#period drama review

[stelly38]

I've been meaning to share this and finally got 'round to it. Occasionally, I write some review/recommendations for a group I'm in. This was my five cents on Rivals.

Rivals is pretty much everything the press said it would be, and then some, although it doesn’t start out that way. The first two episodes are slow and light on content as characters are introduced and plot points are set. But hang with it—the story really picks up from the third episode, when everything begins falling into place.

I’d been looking forward to this series mostly because it stars the deliciously hairy and handsome Aidan Turner, delightful in the role of Declan O’Hara, hard-hitting journalist and TV presenter fresh off his job with the BBC. He’s lured into indie TV by Lord Tony Baddingham, played by the always-entertaining David Tennant, who is terribly, wonderfully evil in his role as the director of Corinium Television, the biggest company in Rutshire County, where the story takes place. The other main character, Rupert Campbell Black, (Alex Hassell), is a filthy-old-money-rich and famous ex-Olympian, cad, and MP, as well as the Most Handsome Man in all of England™. Lord Tony has hatched a plan to ruin Rupert (the two are sworn enemies) by inviting him to be interviewed live on Declan’s new talk show. Intrepid journalist that he is, Declan has unearthed the dirtiest dirt on Campbell-Black, and he’s just itching to smear him in an effort to keep him from sniffing around Taggie, his beautiful, too-young-for-Rupert daughter.

Add to this mix Declan’s flirtatious and frustrated wife, Maud (Victoria Smurfit), as well as a cast of other colorful, endearing characters, all tangentially connected to Corinium, and the stage is set for all sorts of accurate-for-the-era shenanigans, some of which may be shocking to viewers who weren’t around for this decade. Think British Dallas or Dynasty with nudity and sex, backstabbing and adultery and corruption, and a much better sense of humor. There is full-frontal nudity (Alex Hassell), and many, many pairs of breasts, so be prepared for that.

David Tennant has the bitchiest and best lines, and I laughed good and long at those zingers. Tony is a truly detestable character, but it is difficult to hate him, because David is so wonderful. My favorite scene (barring any naked Aidan Turner) in all eight episodes is when Lord Tony throws an epic tantrum. I’ll leave it there. (FYI, the final episode ends abruptly on a cliffhanger, as the series only goes about halfway through the novel by Jilly Cooper.)

Speaking of Mr. Turner, we get to see quite a bit of him (just not that bit), as well as a huge, ridiculous mustache à la Hal Linden in Barney Miller. The mustache is so big, it kind of makes up for the bit of Turner we don’t get to see… a girl can dream, right? Turner, as Declan, appears mostly naked in the kitchen while getting ready for work; in the tub, scrubbing up; and in various rooms of his home, satisfying his wife. I shed a tear of horny gratitude that television producers have finally refrained from touching Turner’s chest hair, save to comb it, perhaps—those lucky, lucky set groomers.

In a nutshell, the show is a snapshot of 1980s English society folk, framed around the power struggles within the independent television industry. It’s good, silly fun—trash—in a word, that is well aware it’s trash. In fact, it wears that badge with pride. While actual trash has zero value, Rivals manages to sprinkle some sharp and insightful social critique in among all the teased hair, orgies, blue mascara, and insane parties of Rutshire County.

Here’s hoping for a second season.

[muchcelebrated]

PSA: If you loved My Lady Jane you should watch The Artful Dodger! It has immaculate romance and banter and angst and the two leads (Thomas Brodie Sangster and Maia Mitchell) have great chemistry!

It’s got great writing and is a part period drama, part medical drama, part romance, and has heist elements! I also really can’t overstate how great the romance is!

[agentnico]

The Count of Monte-Cristo (2024) review

Je suis Batman!!

Plot: Edmond Dantes becomes the target of a sinister plot and is arrested on his wedding day for a crime he did not commit. After 14 years in the island prison of Château d'If, he manages a daring escape. Now rich beyond his dreams, he assumes the identity of the Count of Monte-Cristo and exacts his revenge on the three men who betrayed him.

