A condensed version of the operetta; scrapping parts of the book here and there, only keeping what is necessary for general plot and introductions to songs. Because of its length, it is probably the most enjoyable production to watch; it doesn't feel like it's always stopping for exposition, which is often the fault of other full length versions. Some might say this is a highly campy iteration that reduces the plight of the characters, but when listening to the actual lyrics and libretto how serious can this piece really be without feeling tonal whiplash.
Reviews
5 Reviews
Great Performances: Leonard Bernstein's Candide, a Comic Operetta in Two Acts
(2005)
Condensed and Campy
Season 33, Episode 10
30 November 2018
The Terror
(2018–2025)
Good, but had potential to be spectacular.
6 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Like others, I am a bit disappointed by the show. The production levels, scene/scenario setting, and especially the performances (every actor was absolutely topnotch) were all very commendable. However, the initial trailer promised a bit more than the overall project delivered. Was hoping the series would be strictly a psychological thriller, based on the frailty of the mind and the fracture of relationship/bonds when put under tremendous stress.
To me the supernatural elements did not add any real tension. Mostly because the creature's motives and the rules in which it could attack were never thoroughly explained. I know at the basic level, the creature attacks those who infringe upon nature (its dominion) and all that. But, it did not feel like the main antagonist or threat to the men's survival. The battles against the natural elements, the growing madness/sickness amongst the men, and the dismantling of the power system were just more interesting and tension driving.
Perhaps, if the monster's origins or relationship to the land/natives were explained a bit more. Or (since the creature is a spirit of some sort) was shown to be more calculating in its actions, it might have been a more compelling aspect to the story. But, as is, the creature gains no understanding or sympathy from the audience. The whole "humans meddling with nature/status quo reaps disastrous results" falls flat. That point only works if the audience can see the situation from both sides. We mostly get to see the crew's version, their constant suffering, and without any real realization as to why they are put through said suffering. So, nature just seems to be the villain/bully. Even the natives seem to live in fear of the creature, so the point that man can learn a different way seems mute, as well. The creature is just something that must be avoided or sated. So, what I think might be the lesson or point, at least in regards to the mystical elements, becomes a bit muddled.
Streamlining the story, focusing the plots solely on the obstacles of survival (mentally, physically, and through moral dilemmas) would have made this series simply spectacular. Shame.
To me the supernatural elements did not add any real tension. Mostly because the creature's motives and the rules in which it could attack were never thoroughly explained. I know at the basic level, the creature attacks those who infringe upon nature (its dominion) and all that. But, it did not feel like the main antagonist or threat to the men's survival. The battles against the natural elements, the growing madness/sickness amongst the men, and the dismantling of the power system were just more interesting and tension driving.
Perhaps, if the monster's origins or relationship to the land/natives were explained a bit more. Or (since the creature is a spirit of some sort) was shown to be more calculating in its actions, it might have been a more compelling aspect to the story. But, as is, the creature gains no understanding or sympathy from the audience. The whole "humans meddling with nature/status quo reaps disastrous results" falls flat. That point only works if the audience can see the situation from both sides. We mostly get to see the crew's version, their constant suffering, and without any real realization as to why they are put through said suffering. So, nature just seems to be the villain/bully. Even the natives seem to live in fear of the creature, so the point that man can learn a different way seems mute, as well. The creature is just something that must be avoided or sated. So, what I think might be the lesson or point, at least in regards to the mystical elements, becomes a bit muddled.
Streamlining the story, focusing the plots solely on the obstacles of survival (mentally, physically, and through moral dilemmas) would have made this series simply spectacular. Shame.
2nd Half Slump
15 March 2018
More than the other two seasons, the third has suffered the most from the 2nd half slump. I was never really looking forward to the second half of this season- already knowing what was to come, and it all really seemed to be just a very convoluted way to get the characters to America, where bigger things are to come and other points are set into motion. Up until the reunion, the show was building a great momentum- most importantly emotional momentum. The audience got to delve into what has shaped Jamie and Claire during their years apart, which was compelling viewing. However, after the couple reunited, the plot got its needle stuck on the same reoccurring themes of separation (due to the characters becoming different people or due to actual, forcible separation) and of course the theme of unwavering love (we understand, the couple has still got it). These two themes are usually very effective, but when repeated over and over without any other real plots or emotions at play to support them, it just becomes tedious and predictable; come on, one never really fears that Jamie and Claire will separated again so soon to being reunited.
