Law & Order: Special Victims Unit - Undercover (Season 9)

There is very little that is sacred in the world of Law & Order. No organisation is above performing criminal acts when the devil drives, be they a religious group, a government organisation or even the NYPD themselves, and their accompanying partners in the criminal justice system. It's been a while since the Blue Wall has hampered investigations by any particular detective partnership, be they Green & Lupo, Stabler & Benson, Gorren & Eames or Logan & Wheeler, so it was perhaps inevitable that they come under suspicion at some point. This week it was the prison system that came under fire, and the vague suggestion that all female prisons (read that in either context and it applies) are beds of rape and debauchery.

The funny thing is that, if you think about, it doesn't really require too much of a stretch to believe it. These prisons are full of junkies and whores (and, indeed, junkie-whores) who will pretty much do whatever it takes to get by, and given that they are used to a life of lying on their backs and giving it up, why break the habit of a lifetime if it doesn't actually give you any help?
Of course the whole point of the exercise is that the criminal justice system should be held to a higher standard than everyday society, and that's certainly the backbone of Law & Order as a whole. Dick Wolf seems to have always believed that, no matter how human the people involved in the upholding of the law (and they have certainly proved themselves to be very human over the last about-20 years), they still need to be a model for the average, everyday citizen. Nice in theory, shame it doesn't apply in practice.

Of course, in this particular episode, it's not just the prison system that comes under fire. Mariska Hargitay gets to take center stage for the episode as she is the obvious choice to go undercover and, consequently, show a bit of flesh (although this being Law & Order - where strip club strippers never actually get naked) the prisoners appear to shower in their underwear. On the Jump The Shark webpage, SVU frequently is cited as jumping from the moment Mariska was hired, which is just a little harsh. She is no worse an actress than anybody else that appears in the series, and most of the time a whole lot better. This episode gives her the chance to show us some real acting skills as she is almost raped by the rapist and has to deal with the consequence of that. A painful situation for her, and Mariska deserves credit for making it real.

Most of the other cast are sidelined in this episode (surprisingly so is Adam Beach for a change, getting fewer lines this episode than Richard Belzer) but it's been a while since Benson got to be the center of an episode, so I can forgive it. Just this once.

"B+"

NCIS: Corporal Punishment (Season 5)

After watching TEN's promo for this week's new episode of NCIS, I was briefly under the mistaken belief that the team were going to be confronting the Hulk. Apparently no cell could restrain him...blah blah blah...cue Ziva saying "I've never fought a man as strong as him"...blah blah blah. Oh, but surprise, surprise, it wasn't the Hulk and his strength wasn't actually the focus of the episode. This episode wasn't about a marine with super-human strength or who could turn green and fight after he got angry.

However TEN was actually not entirely off the mark with its promo, but for all the wrong reasons as usual. Because it kinda was NCIS fighting a comic book character but it wasn't the Hulk, nor Iron Fist (a comic of which McGee is reading at the beginning of the episode - although this seems like a gratuitious excuse to signpost the episode ahead because it seems unlikely that Gibbs would allow them to read comics at work, let alone McGee of all people who is usually such a good-two-shoes). No, this episode is effectively NCIS vs Captain America (again a reference that is rather unsubtlely brought to us by McGee - actually he also compares him to the Hulk as well. This episode is swimming in comic book references).

I'm not gonna ramble on about the group dynamics (which are excellent as usual - indeed the scene where McGee and DiNozzo speculate Ziva has feelings for the man they are hunting is hilarious) or a great plot (although this one also has some recycled elements in it - DiNozzo doing his Fugitive speech, which McGee has the decency to point out we have heard before). I'm not even gonna talk about the appearance of Amy Carlson, who I find strangely hot in a non-conforming Hollywood manner. No, I'd like to wax lyrical for a moment on the subject of the super-soldier, and the possibility of it actually either a) occurring, or b) having already happened.

