mgumsley

I don't usually review a Series when I have only seen one episode but I have seen some silly comments from other viewers, which prompted me to add more favourable ones.

A thriller of this type does require the viewer to suspend disbelief, and this one is no different. Richard Armitage is most at home in this genre, and I did wonder how he would fare in the more claustrophobic atmosphere of a plane, but so far he has managed a chase through an airport and dealt with a cardiac arrest, so I see my misgivings were misplaced.

The rest of the cast provides good support, particularly Lesley Sharp. The series' pace ensures that the viewer is engaged at all times, and production values, cinematography and story are all quite interesting.

I am looking forward to the rest of this high octane thriller.

I saw the movie of the same name, and did not think it was Guy Ritchie's best story, but he is an experienced film maker and I knew he would explore other options if he brought it to the small screen.

I haven't been disappointed. It started very well, with a strong cast with some well matched talents. The big surprise for me was Theo James, who I had seen in Divergent and a Jane Austen story where he seemed miscast. I really liked him in this, he is smooth and laid back and wields an iron fist in a velvet glove to perfection. And I never noticed how good his voice is before: he is posh, but not annoyingly so, unlike some actors I won't mention here.

The other standout for me is Kaya Scodelario, whose accent complements him perfectly. I never noticed her in the Divergent series, this is a series where she can really make her mark, and I don't think Guy Ritchie has explored her relationship with Theo much at all at this stage.

The plot is what you would expect from Guy, but because it is a series the violence is interspersed with many other happenings, not least of which the chicken episode was the most hilarious (in a dark kind of way).

It did drag a little bit at the end, but not enough to stop me watching. I am taking it as read that there will be a second series.

I was so surprised to see Amanda Seyfried cast as the lead in this fascinating story of a millenial female entrepreneur who lost her grip on the company she created. I thought she was just another pretty face with a good voice who would appear mostly in musicals.

This story is strongly rooted in reality. Elizabeth Holmes was imprisoned for her bad management decisions, and Balwani, her closest associate suffered the same fate. Amanda Seyfried grows with the part, the way all great actors do. I wouldn't be surprised if she wins some major awards for her depiction of a greedy, pushy millenial who cares more about success and herself, than the people around her.

The soundtrack was too loud and obtrusive initially, and I almost switched off. The plot is quite involved as the product and processes took quite a bit of explaining. After that, the story gained momentum and I was hooked.

The plotting, production values, script and casting is all perfect. I could easily watch it again to increase my understanding of what happened to Elizabeth Holmes. In fact her story could almost serve as a textbook case of what happens when people's ambitions are greater than their ability to manage the work they chose to do.

This is fun from the word go, and whilst it is mostly not LOL funny, it is sweetly and swearily entertaining from start to finish. The ending is the funniest of the lot and to watch Olivia Colman, who plays a prim and proper spinster spouting profanities is sheer joy.

It's a pretty thin story about a woman who sends wicked letters to just about anybody who offends her, and the joy is how she is brought to justice. The two leads, Olivia Colman and Jessie Buckley are both very impressive. Jessie Buckley in particular is a whirlwind from start to finish, and it's great to see many well known British actors popping up throughout this merry little tale. Particularly noteworthy is Timothy Spall as the crusty father, Eileen Atkins as a nosey neighbour, and Hugh Skinner as a friendly local copper. I could go on a bit more about the talent in this story, but the best thing is to go and see it for yourself.

I loved this series, and like most of your reviewers I binge watched a lot of it. It is very touching and shows the emotions and benefits that close relationships can bring.

The two leads who played Em and Dexter were well cast and the chemistry between them was genuine. The pace, direction and production values were all first class, but I was a little disappointed about the focus on Dexter's backstory regarding his parents and upbringing and a complete blank for Emma, although her friend Tilly seemed to fill that void in some ways.

The series runs for fifteen episodes which I found a bit daunting at first, but there is plenty of depth to the story as it covers a period of twenty years in the life of the two lovers.