I’ve been really enjoying this recent wave of French blockbuster cinema creating these lavish big-budget adaptions of their nation’s classic literature, with the recent highly enjoyable duology romp of The Three Musketeers (D’Artagnan and Milady respectively) and now taking on The Count of Monte-Cristo. I was a major admirer of Alexander Dumas’ novels when I was a kid, and by admirer I mean my father used to force me to read those books which at the time I hated him for, as I much rather would have spent hours on end on my GameCube, but now am forever grateful that I have the knowledge of storytelling which I gained from reading those pieces of literature. So I’m eagerly hoping that now with these expensive modern movie takes we will also get some of Dumas’ other great works get the contemporary cinematic treatment, such as La Dame de Monsoreau and The Black Tulip (though the latter may be difficult as there is already an older film version starring Alain Delon, and would be hard to recast Delon, let’s not kid ourselves!). As for Monte-Cristo, I’m not even going to sugar-coat it - this is a fantastic modern adaptation of a classic!

The sets are great and really invoke the post-Napoleon era of France; the costumes are gorgeous; the music score is grandiose and epic, really engrossing you in this decade spanning saga of revenge; the classic story is reinterpreted so well with the themes and the emotion, and the acting across the board is superb. Oh and the cinematography is to die for - wonderful long shot landscape sequences, great use of lighting, gorgeous shots of interior palaces - you can tell this film has been given all the money in the world, only unlike Amazon’s Rings of Power TV series that looks expensive but lacks any narrative depth, this film is both great to look at but also has a great story with awesome performance. Look, I really really liked this movie, let me rave about it!! Of course if you’re not French, you have to deal with subtitles, however don’t let that sway you, as this move manages to tell so much using its visuals and powerful music score that at times you don’t even need to read the subtitles to understand the emotion the characters on screen are going through.

Pierre Niney is honestly superb as the titular Count. From how he showcases him in his younger years as the excited young sailor wanting to prove himself to years later being this highly intelligent and driven yet calm presence, as well as taking on the various alter-ego’s of the Count using his different masks (very reminiscent of Fantomas) such as the dastardly Lord Halifax - Niney does such a stellar job here. What I also loved is how this adaptation takes the “superhero origin” approach to Dumas’ classic, with the Count being showcased as this cool dark vigilante like Batman/Bruce Wayne or Zorro, and even his dark menacing suit (which is dapper as f*** by the way!!) emphasising that. All the props to Niney, he adds so many layers and nuance to his performance, that even when he is super reserved as the Count, you can tell in his eyes the disdain and pure hatred he has for the ones that wronged him, but at the same time being able to showcase his guard dropping slightly when he is in the presence of his beloved lost love Mercédès (played gracefully by Anaïs Demoustier).

As for negatives, as even though I absolutely adored this movie, the inner critic within me still can’t help himself. This is a 3-hour long movie, and granted that is a result of the weight of the original book, however you do feel the length of this thing, but at the same time certain parts feel a tad rushed (due to the writers attempting to cram so much story and character development into the 3-hour frame) that certain side-plots and narrative build ups aren’t given their proper space to breath. One does wonder if this would have worked better as a mini-series, however on the other hand they probably would not have had the budget to make this thing look as good as it does. Secondly, certain details/plot-holes frustrated me which I won’t spoil, but one example is when Edmond and Abbé Faria are digging the escape hole from their prison chambers all those years, where the hell did they keep getting all those candles from to light their workspace?? I highly doubt in mid-1800s France prisons had little kiosk shops to offer inmates various groceries and household items. Happy to be corrected here, but honestly seeing those candles reminded me of Deadpool proclaiming “that’s just lazy writing”. And final complaint (before we can get back to raving about how awesome this movie is) is the ageing, or lack of it more. The tale of Monte-Cristo spans from 1815 and ends in 1844, yet the movie makes zero effort in making the actors look older the further down the timeline we go. The Count does look aged but that is due to the mask he wears, so when that’s off he looks like his younger 20-something self again. One of the main baddies Prosecutor de Villefort (played in true dick-fashion by Laurent Lafitte) looks exactly the same at the beginning of the movie and then right to the end. You’re telling me the make-up artists and hairstylists couldn’t give him a single grey hair or a wrinkle?

Again though, that was me with my critical thinking hat on. With that off, I want to reiterate how I truly enjoyed this new version of a classic tale that has been done so many times before, however this one may be one of my favourites. Truly engaging and epic in scale, with a ridiculously cool Pierre Niney in the titular role. He is… the French Batman!