I have to say, if I found out that the super-soldier programme was not only fact rather than fiction, but had indeed been occurring since the 40's, I wouldn't be surprised. Towards the end of WW2, rumours abounded about the Germans performing eugenic experiments to create stronger, better, harder, faster soldiers, and it seems unlikely that whatever the Germans did the Americans wouldn't do better. Oh yeah, I'm sure they were desperate to inject their soldiers with the various drugs needed to create an army of supermen that would be able to wipe out those damn Commies (let's face it, by the time it would have happened, the normal soldiers would have already done the job with the Nazis). Oh yes, call me a conspiracy theorist but I'm on the boat with this one.

So the idea that today, in a time of heightened paranoia and fear about a new enemy (errr...not exactly sure who they are, but they are bound to be "towel-heads" and come from Iraq, or Iran, or...somewhere there's a great deal of oil, and definitely someone the Americans don't like) a company is mixing steroids to create Captain America is not such a leap of logic. Afraid? You should be.

It was also interesting that, in a television program that is usually so pro-Republic, a small dig was made about the war in Iraq when Gibbs informed the senator's PR man that he supported the soldiers fighting the war rather than the war itself. True dat, peoples.

So if NCIS can lose faith, maybe there's hope for the future of America after all.

"B"

Bill Henson Controversy

Now let me preface this article with two points: firstly, I am a pretty liberal kind of guy when it comes to the whole Sex thing, as I think we seem to have, like America, a somewhat skewed attitude towards sex whereas we have a surprisingly lax attitude towards astonishing violence. It's fine to show someone having their head hacked off, but a pair of naked boobies...omg that's bad, I tell you. Secondly, I am no artist. I'd like to think I am creative and have a little talent in creating some nice artwork, but I don't really know anything about art, though I do know what I like.
For me, photography is an odd sort of medium. It either looks beautiful, crap or staged. For instance things like sunsets, thunderstorms, nude women...all beautiful. Pictures of fools slipping in mud or whatever is crap. "Art" shots, where a naked man eating his own penis with a barbed wire crown and an Osama Bin Laden beard apparently representing "war" is, possibly inventive, but still looks staged. And of course, one of our greatest photographers is Jim Henson...no, no, sorry, Bill Henson. And no, of course, we have Bill's latest work, themed vulnerability in kiddies (or some such title).

Which appears to involve a lot of 10 - 12 year olds stark naked.
Now, Bill has street cred. He is the youngest person to have a display of his photography (in the seventies when he was nineteen) and has gone, apparently, from strength to strength. It is perhaps worth noting that his style of photography involves lots of naked people (invariably quite young) in dark, stormy scenes against bizarre backdrops. Indeed, dear Billy apparently went a little too far a few years back when a girl he photographed had her nipples on display and appeared to be about twelve years old (she was, actually sixteen, so obviously that was all right then).

Therefore his new exhibition isn't actually a surprise. In fact, one might say it's a logical progression. But for me the whole thing just seems a bit weird, and not so much about Henson. Clearly Henson is a bit of a Michael Jackson style freak (for the record, I don't believe Jacko is a paedophile, just a fucking weirdo who genuinely believes there is nothing wrong with sleeping with kiddies, not in the biblical sense by the by) who obviously thought to himself - photographing naked pre-pubescents, no problem there, because it's art. And, surprisingly he's actually right in the eyes of the law who won't be able to prosecute him, it seems as there was no intention. Act, yes, but no intention (apparently mens rea peoples...watch Law & Order!!!).

So, Happy Henson is just fucked up. But here's the question - neither the art gallery, nor the parents of the girls involved thought there was anything wrong with this. Now, maybe it's the forthcoming protective father in me coming out, but if some Charles Manson-look-a-like came up to me and said "Here, sir, have a large wad of cash so I may take pictures of your nude ten year old daughter" I think I'd politely reply "Why don't you go fuck yourself?"

I lie, actually. I'd just punch him in the face.

And knee him in the bollocks.