I wouldn't have wanted to be in Sarah Phelps' shoes when this adaptation of Ordeal by Innocence was released, she must have hated the critics comments. I haven't read the book so I can't compare them. It seems to be very familiar Christie territory with virtually all the characters having a motive to kill the mother of the family.

However, as the story progressed, and the actions of the past came to light, I could see who the killer was, but as it wasn't the same as in Miss Christie's book, that is a star off from me to Miss Phelps and her story.

I rather enjoyed this; we didn't have all the upper class types with posh voices littering the series, but it was a typical BBC dramatic production with great cinematography and casting. As I would still like to find out the proper ending, I guess I will have to go back to the book, and read another crime story by the lady who is one of the very best, Agatha Christie.

Who can forget the terrible plane disaster of 1972 when a group of Uruguayan rugby players were involved in a crash in the Andes. Out of a group of 49 people, 27 survived the crash. The disaster was dealt with by the film 'Alive', which was a fine film in its own right, showing what the survivors did to stay alive.

This film digs deeper, and gives us some idea of the personalities and beliefs of the group, and how this affected their ability to survive. Many of them were students, and two of them, as far as I was able to discern had medical training. This must have helped the survival prospects, but at the end of the day, it was up to the individuals to summon up their own courage to endure this tragedy.

Society of the Snow was probably made to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the crash, and careful mention is made of almost all the original survivors. The youngsters were resourceful, getting a radio going, insulating the remains of the plane shell to keep everyone warm, and it is amazing how long they waited to be rescued, putting their faith in the authorities to do so.

The actual plane crash is shown in more graphic detail than the original film, and it gives one an idea of what flying was like in those days when in mountainous terrain. I see that it was shot in the Sierra Nevada in Spain which is a much smaller range than the Andes, but most people I am sure would be none the wiser for knowing this.

The survivors were virtually all skin and bone when the final rescue was made, and there are some harrowing moments in the film, interspersed with flashes of humour and genuine affection for each other. It is probably still the ultimate plane disaster movie, and the young actors who play them do a fine job of portraying the ordeal.

Berlin was the Professor's second in command in the popular 'Money Heist' series. Although not as altruistic as most of his companions, his sardonic humour made him popular with viewers, and he was given the spin off series, 'Berlin' which is naturally about another previous heist, set in Paris.

It's a smaller gang and the ambitions are not as lofty as in 'Money Heist', but the hallmarks of the earlier series are here in the electronic wizardry and the offbeat humour. Alonso carries this series with ease, and the romance which almost upsets his heist gets in the way of the story at times. However, I feel this is intentional and keeps things off balance for the viewer.

I loved the Paris setting, and Alonso's gang are a nifty bunch who knit together well in this fast paced story. A lovely touch was the addition of the two female detectives from 'Money Heist.' They were bitter enemies in the previous series but here they form an amusing and surprisingly effective duo. I loved it all, and hope Berlin gets more outings with Netflix.

The beautiful homes and setting for this Coben story could be straight out of Hollywood, and I have to admit the cinematography is the main thing that grips me about this thriller. I have been amused at how much time Michelle Keegan spends in her car, mostly driving up the long driveway to her mother in law's sumptuous house. It isn't quite Downton Abbey, but it's not far off!

Apart from that the huge body count on both sides of the family and the number of twists to accommodate that fact, are all piled into this story, which features teenage sleuths alongside Ms Keegan. It's not a bad story, but there are a lot of characters, another Coben speciality no doubt linked to the number of twists.

I haven't yet worked out the suspect( s), so I think the plotting is better than Stay Close where the main antagonist contradicted themself so many times it was obvious. I haven't finished it yet, so I have set the scoring at six. I expected the story to be preposterous and it is, but it's good enough entertainment. Nice acting from the Detective and Keegan herself does a good job, although in my heart of hearts I believe Coben is a better writer when the protagonist is male.

Biographies like this can be so entertaining when done well: the obvious example is Amadeus. Sadly, Maestro doesn't even get close to that standard. It is a well intentioned film made to honour the life of a great composer and conductor, but alas Bernstein comes over as an over enthusiastic, self centred human being. Cooper's performance is borderline hammy to me, although I noticed several reviewers who met the man say he was a huge personality.