Overall score: 8/10

[dilirebas]

My review of The Double / 墨雨云间

Xue Fangfei (played by Wu Jinyan) survives a murder attempt by her husband and takes on the new identity of Jiang Li, the eldest daughter of an imperial official. With the help of Xiao Heng (played by Wang Xingyue), she seeks revenge against those who wronged her.

This drama is very much carried by the incredible chemistry between the leads. Every shared scene is simultaneously explosive and subdued.

Wu Jinyan has a great track record for playing badass female leads in period dramas, and you can absolutely see why. Her take on Xue Fangfei is sharp, complex, and resolute.

Wang Xingyue's take on Xiao Heng is confident and charismatic, but as his relationship with Xue Fangfei develops, he becomes increasingly mischievous and...cute?

Shen Yurong, played by Liang Yongqi, was the supporting character that stood out the most for me.

The writing sucks, but it sucks in a way that's easy to overlook? The story is littered with plotholes, the leads have insane plot armour, most of the minor characters are two-dimensional props, the political landscape makes no sense... but if you don't take the drama too seriously, you can think of all of this as a mere backdrop to the leads having badass moments and magnetic chemistry.

I think most people will find that it's a very satisfying drama to watch. There was just one aspect about the ending that I found incredibly unsatisfying, which was Jiang Li's ending. It seems to say [SPOILER]: you get a free pass to be the world's worst father as long as a random person gives you absolution for your actual daughter's death.

Wu Jinyan and Wang Xingyue are both signed under the same company, and their outspoken boss has been quite responsive to fans, so I think there's a good chance we'll get to see them work together again :)

[wellsbering]

maurice letterboxd reviews, ft. thirsting for young hugh grant, Mustache Discourse™, and more

[sessayyys-corner]

GOMBURZA (2023) - MMFF REVIEW

“Vivan Los Filipinos. Mabuhay ang mga Filipino.”

This film is the story of the three martyr priests. Three Filipinos who were part of the native community who were once under Spanish colonial rule and oppression. If you have been updated, or have been listening in your elementary Philippine history classes, it’s GOMBURZA, not MAJOHA. 

Despite it being produced by Jesuit Communications, the film was able to execute (No pun intended) a factual depiction on a turning point of Philippine history without overused emphasis of religion. It was able to capture how the Catholic faith was used as an instrument of oppression during the Spanish colonial period (This was especially ironic considering how return of the religious orders, including the Jesuits, were the reason for the silencing of the secularization movement). What also impressed me is that almost every single detail in the movie, even in the dialogue, came from actual events in history. It is evident that enough research was made to make this film as accurate as possible.

The film’s cinematography was able to capture life during the period whether it was amongst the Filipino liberals, the Spanish priests, the Governor-Generals, or even the three main characters in our story. With every other scenes of the film shifting from light to dark atmospheres, this symbolized the reality of Spanish colonization — warmth, acceptance, and friendship amongst fellow Filipinos; and ruthlessness, inhumanity, and oppression from the Spaniards (and even traitors). Adding emphasis to GomBurZa’s (2023) cinematography is its sound design. Just by feeling the cinema floor rumbling and the deeply-voiced voiceover in the film’s ending segment, this film can come to a point where it deserves its own IMAX screening.

Dante Rivero and Cedrick Juan showcase over-the-top stellar performances as Padre Mariano Gomez (played by Rivero) and Padre Jose Burgos (played by Juan). Both actors have embodied their roles, not only due to the fact that they, especially Juan, share a slight resemblance with the real life Mariano Gomez and Jose Burgos. It is also because that they were able to portray their emotions from having a friendly conversation, to later condemning their unfair arrest, trial, and death.

Pepe Diokno's time and effort in conducting research and including every important detail in the production is evident in the whole film itself, as it was not only ACTUALLY based on true events, but was able to evoke emotion and outrage, just like how the Filipinos of the 1870s did at the time.

With all of this said, GomBurZa (2023) is not only a history lesson, but also an immersion into the Spanish colonial rule and the lives of the three priests. Being a history nerd and a cinephile who has since learned the names of the three martyr priests as a little girl in elementary, I can definitely say that this was one of the only film experiences where I had witnessed the breaking of the fourth wall. The whole time I was in the cinema, it felt like I was part of their conversation, like I was a witness to their lives and execution.