But apparently some parents said "Yes, that sounds like a wonderful idea, William. Let's run with that." Seriously, what's with that? Now, given that their intention was to give some nude the opportunity to take nudie pictures of their kids for money, surely that's intent to pimp out their child? Which means mens rea is there! Which means this loser parents should be charged with facilitating child pornography. And given that any half-way sensible person would look at a nude pic of a ten year old girl and think "Hmm...that could be a little controversial..." this art gallery should have had some foreknowledge that these pictures were offensive. Therefore, intent to distribute child pornography.

Bill, you're a toss, but clearly you always have been. Parents and Art Gallery, you've pretty much disgraced yourselves. There's little you can do to redeem yourselves.

"D"

Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull

And so it's here. It's been anticipated for the past fifteen or so years, but the more time has worn on the more people have wondered whether it would actually get made or not. Spielberg, Lucas and Ford kept spouting the same old "we're just waiting for the right script" line, but most people had decided that Indiana Jones 4 would never see the light of day. Then of course it did, but with so much anticipation it was almost inevitable that it wasn't going to live up to the hype. And sadly, it pretty much doesn't.

Now, don't get me wrong on this score - it's still an entertianing film. Lots of action and excitment; a cool object for Indy to go looking for - the titular skull; a group of interesting characters brought to life by good actors - it's all there. No, the irony is that, after waiting so long for the right script, the production team have actually ended up with the wrong one.

But let's just have a quick analysis of the acting first, and obviously we need to start with Harrison Ford. Frankly, watching Ford play Dr Jones in this movie is a little comparable to watching Roger Moore play James Bond in "A View To A Kill"; it's really difficult to get over the fact that Ford is considerably older in this movie than he was in the previous ones. Admittedly the movie is set fifteen years on, but Ford doesn't look fifteen years older - he looks a lot more.

In the opening scenes, Ford appears to be very uncomfortable playing Indy and once the action moves to the university, he looks as though he has decided to play "Hollywood Homicide" rather than Indiana Jones. All this changes when Karen Allen (Marion Ravenwood) turns up and finally Ford seems to remember what he is doing and how he should be playing the role. Ironically it's at this point the whole movie picks up, but more on that later.
Allen herself seems to never have forgotten what role she is playing, while clearly "Transformers" is the single best thing to happen to Shia LaBeouf as not only is in every movie being made these days, but he's getting an "and" credit. Happily LaBeouf is emminently watchable, as is, of course, the wonderful Cate Blanchett who plays the villianous extremely well - although in a press conference she apologises for her accent, which frankly she should because it is appalling, particularly in the opening scenes where it drops in and out like a car radio in an underground carpark. Jim Broadbent is a satisfactory replacement for Denholm Elliot (though it is nice that Elliot's character is still given a nod or two in the film), though he doesn't get anywhere near enough screentime; and two other British actors: John Hurt and Ray Winstone, also put in great performances throughout the film.

But, and let's get back to it, it's the script that just doesn't work. For the first third of the movie, we get a very slow feature where people spend a lot of time talking to each other and doing things that ultimately don't make an awful lot of sense. For instance, the Russians are looking for the skull in the opening scenes, and they believe it is in the American vault containing, amongst other things, the Arc of the Covenant. Fair enough. Indy seems to believe it is there too - he knows it is highly magnetic and uses this fact to find it. All good. They find the body and the Russians sod off with it, later opening the skull to show the crystal skull. Except...Indy then finds the skull in the Conquistador's body, and it is this skull which is the one that goes on the skeleton at the end. So...what precisely did the Russians get in the opening scene? It has the same magnetic properties as the actual skull, and appears to look like it when Spalko (Blanchett) shows Indy, yet it is not the skull.

Now aside from that major gaff, and the slowness of the early part of the film, the action picks up, as mentioned earlier, when Marion comes onto the scene. Here the action kicks in, with some great moments (can't get enough of Indy and co using the car to go down three waterfalls) and some equally great deaths (our main villain being carried into an ant's nest is particularly unpleasant). At this point this is an Indiana Jones movie par excellence, with everyone rising to the occasion and giving it their all. We get exciting monuments, more action, more adventure, and the discovery of giant skulls in the mountains. Fabulous stuff.

