Psycho (1960) Review

I first learnt about Psycho in Year 8, in a Music lesson.

When looking at how music changed a scene, we were shown the shower scene of the film - and we watched it a few times and made notes. Then I kind of forgot about it, until I saw the trailer for the film Hitchcock, something which I now want to see all of. Since that trailer, the film's been in the back of my mind. On the shelves of HMV whispering "buy me".

So I bought it. And it's great.

Hitchcock was the "master of suspense", and Psycho certainly delivers that. I don't watch many 'horror' films, in fact any, and while Psycho isn't really the type of horror you find today - it's unnerving. The ability to unnerve the audience is much more powerful. The one thing everyone knows about Psycho is the shower scene - and I knew that happened fairly early on. Happening just before the half way mark, it really does change proceedings and twist things around.

But it leaves the question - what's the film about?

Because up until that point, or ten minutes before where the Bates Motel is introduced, the story has no purpose. It's simply about Marion stealing some money for her boyfriend but never giving it to him. (On that note - the speaking over the car scenes stuff is great, it gives you an insight into Marion and other characters' heads, something which the whole film is good at.) So until the shower scene happens - the film has no real purpose. We only start to examine Bates because of Marion - but we only really learn about him and his Mother after the scene has taken place.

It's just as well that scene's in the film - because that's the point. Which is slightly ironic - considering the biggest surprise in the film is its biggest promotion and most significant moment.

Aside from that, I knew little about the film. But it definitely didn't let me down - it is great. It takes a while to get moving, but there are some really profound conversations. The stuff with the Police Officer with and following Marion seems a little bit like padding - but everything else is great. It's brilliant psychological, and there's thousands of types of analysis you can put into it - which makes it my kind of film.

In terms of the ending - I saw it coming. But that doesn't make it any less weird, or unnerving. I won't put any spoilers in, because it really helped me not knowing what was coming. After the shower scene I was in the dark, going on my own guess work. I didn't know that certain things were going to happen in certain places - and even the trailer with Hitchcock himself shows that. Not knowing anything about it really made the film feel creepier, and it made it feel more real as well. The characters in the film are all completely believable and even likeable most of the time - and that's what makes certain bits creepier.

It's no wonder the film made Anthony Perkins a star - he's wonderful. His performance shows true acting, and he's great to watch on screen. And sometimes - he's too creepy to watch comfortably - and that shows how good an actor he was.

I've probably missed out a thousand things about the film - but all you need to know is that it's great. Don't look up the plot before you watch it - because it's great to be surprised by it. It will creep you out if you're an audience member, inspire you if you're a film maker or an actor, and should be on everyone's list of 'best ever films'.

I would say a bit more - but Mother wouldn't like that.

Peter Capaldi & Doctor Who Live

Before I continue, I'd just like to say I am not judging Capaldi's performance before he's started. I'm not forming an opinion on his Doctor, and I'm not questioning his ability to play the Doctor.

But - I do have an opinion on his casting, in a "compared to everyone else - would you pick him?" kind of way.

The short answer is no, I probably wouldn't pick Capaldi if I was Show Runner. I'd have definitely gone with Matt and just written darker scripts for him, but Capaldi is probably not a choice I'd have made. I was explaining to Mum after the announcement that if I was lining all the potential actors up - so maybe Anuerin Barnard, Harry Lloyd, Peter Capaldi, Other People On My List, and some others, Capaldi is not a choice I'd make. And that's simply because in my eyes, if it's possible, he's too well known. The way he was revealed didn't help, and I think that's more what I'm against. So at least - even if I picked Capaldi, who definitely has a more classic look that I'm excited to see him use - I wouldn't have revealed him on Doctor Who Live.

