A Series of Unfortunate Events- The Bad Beginning Review

Dear Reader,

you may have come to this review straight from my review of the movie A Series of Unfortunate Events, expecting a review of a film with infinitely happier material.  I am afraid that I must disappoint you here, as the Netflix Television adaptation of Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events content is every bit as woeful and saddening.  I have committed myself to reviewing every chronicle of this tragic tale, but you dear reader are under no such obligation.  Therefore I implore you to spare yourself the pain of reading a review of this Valiantly Faithful Depiction of the torments of the Baudelaire children and instead read my reviews of Robot Wars, Hunted or The Returned.

At the beginning of January, Netflix released the first season of their adaptation of A Series of Unfortunate Events.  As a child, A Series of Unfortunate Events was one of my favourite book series, and in case you hadn't noticed, I was deeply disappointed by the 2004 film adaptation, thus I was hopeful that the TV series would be a vast improvement.  My hope was not in vain.  I loved this series.  Netflix has adapted the first four books: The Bad Beginning, The Reptile Room, The Wide Window and The Miserable Mill, into eight episodes, with each book spread across two forty-five minute segments.  Although the episodes were released in two parts, I'll be reviewing both parts in one review.

A Series of Unfortunate Events follows the story of the three Baudelaire orphans.  Violet (Malina Weissman) is the eldest child at fourteen and has a real knack for inventing things, Klaus (Louis Hynes) is twelve and is a keen researcher, and Sunny (Presley Smith) is an infant with four sharp teeth, which she likes to use to bite things.  Their parents and mansion both perish - perish means killed - in a terrible fire, leaving the Baudelaires in the care of Mr Poe (K. Todd Pressman) who is a banker and the executor of the Baudelaires' estate and the enormous fortune that the Baudelaire parents left behind.  Until Violet comes of age and can inherit the fortune, the Baudelaires are placed in the care of Count Olaf (Neil Patrick Harris) a Violent, Fiendish Demon, and untalented actor who wants nothing more than to steal the Baudelaire fortune.

Straight from the off, A Series of Unfortunate Events wonderfully captured the cadence of the book series written by Lemony Snicket (Patrick Warburton) - who as I'm sure you know is the non de plume of the author Daniel Handler.  The theme tune, sung by Neil Patrick Harris, is called Look Away and encapsulates Lemony Snicket's pleas that the viewers not subject themselves to such torment.  I also loved how the theme tune was shot to look like an old-time film, complete with a grainy sepia filter.  This gave the TV series that timeless feel, which exists in the book series.

Secondly, Lemony Snicket appears on screen, inserting himself into the action and breaking the fourth wall - a phrase which here means, "constantly defining words, dissecting popular expressions, espousing anecdotes of his life or pleading for viewers to stop watching" - thus providing much of the TV series black humour.  In this episode alone things get increasingly dark, from children becoming orphaned by terrible fires to audiences being subjected to Al Funcoot's catastrophically bad play, and Lemony Snicket provides some great comic relief.  He does this by reciting monologues, which are ripped straight from the pages of the books - a phrase which here means "narration that is recited word for word, and has nothing to do with tearing pages out of books, which is of course a terrible act of vandalism and should never be done to books, which are great fountains of knowledge.  The only exception would be if these books are poorly written and are about a young woman who undergoes a sexual awakening after her first experience of BDSM."

I agree with Zack Handlen of AV Club who argues that Patrick Warburton is completely up to the task.  His portrayal of Lemony Snicket reminds me of Humphrey Bogart or Fred Macmurray in an old noir film, made complete by his drab, dark suit.

This humour is carried over into the action of the series with the adult characters defining - defining is a word which here means, "explaining what certain words mean" - what certain words mean to the Baudelaire children.  Obviously, you could make the argument that this makes for awkward dialogue and indeed, a lot of the dialogue, especially from the Baudelaires sounds unnatural.  However, this all ties into the absurdist nature of the books.  It's supposed to sound like this.  The Baudelaires are supposed to be well-mannered and polite, certainly more so than the villainous adults that they encounter.

Villainous adult don't come any more villainous than Count Olaf who Neil Patrick Harris plays brilliantly.  He is exuberant and charismatic without being over the top or straying into pantomime territory.  He is also menacing, malevolent and malicious - a word that here means "menacing and malevolent." The commenter Velocityprime1 on A.V's Club review identified that Count Olaf dragging his finger across Violet's face stating that "I can touch anything I want" was threatening, which I would definitely agree with.  Even though we see Olaf strike Klaus across the face earlier, this was far more powerful, as the allusion of violence can be more effective at generating fear than seeing the act of violence itself.  Furthermore, as Count Olaf is the children's legal guardian, it is disturbing to see him touch the fourteen year old Violet in this manner.  Of course this disturbing element is only accentuated when it is revealed that he is scheming to literally marry Violet, whilst performing The Marvellous Marriage, whilst the audience thinks it is only a figurative marriage.