What also added to this experience was that I watched the film on Rizal Day, and what better way to commemorate our national hero's contribution to Philippine independence than to learn about where it all started? Like what I always preached to my family:

Without GomBurZa, there will be no Jose Rizal. Without Jose Rizal, there would be no Andres Bonifacio. Without all of them, the Philippines and the Filipino would not exist.

GomBurZa (2023) is a cathartic experience that is definitely for the family. This film is a testament to the importance of appreciating and learning our history. Hopefully it serves as a reminder of our collective past, national identity, and the importance of our freedom.

[Metro Manila Film Festival 2023]

(my film review of "GomBurZa" is also available on letterboxd!)

[humanreuben]

anyway, you can find me on letterboxd if you want- basically watching everything hugh and mads have ever been in. i think you can find me if you search for TheFictionNerd, for some reason my qr code doesn't want to work.

i just watched Daniel Deronda... review below (SPOILERS)

(also, when i review movies it's often from a "is this actually a good movie?" standpoint, many of them are still my comfort movies. i don't really know why i've rated Adam so low but it's still one of my comfort movies.)

[milliondollarbaby87]

Lee (2023) Review

The story and life of American photographer Lee Miller, a fashion model who became an acclaimed war correspondent for Vogue magazine during World War II. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ Continue reading Lee (2023) Review

[tailsbeth]

My friend asked me about Mary & George and I think I summed it up pretty well 💁🏻

(also very aware I butchered Nick's surname, I stayed up for the Oscars & had got through the day without some how napping fyi)

[fordreviews]

📽️ The Other Boleyn Girl (2008)

This really is a great period piece. Is it factually accurate? Who knows? 😅 But it’s so well acted and well written. I know for sure (because I’ve researched it a bit) that there are some parts that are historically accurate. But I also know that many parts are embellished for entertainment, which is not a bad thing! I just want to make sure no one treats this as a documentary. I very much enjoy this movie and would definitely watch it again.

Sex/nudity: 7/10 (for a movie about the multiple affairs of an English king, it’s milder than one would think, but there’s still more than I want to list)

Language: 2/10 (mostly God’s name, not much else)

Violence: 3/10 (brief sexual violence, some beheadings)

Overall rating: 8/10

[stelly38]

I thought Cambridge Spies was *the* most British thing I’d ever seen, until I watched Maurice shortly after. I’m still on my Toby Stephens kick, which explains Cambridge Spies, and lord, is he pretty in it. But I also wanted to ogle the very young, stunningly beautiful Hugh Grant in Maurice, so I watched both.

I nursed a bit of a crush on Grant back in his Four Weddings days, around the same time as Maurice, but I’d honestly forgotten how incredibly, ethereally gorgeous he was, like some androgynous nymph out of a Waterhouse painting, smooth and luscious, too perfect to be real. For the record, I do love today's older, rougher Hugh, who has managed, over time, to turn ass-hole-ish curmudgeonliness into a charming brand all his own.

My overall impression of Merchant Ivory flicks is that they are much like paintings: pretty to look at, and if you stare long enough, something in your field of view eventually moves, but it takes, like, days. Days. I don’t know if my attention span has been worn down over the decades like everyone else’s, or if these movies need some tighter editing, but good lord, at two hours and twenty minutes, not much happens in Maurice. Or is it EM Forster?  Maurice is a Forster adaptation; and similarly, so is A Room with a View, which also flows like molasses. I’ll never know if it’s the writing or the editing, because I’ve never read anything of Forster’s except for Room, which I attempted when I was a teenager and quit halfway through, because what in the fuck was he going onnnnn about? And I even had a better attention span back then, in the nineties. I said to my husband after Maurice ended, perhaps he and I needed a course on Forster to truly appreciate the literature and the movie adaptations. It’s unlikely to happen, but there it is.

Maurice follows the lead character, played by James Wilby, as he discovers and wrestles with his latent homosexuality. Hugh Grant plays Clive Durham, Maurice’s good school friend and first (unconsummated) love. The two men pal around London and the countryside as they age well into their twenties, spending time together and apart, both grappling with their sexual identities in different ways. The movie also casts a very cute Rupert Graves as Maurice’s first lover, and Ben Kingsley (with hair and a weird American accent—what a hoot) appears in a cameo as a shrink who attempts to hypnotize Maurice into heterosexuality.

