the corner of my eye. The second reason - that my brother's girlfriend lent my mum the book to read. Mum attempted it and got bored, so I attempted it and got bored.
And then (as I only read the first few sentences on my first attempt..) I tried again. And I'm hooked.
I'm not one for the fantasy genre, any books that take the principles of an old fashioned time, or any books that are big. But to find a big book that's modern that I can essentially fly through (if one can go that quickly through a 700 page book) I'm lucky, and to find a fantasy book so reliant on character and relationships is lucky too. It's the character and emotion that's important to me in every book. A Game of Thrones has this without getting too bogged down in the emotion. When emotion comes near, it skips to a new character, mentions it, and then talks about family feuds and sex.
If I'm honest, A Game of Thrones, without the swearing and the sex/nudity, could be a children's book. Get rid of a few families, and obviously the aforementioned things, and any teenager could read this at age 13. They could probably manage the endless names and family feuds a lot better than an adult reader can, anyway. So I imagine because all fantasy books are essentially children's stories, the author's put in the sex and the swearing and the "adult themes" to show that distinction. The prologue is gory, but gripping, and it succeeds in throwing you into the text.
The family feuds are even interesting. There are enough off shoots to make the book seem interesting and layered, and all of these slowly lead and hint to the bigger theme - which I presume is the fight for the Iron Throne. The characters are distinct and understandable, each of them has a personality - which is great for me, who hasn't seen the TV show. The dialogue is written for the era and yet still modern. The use of swear words threw me at first, I still keep thinking this is some Medieval book, but the fact the swear words are (so far) limited to the younger characters works great. The age distinctions are well written.
I normally hate books that jump perspectives. Melvin Burgess' Junk was one that confused me when it switched characters, yet A Game of Thrones handles it well. Perhaps that's why the characters feel so real and alive, and why you're so interested in them. Because you see it through their eyes, and the author is showing you only what he wants you to see. That goes back to my point about emotion. There's a fairly shocking event at some point (which is handled well - as the writing style remains simple the whole way through, allowing the themes to be complex, and allowing more dramatic events to be reacted to by the reader) and the action skips four days. Then two weeks. Yet this feels natural. In a book that lasts 700+ pages, there's no evidence of it dragging so far.
The simple fact is that I'm just fascinated. It is a completely different world, and the author is, although sometimes it seems pointlessly, taking away all of our laws and our knowledge. It is his own world, and it is a completely believable world. The relationships are ours, from our time, the morals and the ethics and the history is from a different world. The blending of the two makes this a perfectly accessible and interesting book. The character's personalities and relationships make me interested in all these political and historical feuds going on around the place. There are moments that shock - and they aren't shocking, they're just not from our world - and this almost loose nature in such a complex plot is welcoming.
The plot, although it has so many characters and names, is kept on top of at all times - and it doesn't feel that complex. Your head tricks you into thinking it might be - but it isn't. The book doesn't even take any getting used to. There are a few moments where paragraphs are spent explaining concepts of the world, and though they seem a bit dull and out of reach, you do pick them up as people talk about them.
Overall, it is a fascinating book. It's simply written, you can grasp it, and the characters feel real. You learn about each character individually, and the background characters even feel understandable. As long as you give this book space to explain, it will fill the space and extend itself further, unravelling concepts and mystery, deploying standard book techniques yet making them fascinating.
I can't wait to keep reading - and one day (when I've finished the book) I will watch the series.
I suppose I've got into A Game of Thrones for two reasons. One; there's been a buzz about the TV series from the end of the first series, and even more recently from the ending of Series Three. So it's something that's always been in the corner of my eye. The second reason - that my brother's girlfriend lent my mum the book to read. Mum attempted it and got bored, so I attempted it and got bored.
And then (as I only read the first few sentences on my first attempt..) I tried again. And I'm hooked.
I'm not one for the fantasy genre, any books that take the principles of an old fashioned time, or any books that are big. But to find a big book that's modern that I can essentially fly through (if one can go that quickly through a 700 page book) I'm lucky, and to find a fantasy book so reliant on character and relationships is lucky too. It's the character and emotion that's important to me in every book. A Game of Thrones has this without getting too bogged down in the emotion. When emotion comes near, it skips to a new character, mentions it, and then talks about family feuds and sex.
