#and it's because Bowie added this idea that he's trapped in his role both as the King in general and in the story by Sarah's expectations

[reachexceedinggrasp]

Has there ever been an iteration of Beauty and the Beast you haven't liked? 💌

It can be a really broad archetype if you want it to be, so for sure there's loads of examples out there that didn't/wouldn't click with me. I'd probably argue some of them belong in aesthetically similar or related categories, but there's definitely ways to do it which aren't to my taste.

In the specific of versions of the French fairytale, I've read some novelisations I thought were pretty poor. Mostly just in the sense that they added nothing, failed to embody the themes of the story, or had boring, lifeless versions of the characters with no chemistry. A lot of people don't understand Beauty and write terrible executions of the character thinking they're 'improving' her. A lot of these longer tellings stumble in trying to add psychological realism to the characters and end up undermining the message.

I've read a whole bunch of books which were supposed to be a B&tB dynamic or that were explicit retellings and most of them were shitty, ngl.

Even the most bulletproof trope needs some meat on its bones if it's going to sustain a novella or novel length retelling.

But if you mean in the sense of a prominent pop culture example of a B&tB dynamic within a larger fandom- I can't really think of one? I don't like Lily/Darkness from Legend, but I would strongly argue that it's not B&tB in any sense, it's a temptation to corruption/selfish seduction and that's, like, the entire reason I don't like it lmao.

[rochellespen]

Watching Doctor Who Season 37 (Series 11), Episode Four

Ok, I’m going to have to say it: Doctor Who has a checkered past in regards to spiders.

I mean, I understand the temptation to go with arachnid-like monsters. Spiders often creep people out, so giant, mutant spiders should have an even greater horror vibe to them. Unfortunately, it seems arachnids of all sorts never fare well when appearing in Doctor Who. 

Thus we have comically stiff spiders with goofy voices in Planet of the Spiders. We have genuinely threatening, but also drama-queen diva spiders in the meh  The Runaway Bride. And then you have  what could have been truly creepy spider-like creatures in Kill the Moon which were wasted by being featured in a dire episode like Kill the Moon.

So when I saw the title of this one, I had to resist the temptation to roll my eyes. And not just because we got another music pun/reference in an episode title (first Bowie and now the Sex Pistols...). I figured we could be in for some very first class cheese with this one.

All that said, I decided to give Arachnids in the UK a go with as open of a mind as possible.

As usual, spoilers from here onward....

Episode Thoughts

This episode went back to the season opener’s structure of having things happen that appear unrelated at first, but quickly fit together into a main plotline well before the episode ends. It’s a smart technique as it can help to cover any thinness to the plot. 

We start with Robertson, a guy who is suspiciously similar to another hotel-owning, multi-millionaire businessman with a crass, harsh personality who decided to run for president. Seriously, not since The Happiness Patrol have we been given such a painfully obvious reference to a real-life political figure on Doctor Who.

 And wait, is that Chris Noth? Why yes, yes it is. That’s something I seriously did not expect and it’s fun to see him in this. XD

Anyway, Citizen Robertson here rants about a possible threat to his political future and fires a random employee for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. This actually turns out to be not so random later on....

(Side note: They do name drop Trump later in the episode with Robertson mentioning that he can’t stand the guy. I guess that’s one way to deflect the obvious....XD)

Meanwhile, the Doctor actually manages to get her companions back to their correct time and place and soon appears to regret her efficiency. Fortunately for her, Yasmin is up for inviting everyone to tea which everyone immediately accepts.

After wonderfully awkward moments with Yasmin’s family and some poignant moments alone with Graham, we finally get to the spiders. Well sort of. We just get one spider to start out with, but there was plenty of foreshadowing before that to let us know that it won’t just be one spider.

Soon, the plot ties together when we realize that it was Yasmin’s mother who got fired and a neighbor of Yasmin’s family has a friend/co-worker/? who is a specialist in regards to spiders and who is worried that she hasn’t shown up for a few days. This eventually leads to a showdown in the lavish, recently finished hotel between humans and arachnids. 

Some more quick side notes....

The hotel they chose for the principal location is a good one. It has the right Overlook Hotel vibe to it which is perfect to accentuate the horror in this episode.

