Change Your Image
ionisravell
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Witcher (2019)
Th Lesser Evil
Netflix's Witcher feels - at the end of the first season - like an amalgamation of narrative lesser evils.
Confusing newcomers and baffling regulars, the series opens up with three different time periods, offering us A-plot/B-plot or even A/B/C-plot structure in almost every episode.
By necessity, this choice, flattens the narrative depth of each of them, as we move between different locations and heroes without much time to give them the time to breath.
Largest victim of this is "The Edge of the World" story, which is presented in "Four Marks". The adventure in Dol Blathanna is brought down to the narrative minimum and told at neck-breaking speed to make time for B-plot and C-plot scenes.
However...
Upon watching the whole 1st season and reflecting on the source material, perhaps this way of telling the story was the lesser evil that had to be taken. Without some of them, by the climax of the first season, we would feel out of place on the Sodden Hill, constantly questioning ourselves who is who.
(Sodden Hill, I imagine, was a victim of financial as well as narrative constraints.. but boy do they reduced the scope of that event).
What must be greatly praised for the series, is the casting. As someone familiar with the Witcher stories for almost two decades, I had a very clear image of all the characters in my mind.
Outside of two or three characters, the cast of Witcher is almost perfect in their performance. Which is a tough feat to achieve with a franchise that already has 20 years of running time with various forms of media existing out there.
Henry Cavill is a brilliant choice for the lead. After the first episode of seeing Medieval Superman, Cavill absolutely owns the Geralt's character. British actor IS the lead every series wants to have - as he oozes love to the series in all interviews he does. He is seen by fans as one of their own, not some 'hollywood actor' who just happened to land a gig on some fantasy show. This choice for the lead could not be better.
Anya Chalotra, an unorthodox choice for Yennefer, can quickly bring a purist like me on board by the level of her performance (and some narrative choices). We take much closer, intimate look at Yennefer from day one. And Ms Chalotra manages to elevate the character that could be seen, by many, as a blunt 'racial diversity' quota.
Freya Allan - portraying Ciri - had a limited range in the first season, her acting often oscillating around one or two emotions repeated over the whole season.
Season two and three, however, will allow Ms Allan to really show her acting skills - for now, it's hard to fully judge an actor who plays a character that is constantly on the run, shocked, scared or lost for the whole season.
Princess Cirilla - I hope - will carry the 'Ahsoka Tano' gene. Gene that made the annoying side-kick from Star Wars' Clone Wars, one of the most beloved heroines of the franchise by the end of season 5.
There is definitely a lot of place to grow for Freya Allan in her role.
Jaskier, or, Dandelion is probably a little more "British" than one would expect. However Joey Batey wonderfully plays off the stoic performance of Henry Cavill, and you can see the bond between both characters almost from the start.
Only few secondary characters feel "off" when it comes to casting, one being Triss Merigold, second being Istredd. While Triss is mostly confusing visually, Istredd-- is missing some of the intensity his book archetype possessed.
However, neither of those two had much time to really own their characters in the first season. And I presume Istredd will be our recurring character through the show (as well as Triss) and both might still have time to capture our imagination.
Final verdict for the first season - 8, should be seen as more 7.75.
Witcher isn't a perfect show and "Game of Thrones 2". It has a different scope, different focus and different budget. It makes mistakes and doesn't nail everything.
However, there is no denying that people involved in this project were invested in it 100%. Trying to do their best while navigating modern climate of filmmaking, to stay true to Witcher's books while not going over budget.
The show, at the end of the day, is worth supporting. I could go into great detail of how I feel the show was "westernized", mostly losing it's "slavic" soul. And yeah, sure-- you do feel like you're watching somewhat generic western fantasy. Especially with Nilfgardians on the screen...
Am I disappointed by it? Yes. But if that was the price of making the show... it may be the lesser evil I can live with.
I believe that Netflix gave Witcher a "green light" but it was really suspicious if the show can win the support of viewers - since most films based on videogames did not satisfied it's core audience.
So I feel like creative freedom of the showrunners was narrowed down to make sure it could get the approval of general western audience.
With Witcher's success, we may only hope that Netflix will grant season 2 higher budget and, hopefully, more than 8 episodes.
Having more breathing space would give the series much better score as the neck-breaking speed of exposition in three timelines was what made this season the confusing experience.
The X Files: Babylon (2016)
Difficult to enjoy.