If I'm honest, A Game of Thrones, without the swearing and the sex/nudity, could be a children's book. Get rid of a few families, and obviously the aforementioned things, and any teenager could read this at age 13. They could probably manage the endless names and family feuds a lot better than an adult reader can, anyway. So I imagine because all fantasy books are essentially children's stories, the author's put in the sex and the swearing and the "adult themes" to show that distinction. The prologue is gory, but gripping, and it succeeds in throwing you into the text.
The family feuds are even interesting. There are enough off shoots to make the book seem interesting and layered, and all of these slowly lead and hint to the bigger theme - which I presume is the fight for the Iron Throne. The characters are distinct and understandable, each of them has a personality - which is great for me, who hasn't seen the TV show. The dialogue is written for the era and yet still modern. The use of swear words threw me at first, I still keep thinking this is some Medieval book, but the fact the swear words are (so far) limited to the younger characters works great. The age distinctions are well written.
I normally hate books that jump perspectives. Melvin Burgess' Junk was one that confused me when it switched characters, yet A Game of Thrones handles it well. Perhaps that's why the characters feel so real and alive, and why you're so interested in them. Because you see it through their eyes, and the author is showing you only what he wants you to see. That goes back to my point about emotion. There's a fairly shocking event at some point (which is handled well - as the writing style remains simple the whole way through, allowing the themes to be complex, and allowing more dramatic events to be reacted to by the reader) and the action skips four days. Then two weeks. Yet this feels natural. In a book that lasts 700+ pages, there's no evidence of it dragging so far.
The simple fact is that I'm just fascinated. It is a completely different world, and the author is, although sometimes it seems pointlessly, taking away all of our laws and our knowledge. It is his own world, and it is a completely believable world. The relationships are ours, from our time, the morals and the ethics and the history is from a different world. The blending of the two makes this a perfectly accessible and interesting book. The character's personalities and relationships make me interested in all these political and historical feuds going on around the place. There are moments that shock - and they aren't shocking, they're just not from our world - and this almost loose nature in such a complex plot is welcoming.
The plot, although it has so many characters and names, is kept on top of at all times - and it doesn't feel that complex. Your head tricks you into thinking it might be - but it isn't. The book doesn't even take any getting used to. There are a few moments where paragraphs are spent explaining concepts of the world, and though they seem a bit dull and out of reach, you do pick them up as people talk about them.
Overall, it is a fascinating book. It's simply written, you can grasp it, and the characters feel real. You learn about each character individually, and the background characters even feel understandable. As long as you give this book space to explain, it will fill the space and extend itself further, unravelling concepts and mystery, deploying standard book techniques yet making them fascinating.
I can't wait to keep reading - and one day (when I've finished the book) I will watch the series.
Monday, 10 June 2013
Trilby Wearing Auton: The New Look!
TRILBY WEARING AUTON
THE NEW LOOK
This has been hinted at on my Twitter feed for a while and it's been accessible for a few weeks, but my Trilby Wearing Auton rebrand has officially begun! You can find me on TWITTER, TUMBLR, BLOGGER (Obviously), INSTAGRAM, YOUTUBE and SOUNDCLOUD, and all of those will have the same look and logo.
TWITTER: @trilbyauton
TUMBLR: trilbywearingauton
I'll be posting lots of random pictures and music to the Tumblr because apparently that's what people do..
BLOGGER: You're here!
And updates continue as normal.
INSTAGRAM: trilbywearingauton
More random pictures.
YOUTUBE: trilbywearingauton
The most important feature of the rebrand, I'll be posting lots of vlogs and videos onto here. Subscribe!
SOUNDCLOUD: trilbywearingauton
Recordings of poems and Audio Dramas should be on here soon.
Along with this, there will also be a new feature coming to this blog. The page above called "50 50" will soon be host to 50 word reviews of every Doctor Who episode ever, as I aim to complete a Marathon. It may not necessarily be in order, but hopefully concise reviews will make my Marathon of episodes easier to follow.
I hope you like the rebrand, and don't forget to keep checking here for updates and the various other places I now have.
Friday, 7 June 2013
Twelfth Doctor: Updated Speculation
The website Starburst has come into news from it's sources that the BBC will announce the new Doctor tomorrow, Saturday 8th June. This announcement, being just one week since the announcement of Matt Smith's departure, is to apparently stop a Sunday paper scoop. And the article puts forward three names from it's sources...
This isn't spoilers - just speculation, and here's my thoughts on the three latest names put forward..