My bitching isn’t a condemnation of Forster or Merchant Ivory; the film was a rather pretty little trifle to look at. I thought the story was good, and I love that a major film studio was tackling the horrors of being gay in Edwardian England so long ago (1987, when AIDS was still considered “the gay cancer.” —Hats off to them.) And I’m always game to watch pretty boys cavorting about. There was a good deal of that, one scene with full frontal nudity (gasp!)

Speaking of pretty boys, several feature in Cambridge Spies, which takes place about thirty years after Maurice, shortly before WWII. The prettiest of them is Toby Stephens, who is just dashing dressed in wide leg trousers, fedoras, and the well-tailored suits of the era. He plays Kim Philby, one of the notorious Soviet spies that comprised the group known in real life as the Cambridge Five. Rupert Penry Jones plays Donald Maclean; Samuel West is Anthony Blunt, and Tom Hollander is Guy Burgess. Since American public-school curriculum doesn’t teach any history but its own, (much of which is white-washed lies, but that’s a kvetch for another day), I never knew about the British turncoats until I watched this, which was last week. Yay for me.

Spies is a four-part miniseries, the last two episodes of which are far, far more entertaining and engaging than the first two. It’s good they decided to balance the episodes thusly, as I was ready to throw in the towel after the second one. The only reason I continued on was because I’d already invested time in watching the first 50 percent—in for a penny, in for a pound. I think the writers wanted the first two episodes for back-story and character development, but there is little that reveals the principals’ various motivations for spying other than that they were all friends at Cambridge, and they shared a deep hatred of fascism. Weird that that was all it took, right? I dunno, maybe I missed something—these were the two most boring episodes.

The entire series really belongs to Tom Hollander. He steals every scene he’s in; he has the best lines, the most cuttingly funny remarks, and he’s the craziest and loosest cannon of the bunch, hence, the most entertaining. Previously, I’d only known his work from 2005’s Pride and Prejudice (the boiled potatoes), and from his creepily-repressed turn as art critic John Ruskin in Desperate Romantics. He’s great and memorable in those, but he is phenomenal in Spies.

Hollander’s Burgess, as well as West’s Anthony Blunt, are gay men, compelling because they'd opted into an overwhelmingly straight-male power structure: espionage. Spies doesn’t really speak to this much, rather than to have Hollander portray Burgess as an out and proud gay man, I suppose as much as one could be on the brink of WWII in England. But it is striking to see the difference just three decades made in how gays were perceived by English society (or not) when you compare the attitudes on display in Maurice to those in Spies. Homosexuality was the worst sin one could commit in the world of Maurice; but by the time we get to Spies, it’s barely an issue. I suspect that homosexuality was still offensive to many in England at the time, as that country’s decriminalization law only took effect in 1967, but for some reason unknown to me, the writers and producers of Spies made it mostly a non-issue.

Overall, Spies was a good series, educational for me, at least, and I got to stare at Toby Stephens for four hours, including a couple safe-for-granny sex scenes. Would I write home about the show? —probably not, but it was not wasted time.

Tom Hollander’s best scene (and they’re all good) is a tantrum he throws during a trip to the States, where he drives across suburban lawns, destroying several white picket fences, then stands atop his car screaming “God Bless America” (in a good American accent), and decries this country’s never-acknowledged social and political hypocrisy.

Brilliant. And funny.

[enyoalkis]

“In a rotten, blood-soaked island kingdom, cursed by plague and riven by religious unrest, there was once a queen by the name of Katherine Parr. She was the 6th wife of an angry and ailing king.”

FINALLY THIS MOVIE IS OUT! I've been wanting to see Firebrand for a while but now me and Reina just watched it together!

Review

Firstly, the costumes are GORGEOUS. Although I was taken aback by the ending, I genuinely enjoyed the movie (maybe an unpopular opinion despite the historical inaccuracies?) It’s a different from all the other Tudor dramas I’ve seen. As my first impression from the trailer initially thought, it definitely has the horror thriller vibe that really does show how you have to be very careful treading through Henry VIII's court.

