hamlet-16

History is a strange thing it is not a straight no matter how much some people want it to be.

Mary & George is about one of the many favourites of King James 1 of England. As portrayed here, and apparently in fact, James enjoyed the company of his male favourites to that of his wife and as a consequence young men vie for his favours as young women would vie for a monarch's favour in other royal courts.

One such is George Villiers (Nicholas Galitzine) whose mother is like a stage mother from hell, played with delicious venom by the wonderful Julianne Moore.

This series is sexual more than sexy. Raw in its use of language. Violent in its telling of history. Political games are played and won and lost.

The script is not too removed from know historical facts at least as far as Villiers and the King are concerned.

The design, costumes and cinematography are breathtaking.

Galitzine plays Villiers with an insouciance and gradual knowing of his role and power.

There is much black humour in this series but at its heart is a story rarely told of homosexual monarchs and the games played around them.

Silly, unbelievable, fluffy, joyful ... two hours of fun. When you sit down to watch it you know exactly what you are getting and it delivers quite nicely.

Our two protagonists squabble... kiss... argue .... kiss ... all the standard ingredients of a classic rom com.

In a year which has seen Heartstoppers, Bros and Young Royals and now the lovely Red White and Royal Blue gay streaming patrons are having a treat of a time.

Nicholas Galitzine (who is a real Russian aristocrat) and Taylor Zakhar Perez have a natural chemistry that helps make the unlikely love story work. Add to that the fabulous Uma Thurman as the President and Sarah Shahi as the aid charged with keeping an eye on Taylor and you have a fun trip ahead.

Sit back and relax and don't think too hard ...just enjoy the well trodden rom com path.

The real question is: "Why didn't Hugh read the book?"

He can't have read it because his adaption is all over the place. Characters added, murders and assaults that are not in the book, plot details changed at will and for no great purpose. The changes add nothing to the story.

ITV would have done better to have spent their budget restoring their 1980 version!

I really do not understand why writers (and producers) think they can "improve" on Agatha Christie? She was the master of the murder mystery!

Why Didn't they Ask Evans may not be one of her best but this "adaption" is unevenly paced and lacking charm and just too long by at least an hour.

I give if for four stars for production design but both sound and costume seem oddly wrong.

Just fun!

"Magpie Murders" is witty and full of delights and good performances. Do not take it too seriously. Just put your feet up, grab a cup of tea (or a G&T) and enjoy the game.

A classic Agatha Christie-esque plot wrapped in a modern tale.

Do not expect car chases or shoot-outs or US tv series style "action". That is not what this is about

The whole thing is done with style and skill and the beauty of the English countryside is part of the appeal.

And Atticus Pünd is one of the nicest detectives I have met. A humane gentle soul. I hope we see more of him.

So just enjoy this series.

Thankfully the BBC has commissioned the sequel "Moonflower Murders". I am looking forward to that!

Old telephones and wrong numbers, misunderstandings, the inability to express true feelings and blossoming LOVE. That is Smiley.

All the classic elements of rom-com rolled into a delightful Christmas gift from Spain and Netflix.

Throw in a handsome cast of fine actors and this Spanish comedy just flies.

It touches on a wide range of issues including family, and rejection but mostly the search, the timeless search, for love.

This series is joy. Sit back and join Bruno and Alex as they navigate the pitfalls of modern romance in a fabulous looking Barcelona.

We may all know where we are going but the journey is half the fun!

The core of the story has just been thrown out.... no Simon or Daphne? What were they thinking? And revealing the identity of Lady Whistledown was a mistake.

The series is still gorgeous to look at ... beautiful people in beautiful clothes in beautiful settings but the whole thing feels flat like yesterday's champagne.

A fairly standard murder mystery. Nicely mounted ... nicely acted but nothing new here and the use of English accents is jarring.

But worse is I find no real connection with the characters who all seem a little artificial except for Van der Valk himself. Their eccentricities seem a little too bolted on.