DOMHNALL GLEESON
He's played a Weasley (no not one of the main two) in the last Harry Potter film - and he's ginger. But that's the thing. Has he only been put forward as a name (made up as a name) because he is ginger? Because his IMDB does show he isn't working at the minute? (Well, he's in something currently in pre-production, so does this rule him out anyway?) I think he'd be an interesting choice. Purely on look, he looks 'ordinary' enough to throw people, and unpredictability is good. The thing is - I still think he looks far too young. He's 30 - the same age as Matt Smith - and I'm pretty sure the Producers would feel that an older choice is better..
DANIEL KALUUYA
A Doctor that's not white is something often speculated - and I think that's both more likely and a good idea. However - Daniel Kaluuya is a bad idea. He's the only one of the three I've seen act - which isn't good for him. He played Barclay in 2009's Planet of the Dead. Which he was great in. But he really wouldn't fit the role of the Doctor. I can't imagine him acting differently (having seen him in Johnny English Reborn too), and I can't imagine him being the Doctor. Furthermore - he's only 23! He's way way too young to be the Doctor. Sorry.
DOMINIC COOPER
He looks older, he looks different, and his appearance already gives him the darker, more serious edge I feel the Doctor now needs. And facial hair. (Domhnall Gleeson has this as well.) The only thing that I believe will stop Cooper getting the role is his involvement in several big movies, and his upcoming involvement in Dracula, which is currently in pre-production. So while I think his choice is unpredictable - I worry he might be a little bit too big for the role.
We'll have to wait and see - and maybe we will find out tomorrow who the Doctor is. I think that might take the edge of Matt leaving - but I can't wait to find out who the new Doctor is either. I'm happy for Cooper or Gleeson to have the role (more happy for Cooper though) - and you can see my other suggestions here.
Geronimo.
This isn't spoilers - just speculation, and here's my thoughts on the three latest names put forward..
DOMHNALL GLEESON
He's played a Weasley (no not one of the main two) in the last Harry Potter film - and he's ginger. But that's the thing. Has he only been put forward as a name (made up as a name) because he is ginger? Because his IMDB does show he isn't working at the minute? (Well, he's in something currently in pre-production, so does this rule him out anyway?) I think he'd be an interesting choice. Purely on look, he looks 'ordinary' enough to throw people, and unpredictability is good. The thing is - I still think he looks far too young. He's 30 - the same age as Matt Smith - and I'm pretty sure the Producers would feel that an older choice is better..
DANIEL KALUUYA
A Doctor that's not white is something often speculated - and I think that's both more likely and a good idea. However - Daniel Kaluuya is a bad idea. He's the only one of the three I've seen act - which isn't good for him. He played Barclay in 2009's Planet of the Dead. Which he was great in. But he really wouldn't fit the role of the Doctor. I can't imagine him acting differently (having seen him in Johnny English Reborn too), and I can't imagine him being the Doctor. Furthermore - he's only 23! He's way way too young to be the Doctor. Sorry.
DOMINIC COOPER
He looks older, he looks different, and his appearance already gives him the darker, more serious edge I feel the Doctor now needs. And facial hair. (Domhnall Gleeson has this as well.) The only thing that I believe will stop Cooper getting the role is his involvement in several big movies, and his upcoming involvement in Dracula, which is currently in pre-production. So while I think his choice is unpredictable - I worry he might be a little bit too big for the role.
We'll have to wait and see - and maybe we will find out tomorrow who the Doctor is. I think that might take the edge of Matt leaving - but I can't wait to find out who the new Doctor is either. I'm happy for Cooper or Gleeson to have the role (more happy for Cooper though) - and you can see my other suggestions here.
Geronimo.
Sunday, 2 June 2013
The Twelfth Doctor
I apologise for doing the same as everyone else will be doing for the next month, but I couldn't resist. Yesterday (June 1st) it was announced that Matt Smith was leaving after four years as the Doctor. Personally, I dont really mind. I wanted him to stay longer, as I think he's been one of the best actors ever to play the Doctor, and it's a joy watching him. However, there's been increasing speculation about him leaving, plus he deserves to be doing bigger things. So yeah, not surprised he's leaving. A bit disappointed though. The news was hinted at strongly by Doctor Who Online and a few others, so most people on Twitter knew that the announcement would be made. Along with the speculation, I feel the rumours and 'leaks' beforehand took away from the actual announcement. We can only hope the announcement of the new Doctor is handled much better.