Ok, having Yasmin’s mom be the one who got fired by Robertson is a solid way to tie the plot together. Having an arachnid expert be friends with someone who lived in the same building as Yasmin’s family and having her show up just as the Doctor starts to investigate teeters dangerously toward deus ex machina territory.

But on a much funnier note, did anyone else notice someone (Ryan, I think?) making shadow puppets in the background while the Doctor and McIntyre were talking about Serious Spider Stuff in McIntyre’s lab? That’s the sort of offhand detail that I just love...

Now, back to the rest of the episode...

As can be expected with someone like Robertson, all of his employees are taken out by the spiders leaving the Doctor, her companions, Yasmin’s mom, Naija, and our new friend, Dr. McIntyre to find out that there’s is both abandoned coal mines underneath the hotel (which is niffty for the spiders to get around) and a toxic landfill that was very poorly managed.

Ok, at this point I need to stop to consider something that’s bothering me about the plot. 

I think we can all agree that Robertson is a terrible person and was horribly negligent in allowing the landfill to combine stuff willy nilly. But if we’re going to assign blame for the mutant spiders, shouldn’t some of it be placed on McIntyre and her lab? These scientist are manipulating spider DNA and apparently not being careful enough in making sure the specimens are dead before disposal. Even if Robertson didn’t have an unusually toxic landfill mutating these spiders further, those half-dead “super spiders” could have wrecked havoc on local ecosystems. Thus, I hardly think McIntyre should be acting like she’s on some sort of moral high ground compared to Robertson.

In the end, it’s decided that it’s more humane(?) to suffocate/starve all the baby spiders in Robertson’s panic room and drive the huge mother spider out of the hotel...to where, I don’t know. However, Robertson clearly wanted a chance to kill something and thus, shoots the giant spider before it can asphyxiate. 

This leads to another little issue I have. The Doctor and McIntyre were just going to watch that giant spider slowly suffocate and die. Robertson shot it once and put it out of its misery quickly. I guess I’m at a loss as to how Robertson’s solution in and of itself is crueler than a slow death. 

And the thing is, I think the writers missed an opportunity here. Having Robertson clearly show no remorse for what he did was chilling enough. But I think we could have added an even more sinister edge to his character if it was made clear that his decision to shoot the spider would be considered merciful and correct by many and that it wasn’t a black and white decision. 

That way, the horrifying aspect of his character would not have been what he did but instead the mindset and motives of why he did it. Few things are more evil that someone who hides their malevolence under the guise of good intentions. 

After that painfully abrupt ending, the Doctor prepares to leave and discovers, much to her surprise and delight, that Graham, Ryan and Yasmin aren’t ready to say goodbye to her and traveling through time and space. 

So did Arachnids in the UK avoid the usual trap of tacky spider themed episodes? Well.....

The thing is, there are several things this episode did right. The number one was a wonderful mix of humor and lowkey scares. We get moments like Ryan and Graham’s two man comedy act leading up to a terribly creepy shot of several giant spiders skittering toward them. The atmosphere of the hotel and some well placed jump scares are balanced by the hilarious sight of mutant spiders gravitating a energetic grime tune (actually listened to it again while writing this, and it really set the mood). 

The problem for me has to be the easy out the plot took. I get wanting to keep this an Earth-bound problem (and making an eco-statement). But the separating of the so-called “good guys” and “bad guys” wasn’t neatly done and the ending felt far too much like the writers couldn’t think of a good solution in the time they had left. 

Thus, this episode works far better as a showcase for humor, atmosphere and characterization than it does as a carefully plotted story.

Character Thoughts

So how about that characterization then?

Two things were well defined in this episode. 

The Doctor is going to continue to be socially awkward, high-energy goofball.

This Doctor is not one who wants to brood by themselves somewhere even for a few moments. She clearly is one of those Doctor who vastly prefers to travel with companions.

Continuing in the tradition of each Doctor often being a “reaction” to the previous one, Thirteen is certainly far less prickly and much more openly social than Twelve. She seems to thrive on the “family” environment a crowded TARDIS creates. The only Doctor I can compare that to is probably Five who also seemed very invested in traveling with a group although there is far, far more harmony on Thirteen’s TARDIS than there ever was on Five’s. 

