Southcliffe Part 1

Well advertised on almost all Channel 4 side shows, Southcliffe has promised to be up there with the great thriller dramas, leveling up to the brilliantly popular ITV Broadchurch and Luther, and many of us went into it expecting luminous characters, heart rendering story lines and ingenuous plot devices, all of them building up the grand finale of the second part. Unfortunately, this was not delivered.

Whilst the show does boast a variety of characters, from family man and news reporter David Whitehead (Rory Kinnear), to traumatic and grieving Christopher (Joe Dempsie), returning, alongside many others from Afghanistan, and they do play their parts well, the characters themselves all seem relatively 2 dimensional and a little bland. The Afghan traumas are a little overused in TV drama productions, and many of the PTSD portrayals are unoriginal and lacking in depth. The mental health side of the show seems unrealistic as well, with nearly everyone in the village of Southcliffe having some sort of traumatic past, or mental disorder. This makes for a disappointingly depressing viewing, in the way that we are shown no elements of happiness, and the few smiles on the show are increasingly fake.

Another problem I found with the programme is that it was very difficult to pick out a solid central story line, as from the beginning the focus is on so many different people at once, and all of them having quite different lives, the village being the only thing they share. We are, at first, led to believe that the focus is to be on burdening psychotic Stephen and his dementia-ridden grandmother,which then switches to the news reporter's supposed stalking of his ex-wife and child, and then back again to Chris' grief after losing his friend to severe injuries and his privately medicated shell shock.

This, however, is not the biggest disappointment. Whilst Sean Harris, playing ex-war veteran and now psychotic carer Stephen does play a haunting and desperately in need of help man, many of his interactions with the other characters in the show are missed due to a massive case of mumbling. I personally found that so many of his lines, which must have been so carefully written out by the show's writers were impossible to understand and therefore created a lot of confusion in regards to the events happening within the plot.

Meanwhile, the premise of the show; the actual shooting of the victims in the village, is only featured at the start of the the programme, in contrast to the other character's back stories. Therefore, overall, whilst the drama had large amounts of promise, it sadly did not reach it's full potential, and we can only hope that the next part of the series will be a little more fast paced, and a little more exciting than the first.

Mulan

Released in 1998, the story of the young woman who saved her father's life, and pretty much the whole of China, Disney's Mulan is arguably the greatest animated film to come out of the woodwork in the history of the industry. 

And...here's why.

For starters, unlike so many other Disney 'princesses', Mulan isn't typically pretty. Sure, she gets dressed up, and made up, and turned into a glorified geisha, but it could be argued that it's then, and only then, that she messes up, and shows her long sleeved, sweeping skirted flaws to China's most prized matchmaker, who then foreshadows the entire film by shouting at our heroine 'you will never bring honour to your family!' But, of course, she does, and does so brilliantly, without using painted lips, big blue eyes and overly ribboned dresses in the process. This speaks volume about the film in general, as it reveals to the naive and underfed audiences that you don't need to be pretty to be a hero. She isn't unattractive by far, but she might well have been for the lack of difference it would have made. 

In fact, it may have even helped her in her own role in the film, as striding into an army base looking convincingly like a young man was, of course, crucial to the plot, so had she been coyly feminine and petite, she would've been thrown out in disgust; therefore proving that good looks won't get you everywhere, and bad looks can sometimes get you anywhere. 

The gender equality elements to the animation, as well, are specifically brilliant, as yes, it's jaw-dropping that one 16 year old woman can save China, but with three other men dressed as women as well?  And would they have been able to save China without the role of women in China at the time? No. And would Mulan have been able to save the Emperor without them? No she would not. And throughout this entire fight sequence, one song is being sung ‘I’ll make a man out of you’. 

However, ‘man’ is not used in a gender associated sense here, it’s literally used to describe someone’s changing from a male to a stronger male, as well as a change from a female to a stronger female. So we have men, dressed as women, and saving the world, and becoming stronger ‘men’ for it. 

It’s not a feminist film, it’s an equalitist film. Men and women fight well. Men can be strong dressed as women, women can be strong dressed as men. Small dragons can be as powerful as giant spirits. Women can bring pride to their families, both through marriage, and through fighting an army. Neither one is any less important than the other, they’re both just as crucial in making a good person. 