Alicia Vikander is a great Katherine Parr: beautiful and looks like someone at the same age as the real Katherine when she married Henry. I enjoyed seeing her religious ambitions and political role as regent, along with her friendship with Anne Askew (I'm not sure if they were ever friends irl but it's nice to see genuine friendship in Tudor dramas). Definitely the best Katherine Parr portrayal I've seen.

But I especially really like how the camera often pans to a young Elizabeth I as a major background observer to all the events as she definitely was very perceptive in real life. I heard the book the film was based off depicted Elizabeth much more negatively (ew?) but the movie doesn't. Katherine has a positive relationship with all her stepchildren in the film as she did in real life.

I do wonder if the film is intended to show both Katherine and Elizabeth's POVs of Henry because his personality is very explicitly monstrous and more violent. I was actually genuinely terrified of him while watching, and Jude Law really is unrecognizable in his role there. I did like though how the film shows his children, even young Edward, being scared of their father because I can imagine you would be after hearing all the crazy shit he's done and pulled throughout his reign.

I don't have much issues with the movie, but I didn't like how young Mary I is portrayed as just... being there? She doesn't have as much of a speaking role as Elizabeth, and her personality came off as bland. Edward did have more moments in the movie but just him being a kid.

Overall, I think this film is mostly worth a watch.

[agentnico]

Rivals - season 1 (2024) review

Blimey Disney - you dirty!!

Plot: Into the cut-throat world of Corinium television comes Declan O'Hara, a mega-star of great glamour and integrity with a radiant feckless wife, a son and two teenage daughters. Living rather too closely across the valley is Rupert Campbell-Black, divorced and as dissolute as ever, and now the Tory Minister for Sport. Declan needs only a few days at Corinium to realise that the Managing Director, Lord Baddingham, is a crook who has recruited him merely to help retain the franchise for Corinium. Baddingham has also enticed Cameron Cook, a gorgeous but domineering executive, to produce Declan's programme. Declan and Cameron detest each other, provoking a storm of controversy into which Rupert plunges with his usual abandon. As a rival group emerges to pitch for the franchise, reputations ripen and decline, true love blossoms and burns, marriages are made and shattered, and sex raises its (delicious) head at almost every throw as, in bed and boardroom, the race is on to capture the Cotswold Crown.

One can recall the time when Disney first announced its streaming service, and how many scratched their heads thinking the platform will be mostly family/children orientated content, as well as Marvel and Star Wars. Since then though the House of Mouse seemingly has grown some cojones, for now they are unashamed to release stronger more provocative mature content. In cometh Rivals, an adaptation of the 1988 Jilly Cooper novel known for its filth and sexual content. And the TV series goes full Game of Thrones in that respect, as it not all all shies away from all the sex, and in fact I even found myself wishing there wasn’t as much sex happening on screen, and to leave a little to our imaginations instead. Then again from what I heard Cooper’s novel was overly erotic in itself, as such can’t blame the series for being faithful. Seriously though, seconds into the first episode we're confronted with a man's bare buttocks furiously humping away in an airplane toilet, as his partner at the mile-high club grinds her red stilettoed heel into the bathroom wall. Yep, this may just be the most expensive porn I’ve ever seen.

Rivals is campy, colourful, glamorous and silly fun about terrible people and inappropriate jokes. Essentially every character is a diabolical self-centred human being, very much emphasising the stereotype of television stardom celebrity. Yet also every single horrible individual is dripping with endless charisma and charm that you can’t help but enjoy seeing them trying to outdo one another. This is a very glitzy period drama set in the backdrop of the 80s, and speaking of the era, the soundtrack of this show is a superb mixtape of the greatest 80s hits. Every other scene another banger is dropped, which was bit another cherry on top of what already was a very delicious cake.