By contrast, Mulligan gives a more nuanced performance as his long suffering wife, although she is kept out of the more important phases of the film. And he contributed so much to musical theatre: who can ever forget the wonderful West Side Story? It is almost as if Cooper wanted to focus on the lesser known parts of Bernstein's life, when it is well known that many of his more highbrow musical works were less than compelling.

I do not doubt that when it comes to Awards time, this film will pick up lots of nominations and wins, but when it comes to more ordinary reviewers, I think this film will fall short when it comes to entertainment and educational value.

I must say I approached this mini series with some trepidation, as it can be quite violent in some phases of the story. One has to appreciate the humour and take much of the plot with a pinch of salt, but it really is a good tale about a mismatched pair of unlikely thieves who find a stash of cocaine in a shipwreck. After that the body count mounts as the cocaine owners come after the couple.

If you like the Coen Brothers and Tarantino, this is for you. The cast is tremendous throughout, I especially liked Daisy Haggard, Joanna Scanlan and the eponymous 'tailor' who switches from villain to lovesick hero at the drop of a hat.

This film had to be more than advertising Mattel's famous doll, which set the standard for playthings fifty-odd years ago. And getting Greta Gerwig to direct a movie about Barbie, seems to have been a creative masterstroke. As expected, she has delivered a stylish incarnation of the sometimes much-derided doll, and it's a fun movie that carries its serious message quite lightly.

It looks spectacular, with Barbieland depicted with so much pink it could be nauseating, but the camera is moved around very skilfully so that images are fleeting. With most of the characters being Ken or Barbie, it is easy to follow, and the audience knows that Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling are the pair to follow.

The plot is simple enough, with Barbie suffering a trauma that causes her to visit the real world where some shattering illusions cause her to rethink her role as a female icon. Robbie is stunning in this role, she has always shone in playing over the top characters, and Barbie has given her plenty of scope for this. She is matched by a superb Ryan Gosling, clearly enjoying playing a downtrodden male who gets a chance to avenge his status, and the rest of the cast are all good as well, particularly America Ferrera as a Mattel employee who sees through the Barbie dream, and Will Ferrell, being the usual Will Ferrell as the boss of Mattel.

I really enjoyed the film, but the second part was somewhat overlong. Gerwig also couldn't resist getting into a preachy mode as the ending approached. I docked two stars for that, but otherwise this film was the tonic the film industry needed. There have been too many mediocre films lately, this isn't one of them.

I am amazed that this film doesn't feature more in John Wayne's legacy of great westerns, it has so much going for it. For one thing, he gives a great performance. He played a lot of good guys in his long career, and not enough characters who are less admirable, and somehow more human. Dunson was such a man, and I suspect that playing alongside Montgomery Clift, who showed his considerable talent in what was his film debut, probably gave him something more to cope with. Needless to say it all adds up to a very fine western that boasts some inspired cinematography. There was no CGI in those days and the film crew must have moved around with that huge herd of cattle for quite some time to produce this movie. There are some predictable elements involved in the film, such as the stampede and the final showdown, but the film is complicated enough to carry this element through with its non stop action. If the film does have a fault apart from predictability, it is slightly too long, but it is well worth a watch and some of the close ups are pure cinema magic featuring the man who was the quintessential cowboy.

If I had to summarize my experience of watching 'Ten Pound Poms' so far I would have to say that Danny Brocklehurst was determined to work his story around xenophobia and racism, and chose the Labour Camp outside Sydney as his best way to integrate those themes, as it brought many races closer together. Unfortunately, it makes the story flat as every day we see Terry going off to do his bit in a hole in the ground, and in the evening he gets together with the other immigrants for a drink or party. It's a generalization of course, but many members of the Maltese side of my family went to Australia at this time and they ended up in the big cities. I think this makes the whole story seem untrue. There may have been one of two places that were like the camp, but they were probably the exception rather than the rule and this is where this story falls flat for me.