Still as I said not bad but nothing new. I keep feeling it could be so much better.

I waited until i had watched all four episodes before writing a comment here.

Like any first series it suffers from uncertain characterisations and exposition.

First the negatives:

1. The photography - the excessive closeups and blurred backgrounds just serve to distance the audience. This style is a fad at the moment and not one I like.

2. there was definitely a problem with the sound. The actors seem to have been miked too closely resulting in a muffled unclear sound that was hard to understand much of the time. The sound needs to be re-equalised to push out the voice component.

3. the production design was weird. The police offices were like a lost set from Star Trek™.

4. the plot was ultimately too easy and telegraphed too obviously. I guessed who and why well before the end of the first episode.

BUT despite this some of this series was gripping. Especially the last episode. The performances finally were allowed to show through. And it is for this episode that I gave the series an 8 out of 10.

I hope there is a second series. The show has promise. None of the issues with the first series are unfixable. Ann Cleeves is a brilliant writer and it shows in parts of The Long Call.

The Fifty Shades trilogy is so famous or is that infamous for being a badly written mishmash of awful prose and plotting with a touch of sadomasochism that any film was bound to be pre-judged before it ever touched a movie screen.

To make a film of these immensely successful albeit critically despised books was a daunting task. In essence it is a simple romantic drama with more than a touch of Jane Austen plotting. Smouldering rich hero with dark secret meets sweet young women and they fall in love (or is that lust).

However our characters are mere cyphers. We never get to understand Christian Grey (but did we ever get to know Austen's Mr Darcy). Whatever backstory is provided by the books is largely missing here similarly Anna is barely sketched. What matters is not the characters but what they stand in for in the reader's or viewer's mind.

The film is really a series of set pieces: The first meeting with the famous line "Mr Grey will see you now".

The hardware store.

The helicopter ride.

The revealing of the Red Room.

The contract discussion (to my mind the best scene in the movie) which is both witty and sexy and with Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan clearly enjoying themselves.

The sex scenes (lovingly photographed) and the inevitable sadomasochistic touches.

Your enjoyment of the movie will depend on your reaction to these moments not the overall plotting. If you do not respond to the main themes of the novels reflected as they are in the movie then this film is not for you.

The cast have really little to work with in terms of the words they speak but both Ms Johnson and Mr Dornan are accomplished actors and when they are given some things to work with (the hardware store and the contract scene) they really do show their abilities. BUT what they do have to work with is the feel and physicality of their roles. And both do that very well. I don't mean the sex scenes. I mean that we see Anna change from slightly hunched mouse to confident woman and Grey is immaculately brooding.

And on top of all this is the production design and cinematography which are as sharp and glistening as Christian Grey sterile cold apartment. But works excellently and of course Danny Elfman' score is wonderful.

So if you like the books you know what to expect. And unless you have been living under a rock for the past decade you know what the story is about so enjoy the film for what it is... a fine well made slice of film entertainment just don't expect a dramatic masterpiece of any depth.

So why an 8? Because it meets the expectations for many and it is a well made entertainment.

The dislike for this film....

At its heart it is a gentle crazy comedy, nothing more. It is pretty, has a lovely music score, fine actors and some witty lines. I found myself giggling along with it.

It is not meant to be a great searing drama it is romantic comedy!

Emily Blunt and Jamie Dornan both surprised me. So her accent was not great but she convinced as the love tossed young woman and Dornan has two big jobs: a scene with Christopher Walken that is the heart of the drama and the big end sequence with Emily Blunt which show his abilities very well.

I enjoyed my quirky trip to County Mayo.

A fascinating and historically traumatic period for Norway and the world but sadly this series is a curates egg. Good (acting settings) not so good (script in parts and historical accuracy is just missing).

It is like "The Crown" vaguely touching historical accuracy. More a romance than reality.

It looks good (except for some very very dodgy CGI which is more to do with budget than anything I am sure). Costuming and sets etc. Are beautiful.