The 'love story' in Mulan is interesting as well, as arguably there are two. The love Shang feels for Mulan once he discovers who she truly is, and the love he already felt for Ping without even knowing so. With it being a Disney film, all homosexual references are, of course, satanic, but it would be ignorant to assume that Shang's feelings for Mulan only began when he discovered she was a woman. As men, the pair have a fascinating relationship, from the unequal beginnings as teacher and failing student, to mutual respect, and compassion for one another. However, this relationship is predictably cut short before it can develop further by Mulan's unveiling as a female due to an injury at her side, something which she gained saving Shang. Upon discovering this, though, Shang is furious, and is even vicious towards her, just because her sex was not the one he believed it to be. It seemed to me as though he missed the illusion of Ping more than he enjoyed the revelation of Mulan, and doesn't that just speak volumes about his characterisation as a 'straight' soldier? 

All in all, though, the love story is only a very small element to the film, with other beautifully lit characters taking center stage in the heroics. A favourite of mine, personally, would be substitute friend, parent, guardian and 'sassy' gay best friend Mushu, who as well as being the comedic spark in the film, also has his own sub-plot similar to Mulan's, one of self discovery and worth, and of simply being proud of himself for once. Another jeweled character for me would be Mulan's father, as he portrays a beautiful weary parent, as well as trying to be the man his country needed him to be, despite his crippling flaws and injuries preventing him from being so. This is a man who would willingly cast aside his life, just to make his family proud of him, and for him to gain some worth in the world, and it's easy to believe Mulan was drawing inspiration from him in her own personal quest to do the same.

To conclude, Mulan is possibly my all time favourite Disney film, and as well as having a multitude of elegant metaphors and social portrayals, it is also thoroughly enjoyable to watch, is also followed by a surprisingly good sequel: Mulan 2, making the franchise an all round success. 

Teen Wolf: Episode 1

There seems to be an unwritten rule about the pilot episodes of TV shows; in that they must all be shockingly awful, the acting grating, and the dialogue flimsy. Bad special effects and mediocre plot lines go hand in hand with what seems like the overwhelming rush to introduce every single character all at once, in the hope that at least one might be interesting enough to keep the viewers hooked, in the hope that it might get even that tiny bit better. Even the sacred BBC’s Sherlock had that one dodgy pilot episode which was never shown, but simply added onto the DVD for laughs.

Don’t get me wrong, Teen Wolf makes no exception to this rule, but on the scale of terrible pilot episodes…it wasn’t horrific. The overall concept of the show isn’t fantastic, with teenage angst and traumatic werewolf gore being two of the most overdone genres in fiction, and some of the stereotypical high school character archetypes have been rammed in, but there were some surprisingly comedic moments, with the two main characters, Scott and Stiles, lightening almost the entire episode in their unoriginal, yet unexpected humour isms.

The plot of the episode was relatively straightforward, and incredibly easy to follow, with the destination between good characters and bad being made fairly obvious from the get go, and the typically damsel in distress figure being surprisingly likeable…for now, anyway. The relationships between the characters are clearly going to be the strong point of the show, from the friendship of the boys, and the darker, twisted relationships between Scott and the werewolves. Romantic relationships seem to have been dulled a little against the general werewolf theme, but they are there nevertheless, with Scott’s romantic interest only seemingly being introduced for the purposes of the plot twist at the very end of the episode, something which is sloppy writing at best.

The technical elements to the show were also generally good, and I was pleasantly surprised by the soundtrack, with the original score being used just as fittingly as the popular tracks, both recognisable and uplifting at parts. The special effects, whilst at the start of the episode could be considered a little hammy definitely improved in time for the big transformation scene. Werewolf transformation scenes seem to be defined along a scale from ‘bad’ to, well, Twilight, however Teen Wolf seemed to take it in a different direction, using less of the fake fur, and more of the cleverly dipped camera shots to create the effect of the wolf. The camera work in the episode is, admittedly, impressive, something which perhaps sets it aside from many of the other supernatural shows, with their overly dramatic zooms, and lagging speed shots.

Overall, with any pilot, there’s room for improvement, and hopefully some character development at least, but as a whole, it wasn’t bad, and has definitely peaked my interest enough to stick around for the next episode. 

Amazing Grace

The film Amazing Grace portrayed William Wilberforce (Ioan Gruffurd) as the dashing hero, and told the story of his triumph over the slave trade. Although the film was very moving and engaging, it was also very biased whilst leaving out great chunks of information. For instance, Phyllis Weakly, a former black slave who, like Olaudah Eqiano, published a book about slavery and sold it, but Weakly wasn’t even mentioned.

Money was a great issue too, but no one seemed particularly bothered that the abolition of slavery would come at a price, quite literally. It appears that Wilberforce never even considered this.