Myself, I’m enjoying a return to the idea of the Doctor being warmer and more familial as I never thought being difficult and prickly were necessary solely to create a sense of “otherness” about the Doctor. Whittaker still manages this with Thirteen’s scattershot, quirky approach to experiencing new places, people and events.

A lot of the humor in this episode was pulled off nicely by Whittaker whether it’s the cringing moments of awkward around Yasmin’s family or her sudden thought that The Spider Mother in the Ballroom could be “the best novel Edith Wharton never wrote.” 

Meanwhile, Ryan and Graham also have some wonderful bits together as they (very reluctantly) keep having to go out on spider-related missions in the hotel. The two of them continue to be a fun team who are slowly trying to figure out this family “thing” they have been thrust into.

Funnily enough, while on the surface this could look like an episode that would focus more on Yasmin since we are spending time with her family....it really doesn’t. The most we get is some insight as to why she wants to travel with the Doctor: because she loves her family, but clearly doesn’t always get along with them that great. I think this is another opportunity the writers missed as we could have gotten a bit more insight into how her family played a role in the person she became. Instead, their presence seems to mainly service the plot (Naija) or try to add to the humor (the rest of her family). 

The Last Word

I’m afraid Doctor Who may never have a completely solid episode featuring spiders....even with this effort. This is episode is a fun ride most of the time with some great moments of humor and characterization, so it manages to not be truly cringe-y. However, it would have been nice if the writers had put more thought into how to end the main plotline and found more interesting ways to develop Yasmin’s family and by extension Yasmin herself.

[charliejrogers]

The Trip to Greece (2020) - Review

The Trip films are an odd bunch. Director Michael Winterbottom has been filming the travels of Rob Brydon and Steve Coogan while they play caricatures of themselves for ten years now over the last four films. In fact, the films aren’t even the original product of their work. Winterbottom first edits and releases the footage as a television series for the BBC that is usually about double the final length of the eventual feature film. I’m not sure if there’s any way for a Yankee like myself to lay my eyes on the full, 3-hour television versions, but I’m also unsure whether the extra footage would add or detract from my enjoyment of the film. Largely, it would depend on whether that extra footage was more of the The Trip’s comedy portions or drama portions. Generally, the former far outstrips the latter.

This is all to say, I find this series the most enjoyable when it doesn’t try to be too overly ambitious in trying to be dramatic art. Most people are like myself: they are turning on this movie because they want to see two very skilled comedians riff on one another. In particular they want to see them show off their incredible skills for impersonation. The Trip to Greece has no clear stand-out scenes of impersonations like the previous films. The first film will be immortal for the two comedians’ dueling Michael Caine impressions, and in some ways each of the subsequent films has always seen the pair struggling to recreate the freshness and originality of the first film’s easy back-and-forth energy. The second movie expanded on the viral nature of the first film by revisiting Michael Caine with the added joy of ripping on Tom Hardy’s non-understandable Bane. Plus, that film saw pitch-perfect, darkly comedic performance of Brydon’s famous “man-in-a-box” voice at the ruins of Pomepii, making it seem like there was someone still trapped inside the site’s molten figures. Then, for me, while the third film is the weakest of the bunch, Coogan’s Bowie and Brydon’s Jagger impressions single handedly made it worthwhile. This film’s coup de grace comes in a superb scene where the pair recreates the dentistry torture scene from the Dustin Hoffman & Lawrence Olivier movie Marathon Man. There’s also an impressive feat of ventriloquism where Coogan speaks while also making his mouth look like they are saying different words, as if someone is dubbing a voice over him.

Luckily, these movies don’t rely exclusively on only scenes of impersonation. The conversation between the two talented actors is entertaining on its own, with one always racing to beat the other to punch line. The winner is always us, the audience, and that remains true in this film.