I know that the show is only following the outline of the novel. However, the main disadvantage the show has compared to the book- as with many adaptations- is that in reading the story-lines, there is a lot more filler and description- in-between moments that separate the many coincidences and reoccurring themes. So, one feels things are a bit more spaced out and evenly paced. I can't quite put my finger on it, but this adaptation in particular seems to suffer a great deal from inconsistent pacing or writing over the course of the episodes and odd moments of focus- mostly moments of intimacy that feel forced or wedged into the flow of the episodes. Just because a small scene happens in the book, does not mean it needs to be placed in the show where time and focus is much more limited and valuable.
Hopefully, next season when more characters and greater challenges take center stage, the show's momentum and success won't fall directly onto the shoulders of Jamie and Claire's relationship (not trying to demean its importance or value). With the full addition of Brianna and Roger, the show can focus on a dynamic more rooted in reality (less perfect or assured), which can break the monotony a bit. Also, a larger role for Lord Grey, whose presence adds a little tension, as well as unexpected support, or even the journey of Young Ian.
Compared to Voyager, Drums of Autumn is, as a whole, a more captivating novel. So, hopefully, season four will be too.
I know that the show is only following the outline of the novel. However, the main disadvantage the show has compared to the book- as with many adaptations- is that in reading the story-lines, there is a lot more filler and description- in-between moments that separate the many coincidences and reoccurring themes. So, one feels things are a bit more spaced out and evenly paced. I can't quite put my finger on it, but this adaptation in particular seems to suffer a great deal from inconsistent pacing or writing over the course of the episodes and odd moments of focus- mostly moments of intimacy that feel forced or wedged into the flow of the episodes. Just because a small scene happens in the book, does not mean it needs to be placed in the show where time and focus is much more limited and valuable.
Hopefully, next season when more characters and greater challenges take center stage, the show's momentum and success won't fall directly onto the shoulders of Jamie and Claire's relationship (not trying to demean its importance or value). With the full addition of Brianna and Roger, the show can focus on a dynamic more rooted in reality (less perfect or assured), which can break the monotony a bit. Also, a larger role for Lord Grey, whose presence adds a little tension, as well as unexpected support, or even the journey of Young Ian.
Compared to Voyager, Drums of Autumn is, as a whole, a more captivating novel. So, hopefully, season four will be too.
Rise
(2018)
Rise Just Falls Flat
15 March 2018
Was hoping that this show could take the lives of teenage students and translate them to screen without the usual clichés. Just bad writing all around, at least for the pilot. Especially, when it comes to creating characters and laying down their perspective issues or story arc paths. All of them feel already done and overused.
They are trying to take the problems of Spring Awakening and directly correlate them to the characters of the show. Rather than coming off as, everyone can relate to these universal problems, it feels as though the writers are trying to force their characters into molds. Just because a girl plays Wendla, does not mean she has severe trust/communication issues with her mother or is ready to open herself up in a relationship with a boy who is different/yet not so different. (And in in using this method, how will the characters change/develop if given future seasons? Will the storylines/characters continue to follow the plots of the musicals they perform?)
Honestly, I would rather see a professionally shot and performed version of Spring Awakening be put out there (of course created by safe hands). Yes, it is angsty and not the best of all possible worlds for its main trio, but at least it does not feel as forced. And seeing a show such as Spring Awakening in its entirety, could actually be more effective in delivering its message (that being the question of 'shame'. Should one feel shame for their inability to fit in or conform, for their impulses/desires, for their sexuality or sexual orientation? And, who determines what actions/thoughts classify as 'shameful'?) Rise is just trying its little heart out to be so relatable and so inspirational, and in doing so, it seems to be missing the point/the heart of the musical it is referencing. For instance, the bonfire scene, using 'I Believe' (a song about convincing yourself that your actions are justified, not one of optimism) in that context. Just why?
The writers need to understand that just having the basic, run of the mill level of representation does not and should not cut it. The issues they are addressing have been done before and in a far more touching/gripping way.
Overall, Rise just falls flat, and I don't know if more episodes can lift it back up.
They are trying to take the problems of Spring Awakening and directly correlate them to the characters of the show. Rather than coming off as, everyone can relate to these universal problems, it feels as though the writers are trying to force their characters into molds. Just because a girl plays Wendla, does not mean she has severe trust/communication issues with her mother or is ready to open herself up in a relationship with a boy who is different/yet not so different. (And in in using this method, how will the characters change/develop if given future seasons? Will the storylines/characters continue to follow the plots of the musicals they perform?)
Honestly, I would rather see a professionally shot and performed version of Spring Awakening be put out there (of course created by safe hands). Yes, it is angsty and not the best of all possible worlds for its main trio, but at least it does not feel as forced. And seeing a show such as Spring Awakening in its entirety, could actually be more effective in delivering its message (that being the question of 'shame'. Should one feel shame for their inability to fit in or conform, for their impulses/desires, for their sexuality or sexual orientation? And, who determines what actions/thoughts classify as 'shameful'?) Rise is just trying its little heart out to be so relatable and so inspirational, and in doing so, it seems to be missing the point/the heart of the musical it is referencing. For instance, the bonfire scene, using 'I Believe' (a song about convincing yourself that your actions are justified, not one of optimism) in that context. Just why?