Considering how Neil Patrick Harris has a background in musical theatre, he is a great choice to play Count Olaf, who is a considerably worse actor.  Count Olaf and his antics also helps to provide a lot of the show's humour especially his interaction with his henchmen/theatre troupe.  Count Olaf has five henchmen who are as incompetent, as they are threatening.  They are the Hook-Handed Man (Usman Ally) the two White-Face powdered woman (Jacequelin and Joyce Robbins) the man with the Long Nose and Bald head (John DeSantis) and the Person of Indeterminate Gender (Matty Cardaropole.) Far from being mere shadows of their boss or stage-props, they are frightening characters in their own rights.  I was initially disappointed that the person of indeterminate gender looks obviously like a man, but this was forgiven by his cynical and abrupt philosophical statements.

Joan Cusack is also great as Justice Strauss, one of the few adults who tries her best who actually helps the Baudelaires.  She is softly spoken and sweet, if largely ineffectual and misguided.  I've also noticed a lot of commenters praise the set design comparing it to a Tim Burton film.  The production of the series certainly brought to mind Sleepy Hollow and Edward Scissorhands, attaching a gothic tone to the season.  Count Olaf's house was filthy and dusty, whilst Justice Strauss' was brightly lit and clean.

With the episodes being a minimum of forty-five minutes, there is plenty of breathing space and nothing is too rushed.  This allowed for the Baudelaire children to receive their deserved screentime and for us to see their talents in full show, from Violet inventing a grappling hook to rescue Sunny to Klaus researching inheritance law to Lemony Snicket's many various asides. The added run-time also allowed for a number of original subplots, as well as Easter Eggs.  The most obvious was the two lines "Volunteer Fire Department" and "Vigorously Fixed Destination," which share the same initials as V.F.D.  Book readers will know that V.F.D is a massive part of the books and the fact that it's included within the first episode, rather than the fifth, adds another level of depth and intrigue to the TV series.  Other great Easter Eggs include Count Olaf's shock at hearing the word "lemony" and his confusion as to the disappearance of the Sugar Bowl.

The other two subplots follow the characters of Mother (Cobie Smulders) and Father (Will Arnett) and Mr Poe's secretary Jacequlyn (Sara Canning) and Gustav (Luke Camielleri.) We find out very little about Mother and Father, but we see that they are escaping from prison using a grappling hook to return home to their children.  We don't find out who their children are, but the obvious conclusion is that they are the Baudelaire parents who survived the fire.  If this is the truth, then this would be a massive deviation from the canon, which has been so faithfully adhered to.  However, I wonder if this is a red herring and whether the producers are going to pull the rug from under our feet.

The character of Jacequlyn is a unique creation of the TV series.  Initially, she appears to be nothing more than Mr Poe's more assuming secretary who is kidnapped, whilst Count Olaf manipulates Mr Poe into assuring the Baudelaire orphans are delivered to him rather than their Uncle Montgomery.  This in itself was a neat way of filling in the plot hole in the book of just why exactly the Baudelaires ended up in Count Olaf's care.  However, it is obvious that Jacequlyn is far more important as a lot of time is spent on her, too much time, as Zach Handlen argues, being tied to a tree before escaping and rendezvousing with Gustav.  Gustav meets an unfortunate end after he is shot by a poison dart, whilst standing literally on the edge of a pond.  His last words are "The World is Quiet Here," (book readers will know what this means,) but to new viewers, this is one mystery that is left unsolved, as is the true identities of Gustav and Jacequlyn.  It is obvious that they are trying to help the Baudelaires and are deeply concerned that they ended up in the care of Count Olaf, instead of Uncle Montgomery.  I think they are on the volunteer side of V.F.D, but let me know your own theories in the comments below.  Also let me know who you think Mother and Father are.

Lastly, we come to the many literary references and allusions.  These are littered throughout the books, but I wasn't aware of them as a child.  As I have become older and read more books, I can truly appreciate all of the allusions that Snicket has included.  The Baudelaire children are named after the French author Charles Baudelaire and Mr Poe, his wife Eleanora and his sons Albert and Edgar are a homage to the American gothic author Edgar Allan Poe.  When sampling the wedding cake, he says "let me eat cake," a reference to Marie Antoinette's famous line.  Lemony Snicket swore himself to document the woes of the Baudelaire children to honour the memory of their mother Beatrice, of whom Lemony Snicket has always had an unrequited love for.  Of course, he could stand for countless writers, but I would like to think of him as Petrarch, who held an unrequited love for a woman called Laura for over ten years.

This was a great start to the series and I am hooked, right from the first episode.  Tune in next week for my review of The Reptile Room, although I do implore you to fill your time with much happier enterprises.

Please let me know any Easter Eggs or literary references that I might have missed.