Disney have also forked out for a stellar cast here. David Tennant (ex-Doctor Who) plays the mean and slimy Lord Tony Baddingham, with the “Bad” in his name not without purpose, as he’s a cold-hearted control freak that wants to own the regional TV network, and destroys anyone that come in his path. Especially with his past in Doctor Who, as well as his fun shenanigans with Michael Sheen, I’m used to Tennant being the loveable personality that he is, but he is truly despicable in Rivals. Then again he played a heck of an antagonist in Jessica Jones, so I shouldn’t be so shocked. Aidan Turner plays possible the only human being in this show with a soul and moral compass as television presenter Declan O’Hara, who’s a riff on Jeremy Kyle, only that he’s not 100% a dick. Turner, who most would know as the good-looking dwarf from The Hobbit movies, is a delight here, and the only one you can actually properly root for. He’s a good guy in a pent house full of wolves. Alex Hassell has possible the most challenging job of balancing the “handsomest man in England” role of Rupert Campbell-Black, as he is both a hero and an antihero. He’s extremely watchable, playing a part-villain, part-Adonis, part-whimpering child, and he plays the role with credibility. Then there is Danny Dyer, who one wouldn’t think would be able to perform on the level of his other cast members, but he was truly delightful here. He plays a self-made millionaire who refuses to adhere to the social rules, or dress codes of the upper class, and is made fun of for it. But it his his romantic side-plot that showcases Jilly Cooper’s more sensitive and sentimental side. Finally we have Bella Maclean as 20-year old daughter of Declan, who acts in some capacity as the viewer’s innocent perspective into the madness of the rich, from the raunchy parties to the endless innuendos. Yet she also has a controversial will-they-won’t-they fling with RCB, and even though the age gap is a tad concerning, the two have such off the charts chemistry that I couldn’t help but ship that boat big time.

Rivals is at its best when it does not take itself too seriously. There are darker moments in this also, from references to the AIDS crisis, to Margaret Thatcher’s political strategy, and more notably sex without consent. I totally get why the latter was included, as it was a reflection on terrible people, especially rich and powerful ones, getting away with terrible things due to their stature. Again though, the show is at its most entertaining when it lets loose and throws these characters in fun stand-offs, and I was truly invested from the first episode till last. It’s rare for me these days to be excited for another season, but goodness do I want, nay NEED season 2 of Rivals ASAP! Please Disney, do one thing right for once and renew this show!

Overall score: 8/10

[dilirebas]

My review of Joy of Life 2

The much-anticipated sequel to Joy of Life finally had its broadcast this year, and it picked up exactly where the first series left off. When Fan Xian returns to Southern Qing after a successful trip to Northern Qi, he immediately faces an assassination attempt by the Second Prince. Although he survives, this is just the beginning of the challenges and dangers that await him.

I really think, perhaps controversially, that the second series is even better than the first!

JoL2 has all the humour and warmth of JoL2 (seriously, it's still so funny), but it also has a darker overall tone. Fan Xian's experiences have shown us that this is an uglier and more dangerous world than we had originally thought. Characters are showing their true colours as their plans and motivations unravel.

We also see an angrier and less trusting Fan Xian. Not everything goes his way anymore. We realize that there are characters who can outwit him, and there are characters that have something to teach him. But that's what I find so exciting about JoL2 -- these newfound challenges raise the stakes and allow Fan Xian to grow as a character.

And at the heart of these challenges lies the fact that Fan Xian is a hopeful and principled person who can't ignore his vision for a fairer and better world. There are easier paths available to him but he refuses to give into his cynical surroundings.

It's true that JoL2 has a bit of a slow start. I'd say the pace and excitement picks up again towards the end of episode 3. But 3 slower episodes on the front end really isn't much to complain about. Remember that JoL1 had a slow start too, but those episodes served a purpose and they were 100% worth watching.

There are characters from JoL1 that will leave an even deeper impression on you in JoL2. For me, one of those characters was Lin Ruofu, and another one was the Crown Prince - for very different reasons. And, of course, the Emperor.

There are also new characters who are loveable and hilarious, including the Grand Princess of Northern Qi, the Eldest Prince of Southern Qing, and Deng Ziyue.

The cast chemistry in JoL2 is so good, you guys!! There are scenes where the actors' rhythms and energies come together so perfectly (whether it's comedic timing or dramatic buildup) and you just want to watch them over and over again.

I also think Zhang Ruoyun has improved as an actor. I know his original Fan Xian was already beloved and critically acclaimed, but he has continued to mature as an actor in the past few years. This time around, his performance as Fan Xian is simultaneously more explosive and more nuanced. There's much more happening in the details of his acting now.