The production values, acting, scoring, cinematography are all world class. It's just that the story falls flat, it is too crowded, and the characters are not three dimensional enough. I will make an exception for the Terry character, and I think the Michelle Keegan character could have been worked better. The orphanage scene was embarrassing and unconvincing.

I think the subject material needed a more sensitive approach and probably should have come from someone with more first jhand experience of the process of emigration.

When I saw the trailer for this series, I was delighted to see that it was written by Alex Pina, who wrote 'Locked up' and 'Money Heist'. This series doesn't even compare with either of the previous two stories. It jumps around too much, much of the dialogue is unintelligible, there is way too much gratuitous sex and nudity, and some of the acting is borderline hammy.

I think the central premise is quite sound although Zoe is a bit of a one dimensional character who seems to think of nothing else except her brother's unexplained death in Ibiza. Ibiza of course looks wonderful and the production values are equally good. But frankly it is a waste of the talent of both Daniel Mays and Laura Haddock and I hope Alex Pina will come up with better projects than this in the future.

Bridgerton was a knockout series when it started. It's opulence and beautiful sets, combined with a racy storyline, set pulses tingling. I found the second series less addictive than the first, and wondered if a spinoff would be valid or even interesting as a sense of ennui and familiarity with the source material set in.

How wrong I was.

This truly entertaining and compelling story takes its inspiration from a well-known royal malady: The Madness of King George. It builds a story around King George's wife, Queen Charlotte, and how she deals with her husband's sickness. I am sure many liberties have been taken with the truth. That matters little as this is such an interesting and worthwhile series, which rather focuses on how Queen Charlotte attempts to help George reign in a meaningful way, considering the challenges he faces as a sick man in a powerful position.

The two young leads rise to the challenge and have wonderful chemistry. Corey Mylcreest manages to make a disability look like an asset, and the cast as a whole is supportive and charming. I think this is a better series than Bridgerton as it doesn't try to be smart or clever, it tells a story as economically and truthfully as it can.

Highly recommended.

Little Dorrit might be one of Dickens' lesser-known stories, but it is nonetheless powerful for that. His criticism of Britain's legal system is probably better known from Bleak House, but I really enjoyed this series and loved the characters in it. The story is complex and I think I would benefit from watching it again and probably reading the book as well. I remember Bleak House began to bore me with the many characters which seemed like cartoons, but Little Dorrit features some engaging and liklikablelk.

The main ones are Amy Dorrit and Arthur Clennams, whose lives are inextricably linked through various incidents in the past. Arthur spots the link before Amy, but there is a huge age difference and his estrangement from his family doesn't help with their budding romance.

Dickens' ability to build a world and populate it with believable characters is phenomenal. When the story opens, we see Amy's world, a debtor's prison where she has lived all her life, after her father's debts ran out of control. The drab, dark colours and eerie atmosphere of Victorian London are so well depicted, as is the house where Mrs Clennams runs the family business, to which Little Dorrit comes in search of work. It looks rather like a haunted house, and it is a dusty, dirty place that hides many secrets.

In true Dickens fashion, Amy's world changes, but she is such a steadfast, stoic character, she struggles to change with it. Claire Foy is perfectly cast as the angelic Amy, her huge eyes reflecting her emotions and her apparently calm exterior hiding a tormented soul. Matthew McFadyen complements her perfectly with his charm and good looks, and his tendency to treat her like his little sister.

The supporting cast features the cream of British talent. Andy Serkis makes the French villain Rigaud believable (even his accent is on point,) and a special mention also to Eddie Marsan as Mr Ponckas, the prickly debt collector who has a heart of gold beneath the porcupine exterior. The other standouts include Amanda Redman, as the pushy Mrs Merdle and Annette Crosbie as the decrepit aunt of Arthur's old flame.

The cinematography is outstanding throughout, especially as the camera wanders around the back streets of London, but the scenes in Venice provide some welcome light and shade after the Dorrits become seasoned travelers' doing Europe'.

There are wonderful production values here, with a script that could have been written by Dickens himself. With fourteen episodes it is a trifle on the long side, and this is a story that will stay in the memory more than many of Dickens' more famous adaptations.