And then...well, if you don't want to be spoiled by the end of the movie, you probably should skip the next paragraph.
I'm sorry but for me aliens just don't seem to sit well in an Indiana Jones movie. If the crystal skull had turned out to be Egyptian Gods I would've found that easier to accept. Mysticism and magic are fine in an Indy movie, but aliens...I just don't buy it. It just doesn't seem right for some reason.

Aside from that complaint, there are only a few other things to moan about: shame we didn't have John Rhys-Davies return as Sallah, and Indy should've used that whip waaay more often. Oh, and there were no truly gruesome moments. The ant thing was uncomfortable, but it wasn't face-melting/heart-ripped-out-while-beating gruesome. There should be a gruesome moment in an Indy film, truly.

I think Indiana Jones 4 was a viable movie about five-ten years ago. With the right script it would've been brilliant. Now, though, we're left with an actor who's just a little too old to be convincing as an action hero in a script that's just not quite an Indy script. The ending was sweet, so let's leave it there.

"B-"

Prom Night

There's something about seventies movies. The seventies truly were a different planet, and watching movies made in the seventies are proof of that. It's like all the rules of normal society just don't apply. For instance, take the character of Jude. She desperately wants to go to the prom, but she has no date. On her way to school on the day of Prom Night, a fat kid pulls up beside her and offers her a ride in his van to school. She accepts. That night they lose their viginity to each other at the Prom. Stranger danger, Jude!!! Didn't your mother tell you not to get into a car with strangers???

And what's with the idea that, if you haven't had a shag by Prom Night, that's the night you're gonna get some. I'm not just pointing the finger at Prom Night, by the way, because aside from all of its sequels, it's not the only movie to give us this idea. Big pressure in America at school, I would imagine.

Oh, and incidentally, I know Prom Night was released in 1980, but it was made the year before.

So we come to the original Prom Night, a movie born from the idea in the seventies that slasher flicks could make as much, if not more money than horror flicks. It's a good theory, by the by, and if it wasn't this movie wouldn't be made, because it is essentially crap. It's a kind of reworking of Carrie, with Halloween thrown in for good measure, and that's not just because Jamie Lee Curtis makes another slasher appearance, securing her reputation as the original scream queen. The wonderful thing about slasher flicks in the seventies was that the killer needs no motivation to actually perform the killing. They just do. We don't know why Michael Myers (in the original Halloween) has any desire to kill off his sister and then come back and kill randomly any old babysitter he can find on the street close to where he used to live. It bears absolutely no logical thought at all, and what's more, when it is finally given a reason in the second film, the reason is a little bollocks, truth to tell. By the eighties, someone believed that it was necessary to give the killers motivation, and so, resorting to the Halloween II theory, they were given the weakest of motivations, and generally the killers turned out to be lunatics before the dreaded thing that happened to them happened (Mrs Voorhees, I'm talking to you).

Prom Night fits in between the two camps somewhere without actually satisfying either. The killer has a motivation (and a surprisingly good one...although...more on that in a moment), but for the majority of the movie we are presented with a vague sort of mystery; who is the killer? The real killer is never alluded to, except given the pretitle sequence it's pretty obvious, but the false starts we are given include a convicted sex killer, and a retarded school janitor. Gotta love the seventies:

"He's probably the killer."

"Why?"

"Cause he's a mong."

"Oh, of course."
The big surprise being, of course, that it's neither.

The pretitle sequence shows a little girl being inadvertantly killed in stupid game with four slightly older kids. When it's the four slightly older kids who are targeted years later, it becomes pretty obvious that the killer is someone associated with the little girl's death, and given that the only person with her on that day was her brother...well... It's hardly likely, then, to be the sex offender who was horrifically mutilated on the day of the original death, or the retarded janitor who turned up years later.