A Series of Unfortunate Events Film Review

I am sorry to inform you that this review is not from the Top 1000 greatest films of all time, nor is it from a happy occasion such as my dear mother's birthday.  Rather this is a review of the movie, a word which here means, a group of moving pictures stitched together for the purposes of entertainment, A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004.)  The subject matter of the movie is not happy and whilst it is my duty to review it, it is not your duty to read it.  Upon watching this film, I became miserable and distraught - words that here mean, so sad and upset that I am currently crying onto my keyboard, I do not wish for you, dear reader, to undergo the same heartbreak, so please read my reviews of Love Actually and Run Fatboy Run, or better yet watch the films themselves, as they are far happier than this melancholy tale.  This is your Very Final Dire warning to click off this review and watch a funny cat video.

A Series of Unfortunate Events is a children's book series that was written by Lemony Snicket - which as I'm sure you know is the penname of Daniel Handler who was the real author - and it remains one of my favourite book series.  This was why I was ecstatic to find out that they would be making a Netflix TV Series.  However, this review is not of the TV series, rather this review is of the film that preceded - a word which here means, came before - it.  Some comparisons of the two may sneak in, but any in-depth commentary will be saved for another time.  The film adapts the first three books: The Bad Beginning, the Reptile Room and the Wide Window.

A Series of Unfortunate Events focuses on Violet (Emily Browning,) Klaus (Liam Aikens) and Sunny Baudelaire (Kara and Shelby Hoffman.)  Violent is 14 and an inventor, Klaus is 12 and a lover of reading and researching and Sunny is an infant with very sharp teeth, which satisfy her love for biting things.  They experience a great tragedy - a word which here means, a terrible fire destroys their home, killing their parents - leaving them in the temporary care of Mr Poe (Timothy Spall.) Mr Poe is a banker and executor of Baudelaire estate.

The Baudelaire's parents have left behind a great fortune that Violet will inherit when she turns 18, but until then, it will remain in Mr Poe's care.  Although, Mr Poe is well-meaning, he is incompetent - a phrase which here means, having a good heart, but being unable to listen to common sense and not put the Baudelaire orphans in the care of the Villainously Fiendish Devil, Count Olaf (Jim Carrey) who wants nothing more than to steal away the Baudelaire's fortune.  After the orphans are taken out of his care, they are then entrusted to Dr. Montgomery Montgomery (Billy Connolly) and then Aunt Josephine Anwhistle (Meryl Streep.)

I am by no means, a book purist, - a phrase which here means, somebody who is such a big fan of a book, that they insist that the movie adaptation has to be identical, I realise that books have to be changed to make them suitable for the big screen.  I acknowledge that there are some films which are just as good or even better than their source material: the Lord of Rings, Life of Pi and The Godfather, and there are some books that are far superior than their movie adaptations: the Harry Potter series, The Beach, Stormbreaker and Hannibal.  However, when you love a book series, as much as I love A Series of Unfortunate Events, it is disappointing when the movie adaptation doesn't live up to it.  And as much as the film is a good film in its own right, it does not compare to the books.

Before I become a Harbinger of Doom, - a phrase which here means, a grumpy critic who likes to pull apart a popular and well-loved film - I would like to say a few things about the film that I did like.  Firstly, there was the performances.  Other than Jim Carrey, whom I'll come to later, I thought that the acting was all good.  Timothy Spall was great as the inept Mr Poe, and Billy Connolly played the eccentric Dr Montgomery Montgomery with charm, but I think it was Meryl Streep's portrayal of Aunt Josephine, which was the most faithful to the books.  Until I rewatched this film, I don't think I've ever realised just how tragic of a character she is.  In her youth, she used to be very adventurous, but upon the death of her husband, she has become afraid of everything and lost all joy in her life.  I think it could all be too easy to dislike or tire of a character like this, but Streep makes the character pitiful and quite sympathetic at times.

One of my favourite moments of the film - a phrase which means, a part of the film that I enjoyed the most - was right at the end, where Mr Poe confronts Count Olaf denouncing him as a greedy monster.  Count Olaf replies that it is actually Mr Poe who is the monster, as he refused to listen to the Baudelaires, due to the fact that they are children.  A big theme of the books is the idea of obedience to adult authority and how children's opinions are of no importance, and I think it's great that the film portrayed this theme so well.