For me, Doctor Who is a show that has reached popularity it never expected to reach again, yet it's not a show that fits Saturday Night shows in the mould of a game show or of X Factor.  Doctor Who Live, as lovely as it was seeing all these celebrities feel a real enthusiasm for the show, and as funny as Rufus Hound's mistakes were, just felt wrong for the series. The montage of clips with a John Hurt narration was excellent. I've missed that kind of thing that Confidential used to be. Talking to the old companions, talking to Bernard Cribbins, and even Zoe Ball's enthusiasm, it was all lovely. But - shouting Peter Capaldi as if he'd just won a talent contest sends shivers down my spine. In a bad way. And this is where the "he's too well known" doubt comes from.

Before there was an 'intimacy' to the announcements, there was a kind of "I'm the only one watching this - he's my Doctor". Capaldi's announcement in front of viewers worldwide emphasises the fact that Doctor Who is no longer a nice little programme that is deservedly popular - it is a brand. So fittingly, they've cast an actor who's popular, and who goes with the brand. He is a face for Doctor Who. For me, it feels more like "but he's Peter Capaldi! He's only gonna do a 20 minute Comic Relief special". He's that well known, it seems like we don't deserve to have him. It's great that he wants to do it, it's great that he's a fan (his letter in the Radio Times got him a lot of credit from me) and it's great that he seems genuinely nice to the fans. That all matters. But - it still feels like a bit of celebrity casting, and the very high profile way he was announced means that that was more important. The brand overtook the show.

Of course, even though he is famous, he can still do the job and very well I expect. I am excited to see what he does. He just doesn't quite feel like an actual Doctor yet. The way it was announced makes it seem even more showy. The other thing is that we missed out on a whole load of stuff. I want in-depth Moffat interviews - I want an in-depth Capaldi interview - I want decent promo pictures rather than just a white background one. Doctor Who Live replaced all the good stuff Doctor Who Confidential used to do (bar the montages) with Saturday Night (even though it was a Sunday) showy things. And in a way - it reduced the significance of Capaldi's casting. It was like OH MY GOD A FAMOUS MAN WILL BE THE DOCTOR not THIS IS YOUR NEW DOCTOR, BY THE WAY HE'S CAPALDI as it should have been.

So I definitely think Doctor Who Live missed several tricks. I do object to the way it was announced, as it focussed more on Capaldi's status as famous, rather than his ability to the job. That's probably influenced my bias about him being too famous.

I am very excited to see what he does though. I'm sure he'll do a great job. I want darker storylines, no love storylines, and at last, we might be rid of the fan girls. There are thousands of opportunities his casting allows.

I just hope the opportunity to publicise/merchandise it more isn't the only one taken advantage of. And they haven't made a good start.

Sherlock: Series 1 VS Series 2

This is going to be a tricky one.. Might be controversial.

Over the last week I've been rewatching Sherlock Series 1 and 2, culminating in the BBC One repeat of "The Reichenbach Fall". And I've had a few thoughts about both series - the merits or otherwise of both of them. It's lead me to the conclusion that Series 1 is amazing, and near perfect. But it's also lead me to the conclusion that Series 2 is just rather good. Just rather good. It's not really, in my eyes, the standard of Series 1 at all.

Series 1 is amazing. "A Study In Pink" is a near-perfect opening episode - and you can read my thoughts about that here. "The Blind Banker" is a stranger choice. As far as I can work out, it's more to showcase modern London/Cardiff than it is to showcase Sherlock Holmes' stories. It is a new story for Sherlock - and although it's probably not anyone's favourite of the series ('cos it can't compare to the others), it is very good, and I definitely prefer it now to when I first saw. Dimmock doesn't seem to have much point in the story - let's face it, second story in we want Lestrade or at least Gregson - but overall it is a good and clever story. It's fairly basic, and the "writing on the screen" technique is used well and effectively. "The Great Game" is another spin-off of various Sherlock Holmes stories, and it is awesome. I can easily sit and watch it all the way through, follow the story, and still be interested by it. The confrontation with Moriarty at the end is electrifying and the cliffhanger works really well. This is Sherlock Holmes made lovingly, effectively, and modestly. Can you sense what I'm going to say about Series Two?