To me, Li Qin as Lin Wan'er felt a bit like a weak link in a sea of outstanding performances. Compared to some of the others, she just felt less natural in her character. She's an excellent actress so this probably just isn't her best, and she still has several scenes where she makes a strong impression.

It took me a while to get used to the recasting of Yan Bingyun. I understand why it happened (Xiao Zhan's career skyrocketed after he filmed JoL1) but the new actor (Wu Xingjian) took a different approach that I didn't think was an upgrade. The new Yan Bingyun feels like a flatter and more transparent character, but that does also make sense in a way. In any case, Wu Xingjian still delivered in key scenes.

Through the lens of history (if you can call the setting history?), this drama touches on a range of themes and topics that remain relevant today. Fan Xian is not a saint but he's an admirable character by the standards of any society and he's the type of hero that every society needs.

If you've made it to this point in the review without having watched JoL1: I think you do need to watch the first series for the second series to make sense. But both series are amazing (like I truly believe they are among the best of the best of cdramas) and it will absolutely be worth your time. Run, don't walk!

[misaxmoto]

Zmory (1979), Wojciech Marczewski

IMDb provided plot:

The life and times of a sensitive, poetic Polish boy who watches his country strive towards the liberation movement.

My observation:

Due to language and cultural barriers, my interpretation of the film is unarguably spoiled with misunderstanding and limitations. Although I wish to write of the entire picturesque film—specifically the scenes of social ridicule, improper guidance, manipulative indoctrination, and abusive authority that especially made my heart hurt and were central to the film—I must keep this review short and will express as a snafu only a few of the infinite post-film thoughts that have consumed my attention.

Wojciech Marczewski's Zmory (1979) is a paragon, especially amongst his films, of boyhood trauma. Mikołaj’s endless gender reduction and sexual trauma, while burdened with the central function of masculinity, a penis, was the ultimate blight; moreover, his failure to properly integrate into society and nurture cultural values devolutionized his character and emphasized his existence as a biological being, even as which he continuously failed by virtue of opposite sex dysfunctions and penis guilt. Simply, his is the greatest case of degradation and dissociation. His passive existence—confirmed only by pain and enclosed in death—was an endless rejection, a stripping of humanity, a dying faith, a quiet suffering.

Undoubtedly, his mother was the first pathogen to his putrefaction that took the form of abandonment and expressed itself as the most painful quote, "I'm not able to love you. Forgive me." And like Mikołaj's persistence to love his mother despite her grievous faults, I could not help but admire and long for her maternal abundance; which was perfectly encapsulated in a quote by Mathias Malzieu found in his novel The Boy with the Cuckoo-Clock Heart, “Everything about her is curved: her eyes, her cheeks like russet apples, her bosom. She's made for wrapping around you. I'll pretend to be hungry even when I'm not just to tuck into her breasts." Her tear still breaks my heart, for it seemed to be an inheritable tear of guilt as it was very often released by Mikołaj- who cried like a bird with a wing trapped under a rock. I am quick to forget just how much his beauty overwhelms me, and when I rewatch this film I am reminded by my own sobbing. I am especially magnetized by him when his diaphanous eyes well with tears. To me, it is another act of internalized suffering for his tears seeped into his puffy skin, while he made not a sound, as though he was choking on cotton. After he could no longer kiss his mother, crying and Balbina seemed to be his way of love's expression (the poetry recitation for instance).

Incidentally, I would sum up the totality of his trauma as the nightmare of a boy raping him, whom he later befriended. I appreciate the intimacy of the camera, keeping to Mikołaj and his little world. I found it only fitting that it left him for a wide-shot casting credits scene when he finally rejected the world; everything left him and in the end, he left it all as nothing walking to nowhere.

"If We Wait" by Guided by Voices is a wonderful, freeing melody of this film. "I die of love, father."

[blumoonfiction-blog]

#ShowsWeLove: The Gilded Age

If you love period dramas steeped in grandeur, scandal, and societal intrigue, HBO’s The Gilded Age is a must-watch. Set in 1880s New York during a time of rapid economic growth and cultural change, the show is a lavish exploration of the tensions between old money and new wealth in America’s most opulent era. Created by Julian Fellowes (Downton Abbey), The Gilded Age is rich in historical…