The Rings of Power has had a mixed reception from audiences and critics since its launch last year, and after the news of yet another Lord of the Rings film, I must confess I did stifle a yawn. But The Rings of Power is a new beginning, with new names, new settings and I believe it is going better than many critics like to think.

As it is set in Middle Earth at its earliest stage, the cast is mostly young and people not familiar to the audience. This is good, they can grow with us. I like the fact that there are more women, and the casting seems quite colour blind. There are many strands to knit together, the Harefoots, elves, dwarves, the people of Luminor and others.

We have the opportunity to see why the rings are cast, why the elves are in trouble, and it is only at the end of Season One we get to discover who Sauron is. I found all of this quite enjoyable, and I have quickly warmed to the characters as well. Galadriel as a young woman has a different personality to the more mature lady, and Elrond as a young man has a twinkle in his eye and a willingness to go the extra mile for his people. The Dwarves are more than the squabbling group shown in the Hobbit, and the mystery around Sauron is fascinating.

I must say when being introduced to the world of The Rings of Power I thought at first that it would all look much better on the big screen, as the cinematography is quite outstanding. Amazon could easily do this in the future, but I doubt they will ditch their home audience very quickly. The actors are predominantly young and unknown and some of their skills seem somewhat lacking, but I feel this will improve as well.

So much care has been lavished on this detailed if primitive world, I think it is a series that will go from strength to strength, and we have already had a major twist in Series One, so can expect more from now on. I can't wait for Series Two.

The French series was always going to be a difficult act to follow, and the British version somehow doesn't have the same warmth and finesse as the original.

A few points.

1. The introductory music is dreadful. It made us want to hit the stop button straight away.

2. In the French series, the real-life Actors and Agents were indistinguishable from each other, it was that good. This series has been patchy and I don't think the casting is quite as good, although I love Tim McInerney.

3. Everyone is over-polite to with each other. My French isn't good enough to compare to the original

4. The production values are great and the choice of stars is wonderful. With Helena Bonham Carter and Dominic West particularly good.

5. I don't think the writing is as engaging as it was in the original. It's a pity as the series on its own is perfectly watchable.

Like anyone born in the West Country, I was interested in this but I was somewhat disappointed. It was like so many shows these days, just so-so, populated by stereotypical characters, and I cringed somewhat at the fart jokes.

DI Goodman seems less bouncy than he used to be (well, he is older and looks it), and Sally Bretton as his wife is a good choice as she smiles a lot and is easy to understand.

He seems to have a different way of going about his work, using the camera to good effect, which is a plus. The plot involving a witch didn't enthrall me either, it seemed like the writer was trying to imply people from this part of the world bred a lot of witches, but perhaps I am biased.

I remember when I first watched Doc Martin years ago, I loved the fact that Port Isaac looked relatively unspoiled. Now it seems that Devon and Cornwall are very commercialized, with lots of tourists. But perhaps this series will improve and I think it is a good thing that they say they will not focus exclusively on murders, although the first episode very nearly was.

But this series is doing quite well. Its biggest problem is that it doesn't have the overpowering dramatic characters that 'Vikings' enjoyed with Travis Fimmel and Linus Roache being particularly good. However, as good entertainment, I am enjoying it.

There are lots of strands to the current series. Harald Hardrada (the most compelling character for me, Leo Suter in his first decent role). He's Christian, and aspires to be King of Norway. There's Frida, a pagan, charismatic character, fighter, and thinker. Leif Erikson, who we know from history, and King Canute, King of England. The plot follows the destinies of all these people with varying degrees of success. I think in Season Two, Harald Hardrada and Leif Erikson come off best with their business in Constantinople; they have lots of adventures.

The CGI is a bit messy at times, and it is pretty gory. We still think the Vikings were a violent group of people and the fact that they became Christians late by Western standards was due more to geography than anything else. I think the acting is a bit uneven as well, but I still think this is a better than average series and as the competition for the throne of Norway hots up, I think Season Three might be even better.