The writers need to understand that just having the basic, run of the mill level of representation does not and should not cut it. The issues they are addressing have been done before and in a far more touching/gripping way.
Overall, Rise just falls flat, and I don't know if more episodes can lift it back up.
Little Women
(2017)
Disappointing Adaptation
4 January 2018
Unlike many classic adaptations the BBC has released in the past, problem after problem weighs down Little Women and stops the series from being a truly enjoyable watch.
The book itself is largely written in a sweet, innocent voice/tone, and it works well within the text. However, when translating or trying to capture that same voice or spirit in actual dialogue for the screen, it comes off as amateurish or overly sentimental when spoken aloud. The text's tone is actually one of the reasons why this book is difficult to adapt. It is not the acting that lets the series down, rather it is the words that are unbelievable. People simply don't/didn't speak in such a way, even in the Victorian period. If this version is trying to modernize the girl's characters/eccentricities and the story's main message, why could it not modernize the language a bit or be a little more age appropriate- of course, still keeping it in line with the book's tone. An adaptation of Little Women should strike a balance between the two parts of the girls' and Laurie's journey into adulthood. First, establishing the way things are and have always been in the March home in a playful tone, and then, as they are forced to change through the circumstances of life and love, the tone becomes more heartwarming and more mature. From the get-go, this version applies a serious and mature tone despite the language used and the children's level of maturity, so, there is never a real transformation in character/perspective for any of the children, only in the circumstances they find themselves in.
Another glaring problem is the editing and structuring of the plot. Simply put, many scenes are too short; the scenes are like snapshots; they tell the basic story from a surface, visual level, but it lacks any depth, detail, or real explanation. This version misses the opportunity, being that it is longer and has more time, to include parts that have been left out of adaptations before it- parts that develop or establish the characters, their relationships, and their motives (examples, Jo visiting Laurie when ill, meeting Mr. Lawrence, Laurie's backstory and mother, the girls engaging in Jo's plays, Laurie joining in). Actually, this version excludes more than it adds, which is a little baffling. How can so much be glossed over?
The last problem is the accompanying score. If I am not mistaken, the music used within the series seems to be lifted from or inspired by the Radio 4 play of Little Women. Which is an odd choice, being that it is not of the period. Adding a modern score can work, but here, it is a miss-match.
Though the 94 film has its faults as well, it remains the best crack at adapting Alcott's work, which is disappointing seeing that the BBC had so much potential.
The book itself is largely written in a sweet, innocent voice/tone, and it works well within the text. However, when translating or trying to capture that same voice or spirit in actual dialogue for the screen, it comes off as amateurish or overly sentimental when spoken aloud. The text's tone is actually one of the reasons why this book is difficult to adapt. It is not the acting that lets the series down, rather it is the words that are unbelievable. People simply don't/didn't speak in such a way, even in the Victorian period. If this version is trying to modernize the girl's characters/eccentricities and the story's main message, why could it not modernize the language a bit or be a little more age appropriate- of course, still keeping it in line with the book's tone. An adaptation of Little Women should strike a balance between the two parts of the girls' and Laurie's journey into adulthood. First, establishing the way things are and have always been in the March home in a playful tone, and then, as they are forced to change through the circumstances of life and love, the tone becomes more heartwarming and more mature. From the get-go, this version applies a serious and mature tone despite the language used and the children's level of maturity, so, there is never a real transformation in character/perspective for any of the children, only in the circumstances they find themselves in.
Another glaring problem is the editing and structuring of the plot. Simply put, many scenes are too short; the scenes are like snapshots; they tell the basic story from a surface, visual level, but it lacks any depth, detail, or real explanation. This version misses the opportunity, being that it is longer and has more time, to include parts that have been left out of adaptations before it- parts that develop or establish the characters, their relationships, and their motives (examples, Jo visiting Laurie when ill, meeting Mr. Lawrence, Laurie's backstory and mother, the girls engaging in Jo's plays, Laurie joining in). Actually, this version excludes more than it adds, which is a little baffling. How can so much be glossed over?
The last problem is the accompanying score. If I am not mistaken, the music used within the series seems to be lifted from or inspired by the Radio 4 play of Little Women. Which is an odd choice, being that it is not of the period. Adding a modern score can work, but here, it is a miss-match.
Though the 94 film has its faults as well, it remains the best crack at adapting Alcott's work, which is disappointing seeing that the BBC had so much potential.
Tell Your Friends