Do you remember those few X-Files episodes that showed us "geek" and "nerd" culture? How heavy-handed, stereotypical and over the top it was?
This episode is like that.
You can understand what the authors were going for with this one. But by the God Almighty, they missed the mark with it.
!!!
*** Mild Spoilers Ahead***
***You won't learn what happens in the episode***
***But I touch upon specific elements of the show - secondary characters and specific sequences that aren't plot-oriented***
!!!
The most jarring element of the show is not even the quagmire of a terrorist episode. Sure, it feels like someone really tried to shove a political message into sci-fi drama. And sure, it was very poorly handled.
The real problem, however, are the two supporting characters we were introduced to: Teen Scully and Teen Mulder.
Okay, that's too far perhaps - they aren't teen versions of our protagonists. But that description fits them quite well.
Both of them feel like our old heroes stripped down to two or three basic characteristics. That is about it. There is nothing more to them.
I enjoyed Mulder and Scully following different paths in the investigation. It was interesting to see them work apart from each other on the same case.
Mulder's "trip" is probably one of the most memorable goofs the show had... but... don't you think Mulder's trip should be way more bizarre than it was?
Come on. This is Fox Mulder we're talking about. His trip should be some of the most esoteric, surreal and disturbing experience on TV. This was mildly odd at the end. Rest of it was just a goof.
The final score of 3 stars this episode earned for heavy-handed social commentary, crude plot and overall low intellectual quality of the episode - compared to X-Files standard.
The Orville: Majority Rule (2017)
Bluntly Admirable
This is first ever 10/10 I gave to anything on IMDb - I normally review things I like, and my average is about 7/5.
I don't think "Majority Rule" is somehow flawless; my score reflects the feeling after watching that episode. This could be descent TNG episode, easily!
It is, perhaps blunt, but on point commentary on our modern social- media controlled world. World in which hashtag activism became a valid form of social participation.
This episode doesn't focus on Mr. MacFarlane or relationship of his character with Cmdr Grayson, instead giving front seat to Lt. LeMarr with support of Grayson, Alara and Dr. Finn - giving the show proper feeling of being an ensemble endeavour - which is what Star Trek always was (with notable exception of STD).
This episode isn't extremely clever and it's not a deep philosophical debate that let us look upon ourselves through lenses of sci-fi storytelling, but it is the best a show like Orville could do, while appealing to a modern audience.
For that, it deserves, in my opinion, the highest praise and rating.
The Orville: Krill (2017)
Outstanding and Awkward
Orville delivered on balancing comedy and drama while giving us an insight to the society of Krill.
So far series presented this alien species as the default enemy. If the plot needed nameless bad guys, Krill filled the role. This episode gives us a chance to see Orville's universe through Krill eyes - it is a great chance to explore series setting.
Speaking of settings, Krill ship, prognostics and actors in them, present themselves outstandingly and give a believable representation of an alien culture.
Krill bare resemblance to Warhammer 40.000's Empire of Man - with their religious devotion in the age of spaceships, by we can easily compare them to our modern faith-based societies and ask ourselves a question, how to make peace with someone who is on a mission from the Divine?
Orville doesn't present those type of questions openly, but introduces us to a story that grows more complex with each scene - a fairly simple mission gets complicated and moral choices must be made.
That is what sci-fi that inspires to resemble Star Trek should be doing!
It is worth noting that we're having a chance to see Captain Mercer and Lieutenant Malloy being focus of the episode - both characters bring a degree of awkward charm to the story, but there is only one truly memorable funny scene in the whole episode. Both protagonists present rather awkward, bordering of incompetent, attitude towards their mission, especially compared to the very serious negative background of their Krill crewmates. It serves as a lighter tone for the episode but can be seen as overdone.
Light touch when it comes to comedy adds to the dramatic undertone, leaving us asking ourselves the question - can the circle of hate be broken by more violence and death?
Seth Macfarlane proves, beyond any doubt, that his aspirations for Orville go beyond a simple spoof fuelled by humour. Those who want a space comedy might feel disappointed, everyone else will probably enjoy the ride.
The Orville: Pria (2017)
We'll Always Have Paris...
This episode, more than any previous in the short history of Orville, felt like a "bottle show". No wacky, crazy planets, little in terms of new sets or aliens walking around in prognostics - it was centred around the crew and the guest star of the week.