The acting is good but the material is so thin.

And despite all the comments here ... TV in the US was underway in a limited way in 1940 and full broadcasting beginning in 1941. FDR's 1940 convention speech was broadcast live.

(TV began in the UK in 1936 and Germany and other European countries in the late 30s. Norway had to wait until 1953 and full broadcasting by NRK began in 1960.)

I am saddened by the comments here about people not wanting to watch things not in English. That cuts off much of the world to you.

The core elements of this were excellent ... the main characters were good and the acting excellent but the trope of the hero being in constant conflict with the boss is dreary and unoriginal and added absolutely nothing to the plot.

The potential to be the next Vera or Morse is there but at the moment it is a case of could have been.

The plot in this one was ok but the twist was obvious from the moment I saw the villain for the first time.

Maybe I have seen too many TV thrillers?

BUT I will watch the next episode to see if the rough edges in this first episode are sorted out.

POI was a great show but ended up drifting into a blind alley with the conspiracy plots. It would have been far better if they had allowed John and Harold to help people, fight the villains and left out the mystery mob trying to steal the Machine etc.

In the end the show was simply ruined. The death of Carter was unnecessary and changed the dynamic. Almost as if the producers lost faith in their own product or wanted POI to be a different show.

In the end POI was a lost opportunity. Series 4 and 5 really no longer has the elements of the series I enjoyed when I began watching.

An exotic thriller in four languages (Polish, Ukrainian, Czech and English). Beautifully photographed and a with stunning musical score.

It took a while to get into and be warned it contains a lot of violence, nudity and sex. Far more than your average US or UK thriller.

I found the story a bit complex to follow but I liked the characters.

Worth a look.

As a gay man who lived through the 80s and watched as friends and acquaintances "went home" this TV show brings it all back.

It is almost unbearable in parts... the passing of Colin is devastating ... the scenes in the hospital in the final episode... all too familiar family disdain for their gay sons... the love of strangers ... the angels like Jill...

Perhaps now some people will understand the deep wounds inflicted by some politicians and "religious" leaders of the day ... wounds that do not heal with time...

So to Russell and his cast thank you....

and to David Dennis Paul Tony Red Lee and so many guys ..too many guys ..... here's to you!

This episode which involves a road accident and another death which may or may not be suicide.

And as usual with Gently unravelling the events reveals much more than motive and cause and villain... it opens a view into the lost world of the 1960s. A world in turmoil (as shown with references to the 1968 student riots in France).

In a number of key scenes our protagonists reveal a cynicism and underlying void to their existence.

In the end the events unfold as tragedy not murderous. And perhaps the only real villain is shown only at the very end as Anthony practices a speech in front of the mirror.

Add in early appearances by James Norton and Nick Hendrix (who gave me the chills with his performance of the deeply nasty and ruthless Anthony) make this episode one to savour.

I remember this series from its first broadcast in 1974-75.

This is the BBC at is most spectacular. Technically things have changed in the past 45 years and the image quality is not up to today's standards. BUT the acting and script are impeccable. And it is Trollope.

I have not read the books so I will not try and discuss how well the series captures them all I can say all the best things of the British tv tradition are on display.

If you enjoy fine eloquent drama give this series a try. it is not fast paced by today's standards. There are no explosions or grumpy middle aged detectives or violence just fine drama with a touch of satire in the Trollopian way.

If you liked the recent "Belgravia" you will enjoy this.

This is an unexpectedly dark film. Not hagiography but rather a look at the men and women that were part of the great adventure to land a man on the moon.

They are not saints. This is not an episode of StarTrek™.

This is an intimate portrait of a man renowned for his skill as a pilot and engineer. But whose taciturn nature meant he did not seek fame nor openly display emotion easily.

This makes making a film far from simple.

The reviews here talk of the film's length and that is "boring". I disagree. The film's length gives it a chance to reveal Armstrong to us and to explore the huge gamble that was the Apollo.