Watch the scene for yourself here and go to 7:30

Although, the movie tried, I don't think that it conveyed the character of Lemony Snicket (Jude Law) well.  In the books, Lemony Snicket is far more than just the narrator/writer of the series.  He is a character in himself, often inserting himself into the scenes, and breaking the fourth wall - a phrase which here means speaking directly to the reader - through either defining difficult words to the reader (a device which often appears within the story too,) dissecting popular expressions or literary devices or giving Variously Funny Descriptions of different events in his life.  This provides a lot of the series' humour, but this didn't translate into the film.  The film begins with an animated short of a ghastly creation called The Happiest, Little Elf, which is quickly cut short and replaced by Snicket begging the viewer to leave the theatre and not to watch A Series of Unfortunate Events.  There are also a few occasions, where Snicket verbatim - a phrase which here means word for word - explains what certain phrases mean, but Snicket is mostly reduced to a narrator sitting in a clocktower, thus losing a lot of his presence and effect.  Lemony Snicket is a character which is in every way, just as interesting and important as the Baudelaires and I don't like how his role was so diminished in the film.  Not only does the film lose some of the depth that the books have, but it also loses some of the great deadpan humour.

I thought Jim Carey was very over-the-top as Count Olaf going so far to render him as a Pantomime villain.  This resulted in the character's dilution and a considerable loss of  menace.  I get that Count Olaf is supposed to be a talentless actor, but I think that Carey overdid it.  I also didn't like the portrayal of his theatre troupe who far from being threatening henchmen in their own right were reduced to little more than stage props and dressing.

Another scene I had a big problem with was when Count Olaf locks the Baudelaire children in his car and leaves it on a set of train tracks with an oncoming train only minutes away.  Obviously he does this to kill them and thus steal their fortune, yet this was a stupid idea, hurting Olaf's portrayal as an intelligent villain.  Olaf's intelligence is demonstrated through this film via his costumes and his Vicious Fetid Diabolical schemes to steal the Baudelaire's fortune.  He is intelligent enough to know that if he kills the Baudelaires, then he won't get a cent of their money.

Watch the scene for yourself here

My biggest problem with this film is how it compresses three books into one film meaning that everything is very rushed and some important details are sacrificed in the name of pacing and relevance.  It also hurts the Baudelaire's character development too.  From the offset, we see that they are talented and intelligent, using their skills to get them out of harm's way.  Yet in the film, this is substituted for luck and coincidence.

For example, in the Bad Beginning section, Count Olaf orders the Baudelaires to cook dinner for him and his theatre troupe.  They find a cookbook in his kitchen, which is a bit odd, considering how he doesn't have a strainer or cooking pot, and cook Pasta Puttanesca - a phrase which here means, a delicious Italian pasta dish consisting of anchovies, olives and garlic, cooked in a gorgeous tomato based sauce.  In the book, the Baudelaires visit their neighbour Justice Strauss (Catherine O'Hara) and borrow one of her cook books, where they discover the Puttanesca recipe.  By changing this, the film undermines how the Baudelaires use their initiative to help them.

Another example of this would be in the Reptile Room section, where after the Incredibly Deadly Viper is framed for biting and killing Dr Montgomery Montgomery, Sunny proves that there isn't anything dangerous about it by playing with it.  However, due to the rushed nature, there is no earlier scene, where we see Sunny become friends with the snake, as there is in the book.  Also there isn't any evidence of Klaus using his researching skills to discover that it was actually Count Olaf, disguised as a research assistant Stephano, who killed Dr Montgomery Montgomery by injecting him with the venom of the Mamba Du Mal, nor is there a scene of Violet inventing a picklock to break into Stephano's suitcase to find evidence.

Despite how the film cuts out a lot, it includes some interesting subplots, most notably the fact that the Baudelaire's parents, Dr Montgomery Montgomery and Aunt Josephine all knew each other in a past life.  This is presented in the Wide Window section, where Aunt Josephine hints that they were all part of a secret organisation.  Obviously, she is referring to how they were on the volunteer side of V.F.D, but, and I reach out to any eagle-eyed reader, was this in the books at all? It makes perfect sense if it is, but I found no evidence about it when I reread the novels.  Please let me know in the comments below.  Also be sure to keep a lookout for a couple of the very subtle nods to V.F.D.

The Wide Window section ends with another deviation of the book, which makes little sense within the film.  Count Olaf has adopted the guise of Captain Sham to gain the confidence of Aunt Josephine and force her into killing herself and leaving the Baudelaires in his care.  She fakes her death, goes into hiding, and leaves a hidden message for the Baudelaires which they decipher and quickly rescue her.  When they are sailing back across Lake Lachrymose and are being attacked by the Lachrymose Leeches, who should come rescue them, but Count Olaf.  However, he has discarded his Captain Sham costume, which made no sense to me, as he had no reason to get rid of it.  Nobody knew who he was.  On a smaller note, if Aunt Josephine is a grammar-Nazi on steroids and Captain Sham speaks in "sea-dog" slang, why, oh why, would she become so attracted to him? This was something else that made no sense to me.