Episode suffered balance between A and B story. 'A story' felt... bloated, if that can be term used to describe a story. Things that should be said with a single stare, were over-explained. As if anyone needed to be told, exactly how it is to feel betrayed by someone you decided to trust.
Emotional scene works better, when viewer can insert their own feelings into the story. When going too far with explaining exactly what character feels, this connection is lost.
'B story' on the other hand, involving Isaac and Lt. Malloy, could really use an extra scene in the middle - something that would lead up to escalation we see closer to the end of the episode.
The Orville consequently tries to rebuild relationship between two main characters of the story - Captain Mercer and Commander Grayson. You can almost hear the conversation that happened while season 1 storyline was written, where someone said "We need to show how those two, despite turbulent past, can learn to work together and appreciate each other again."
While the effort itself is noble, it feels that plot of this episode was written to serve just that purpose.
I am hungry for episodes that would put Mercer-Grayson relationship as the 'B story', something that grows in the background, while giving the stage to the talented cast that plays very unique characters. We want to know more about them and see their characters being developed - you don't create such a colourful set of personalities and leave them as the window dressing.
Even the character of Chief Engineer Steve Newton is interesting in it's own way. Despite being just a minor role! Same goes for Yaphit (the jelly-guy).
Lastly, Charlize Theron's appearance in the show was noteworthy. She sold the character she played within the setting of Orville episode, but without stealing it. It's hard to say much more without going into spoilers.
It's not the best episode so far, but it does it's job and is enjoyable to watch to a certain degree.
Star Trek: Discovery: Context Is for Kings (2017)
Star Trek: For The Next Generation
Sharper and edgier than ever before, Discovery tries to rediscover Star Trek for the new generation of fans.
For old Trekkies it's a matter of taste if they embrace the Battlestar-like style of the show or not. For me, the show completely misses the mark and goes into direction I cannot follow.
I can, however, understand those who can see the appeal of the new take on the universe.
STD seems to be following the trend of realistic, gritty reality that explores flaws of human existence as means of creating drama. This is what makes the show score high among critics, but much lower among many Star Trek fans.
Many, but not all - there are dedicated Trekkies who enjoy the new take and I think they are completely entitled to do so.
But the show is much different than what many of us liked in Star Trek of yesterday.
And that is really the main problem here - STD doesn't feel like a Star Trek show. Plain and simple.
Focus on Michael Burnham as the protagonist changes the chemistry and structure of the show to the point it stops feeling like a Star Trek show.
Exploration of human condition is handicapped by the main protagonist being a Vulcan-raised human. It is not a good combination for a protagonist. 'Outsider' status of Spock, Data, Odo or the Doctor was played off other cast members, as they observe and/or pursuit condition of humanity.
Show's 3rd episode feels, very much, like a pilot episode of a series - due to complete separation from the two previous instalments.
We're introduced to new cast members, new location and new plot arc - only remotely related to the two previous episodes. New characters are either completely bland or simply unlikable. Single returning character of any interest - Saru - is so far the brightest member of the cast.
Machiavellian character of captain Lorca is overdone - instead of being a mysterious commander with anterior motives, he comes off as creepy and impossible to relate to.
Another featured cast member - Cadet Sylvia Tilly feels completely over the top awkward, and not in a way that was nailed by Dwight Schultz's Barclay in TNG.
Can those characters evolve to become more likable and easier to relate to? Of course. But at this point, the series presents a dark, uninspiring cast of characters who exist in a mysteriously dangerous universe.
While it is the current trend in entertainment, Discovery tries to become another show on the same shelf, instead of going boldy, where no one has gone before.
Star Trek: Discovery (2017)
Difficult to appreciate.
I'll be damned... and here I was worried they're not going to make more Star Trek motion pictures!
Jokes aside, this felt very much like the Kelvin timeline film, and not at all like the Star Trek TV series. Is that such a bad thing? Not really - if you like the action packed shiny summer flicks.
But is this the Trek we were waiting for?
Lets start from the regular introduction that is in our modern day of age is required, not to be branded -ist of some sort:
Actors were hit with the "Hayden Christensen effect", term I apply to good actors, giving their best performance under horrible direction. Female lead, male lead, black, white, andorian - makes no difference - you couldn't get those characters with those lines to work in any configuration of gender and/or race. Scott Bakula, Kate Mulgrew, Avery Brooks, Patrick Steward and William Shatner put together couldn't make this better.
