Showing posts with label Homeland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homeland. Show all posts

Monday, 11 February 2019

TV Series: Taken on 5USA



Neeson as Bryan Mills
This is a spin-off from the Liam Neeson film franchise. I gather the films are pretty formulaic, with Neeson’s protagonist, the ordinary-sounding Bryan Mills, a name that is also used in the TV series, but which sounds more like a mail-order catalogue from the 1970s than a moniker for an action hero, tooling up with weapons prior to encountering some cartoon-like baddies and somehow despatching them one by one. You know the sort of thing I mean, the films your Dad and brother love and love partly because they know what to expect. It’s only ever gonna go one way.

Rollo, never without a weapon
The only possible justification for this series is the sex appeal and presence of Clive Standen (who I loved as Rollo in Vikings, let’s face it, he’s not hard to look at) but it’s a poor vehicle for his talents. He does his best, much like Patrick Swayze (Rest in Peace) in The Beast* (I’ve got to say that Travis Fimmel was far better in Vikings than in the latter), with a poorly scripted, poorly plotted show.  I can't fault Standen. Because of his physique, he’s a much more credible ‘special ops’ guy than Neeson, for instance, or even Bruce Willis. He delivers his lines, no matter how nonsensical, with absolute conviction. 

Bryan Mills, ditto
It’s just so hackneyed, the storyline from IMDb says Mills is coping with a personal tragedy as are all the heroes in these shows, from Leroy Gibbs (Mark Harmon) in NCIS to Patrick Jane (Simon Baker) in The Mentalist, to Walt (Robert Taylor) in Longmire. Feel free to comment and add your own.

Jennifer Beals, who is the source of all the missions this elite team take on and for some reason ends up looking like a man in drag, asks to see Clive alone to say: ‘I just wanted to check in with you’. He’s bemused: ‘Ok. Why?’ We say: ‘Because you’re sexy?’  I can completely understand why Standen took the role – a lead in a TV series seems too good to resist, especially when you’ve been playing second fiddle to Ragnar for a while but he’s capable of much more than this.

Carrie Mathison
It’s sort of Homeland without, oh, everything that Homeland has – real suspense, fully developed and engaging leads, believable storylines, quickfire and natural-seeming dialogue and a character you root for even when she's really annoying you in Claire Danes's Carrie Mathison (like Buffy, 'she saved the world, a lot'). For more on Homeland, see Peter Quinn (Rupert Friend) and Peter Quinn in Homeland.

What we get is a whole load of on-the-nose dialogue (i.e. dialogue that explains a character’s back-story or tells us what they’re like), something like ‘So you’ve been sent here after your actions in the whatever when this and this happened’. See my review of Ferocious Planet for some good examples. The characters are stereotypes. There’s always a nerdy computer whiz (a boffin, I love that word), often Jewish for some reason, who has trouble making small talk or relating to others.

Patrick Swayze, Travis Fimmel, The Beast
*My favourite line was Swayze’s character, Charles Barker’s comment on a mysterious band of baddies:  ‘It doesn’t  have a name. Sometimes they call it the Outfit.’ Ok, so that would be a name, Patrick.

For more on Travis Fimmel,Clive Standen, etc., see Ragnar and Athelstan. For more on Ragnar, see Travis Fimmel is Ragnar Lothbrok.


Wednesday, 8 November 2017

Film: Three Peaks (at the London Film Festival 2017)