Anyway, soon joining Count Olaf and the Baudelaires on the lake is Mr Poe (I wasn't really sure why he was there either.) Count Olaf pretends to save Klaus from the leeches, which is enough to convince Mr Poe to put them back into his care, but not before saying that the Baudelaire fortune will not go to Olaf unless he is married to Violet, thus giving Olaf the idea to perform a play called the Marvellous Marriage, where he intends to marry Violet for real.  However, his decision to put on this play seems very spontaneous, which contradicts - a word that here means doesn't make any sense compared to an earlier scene I am about to discuss - this earlier scene which I am about to discuss.  If we remember back to the silly car/train scene, we see quite clearly that there is a book about Inheritance Law.  If Olaf had this plan all along, then why did he wait so long to enact it? Again, I think this hurts his intelligence as a villain.

See for yourself at 1:16

In terms of blackmailing Violet to marry him, Olaf has Sunny kidnapped, put in a cage and dangled out of a tall tower, with the threat that she would be dropped to her death, if anything went wrong with the production.  The silly thing about this scene is how all of this happens off-screen.  In the books, Olaf has one of his henchman sneak Sunny out of the Baudelaire's bedroom, but in the film, it comes as a complete surprise to Klaus and Violet to find their baby sister missing.  Where did they think she had gone? Did they not notice that she was missing?

Finally, I really disliked the ending of the film, as it goes against the whole nature of the books.  Throughout the series, Snicket lampoons the literary devices that make up a traditional children's story, most notably, how all the characters live happily ever after.  This is a real story where the villains win and the heroes lose.  However, the film ends with some sentimental, cheesy monologue, performed by Snicket himself, about how fortunate the Baudelaires are to have each other, and how in the darkest situations, there is always hope.  This sentimentality is exactly what Snicket was writing against and contradicts the whole flavour of the film.

See for yourself here

I know that my review of this film might seem a Vile Foul Diatribe, but it's only because I love the books so much and a Series of Unfortunate Events fails to recapture its magic and wonder.  It is a good film in its own right and I'm glad that I gave it a second chance.  I'm also sure that non-readers of the book series will enjoy it, but it was nowhere near as good as it could have been.  Unlike, the Netflix TV adaptation, which is far superior, but that is another review for another time.  Until that time, dear reader, I wish you have a Very Fine Day, or at least a happier day than the Baudelaires generally experience.

Lion Review

A deviation from the top 1000 films of all time to review Lion, a film that I watched for my mum's birthday.

Saroo (Sunny Pawar) is a five year old boy from Ganesh Talai in the slums of India.  He spends his time with his older brother Guddu, including following him to work at night.  When Guddu discovers that Saroo has done this, he tells him to wait for him until he returns.  Saroo waits and falls asleep in a train-car, which takes him to Calcutta.  He is alone in this strange town, with nobody to help him, and to make matters worse, he only speaks Hindi, whereas everybody else speaks Bengali.  Eventually he is taken to an orphanage and from there, he is adopted by a Tasmanian couple John (David Wenham) and Sue (Nicole Kidman.) Twenty years later, an adult Saroo (Dev Patel) begins looking for a way to return home.

This is a poignant and heart-breaking film, and the fact that it is based on a true story, makes it that much more powerful.  The performances were strong, with Dev Patel and Nicole Kidman, both quite rightly, up for Oscars.  The first act of the film is set in Indi, spoken in Hindi and seen through the eyes of five year old Saroo.  It is obvious that he has come from an impoverished background, yet as he has come from an impoverished background, yet as he has never known any different, he doesn't complain about it.  Rather he is a jubilant child, which makes his character more nuanced and interested to watch.  He becomes more nuanced when his life changes in the few hours that it takes for the train to take him to Calcutta.

Lion ends with a line reading that 80,000 children a year go missing in India and to follow the journey of one of them was interesting to watch.  Even after Saroo arrives in Calcutta, he is determined to get home by following the train tracks, demonstrating his will for survival.

Another thing I liked was how subtle and understated the darker elements of the film were.  Lion is rated PG, which means for the most part it is family friendly, but there are many allusion to more sinister parts.  Saroo's orphanage is implied to be a dark place, where the children are locked up, yet the best example of my point is when Saroo also becomes the victim of a paedophile.  When Saroo is walking along the trainlines to get home, he is taken in by a supposedly friendly woman who is actually grooming him for a paedophile.  She bathes him and presents him to the paedophile who inspects him, whilst he is still dripping wet.  Very little is said or done to indicate this man's hidden agenda, but it is clear what he wants.  Later, Saroo sensing something is amiss, runs away.  The threat of this violence was far more chilling and effective than actually seeing it first-hand.  If we had seen it, it could have lost its effect altogether.


Although I especially liked the time and pacing spent on developing Saroo's character, I feel that other sections did not receive the same treatment.  The best example of this is Saroo's adopted brother Mantosh.  We first see Mantosh as a child, the same age as Saroo and it is clear that he is so mentally disturbed, that whenever he is scared or angry, he begins hitting himself.  This was particularly frightening to watch, considering his young age, but I don't feel like anything came from this subplot.  As an adult, Mantosh, is only in a handful of scenes and it is made clear that he is a disappointment compared to Saroo, and also a great drain on John and Sue.  I feel much could have been done to have developed this subplot.