For a slasher film there is surprisingly little slashing, and it takes an incredibly long time before people start to die. When they do die, it's not terribly scary deaths, and one in particular - the school bitch - is both long and boring, the latter being primarily because we have no sympathy for her. She was going to do a Carrie and disrupt the school prom, so poo to her with nobs on. There is also surprisingly little nudity, although I suppose to be fair that sort of thing was more of an eighties slasher check.

It's weird to think that there was a time when Leslie Neilsen made movies that weren't crap spoofs of other films. Sad to think that he sits around by the phone hoping for a call from David Zucker and Robert K Weiss to tell him that they want him to appear in another of their mindless and pretty stupid "MOVIE" movies. However, here is in Prom Night, actually trying to act and doing a relatively good job. However, again one of the strange things about this movie is the fact that Neilsen's character disappears towards the end of the film, presumably to suggest that he is potentially the killer, but once the real killer is unmasked Neilsen doesn't show up again. What happens to him?

And while we're on the subject of faults in the movie, let's get back to the killer and his motivation and actions. OK, so it's the little girl's brother. That's fine. He knew that four of his older sister's friends were responsible for the death of his twin sister, and he's going to get them back. Again, no problem, make's sense. But why wait til his older sister's Prom Night? Especially as he knows that she is going to be Prom Queen...does he hate her as well?

The good old police lieutenant who investigated the original murder discovers that the sex offender is back in town and for bizarre reasons, calls in the psychiatrist who was there at the time. The psychiatrist is as baffled as the rest of the audience but he gets to go to a crime scene and be disgusted by the murder there. So who was the girl that was killed? And why? And who by? Presumably not the main killer because he had only four targets, so are we supposed to believe the girl was killed by the sex offender? And if we are, why did he kill her in the same place as the original movie...or was that just coincidence?

Our good lieutenant turns up at the prom to make sure everything is fine. Err...why, exactly? He doesn't seem to have any reason to suspect that the sex offender will go to the school (indeed given that the original murder was a pre-adolescent girl and the prom is going to be filled with (very horny) adolescents, there is even less reason), so why is he there?

There have been very few remakes which were better than the original, and in this current state of remaking old horror movies, the success rate has been even lower than usual. Halloween, The Fog, House Of Wax, etc are all not as good as the original. Only The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was better than the original and that's because the original was so absolutely awful. However, the remake of Prom Night is actually a better film than the original because at least its plot is thought out. In this movie there is nothing to really keep the movie together aside from a few vague ideas. If you want to make a murder mystery, don't give us the motivation for the murder at the beginning and thereby make it obvious who the killer is - only Agatha Christie can really get away with showing us motivations at the beginning of a story, and that's because she's a master.

"C"

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit - Inconceivable (Season 9)

Law & Order is, always, at its best when you feel the urge to turn to the person beside you and discuss the case that is unfolding onscreen. Back in its hey-day, controversy was the thing the show fed on, and its cases, "ripped from the headlines", always made you wonder about all sides of the argument. Nowadays, the whole thing is a little tamer and not quite so keen to present more than one point of view in a case, but every so often something is thrown in to make you think twice.

This week, on Special Victims Unit, the case itself was not so much one for discussion - stealing embryos is a horrible thing no matter which side of the fence you sit on - it's murder one way, and a horrible thing for those who have invested something (not necessarily money) into the procedure the other way. Equally, and commonly, the episode seemed to be struggling to fill its 42 minutes, having not only the pain plot, but also a tonne of other little stories in the episode as well to give us more suspects and pad that episode to bits. However it is the little stories that actually do provide the most interest in the episode.
We are given a few different stories: a couple who have harvested their child's eggs because she has, at age 8, the mind of a 3 month old; a woman who has become infertile thanks to the chemotherapy she has been having because of her cancer; and a midget who wants to reproduce, but only wants to have a midget child.

The first and last of these stories are the most interesting, the second, of course, being a tragedy for the poor lady who has become infertile. Cancer is a terrible thing and this episode highlights that the victim had to make the horrible choice between her life and her children. But the other two are slightly more controversial in nature.