Three Peaks
You know a film is good when you’re still talking about it several days later. So it was with Three Peaks, directed by Jan Zalbein which I saw at the London Film Festival. [Incidentally I noticed an ad for the 'Face to Face with German Film' campaign in the LFF programme but no further details were given. Is it coming to the UK?] However, I was still a little worried that the film might be a dud simply because it was a three-hander, featuring a child. Occasionally, and this is particularly true of British cinema, you get a child in a movie who cannot act at all, for instance, the kids in Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe et al.). We Brits seem to demand nothing of child actors (beyond speaking their lines in the right order) and consequently we get nothing (or less in the case of Harry Potter) while the US has a history of high expectations and correspondingly high achievers from the 1970s to the 2000s, from Tatum O'Neal in Paper Moon, Justin Henry in Kramer vs Kramer, the ubiquitous Jodie Foster, Henry Thomas in ET: The Extra-Terrestrial, through Haley Joel Osment in The Sixth Sense and AI: Artificial Intelligence to Jacob Tremblay in Room, not to mention Dakota and Elle Fanning in almost everything else. I’m relieved to say this is not the case with Three Peaks. Arian Montgomery, who plays eight-year-old Tristan, is a revelation. Entirely believable in every scene; you immediately empathise with his stepfather Aaron’s desire to connect with him.

This film is about identity, love, parenthood, fractured families and the effect the last has on all involved. It depicts the predicament of the new man in a mother's life, illustrating how he performs the father role in all but name, depended upon, even taken for granted by the child, sharing in all the labour and reward of raising the boy and, from the opening scene, it seems, completely accepted. And we also see it from the boy’s point of view, in which Aaron is the interloper in his family, having usurped his father (whose presence is established by regular phone calls), all complicated by Tristan’s own guilt for occasionally preferring Aaron to his father.

Carrie and Jonas/Homeland
Alexander Fehling, who was very good in Homeland, in which, coincidentally, he also had to play father figure to someone else’s child, the daughter that Carrie (Claire Danes) has with Brodie (Damian Lewis) although his role is secondary to the main storyline (for more on Homeland, see secretsquirrelshorts), is the easy to identify with Aaron, who has to negotiate the tightrope of this awkward situation, in which he is asked to be a father but never be called a father, in which he plays second fiddle to the whims and wishes of a wilful and demanding but sometimes incredibly charming eight-year-old, and has to handle the pressure put upon him by Lea (played by Bérénice Bejo, who bears an uncanny resemblance to a young Natalie Wood) who wants to be fair to her child, his father and her new man. Aaron is frequently tripped up (dangerous on a tightrope), courted and betrayed by both.

Lea, Tristan, Aaron
The rather cosseted Tristan continually tests the boundaries, crossing the line between mischief and malice. He can be deliberately and casually affectionate and just as deliberately and casually cruel. Realising that he’s a king in his court, he wields his power accordingly, bestowing and withdrawing his trust randomly, so that poor Aaron is forever placating him in order to gain his favour, scavenging for crumbs at the table. But what the boy gives with one hand, he takes back with the other, pulling him towards him as he pushes him away. Loved and resented in equal measure, with Tristan revealing himself to be capable of minor violence, Aaron is in a quandary. Should he come down hard or brush it off? He opts to ignore it.

'Papa'
Aware that he holds all the cards, Tristan toys with Aaron, who’s begun to see him as his own son, and undoubtedly loves him, by calling him ‘Papa’ just to see how it feels and what the reaction will be – poor Aaron is beguiled and grateful, happily reporting it to the mother only for her to disapprove – he should have made it clear that he’s not Tristan’s father because Tristan already has a father and this might confuse him. The unfortunate Aaron is in a no-win situation here. If he had said ‘Don’t call me Papa’ I can well imagine the tantrums that might have resulted. From mother and son.

In danger
Repeatedly offered an ultimatum by Tristan, as their circumstances become more desperate, and the man's situation more precarious, Aaron, like the people who attended the film’s screening cannot conceive that a child would resort to something much more dangerous and violent in order to force a return to the status quo. It's shocking but suddenly, because of the way it's played, also totally credible.

(Stop reading now if you haven't yet seen the movie)
The ending is cleverly ambiguous. At one point, I was reminded of the scene in Before the Fall (Napola) when the character runs out of options and chooses to sacrifice himself. The director realised that such an outcome might prove unpalatable to some audiences (and such it proved at the LFF, where they chose to believe in the innocence and innate goodness of the child despite all evidence to the contrary). We were allowed to come to our own conclusions. We were allowed to hope.

At the time of viewing, Three Peaks had yet to acquire a UK distributor, which is a real shame. It definitely deserves to be seen.