Series Two is very good - and the stories are very good to watch. There are moments in all three that are really good and show that the show has moved on, grown up (already) and still keeping up the high standard. Indeed, the whole series operates on a very high standard. It's just simply that in my opinion - Series Two isn't as good. "A Scandal in Belgravia" starts off very well, if we ignore the naked Irene Adler, which seemed to serve no purpose other than... Well actually what purpose did it solve? I know it's explained in the story - but it feels a bit unnecessary. The most part of "A Scandal in Belgravia" is very much "Several Sex Scandals in Belgravia" - and it does feel a little bit too much. Steven Moffat, writing about sex too much? He's never done that before. (Sarcasm.) I think Arthur Conan Doyle would be spinning in his grave at some moments - surely Irene Adler is there to show an intelligence equal to Sherlock's - not this and also several innuendos.

There are several moments in the story that are really good. The resolution to the Series 1 cliffhanger is awesome, the client scenes are great, the moment the bed tilts up into shot is stunning. The SHER at the end is amazing. Unfortunately, amongst sex references and lots of plots crammed into one, the story gets lost in the middle. When it changes to being Christmas I was confused. I'm still confused. Yes, it looks lovely - but for me it's wrong for this story. There was plenty of time to include this scene. John having a string of girlfriends feels wrong as well - he's shown as a clever, ordinary, but a bit brilliant man. Not an everyday bloke. At least - not in the sense he needs loads of girlfriends. The whole Adler's dead - oh five minutes later she isn't - oh now Sherlock's depressed FOR NO REASON about a girl he met FOR FIVE MINUTES. Yes she probably appeals to him - but not that much. It's just strange - it's played a bit a bit too much from what's in the story. The idea about the plane is very clever but again, it's too much. The whole American storyline is again too much. Simplicity and cleverness worked in Series 1. "A Scandal in Belgravia" is clever - but not simple by any means. The screen trickery is good, but perhaps a little too much now.  Maybe they were trying too hard. Either way - not a favourite.

"The Hounds of Baskerville" - why HoundS, there was only really one and a drug, so it should be the HOUND of Baskerville - is probably the best of the series. But it's still not got the rewatch factor. I saw it a few weeks ago - and didn't really want to see it again as part of my rewatch this week. It is very clever, and like "A Scandal in Belgravia", the first time you notice it you see some really good elements. The scene in the lab where John's locked in was actually scary (TV doesn't tend to scare me that much) when I first saw it - and it retains that element even now. It is a really clever, exciting and scary story - the moment with the gas mask, the creepy old picture, the revelation of HOUND, they're all brilliant. It's held together really well too, and it feels more Sherlock Series 1, it's more simple. It tries to be less showy and so works better.

"The Reichenbach Fall" I loved when I first saw it. Who didn't? But again, as with the others, I noticed problems then. The main one being the scene on the roof. It's too long! At first it's another dramatic Moriarty/Sherlock scene - but then Sherlock climbs up to jump off then talks again, then Moriarty will reveal something then they'll talk then they'll talk a bit more. The tension's ruined a little bit by how long the scene takes - it  make you lose interest. But obviously - the cliffhanger is amazing. The episode really does feel tense all the way along - moments still make me shiver even now. Sherlock, despite being the focus, doesn't seem to do much in the episode apart from go along on other people's movements - and perhaps it needs a bit more of him. Maybe it doesn't work. But actually, forget what I said about Hounds, THIS is the best story of Series 2. All the same though, the essence of Sherlock seems to have been lost a bit under the showy, complex storylines.

It happens in most series. They tend to be a bit pleased with themselves in Series 2 - so it pushes it a bit further, with jokes, plots, scenes. And sometimes it works - sometimes it's too much. And I think for Sherlock - it's a bit too much.

So Series 1 definitely works better. Series 2 is impressive, but that doesn't fix the jumble of a story like "A Scandal in Belgravia". Eventually, Series 3 will get here too. I'm not looking forward to Martin Freeman shouting and breathing heavily when Sherlock's back and I'm not looking forward to them not talking for a lot of the first episode. But apart from that - should be good. I hope.

Sherlock | A Study In Pink Review

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.

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?

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.

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.