The midget has harvested her eggs and wants them impregnated, but only wants to have a child that is similarly a little person like herself. When the detectives are dubious about this point, she replies that everyone else gets to have a child in their image, so why can't she? And given that there is nothing inherently wrong with being a little person, what's the problem with a child that turns out that way. Her doctor is refusing to perform the operation because he thinks it is wrong to, but she makes a valid argument. As we go more and more down the path where we can point to what sort of child we want (if we have the money, I might add - no one has remotely suggested anything to me about my forthcoming child in any way, shape or form, so I'm assuming I just have to make do with what comes out; not that there's anything particularly wrong with that, I might add), one can't help but wonder just how far away we are from designer babies. What's the difference, really, between saying "My foetus has Down's Syndrome ? I'd prefer an abortion" and "My child is going to be a little person? I'd prefer not to have that child; abort." Or, in the case of this little person, vice versa. It seems to be that she has every right to want to have a child that will be small, and given she is not aborting anything, rather ensuring the outcome from the very beginning, she is actually on safer grounds than most.

The first story, though, is the really controversial one, and is definitively based on a true incident. A young girl - eight years old - has the mind of a three month old. She can't walk, she can't talk and she can't do anything for herself. Her parent's have put her on a special programme designed to stunt her growth so her mind has the opportunity to catch up with her body, but the side effect of this is menstruation and the parents, unable to have any more kids of their own, harvest their daughter's eggs with the intention of carrying them themselves. They (wisely) don't say who is going to impregnate the eggs. Benson is appalled - she believes what is happening is tantamount to child abuse - but Stabler disagrees. I have to say I'm not sure where I stand on the matter. It does seem harsh to do what they are doing to the girl without her consent, but given she cannot realistically give her consent, the actual procedures obviously make some sense and have some benefit. But harvesting the eggs is a different matter. The parents may be bitter about their line ending with that child, but unfortunately that's the whole point of evolution. It raises an interesting dilemma, and you can see both sides of the argument.

A basic episode, definitely enhanced by some thought-provoking side issues.

"A-"

PS - Channel Ten...is there any reason we skipped two episodes?

NCIS: Lost & Found (Season 5)

It's a bit of a worry when a television programme - any television programme - starts to recycle its plots. Programmes like Doctor Who and Star Trek can almost get away with it because they are recycling plots that are forty years old, and so when they come around the second time (particularly with fresher dialogue and effects) they don't quite seem like the same story from forty years ago. NCIS is only five years old, but - and let's be honest here - they've done the "kid is the center of the investigation and bonds fantastically well with Gibbs" story before. Sure, this time the kid is a mini-Tony, but it's still the same old story.

This story mirrors the original version in a very similar way: boy is convinced that his father is not a killer; father is best suspect in the murder investigation; Gibbs believes boy and sets out to prove that the father is innocent. The fact that the real killer is a former colleague of Tony's seems to be just an excuse to do something a little different.

One thing that the episode does have in its favour was the pretitle sequence which was nicely done, showing us not only McGee's bizarre scout-like organisation that he is involved in, but gives Abby the opportunity to deal with a slightly snotty kid. When that kid then turns out to have his fingerprints in the AFIS (sic) database, we are given a cliffhanger that is a little more interesting than the usual ones we have had over the past few weeks. Sadly the episode becomes very derivative from that point.

The episode in of itself isn't bad, it just feels a little too much like "been there, done that". And let's face it, there's too much potential in NCIS to be slack and not put in the effort to give us something new.

"B-"

Casino Royale

Wow. It must have sounded so great when it was finally synopsisied. David Niven and Peter Sellers star in a James Bond spoof. You'd be forgiven for wondering how it could possibly be bad. But if you knew the history behind it, then it might start to make some sense. Essentially Casino Royale was the first Bond novel and Fleming (despite thinking it was rubbish) always hoped he'd make a mint and sold the movie rights as soon as possible, but it became clear that it wasn't going to happen in a hurry, and all the other novel's movie rights were sold to Eon productions. Charles K Feldman ended up making Casino Royale as a spoof because of the official Bond series, and cast the hugely talented Peter Sellars as Evelyn Tremble, a man who would impersonate James Bond. Unfortunately he had no idea that Sellers would be astonishingly unpredictable and walk off set, and get into a personality clash with the other star Orson Welles. David Niven was brought into pick up the pieces. And you're left with a movie that...just has no cohesion at all.

