Showing posts with label Film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 October 2014
Sunday, 30 December 2012
The Hobbit
The film off the Hobbit has opened to mixed but generally favourable reviews. Having seen it in 3D I would award it an excellent rating. The critics seem to have honed in on a few points - the length of the film, that the story takes a while to get going and the use of high speed 3D.
The first two points are related. By making use of the other writings of Tolkien, particularly the appendixes of the Lord of the Rings, the film is able to fill in the background information to the dwarfs quest.
This actually makes the film easier to follow and is to be welcomed in my view. The film takes a while to 'get going' because the book takes a while to get going, but the early chapters of the hobbit are brilliantly imagined - keeping faithful to Tolkiens story without allowing the very childish passages of the book to change the tone of the film.
The bewildered Bilbo Baggins as the dwarfs ransack his larder is played to perfection. Of course it it difficult to distinguish all 14 dwarfs - but it is thus in the book and the film does a better job than the book does !
The film is largely faithful to the book, with the usual cinematic licence needed to convert what is on the page into something on the screen.
The encounter with the trolls is comic, and that with the goblins scary and that with Gollum deeply moving. It is striking that Gollum comes across so sympathetically and one feels for a creature who is actually - only an animation. Definitely a highlight of the film.
It is great to see Radaghast the Brown given some scenes and these add to the arc of the story, especially as in years to come people will watch the hobbit followed by the extended version of the Lord of the Rings.
I didn't watch in the high speed version so i can't comment on that but The 3d effects are used sparingly and effectively. I particularly enjoyed the eagles in flight and the various birds and butterflies flitting out into mid air.
The only worrying note - the great Goblin reminded me of the late astronomer Patrick Moore.
The first two points are related. By making use of the other writings of Tolkien, particularly the appendixes of the Lord of the Rings, the film is able to fill in the background information to the dwarfs quest.
This actually makes the film easier to follow and is to be welcomed in my view. The film takes a while to 'get going' because the book takes a while to get going, but the early chapters of the hobbit are brilliantly imagined - keeping faithful to Tolkiens story without allowing the very childish passages of the book to change the tone of the film.
The bewildered Bilbo Baggins as the dwarfs ransack his larder is played to perfection. Of course it it difficult to distinguish all 14 dwarfs - but it is thus in the book and the film does a better job than the book does !
The film is largely faithful to the book, with the usual cinematic licence needed to convert what is on the page into something on the screen.
The encounter with the trolls is comic, and that with the goblins scary and that with Gollum deeply moving. It is striking that Gollum comes across so sympathetically and one feels for a creature who is actually - only an animation. Definitely a highlight of the film.
It is great to see Radaghast the Brown given some scenes and these add to the arc of the story, especially as in years to come people will watch the hobbit followed by the extended version of the Lord of the Rings.
I didn't watch in the high speed version so i can't comment on that but The 3d effects are used sparingly and effectively. I particularly enjoyed the eagles in flight and the various birds and butterflies flitting out into mid air.
The only worrying note - the great Goblin reminded me of the late astronomer Patrick Moore.
Tuesday, 14 August 2012
Harold Steptoe - The life of Harry H Corbett
The actor Harry H Corbett is instantly recognisable to many people as Harold Steptoe - I imagine that more people will recognise Harold Steptoe than will be able to name the actor who played the role.
Strangely, there hasn't been a biography of Harry H Corbett till now. The attitude of Harry and his wife and family was to let his work speak for itself -
Sadly this biography was rather prompted by a couple of docu-dramas which were very misleading. When Steptoe met son on Channel 4 and The Curse of Steptoe on the BBC.
The care taken by BBC is easily illustrated. They had the actor playing Harry H Corbett wear brown contact lenses - to hide his blue eyes. Harry had blue eyes - as any colour photo or colour episode would have shown !
One of the authors of the docu-drama discovered the 'shocking' fact that when Corbett and Brambell toured Australia they travelled in separate cars and had separate dressing rooms. This is given as evidence that they hated each other, rather than the more obvious conclusion that Harry travelled with his family and that as stars they would expect their own dressing rooms.
Despite entirely justified complaints that the programme was unfair and inaccurate, it took the BBC years to concede the obvious and grudgingly accept they were wrong. Does it matter if these things are wrong ? Even today Harry's co-star Wilfrid Brambell name is often given as Wilfred Bramble ! If Harold wins the Battle of Hastings - is that artistic license ?
Is Mel Gibson's Film Braveheart a film or a history lesson?
So Harry's daughter, the actress and author Susannah Corbett has written the book (The Front legs of the cow, ISBN 978-0-7524-7682-7 the History Press)
It is an excellent book, well written and researched and comprehensive. May favourite discovery was that the film The Bargee - was originally given an X certificate :-O by after cuts was releases as a U. That such drastic editing was made makes me yearn for a directors cut, to see the original concept of the film.
The appeal of Steptoe and Son was enormous, viewing figures of 27 million ! That puts it up there with the Olympics opening ceremony, Royal weddings, etc
Was Harry H Corbett trapped by the curse of Steptoe ?