So who should be the new Doctor? It's times like this I realise how behind I am with modern actors and possibly actresses. I could easily suggest actors from The Prisoner or Sapphire & Steel, but that's not much good. So after some research, a delve through my own memory and a look at some other lists - here's who I believe should play The Twelfth Doctor. These are in no particular order.
A. BEN WHISHAW
Probably one of my top choices after his performance in Skyfall. He's quite Matt Smith like in look and probably age, so maybe on this occasion it wouldn't work. However, he's certainly a good enough actor to play the part, and it's the quality of acting that matters more than quirkiness of personality. Which is why some comedians and comedy actors people are mentioning, who I've not really any idea about, would be bad choices.
B. EDDIE REDMAYNE
This one's down to BBC Breakfast, but it's been in my head for a lot longer. At one stage I was planning a series of Figure Adventures with a custom Eddie Redmayne figure (I never made). He'd certainly be different. I've seen him in both Birdsong and Les Miserables, and in both he just stares at people and falls in love. So it'd be good to see him have to act differently, and he'd bring something different to the role. I actually could not imagine what he'd do, and that unpredictability would be great. No one would be able to imagine what he'd be like, but it would certainly be one of the strangest incarnations of the Time Lord - so why not pick Eddie? (Well, he's doing massive films for one..)
C. ANDREW-LEE POTTS
This is another name that gets thrown about by fandom, and probably the same fandom that throw round Benedict Cumberbatch's name. But I think he'd be good, a bit more predictable than Redmayne, and perhaps too used to the kind of circles Doctor Who gets mixed with. I'd feel comfortable with this choice though, but would hope he could do something a little bit different to surprise us all.
D. SIR IAN McKELLEN
Because obviously, he is the best actor in creation, and there should be no other choice. He's not too old either. And don't even get me started on the people who say the Doctor needs to be good looking.
E. JAMES McAVOY
He's both a good actor and I think, a good choice. He's, again, perhaps far too big for the series, but it'd be interesting to see him tackle the role.
F. OLIVIA COLMAN
Yes - a woman! I'm not sure a woman would work at the minute, for the following reason:
I was discussing this with a friend, a female, the other day when watching City of Death (she made it to the end of Part One) and she said there should be a female Doctor. And my issue with that is that it would be so difficult not to write them as River Song. Especially if Moffat, who seems to write most female characters the same, is staying on for Series 8, apparently. If you had a different writer who could handle female characters well, and a 'normal' actress, who wasn't picked on personality on character acting, then it might work. But at the minute, an over the top female actress written by Moffat seems too likely and would be awful to watch.
So Olivia would be a good choice, she seems to be a good mix of 'normal' actress and comedy actress, and she can act all kind of genres (and she comes across as a little bit insane, which is always good). I'd be confident with this choice - but perhaps not with Moffat as the writer.
G. ANEURIN BARNARD
I need to thank Blogtor Who for this suggestion because I'd never even heard of him. He acted alongside Karen Gillan in 'We'll Take Manhattan', and he's definitely got an unearthly, darker look about him. If the Doctor is meant to be becoming darker than maybe it's time for an actor that reflects that, and after watching some brief clips and looking at a few pictures, I'm thinking maybe he might be a good choice. He's unknown enough, he's interesting enough, and with the right look, he should be a possible. Oh and he's Welsh, which is awesome.
NEW SUGGESTION: H. HARRY LLOYD
Here's another suggestion! Harry Lloyd would probably be my ideal choice. He played Banes wonderfully in Human Nature/Family of Blood, and he's a superb actor. He's posher (which is part of the criteria I mentioned below) and he would have a more serious approach to the role, which is good, because we need a bit of that drama and mystery back. I honestly would be sooo happy if Harry Lloyd got the role. Please Moffat.
CRITERIA
So if I can't pick a specific actor, and let's face it the list above isn't great, then I can pick criteria:
Out of the ones I have suggested, I'd want Redmayne or Lloyd the most, just because of the unpredictability and cos I like them as actors. But it's likely a 'jobbing' actor will be picked, that I've not heard of. That's fair enough, I look forward to finding out.
And as for how Matt will regenerate - we'll have to wait and see....
But please, let the word 'love' not be mentioned nor the Sonic Screwdriver overused in his last episode.