It's rather strange to see the Colombia logo at the beginning of a Bond film, and for those who hadn't seen the trailer (bearing in mind this was the 60's and it was possible) it must have been a shock to find out the movie was a comedy. The pre-title sequence, while worthy of a chuckle, is a little strange, especially as it doesn't really tie into the movie, but it feels like it should. The title sequence is very imaginative, and it has to be said that the music is one of the finest things about the film. Burt Bacharach provides the soundtrack, as well as the wonderfully 60's song, "The Look Of Love", sung with such sultriness by Dusty Springfield. By the time Woody Allen's name appears in the titles you can be pretty certain you are going to be watching a comedy film, but when there are no less than five directors, you should also probably start to worry. And, as it turns out, with good reason.

If ever a movie could be described as being less than the sum of its parts, this is the film. The five directors clearly weren't on the same page as each other, and so we have parts of the movie that are hilarious, parts that are quite tense, and parts that are just completely bizarre. The cast is simply superb with names such as Valentine Dyall, Bernard Cribbins, Ronnie Corbett, Colin Gordon, Geoffrey Bayldon and (unsurprisingly given Sellars) Graham Stark. John Le Mesurier has a cameo, and strangely enough even David McCallum is on screen for about two seconds. It's a cast to die for.

David Niven plays Sir James Bond, and it is he that opens the movie in the first few set pieces which are all comedy, although the McTarry Castle sequences boarder on being just strange. Niven is brilliant and plays his part perfectly straight, dealing out some wonderful lines of dialogue and bringing to life a character that was essentially an add-on to the original film. Sir James, for instance, has a stutter at the beginning of the film but when he takes over as head of MI6 (or is it MI5? Q seems to think so), he decides to lose the stutter as they don't have time for that anymore. Equally it is sneakily suggested that the Eon Bond is not the real thing, rather a person employed to carry on the legend. Sir James dismisses him for his sexual appetite and reliance on gadgets, which, given Casino Royale was released in the same year as You Only Live Twice is acutely appropriate. One of the most impressive aspects of the character is the fact that he has a building purely for his piano.

Peter Sellers, on the other hand, is Evelyn Tremble - a card shark who is a baccarat expert and is asked to become James Bond in order to beat LeChiffre at the game so that LeChiffre will be destroyed by his own organisation: SMERSH. In the film The Life And Times Of Peter Sellers it is suggested that Sellers wanted to play the part seriously, and although the more wilder scenes of Tremble were outtakes used to tie the film together, even the deliberate takes are played somewhat jokingly, and Sellers gets to have his usual "dress up" scene in the movie, allowing him to become, amongst others, Toulouse LaTrec, forshadowing him doing the same thing in Return Of The Pink Panther. In fact, perhaps because it's a comedy and has Sellers, Niven and David Stark in it, the movie feels more like a Pink Panther film than a Bond film. Indeed, when Tremble arrives in France, the scenes in his hotel are played in a very Clouseau fashion. That aside, Sellers does get to deliver the line "Bond...James Bond" and he does so rather well. Equally there is real tension in his scenes at the baccarat table - although that could just be because Sellers hated Welles.

So with two brilliant stars, the script they were presented with has some first class dialogue. There are so many gems it would be unforgivable not to mention a few of my favourites:-

Sir James on the Connery Bond: "It's depressing that the words secret agent have become synonymous with sex maniac."

"M" informs us that Sir James "washes his intestines by hand."

The Russian Smirnoff (we'll get to the really bad jokes in a moment) remarks, on seeing Sir James' lions: "I did not come here to be devoured by symbols of monarchy!"