Gosling's performance is stoic but underneath you sense a raw intense level of emotion in his Armstrong. It is a truly stellar performance.

Ignore the naysayers. Do not expect a boy's own adventure. This is a human drama not a sci fi fantasy. It is ultimately very powerful and I suspect will grow in reputation.

... I am just not sure what!

Hollywood is a dream factory and this "Hollywood" is truly a dream. An alternative world to the sad reality of the ultraconservative Hollywood of the 1940s and 50s.

On one hand total fluff, a feel good story that is uneven and an unbelievable fable but on the other a beautifully crafted series that at its best is a wonderful evocation of a period long gone.

The acting of the principals is standout especially Patti Lupone, Holland Taylor, Dylan McDermott and Jim Parsons (who humanises the infamous Henry Wilson).

The series shifts for satire to drama and back again and sadly not always convincingly but I enjoyed it.

The more you know about the Hollywood of the period the more you will either love this or pick at its historical missteps.

In the end I suggest you give it a try. You may like it or maybe not. Yes there is homosexuality, yes there is feminism, yes there is some preachy stuff but I enjoyed it even for daring to be a little different.

And at least it wasn't another grim noire series!

What a nice bit light murder for a Sunday evening.

Bath looks beautiful (comparisons with Oxford are obvious). The music is jaunty. The script is passable. The acting fun. What is there not to like?

This is not great noir drama with seething passions and deep neuroses and set in deep dark greyness. We are in Midsomer not Morse territory.

I know people seem to have disliked this as too coy too old fashioned too conventional. But this is a genre pierce not cutting edge drama. A comfortable Sunday evening entertainment. A guilty pleasure perhaps.

And you know that I thoroughly enjoyed my trip to Bath but now I really must get back to the library!

Greed corruption and murder amongst the rich and beautiful with a poor person taking the fall is hardly a new plot.

The key is how, what is effectively a genre piece, is put together.

The scenery is beautiful as is the design. The music is good and not obtrusive in the way it often is these days. The cinematography is luscious, lovingly displaying the rippling muscles of Toy Boy.

The acting is variable. The script, oh well, it is not important in a film like this.

BUT one surprising element and one totally unexpected is the relationship between the mute man and the gay son of the leading lady. Touching and genuine and beautifully done.

Enjoyable fluff for a long languid weekend just don't take it seriously.

I really know nothing about Finnish post war history. I have a vague knowledge of the Soviet invasions in the 1940s but that is about it so this cold war thriller is new territory.

A slow burn series that drew me in bit by bit and with quite a number of unexpected twists.

Who are the real heroes in this? That is perhaps the most difficult question of all.

But atmospheric design and music, quality acting, a script that seamlessly moves between Finnish, Russian, English and Swedish is a fine mix.

Recommended for lovers of cold war spy thrillers. But be warned, it is quite violent and explicit.

This episode starts well enough but ends rather disappointingly. Some would say it was a silly ending.

But it looks wonderful. The lush English village and quite gorgeous jester costuming is a definite plus.

And the lovely Sorcha Cusack has a marvellous time!

Not one of Father Brown's best but a for 43 minute dalliance of jest.

The plot is familiar. I have seen thrillers with similar themes many times BUT and it is a HUGE BUT, this series is a must watch for the truly mesmerising performance of Janis Niewöhner.

A performance that deservedly won him an International Emmy nomination for Best Actor.

His Beat is a complex flawed damaged character worth meeting.

This is a violent series with a lot of nudity and sex so be warned. But if you can get past this it is a rewarding and at times exciting experience.

Why ...oh why... this is a truly dreadful version of the most famous of Christie novels. it bears only a passing semblance to Miss Christie's original, not in terms of plot although the plot has been turned into a turgid dross, the whole tone of the film is completely unrelated with the novel.

One to avoid, which is a pity given the quality of the players and the production design.