Having women in leading positions is a daily bread for any Trek fan for years. Same with non- whites in the same role. My criticism aims only at the direction of the new series - not what genetic configuration actor exhibits.
My inner Trekkie yelled out in terror when Michelle Yeoh's (who gave best performance in the show in my opinion) character was asked "What does the soldier in you say?" and she answered "Nothing good." Inner soldier? What kind of Starfleet is this? Are you sure this isn't a Mirror universe? (now that would be a series...)
Conflict and war isn't something new in the Star Trek universe, but it was always handled with great care and understanding of what a hostility should be in a character-driven show. In each Star Trek series, major conflicts were introduced long after we're familiar with the crew - tension came from us knowing and caring for the protagonist, hoping them to succeed in the struggle.
Discovery gives the most gentle characterisation to the main characters, before thrusting them into combat. As a result, scenes that should provoke strong emotions - were seen as "red shirt" deaths.
Visuals of the series are outstanding and made an impression on someone who isn't easy to impress with visual light show. Remade Klingons don't feel like Klingons, but their look, aesthetics and style is quite impressive in their own right, even if they remind Remans now and again.
Star Trek fans crave smart, nuanced writing a hard-hitting emotional episodes. Stuff like "Duet", "Far Beyond the Stars", "The City on the Edge of Forever", "Tapestry", "Blink of an Eye", "Cogenitor".
Making a Star Trek series, one must understand what won Star Trek such a devoted following! If you're not going to understand what made Star Trek, you might as well call your generic sci- fi series something else. I don't know... like Orville? Oh-- wait...
The Orville: About a Girl (2017)
Two steps forward, one step back.
(Spoiler-light part)
Third episode of Orville throws us into familiar Star Trek territory with an ethical choice being a centrepiece of the show.
Comedy part of the episode was completely overshadowed by a dramatic story that despite strong ending, somehow doesn't feel complete.
It is another big step of Orville's crew away from the "Star Trek spoof" and into fully-fledged sci-fi drama of their own.
Those who expect comedy in space will be disappointed and some will feel that the episode tries to push, slightly too hard, certain political commentary relevant to our modern times.
For me, "About a Girl" is first really drama-focused episode of Orville, and one that takes itself seriously. The delivery however, is somewhat lacking.
(spoiler-heavy part)
This episode was written, as if someone asked a stand up comedian to direct Shakespeare's "King Lear". All the pieces are there, but it seems the writers couldn't grasp the essence of drama and depth of the topic they were asked to present.
Whole tribunal scene left me scratching my head in disbelieve how such a powerful and easy to relate plot, could be so poorly handled. Neither side delivered any hard-hitting and thought-provoking evidence, but the biggest shock was the fact the very position I held myself - to not alter child's gender at birth due to prejudice and bigotry - was presented so poorly by Cmdr. Greyson, that even I wouldn't agree with her.
End of the episode was a bitter-sweet conclusion that increased my opinion of the story. At the end of the day, Bortus was the character who delivered deepest and most heartwarming line in the show - despite such a crucial disagreement, he still loves his mate and doesn't give up on him, or the baby.
This is also the time to praise Peter Macon's role in this episode - similar to Miss Sage who carried "Command Performance", he was the focal point of the episode and achieved seamless blending of very reserved character with very strong emotions.
General feel of the episode was a big positive - it is also hard to imagine "About the Girl" is only two episodes away from a goofy pilot of the series!
Despite some shortcomings, Orville surprised once again by boldly going where Star Trek was before - for better or worse.
Perhaps it is time to ask the question about the elephant in the living room: do audience and creators want a light-hearted, goofy, version of Star Trek, or played straight dramatic space opera?
The Orville: Command Performance (2017)
Tiny Cheesy Masterpiece
(Spoiler-light part)
Second episode of Orville is a notable improvement over the previous instalment. Gone is the toilet humour so jarring in the pilot and "Command Performance" finally feels like an ensemble show it should be. Episode doesn't try to be funny at all cost, giving stage to drama, which was missing from the one-liner loaded pilot.
Episode is carried by Halson Sage(Lt. Alara Kitan) performance which mostly hits the spot, leaving Seth MacFarlane (Cpt. Ed Mercer) and Adrianne Palicki (Comm. Kelly Grayson) to their B-story. Miss Sage gives a believable performance, convincingly showing her character's struggle. Delivery of few lines might have been better, but overall we can identify with Lt. Kitan very well.