William Pitt, a former prime minister and friend of Wilberforce was included but we are told that he turned away from the project, leaving William alone.

Some facts were solid truth though e.g. Wilberforce's’ wife Barbara was a friend of her husbands’ cousin but it also portrays John Newton writing the song ‘Amazing Grace’ and his significance to the abolition of slavery.

The film may have been wrong or inaccurate in the descriptions of the slaves themselves. It scarcely mentions the rebellions aboard slave ships or the fact that Captains and Plantation owners were terrified of an attack or revolt. Perhaps the film researchers had a lot more information on Wilberforce but his supposedly solo-attempt at completing an extremely long petition was in fact composed by Thomas Clarkson, with no mention of any help from William.

Despite this Amazing Grace is a brilliant film with a lot of events based on reality. But if the audience knew nothing about the abolition, they would’ve been led to believe that the slave trade ended there and then, all thanks to William Wilberforce.

This information would be wrong. The slave trade was only abolished in England and even the British could still own slaves and put  them to work. The complete abolition was around 1838, with thanks to Wilberforce and Clarkson, Pitt, the Quakers, Newton, Granville and William Sharp, plus so many other brilliant people, making the world that little bit better.

Nanny McPhee

‘When you need me, but do not want me, I must stay. When you want me, but no longer need me, I must go’.

Set in a time period that no one’s quite sure of, and filmed in a house that would make even the tallest of bungalows weep, we start our cinematic adventure half asleep, and lulled into serenity by the soothing, dulcet tune of Colin Firth, welcoming us into the world of The Sound Of Music Gone Wrong.

This film is one of those films that takes the word ‘Juxtaposition’, considers it for a while, but eventually throws it out of the comparative window, claiming it to be far too simple. It’s got a  beautifully jaunty rhythm to it, colourful and fantastic in it’s construction, but as fairy tales go, it has to be one of the dark ones. Death surrounds the scenes like a veil, whether it be in the teapot on the chair of their father’s dead wife; or the many heart stopping and incredulous tricks performed by worryingly young and doubtedly sane siblings.

Nanny McPhee has the unique charm of taking quite a dark and twisted fairy-tale, of evil stepmothers, witches, widows and fears and layering it up with food fights, and children and fun. In particular Thomas Sangster, playing eldest Brown boy, Simon is cast into such a relatable role, as both the leader of the pack, and the one who needs the most leading. He’s the typical stubborn, moody adolescent, but he’s clever too, and he’s changeable, something which obviously inspires the other children enormously. The family dynamics are clearly the heart of the story, and it’s refreshing to see Colin Firth play such a comfortable fatherly role, taking all his Eton mannerisms and turning them into paternal flaws, and faults.

Emma Thomas starring as title character Nanny McPhee is interesting choice, but nether less a good one. Nanny McPhee as a role is terrifying, and brilliant and so heartbreakingly melancholy that it takes you until the end of the film to realise who the story was actually about. It’s easy to become absorbed in the humour and the comfort of the happy family ending, but in the end, it’s her story really. It’s Nanny McPhee showing us her finest work. We see this children well mannered and well behaved, and know that that is how she always saw them, as children that were already fixed, however unwillingly. It’s a heart-breaking thought that, in the end, she doesn’t get to be wanted, she doesn’t get to be loved like Evangeline, or like Papa, and she doesn’t become one of the family until she’s already moved on and left.

There are so many morals to this story that, when thought about, it is the  equivalent of two years social teachings condensed into two hours of fiction. Respect your parents, blood is thicker than water, money isn’t everything, do as you’re told….But the one moral I found the most interesting, personally, isn’t really a moral at all. At the start of the film, we are shown Nanny McPhee to be, for lack of other words, ugly, and a little bit frightening with her protruding tooth, bulbous nose and hairy warts, but with every lesson the children learn, she becomes that little more beautiful, until at the end of the story, she’s just as pretty as the bride she stands next to.  In terms of morals, this, for all intensive purposes,  gives us the impression that the more nice things we do, the more beautiful we become, and given that the children seem to warm to their Nanny with every wart she loses; that being attractive will make people like us. Of course, for adults, this is an obvious metaphor for inner beauty, and the attractiveness of a soul, but for children, I find that this can be ever so misleading.

In conclusion, however shallow the humour, and however pretty the actors, this film is incredibly structured, with so many inspiring teachings for children, and even some lewd innuendos for the adults. The rule about working with children and animals doesn’t seem to apply here, as every single part is spot on and perfected, and it is definitely well worth a watch.

Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares USA

Gordon Ramsay. Famous Michelin Star chef, turned TV star and restaurant developer. And full time potty mouth, judging by his attitudes on Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares.

The structure of the show is simple: Gordon visits a failing restaurant, eats a terrible meal, tells everyone what they're doing wrong, argues with the owner, someone cries, Gordon shouts, restaurant gets a brand new makeover and the customers come flying in again. However, whilst this is the general plot of every single episode in the series; individually, they're actually incredibly enjoyable. 

Like most reality television programmes, the staff Gordon goes to meet are bursting with character and are very easy to critise, whether it be a xenophobic widow, stubbornly fighting from her kitchen's corner or a delusional Italian, skimping on the salmon and charging at the Chef, and at times they will drive the audience to insanity. The good kind of insanity though; the healthy rage that can only be stemmed from watching a fully grown man spit in a celebrity chef's face and being too many countries away to deal with it. 

Many of the episodes are purely frustrating, but this doesn't stop them from being infuriatingly addictive, and they seem to get more shocking as the series goes on. Disgusting kitchens, horrified customers and uncooked food must all be seen and sorted by Gordon, who in turn seems even more frustrated than us. One of the more surprising elements of the episodes, however, are when he stops being the loud mouthed chef, and becomes a friend to the owners instead. Usually once the tears have flown from the broken hearted, and penniless waitress' face, Chef Ramsay becomes more Jeremy Kyle than anything else, and does his best to fix up the staff and the shredded families involved in running the establishments, instead of simply taking over and doing it all himself.

He does do a reasonable amount of cooking in the show; though unfortunately, most of it is done off camera, and the meals are simply laid out on the nearest table on the morning of the restaurant's 're-launch' to be studied and copied by the other chefs. The major revamp of the places themselves are out of his control as well, and usually the entire eatery is made-over in a little under 12 hours. A little unrealistic by anyone's standard.

One of my personal favourite elements to the show is the sheer volume of crumbling restaurants in America, as the series spans over 4 seasons, each having it's own variety of revolting and revolutionary failures. The only downside is, we don't get to find out if Ramsay's changes actually work. Many of the episodes end minutes after the re-launch is over, showing us just one night of his good work, before he leaves to visit another state, and if I were to criticise the show at all; it would be this. Show us what happened next, Gordon. We need to know!

Toy Story 3

Our story starts with a 17 year old Andy leaving for college, and leaving behind him his home, his family and of course, his beloved toys. The toys, however, aren't ready to leave him. After being stuck in a trunk, alone and un-played with for far too many years, they must await their destiny; are they going to college, the attic, the donations box, or, worst of all, are they being thrown away as junk? Before Andy can make his choice however, the decision is made for him, and home begins to shrink behind them with every box packed.

Every scene is a new chapter to the story and with each new twist, the idea of a happy ending is pulled further from them. In some scenes, it's not a case of love or loss; it's a case of life or death for our heroes, (one scene in particular has to be applauded for it's ability to reduce solid, emotionally stable adults into nervous wrecks, literally gripping their seats with fear...and for a supposed 'child's film', that is quite an achievement.)

The general stereotype of toys is warped into a twisted version of our lives, where humans are monsters, are incapable of love, and as the plot unravels, the audience is drawn into the conclusion that in the end, the plastic toys turn out to be more alive than we are. Ever loyal Woody especially becomes so human in his quest to return to Andy, even leaving his friends behind in the process, that when he finds a sweeter life than the one that he's trying to run back to, he barely takes a minutes hesitation in choosing between them. To consider this from a more controversial point of view though, perhaps Woody wasn't acting more human. He was acting more toy, and shaming every single one of us in the process.

The older audience will see the heartbreak all of the toys go through, and will continously be reaching out to the screen, to take a paw or hand in theirs and save their childhood from slipping away with the rolling credits at the end of the film. For the younger viewers, this film will do nothing but inspire them to gather up their own toys, hold on tight, and begin their own adventures with their make-believe families, before it's all too late. Whilst this film is slightly darker than expected, a lot of the deeper references will be lost on younger children, and will serve to amuse the elder ones. 

Sitting in the dark cave of a cinema or living room, this wondrously emotional film can shock you, and absorb you, make you laugh, make you cry, and will definetly bring out the child in all of us. It will definitely keep you guessing. Will Buzz win over Jessie? Does Barbie's new boyfriend Ken have a dark secret? How much darkness can a day care center hold? And will all the toys get their happy ending?