But as I mentioned, the comedy is only about half the equation for each of the film. All of them have a sadness that runs just below their surface. Generally, it revolves around a failed or, in some cases failing, marriage of one of the actors. Or perhaps the two actors start to discuss and struggle with the fact that they are aging and feel that their lives lack meaning. A not-so-subtle loneliness lives at the fringes of the films, particularly when it focuses on Coogan’s character. At its best, the dramatic aspects of the films are thought-provoking and act as sobering subtle criticisms of the seemingly hedonistic, vain lives of actors and those in show business. At its worst, like in The Trip to Italy or The Trip to Spain it’s a self-indulgent mess that we put up with just so we can get more of the impersonations and snarky banter. The first film probably balanced the drama the best by leaning harder into the comedy throughout, with the dramatic undertones only becoming prevalent at the end – a beautifully impactful end to an otherwise frivolous film.

This movie leans much more into the drama than the first film, but unlike the prior two installments the drama is still well-balanced by the comedy. I think that this is largely due to the fact that the actors decide to slide back into their respective roles from the first film. This means that Coogan plays the role of the self-important, womanizing, superior actor, while Brydon is the more light-hearted, good-natured, merry-prankster, unlike in The Trip to Italy where their personalities seemed reversed. And, importantly, this film gives equal screen time to both actors instead of The Trip to Spain where the dramatic bits were skewed towards Coogan.

But above all else, I think the film feels so balanced because it takes such great advantage of its setting to enhance the drama rather than just serve as a pretty backdrop for silly conversations. The script uses the Grecian landscapes to hearken back to the ancient Greeks, with particular emphasis on this land being the birthplace of drama and comedy. Unlike today where “dramedies” dominate much of the premium TV landscape, for the Greeks these were two completely separate styles of theater. Dramas were largely devoid of comedy, and vice versa. The Trip to Greece take advantage of this separation and allows each of its character to embody a different stereotype. The self-important Coogan, of course, embodies the drama. He scoffs at Brydon’s lack of knowledge of Classical philosophy and seems more impatient than ever with Brydon’s imitations. He particularly bristles when Brydon claims that Coogan’s recent BAFTA-winning dramatic performance as a real-life comedian/entertainer in Stan & Ollie was nothing more than an imitation.  Brydon, the light entertainer, is like a court jester, always smiling, the embodiment of comedy.

But what I like even more than how this comedy/tragedy separate thematically resonates with the actors’ temperments is how the movie uses this same duality and  applies it to the overarching “plot,” if it’s appropriate to even call it that. The whole idea behind this particular trip is that Coogan and Brydon are going to follow the course of Odysseus’s eponymous Odyssey. In fact, the first words we hear from the movie, with the screen is still dark, is Brydon reciting the first words of the Iliad. The first image we see is the pair looking over the ruins of ancient Troy. What’s so wonderful is that the actual Odyssey is not a piece of theater. It’s an epic poem with as many pieces of light-hearted adventure and romance as there are set pieces of grief, destruction and other heavy drama. As such, the film allows Coogan and Brydon to experience their own, separate aspects of Odysseus’ original journey. By the end of the film, both do reach their respective homes, but in a way that matches the vibe of type of theater they embody.

Like any good Shakespearean comedy, Brydon’s journey ends with a marriage of sorts. Ever the light-hearted romantic, he asks that his wife fly out to meet him in Greece. Now, far from his home in England, Brydon has found his home in his wife, his Penelope. With the domineering Coogan out of the picture, Brydon becomes king of his castle, i.e. now HE drives the car.

Meanwhile, Coogan is haunted throughout the film by the possibility that his ailing father will die. His eventual death is all but confirmed by a dream Coogan has midway through the film which essentially recreates Aeneas’ famous flight from Troy while carrying his son and aging father. As those who know the Aeneid know, only one of those three will survive to make it to their new home. His dramatic story arc concludes with the emotional reunion all the way back in England between himself and his son, recalling Odysseus’ eventual reunion with his own son Telemachus.

It’s a beautiful way to end the film. It gives consistency and weight to the fairly rigid juxtaposition of to the two character’s personalities in the film, and it does so in a way that almost seems fated in a way that recalls Greek tragedy. This thematic consistency is overall satisfying without being distracting in the way the dramatic portions detracted from the second and third films. Ultimately, it serves to complement the comedy you show up to enjoy. While it will always be tough to top the first film’s originality and surprisingly poignant end, this is by far the most artistic film in the series, and the arguably the best since the series began. Here’s to more and more trips to come!

*** (Three out of four stars)