Sam Mendes' made this film as a love letter to the movies. He almost succeeds in this, since Dreamland in Margate, with its magnificent cinema, ballroom and sweeping sea views is a visual treat. It's just that the people who inhabit this dreamlike landscape are flawed human beings, and the plot of this movie is just too ambitious and scattered.

The actors are gifted, particularly Olivia Colman who plays the central character Hilary. She has mental issues, and is preyed upon by the Cinema Manager (a sullen Colin Firth). Her relationship with a new recruit, a young black man, gives her a new outlook and at the same time, she begins to take a new look at her life and surroundings. This sounds like a simple plot but so many issues intrude and it isn't helped by endless poetic quotes which would have been fine in the West End or even in one of Margate's quirky little theatres, but somehow feels wrong in Dreamland.

I was even somewhat bored at times, and I am a Margate resident. But the town looks great and its regeneration will surely be helped by this film.

Those four words are the cornerstone of English law, and they were inscribed in our courts by no less than Richard III, the subject of the film 'The Lost King'. Those words are ringing in my head as I write this review because I am fairly sure that even today, there are those who believe him to be the usurper of the throne of England.

But I have digressed because this film is not really about whether he was a usurper or not, but is about the search for his remains in a Leicester Car Park. Philippa Langley, the protagonist in the film is not even an archaeologist, but she does have an interest in Richard to the extent of joining the Richard III society. Her interest is so obsessive that her findings lead her to believe that Richard was not thrown into the River Soar after the Battle of Bosworth, but that he was quietly buried in Greyfriars Chapel which was close to Leicester Cathedral and used for burying the nobility of the city. Philippa's quest was fraught with the usual difficulties with funding, her own lack of credibility, and clashes with the University of Leicester which has a world reputation for DNA analysis. These issues for me were less fascinating than Philippa's obsession with Richard himself and in the film she meets his 'ghost' and talks to him. It is this fact that makes this film so great, and the moment when the caterpillar machine digger hits the concrete of the car park is the most exciting part of the film as we see Richard and Philippa watch as they see his skeleton gradually appear. It also sounds a bit far fetched, but when you see the film, it all makes sense. Sally Hawkins is riveting as Philippa, and Harry Lloyd a masterful Richard. They are surrounded by the cream of British acting talent in a very British story. Some say they are hard on Leicester University and others say not all interested parties have been given credit here, but what remains is a story that needed to be told and fascinated the world.

I really enjoyed this account of the romance and courtship of Countess Sisi in Imperial Austria. The production values, the acting, and the story have been superb, even if I admit to not being au fait with the history of the Austro-Hungarian empire. The story was quite engrossing, and the intrigue of the Austrian court was especially well portrayed, as well as the tension between the crown and the general public.

There is a little bit of dodgy CGI, but when everything else was so enjoyable, I hardly noticed. And the actress who played Countess Sisi, later the Empress, was especially impressive and conveyed a sincerity that was hard to fault. Added to that, she had a remarkable chemistry with her male co-star, who played Emperor Franz Joseph. I hope there is a second series.

When Americans make shows with guns, their frontier mentality helps a lot. When we do the same, our European sensibilities are all too prevalent., and it really only works with police formats and gangsters. This story seems to relate to the incident in Tunisia where many British tourists were killed by a random gunman. However, the motivation for the gun attack on tourists in this story is never fully explained, it just became a vehicle for Hawes to do her ex policeman act. Why did no one ring the police, when everyone was on their phones at the time of the attack? This is scriptwriting at its most mediiocre.

I found the camerawork to be rushed and lazy, there were endless shots of the same darkened corridor, and glimpses of a masked gunman. If the story of the actual Tunisian experience had been done instead, it might have worked a great deal better. This would have worked better as an ensemble piece, not a vehicle for Keeley Hawes perhaps looking out for better work in detective dramas in the future; or dare I say it, in a James Bond movie. Having said that, she did a decent job as did Lee Ingleby.

When I use the play back feature on TV serial dramas, I find if I can easily resist the temptation to binge, it is because the drama does not have legs. This story doesn't have 'legs' either.