There is a debate about actors and actresses and the 'dangers' of type casting and being for every associated with one role.
I think the dangers are overplayed - most actors wish to earn a living- they have lifestyles and usually families to support. To be cast as a major part in a long running series is usually seen as a godsend.
The evidence of Harry being 'cursed' by Steptoe is rather thin. As he himself pointed out - "I had appeared a hundred times on TV in the six years before Harold Steptoe came into my life. And I can't count the number of parts I have played in the theatre."
He appeared in at least 32 films, and actually the money he earned from Steptoe and Son allowed him to have more choice about what other acting he did.
Harry wasn't the stereotype clown that wanted to play Shakespeare - he was an actor, not a comic and he did play Shakespeare.
I fear the reality is that it is the public as much as casting directors who type-cast actors. In the USA, the film system was basically run on actors playing to type.
Few actors are lucky enough to make a massive impression in more than one TV role. David Jason - as Derrick Trotter, Granville, Pa Larkin and Jack Frost did it.
Harry wasn't stopped from having a glittering film career by Steptoe but by the state of the British Film Industry in the 1960's and especially 1970's.
However brilliant Harry was on stage - and everyone agrees he was brilliant - a few hundred or several thousand people could see each performance - minuscule compared to the number who saw him on TV.
I think the worse things about the 'curse of Steptoe' theory is that it rather belittles the towering achievement that Steptoe was. For some people who work in Theatre or on Film, TV, especially in the 1960s and 1970s was seen as inferior. To me - it is neither better or worse, just different. Steptoe was hugely influential on almost all the comedy and many drama shows that followed. It is a fantastic legacy that can still be enjoyed today.
Strangely, there hasn't been a biography of Harry H Corbett till now. The attitude of Harry and his wife and family was to let his work speak for itself -
Sadly this biography was rather prompted by a couple of docu-dramas which were very misleading. When Steptoe met son on Channel 4 and The Curse of Steptoe on the BBC.
The care taken by BBC is easily illustrated. They had the actor playing Harry H Corbett wear brown contact lenses - to hide his blue eyes. Harry had blue eyes - as any colour photo or colour episode would have shown !
One of the authors of the docu-drama discovered the 'shocking' fact that when Corbett and Brambell toured Australia they travelled in separate cars and had separate dressing rooms. This is given as evidence that they hated each other, rather than the more obvious conclusion that Harry travelled with his family and that as stars they would expect their own dressing rooms.
Despite entirely justified complaints that the programme was unfair and inaccurate, it took the BBC years to concede the obvious and grudgingly accept they were wrong. Does it matter if these things are wrong ? Even today Harry's co-star Wilfrid Brambell name is often given as Wilfred Bramble ! If Harold wins the Battle of Hastings - is that artistic license ?
Is Mel Gibson's Film Braveheart a film or a history lesson?
So Harry's daughter, the actress and author Susannah Corbett has written the book (The Front legs of the cow, ISBN 978-0-7524-7682-7 the History Press)
It is an excellent book, well written and researched and comprehensive. May favourite discovery was that the film The Bargee - was originally given an X certificate :-O by after cuts was releases as a U. That such drastic editing was made makes me yearn for a directors cut, to see the original concept of the film.
The appeal of Steptoe and Son was enormous, viewing figures of 27 million ! That puts it up there with the Olympics opening ceremony, Royal weddings, etc
Was Harry H Corbett trapped by the curse of Steptoe ?
There is a debate about actors and actresses and the 'dangers' of type casting and being for every associated with one role.
I think the dangers are overplayed - most actors wish to earn a living- they have lifestyles and usually families to support. To be cast as a major part in a long running series is usually seen as a godsend.
The evidence of Harry being 'cursed' by Steptoe is rather thin. As he himself pointed out - "I had appeared a hundred times on TV in the six years before Harold Steptoe came into my life. And I can't count the number of parts I have played in the theatre."
He appeared in at least 32 films, and actually the money he earned from Steptoe and Son allowed him to have more choice about what other acting he did.
Harry wasn't the stereotype clown that wanted to play Shakespeare - he was an actor, not a comic and he did play Shakespeare.
I fear the reality is that it is the public as much as casting directors who type-cast actors. In the USA, the film system was basically run on actors playing to type.
Few actors are lucky enough to make a massive impression in more than one TV role. David Jason - as Derrick Trotter, Granville, Pa Larkin and Jack Frost did it.
Harry wasn't stopped from having a glittering film career by Steptoe but by the state of the British Film Industry in the 1960's and especially 1970's.
However brilliant Harry was on stage - and everyone agrees he was brilliant - a few hundred or several thousand people could see each performance - minuscule compared to the number who saw him on TV.
I think the worse things about the 'curse of Steptoe' theory is that it rather belittles the towering achievement that Steptoe was. For some people who work in Theatre or on Film, TV, especially in the 1960s and 1970s was seen as inferior. To me - it is neither better or worse, just different. Steptoe was hugely influential on almost all the comedy and many drama shows that followed. It is a fantastic legacy that can still be enjoyed today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)