The second subplot I had issues with was Saroo's relationship with his on/off girlfriend Lucy (Rooney Mara.) This criticism also ties into my last issue with the time jumps.  The first time-jump of twenty years is perfectly logical, as we don't need to see Saroo growing up, but then there are time jumps of two or three years, which are random and abrupt.  After the first time jump, we see Saroo begin his search for home, as well as his relationship with Lucy.  Then there's a time jump of two years, and we see Saroo is still searching for home.  What are we supposed to believe? That he has been searching for two years? Also at this point, his relationship with Lucy finishes, as his obsession with finding home consumes him.  Then there's another time jump of two years, and we see that Saroo and Lucy have rekindled their relationship.  Has nothing happened to them in these two years to change this outcome?

Secondly, and this is a massive nitpick, but I find it weird that we never saw the pair kiss.  We see them before and after sex, of course we don't see them having sex, nor do we need too, but it doesn't show them doing the one thing that would kick it all off, which I found peculiar.

Nevertheless, this was a tragic and uplifting film, especially at the end when Saroo returns home to find his mother and sister waiting for him.  Guddu was killed by a train on the night of Saroo's disappearance.  This uplift was only amplified by how the real-life documentary footage of the real-life Saroo reuniting with his mother is shown, but also by the final lines of the film, which explain that throughout his whole life, Saroo has been mispronouncing his name.  His name was Sheru, which means Lion.

Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India review

Number 102 on the top 1000 films of all time is this Indian epic, sports drama film.

Set in Victorian Indian, the British Raf is in full force.  The village of Champaner is suffering from a terrible drought and to only make things worse, Champanur's commanding office, the arrogant and obnoxious Captain Russell (Paul Blackthorne) imposes double Lagaan (taxes) upon the people.  When they come to protest his decision, they become captivated by the game of cricket that he and his men are playing.  After Captain Russell chastises them for interfering, the young rebel Bhuvan (Aamir Khan) insults the cricket game.  In retaliation, Captain Russell challenges the villages to a game of cricket.  If they win, he will cancel Lagaan for the next three years, but if they lose, they will have to pay triple Lagaan.  Bhuvan accepts and puts together a rag-tag team of cricketers to beat Captain Russell at his own game.

Although on the surface, this film is purely about a game of cricket, the far wider political implications are obvious.  The film was set about 30 years before the Indian independence movement in the 1920s, and it is clear that Bhuvan and the others are fighting for more than the cancellation of Lagaan; they're fighting against the unwelcome occupation of the British forces.  Even the puppet ruler, the Rajiji, comes to support Bhuvan's team.  Bhuvan also receives help from Captain Russell's sister Elizabeth (Rachel Shelley) who sympathises with the Indians and aids them in their mission.  What was even more impressive was how quickly Elizabeth was able to learn Hindi, especially as she was initially relying on an interpreter.  Anyway, by setting up the film like this, the Indians are positioned as the under-dogs, and I found myself rooting for them quickly.

Lagaan had a large cast with many different characters making up Bhuvan's team, from a fortune-teller, to a doctor, to a woodchopper, to a cripple, all with their own skills to offer.  Whilst initially, they all argued and fought with each other, seeing them unite in the face of their common enemy was great to watch.

I loved the inclusion of the cripple Kachra, which I think was one of the best parts of the film.  Kacha served to expose the hypocrisy in Indian culture, as despite how they are discriminated against by the British, they themselves discriminate against Kachra, due to how he is an untouchable.  Although his deformed hand allows him to unpredictably spin the ball, the others are disgusted by the thought of him, due to his lower caste.  It is only after Bhuvan chastises them for their hypocrisy do they relent.  This occurs within one scene and I do wish they had made a bigger deal out of this.  Although having said that the fate of the team rests in Kachra's hands in the final act.

The last section of the film is dedicated to the actual cricket match and, despite how I'm not a cricket fan at all, I found this highly entertaining.  I had no doubt that the Indians would win; they were the underdogs after all and there was no way they were going to lose to the British.  Yet the match was still unbelievably close.  It was tense, which was how it's supposed to be.  The British batted first and soon rumble all of the Indian team's tactics.  And then when the Indian team bat, their batters drop like flies, leaving only Bhuvan and Kachra.  Whenever one of the Indian batters was eliminated, the pain and failure on their faces was evident.  They were so passionate about winning that I become quite excited seeing whether they would actually do it, which of course they did.  But the interesting thing was that I became as wrapped up in their battle, as the two teams did.