Episode has an overall cheesy feeling to it. It's a simple story with predictable plot points and conclusion - but it doesn't take away from the enjoyment of watching it.
Score 8/10 is given for an overall feeling to the episode - you can sense the show is done by people who know exactly what they are doing. Orville doesn't pretend to be anything more than it is. People behind, as well as in front of the cameras understand the scope and nature of the show.
(Spoiler-heavy part)
With captain Mercer and first officer Grayson kidnapped and Lt.Cm. Bortus laying an egg, command falls to the young Lieutenant Kitan who struggles with sitting in the big chair. Departure of characters who were focal point of the pilot, gave other crew members a real chance to shine and show some depth of their characters. Hopefully this trend will continue as the show, if imitating Star Trek, will rely on well written characters.
Likable Lt. Kitan stole the show completely, despite story arc of the episode being quite predictable. Predictability of the plot, makes the First Act of the episode most enjoyable, other two lagging behind due to their on-rails plot line. Once again, the Star Trek nostalgia is present. And for you Trek-fans out there, you might feel an echo of TNG's episode "Disaster" ringing in your ears, while watching Lt. Kitan struggling to command her crew.
B-plot revolves around Mercer and Grayson's reevaluation of the failed marriage and presents a little more depth to their characters as well, giving us more insight into how their relationship worked. This feels like a setup for future evolution of their bond.
Overall, episode 2 of Orville shows a lot of promise and is less uneven with the humour. "Licking balls" jokes are gone, replaced by somewhat more intelligent approach to the funny aspect of the show. After "Commanding Performance" I have no doubt crew of Orville could deliver real drama, despite light attitude the show rides on.
The Orville (2017)
Heart loves, brain remains skeptical.
**SPOILER LIGHT** (If you've seen the trailer, you'll be fine reading this).
Orville arrived first to the biggest Sci-Fi standoff since Empire Strikes Back met Wrath of Khan in the early 80s.
Today however, it's not the two most recognisable sci-fi series battle for supremacy - it is The Orville - advertised as a slapstick-comedy fanfic of Star Trek, meeting the newest and plagued with problems genuine Star Trek series.
While we can't compare the two combatants yet - as Discovery is still few weeks away, lets take a look at Orville.
In minds of many, Orville can steal the thunder from the upcoming Star Trek series, as being more true to the spirit of legendary TV space opera - even without the iconic names, locations and designs backing it up.
Can Orville deliver? It's difficult to say after just one episode, but the pilot surely played well off nostalgia feelings of potential fans. There are moments that make you feel like you're watching a new Star Trek series, with all the excitement and optimism that we felt when NX-01 was leaving Earth for the first time over a decade ago. Here however, lies the paradox that may be the fatal flaw in Orville's idea:
Blending lowbrow humour with Star Trek's serious tone exploring human condition might be an extremely difficult task.
From one side, fist installment of the series worked well as an introduction to the colourful crew of Orville, from the other, showed a deep divide between what it emulates and what it tries to be.
We have a divorced couple working on the same ship, we have racist alien, a young officer working to prove herself, and I think we also have one officer who has some alcohol problems - the setup for a drama we haven't seen since DS9. And yet the show really tries to show itself as a light comedy with witty one-liners using modern 'cool' talk.
Humour in the episode was on the hit-and-miss level, some jokes working well, some being clearly planted to get a toilet level of laughter out of viewers. Putting a dysfunctional group of characters on one ship could really work well, but the comedy would come out of their personalities interacting with each other (and reacting to a wide range of tropes we're used to seeing in space operas).
Here we seem to be given a comedy that relies more on confronting Trek-like situations with lowbrow humour. Perhaps there are fans out there, for whom this take on Trek universe is exactly what they are looking for. I am not one of them. For me the show will have to choose - hopefully sooner than later - does it want to be a comedy show for new, hip audience, or the lighthearted adaptation of Star Trek, appealing to the core audience.
At this point - it has the potential to do both - but I fear it won't be able to be both at the same time long after the nostalgia feeling wears off.
Despite my criticism, I give rating 7 out of 10. If I could, I'd give it 7.5. Orville bravely tries to be it's own, fresh thing, even while shamelessly stealing from Star Trek. I would love for this show to mature into either nonsense humour of Spaceballs, or more highbrow comedy inspired by space opera genre. At this time however, it is trapped between both those choices. If it could only become The Best of Both Worlds...