So who should be the new Doctor? It's times like this I realise how behind I am with modern actors and possibly actresses. I could easily suggest actors from The Prisoner or Sapphire & Steel, but that's not much good. So after some research, a delve through my own memory and a look at some other lists - here's who I believe should play The Twelfth Doctor. These are in no particular order.
A. BEN WHISHAW
Probably one of my top choices after his performance in Skyfall. He's quite Matt Smith like in look and probably age, so maybe on this occasion it wouldn't work. However, he's certainly a good enough actor to play the part, and it's the quality of acting that matters more than quirkiness of personality. Which is why some comedians and comedy actors people are mentioning, who I've not really any idea about, would be bad choices.
B. EDDIE REDMAYNE
This one's down to BBC Breakfast, but it's been in my head for a lot longer. At one stage I was planning a series of Figure Adventures with a custom Eddie Redmayne figure (I never made). He'd certainly be different. I've seen him in both Birdsong and Les Miserables, and in both he just stares at people and falls in love. So it'd be good to see him have to act differently, and he'd bring something different to the role. I actually could not imagine what he'd do, and that unpredictability would be great. No one would be able to imagine what he'd be like, but it would certainly be one of the strangest incarnations of the Time Lord - so why not pick Eddie? (Well, he's doing massive films for one..)
C. ANDREW-LEE POTTS
This is another name that gets thrown about by fandom, and probably the same fandom that throw round Benedict Cumberbatch's name. But I think he'd be good, a bit more predictable than Redmayne, and perhaps too used to the kind of circles Doctor Who gets mixed with. I'd feel comfortable with this choice though, but would hope he could do something a little bit different to surprise us all.
D. SIR IAN McKELLEN
Because obviously, he is the best actor in creation, and there should be no other choice. He's not too old either. And don't even get me started on the people who say the Doctor needs to be good looking.
E. JAMES McAVOY
He's both a good actor and I think, a good choice. He's, again, perhaps far too big for the series, but it'd be interesting to see him tackle the role.
F. OLIVIA COLMAN
Yes - a woman! I'm not sure a woman would work at the minute, for the following reason:
I was discussing this with a friend, a female, the other day when watching City of Death (she made it to the end of Part One) and she said there should be a female Doctor. And my issue with that is that it would be so difficult not to write them as River Song. Especially if Moffat, who seems to write most female characters the same, is staying on for Series 8, apparently. If you had a different writer who could handle female characters well, and a 'normal' actress, who wasn't picked on personality on character acting, then it might work. But at the minute, an over the top female actress written by Moffat seems too likely and would be awful to watch.
So Olivia would be a good choice, she seems to be a good mix of 'normal' actress and comedy actress, and she can act all kind of genres (and she comes across as a little bit insane, which is always good). I'd be confident with this choice - but perhaps not with Moffat as the writer.
G. ANEURIN BARNARD
I need to thank Blogtor Who for this suggestion because I'd never even heard of him. He acted alongside Karen Gillan in 'We'll Take Manhattan', and he's definitely got an unearthly, darker look about him. If the Doctor is meant to be becoming darker than maybe it's time for an actor that reflects that, and after watching some brief clips and looking at a few pictures, I'm thinking maybe he might be a good choice. He's unknown enough, he's interesting enough, and with the right look, he should be a possible. Oh and he's Welsh, which is awesome.
NEW SUGGESTION: H. HARRY LLOYD
Here's another suggestion! Harry Lloyd would probably be my ideal choice. He played Banes wonderfully in Human Nature/Family of Blood, and he's a superb actor. He's posher (which is part of the criteria I mentioned below) and he would have a more serious approach to the role, which is good, because we need a bit of that drama and mystery back. I honestly would be sooo happy if Harry Lloyd got the role. Please Moffat.
CRITERIA
So if I can't pick a specific actor, and let's face it the list above isn't great, then I can pick criteria:
- Older. Not too much older, unless it's Ian McKellen, but definitely older than Smith was.
- Posher. That'd be interesting.
- Without dark hair. But not necessarily ginger...
- Absolutely under no circumstances ever a fan film Doctor. Ever.
Out of the ones I have suggested, I'd want Redmayne or Lloyd the most, just because of the unpredictability and cos I like them as actors. But it's likely a 'jobbing' actor will be picked, that I've not heard of. That's fair enough, I look forward to finding out.
And as for how Matt will regenerate - we'll have to wait and see....
But please, let the word 'love' not be mentioned nor the Sonic Screwdriver overused in his last episode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)