All this being said, the film wasn't the best Indian movie that I've seen.  That honour would go to Rang De Basanti, with 3 Idiots as a close second.  Funnily enough, Aamir Khan stars in both of these films too.  Whilst the diversity of the Indian characters was great, I do feel that the British characters were all the same and drawn very stereotypically.  Captain Russell is your daily villain with little to him, but his arrogance and impudence.  Whilst this may have been typical of the time, his character could have been far more interesting.  Having said that, it was gratifying to see his arrogance become his downfall.  When his superiors hear of the wager he has made, they tell him that he will pay triple Lagaan and be sent to Central Africa if he loses.  Right at the end of the match, Captain Russell mistakenly catches a ball that has gone beyond the boundary, thus giving the six runs that the Indians needed to win the match.

My second criticism would be all of the singing.  I've seen Indian films before and I know that the songs are part and parcel of the whole show, but I really didn't lie them here.  They were tedious and stopped the film cold.  In some cases, they felt increasingly out of place, such as when Elizabeth sings about her realisation of love for Bhuvan.

This notwithstanding, I did enjoy Lagaan.  Despite being close to four hours, it flowed well and was paced nicely, other than the singing.  Aamir Khan was great as usual and the anti-colonial message makes this necessary viewing.

Robot Wars Battle of the Stars Episode Two

The second in Robot Wars Battle of the Stars edition, seeing C-list celebrities fight against each other in the chrome-clashing, metal-mashing, steel-smashing show that is Robot Wars.  Enough talking...

LET THE WARS BEGIN

Robo Savage Vs Kadeena Machina

Robo Savage is the robot operated by Welsh footballing legend Robbie Savage and some of his non-descript friends.  No prizes for guessing how he came up with the name of his machine.  Robbie Savage was mentored by Jason Marston from the Thor team.  

Robo Savage is very much a machine embodiment of the Welsh flag completed with dragon wings and the red, green and white paint job.  Robo Savage's weapon was a flipping arm capable of lifting three tons.

Their opponent was paralympian Kadeena Cox who was mentored by Ellis Ware of the Pulsar team, who were grand finalists in the last series.

Kadeena's machine was unimaginatively called Kadeena Machina, but her robot was sleek and stylish.  It looked quite similar to the machine S3 from the days of old, with a small and squat bodyshape with a 15kg spinning disc that spins at 2000 rpm.  Although Angela did point out that Kadeena's wheels are exposed, Ellis makes the good point that the less weight they have in armour, the more they can put into the weapon.

3...2...1 ACTIVATE 

The battle began quietly with Robo Savage getting some tentative flips in and Kadeena Machina's spinning disc being deflected by Robo Savage's armour.  After some more dancing around each other, Robo Savage tries to get another flip in, resulting in its flipping arm becoming bent and buckled by Kadeena Machina's vicious spinning disc.  Robo Savage then begins running away, but it can't get away from Kadeena's flywheel, as it shreds Robo Savage's wheel, tears up the dragon wings, thus immobilising the Welsh machine.  A good win by Kadeena Machina.

Dee Vs The Soldier Ant

Dee was operated by Rizzle Kicks member Jordan Stephens who was a great sportsman and very entertaining, if a little obnoxious.  Mentoring Jordan was John Reid from the Terrorhurtz team.  Dee is a simple pink thwackabot.  This basically means that their robot is essentially a big mace/spike to thwack other machines into submission.

The Soldier Ant was operated by TV historian Neil Oliver and his two sons.  I liked Neil, as it was obvious he was a family man and he was doing the show for his kids, which was great to see.  The Soldier Ant is something out of Desert Storm, armed with a 3 tonne hydraulic crush.  Neil Oliver was assisted by Will Thomas from the Shockwave team.

3...2...1 Activate

Dee's biggest weakness was its huge pneumatic tyres, which were a juicy red target for the Soldier Ant's hydraulic claw.  The Soldier Ant tried to take advantage of this weakness by repeatedly grabbing hold and pinning Dee, but their weapon wasn't strong enough to penetrate Dee's armour.  Whilst Dee wasn't being pinned down was spinning around the arena, showing that it was a robot that difficult to control.  Thwackbots like Dee are notorious for being difficult to control, due to the nature of their weapons.  The general idea is that the robot would charge into its opponent with its own momentum sending its hammer crashing down onto the enemy machine.  This was the theory, yet rarely did it work.  The only exception is the S4 grand finalist Stinger.  This time round, The Soldier Ant was able to take full advantage of Dee's unpredictability by grabbing hold of its and piercing its wheel.  The decision went to the judges who unsurprisingly awarded it to The Soldier Ant.

The Soldier Ant Vs Robo Savage

This was a good fight between two good robots.  The Soldier Ant gets the first blow in by lowering its crusher into Robo Savage's sweet insides, but doing no real damage.  Robo Savage didn't take kindly to his by then flipping over The Soldier Ant, which suffered a weakness common amongst crushers-no or an ineffective self-righting mechanism.  The Soldier Ant was down for the count.  Matilda flipped them back over after they had been immobilised and the two had a tousle, which The Solider Ant eventually lost.

The Kadeena Machina Vs Dee

This battle was over before it even begun.  Dee went on a kamikaze run over to be sent flying across the arena by the sheer force of The Kadeena Machina's spinning disc.  Dee lost a wheel which went in one direction, whilst the rest of the robot went in a completely different direction.  The Kadeena Machina were the obvious winners.

Robo Savage vs Dee

This fight was the most controversial and closest fight we've had so far.  Dee started as per usual by spinning wildly and in fairness, they did get some good hits in.  The sparks flew as the two robots connected.  And as Dee is an invertible machine, Robo Savage's flipping arm wasn't that effective at flipping it.  However, what it was good at was puncturing Dee's tyre, but Dee also managed to buckle Robo Savage's flipping arm.  There wasn't any clear winner by the end of the fight and the decision went to Dee, which Robbie Savage was not happy by.  There was bickering galore, which I imagine was played up to the cameras.  Dee was still out either way, but that didn't stop Robbie Savage from kicking off.

The Soldier Ant Vs The Kadeena Machina

The final fight saw the group winners The Kadeena Machina against the hydraulic crusher The Soldier Ant.  

The Soldier Ant started strongly by staying away from The Kadeena Machina, but they failed to inflict any damage themselves.  The Kadeena Machina punished The Soldier Ant for this by first shredding their wheel, then their crushing ant, before finally tearing out The Soldier Ant's removable link (kill-switch) immobilising it.  

The Kadeena Machina were through to the final, but The Soldier Ant was a worthy opponent.

The Kadeena Machina Vs Robo Savage

Robo Savage began this battle tentatively, spinning around, wondering how they would take on the fearsome The Kadeena Machina.  However, Kadeena had no such reservations.  She went in for the kill, buckling Robo Savage's wheelguard and tearing up the wheel itself.  With one hit, The Kadeena Machina had won the battle and the contest.

Robot Wars Battle of the Stars

Robot Wars Episode One

Robot Wars Episode Two

Robot Wars Episode Three

Robot Wars Episode Four

Robot Wars Episode Five

Robot Wars Episode Six

The Apartment Review

SPOILERS

Number 101 on the top 1000 films of all time is Billy Wilder's romantic comedy The Apartment (1960.)

C.C Baxter (Jack Lemmon) is an office drone working in a big New-York based insurance company.  He begins to curry favour with his directors when he allows them to use his apartment for their extramarital affairs.  Happy with the attention and adulation he receives, he allows them to continually do this, indifferent to their actions.  That is until his personnel director Mr Sheldrake (Fred Macmurray) takes an interest in the life attendant Fran Kubelik (Shirley Maclaine.) Baxter has his own attraction to Kubelik and seeing Sheldrake's interest in her, finally decides to take action.

I feel lie the Apartment is only a film that could have come out in the 60's or at least before the second and third waves of feminism.  In today's politically correct culture, I think that it would be crucified for its obvious sexism.  The directors are romanticised for their extra-marital affairs and Sheldrake slaps Kubelik's arse when he leaves the lift.  This isn't a film for the easily offended.

This is more of an observation than a criticism, because I did enjoy the film.  As IMDB user Cwelty1 points out, The Apartment "isn't the laugh out loud comedy of Jim Carrey or the Farelly brothers, but a subtle, nuanced comedy about two people who have been jaded in love," which is a very appropriate description.  There are definitely some funny moments such as how Baxter's neighbours view him as a player who knows how to keep the ladies happy, but he is also an empathetic character who I came to root for.

This was partly because of Jack Lemmon's great performance of him.  It is obvious from the start that he is a good, but flawed and lonely man.  He is a people-pleaser, unable to say no and readily accepting his rewards for helping his directors conduct their private business.  This is what makes his transformation great to watch.  Within Fran Kudelik, he finally finds something worth fighting for.  Mr Seldrake promotes Baxter to an executive assistant position, accompanied with his own office and other privileges.  However, the film concludes with Baxter giving everything up, as he quits his job to be with Fran.

Jack Lemmon was great as the reluctant hero Baxter and Fred Macmurray was very good as the villainous Mr Seldrake.  Whilst he might not be your typical big bad villain, he is most definitely the villain of this piece.  Macmurray played Mr Seldrake as the sleazebag that he was.  Charismatic and charming, but definitely a sleazebag.  He manipulates Fran into believing that he is leaving his wife for her, but he is lying.  He is telling the same lie that he has told to the long line of women who came before Fran.  Seldrake's callousness extends further when he makes no effort to help Fran after she overdoses on sleeping pills.  It is Baxter who helps her going so far to cover Seldrake's arse.

All in all, this romantic comedy is a funny and entertaining film, which emphasises the importance of standing up and fighting for what you love.