And when Evelyn Tremble says to Mathis: "Inspector, there's something that's been worrying me. You're a French policeman, but you speak with a Scottish accent." Mathis replies: "Aye, that's been worrying me too."

Sadly, for every clever piece of dialogue there are some obvious jokes (such as Smirnoff) to be found. Bond handing over "M"'s wig to his wife is told that the wig can "only be regarded as a hairloom." Oh dear.

And that's pretty much what the movie's faults are - they have a series of brilliant moments, but in order to make a funny film, free reign is given in the hope that the brilliant moments can be a continuously brilliant film, and frankly that just doesn't happen. The Niven and Sellers plotlines are so separate, it's hard to see what they have to do with each other; Sir James is investigating missing spies and suddenly asks Vesper to recruit Evelyn to play LeChiffre at baccarat...but it's never quite clear why this is, and so it has to be virtually spelled out for us later. Terrence Cooper (as Agent Cooper) turns up to be a Anti-Female-Spy Device...but it seems somewhat irrelevent. Mata Bond (Joanna Pettet) is recruited to stop the sale of LeChiffre's artwork...but because we haven't yet had the story played out, this again seems whimsical. And yet, the scene of Mata Bond meeting Sir James is simply beautiful, and the Bond girls are easily on the same calibre as the main series; beautiful, resourceful and cunning.

It essentially seems as though the entire kitchen sink has been thrown into the mix in the hope that at the end the movie will make sense and be funny. There are nods to the Bond films (a Q scene, girls dressed as Honey, Tatiana and painted gold all show up; while former Bond actors Ursula Andress [not dubbed either!], Vladek Sheybal, Burt Kwouk and the voice of Robert Rietty all star); Q's assistant is almost a precursor for Are You Being Served?; the spy school is truly surreal - the auction sequence ending in a fight that is just ridiculous. There seems to be an attempt to get all of Sellers' filmed material into the film as a dream sequence occurs with scenes that make no sense, and there is no logical thread between some of the scenes. This hits a low as Tremble arrives in France and punches a custom official (although we never find out why), drives with Mathis (when they met never happens), meets Miss Goodthighs and is poisoned, before going to the casino and playing LeChiffre. From here, Vesper is kidnapped, Tremble goes after her...and in the next scene is tied up by LeChiffre before apparently going into a dream sequence which seems to turn out to be real when Vesper kills Tremble and LeChiffre. Even explaining it makes no sense.
The plot of the novel is actually in the movie somewhere, buried beneath a pile of gratuitious comedy and the final baccarat game between Tremble and LeChiffre is actually quite tense. LeChiffre doing magic for no reason is odd, and I can't help but wonder if Tremble's (completely serious) sarcasm towards him isn't actually Sellers letting a little of the real him out.

You can't help but wonder how the movie was going to end or what was going to happen, but it's pretty clear that by the time it came to end the film there was just no way it was going to be achievable. From out of nowhere we get Woody Allen (slapsticking in a way that even Sellers and Niven refrained from sinking to) as Dr Noah, or Jimmy Bond, planning on making all women beautiful and killing all men over 4'6". This then turns into what appears to be a Mel Brooks film as the director clearly instructed his extras to get a costume from the costume store (doesn't matter what costume at all...could be anything) and then come in and fight in Casino Royale. Just before everything is blown up and everyone is killed. Yes, when Sir James speaks to Frankenstein's monster, it is a foretelling of what is about to come.

The real shame about this movie is that there are actually some really, really funny moments in it, and yet they are all washed away by the mess of trying to make a proper story without realising that this goal was unachievable. What's funny though, is how much this movie (along with Thunderball and You Only Live Twice) inspired Austin Powers. Look out for the Fembots, people!!!

"B" - for having the balls to do it.

Big Brother 08

Oh, please, why not just bring back "It's time to go..."? Clearly, the whole "revolver room" didn't work terribly well (and aside from the fact that Big Brother fucked it up, one can't entirely see why they thought it would be so suspenseful. It actually would have been better to see it spit out the person who was evicted first), but having Jackie O say "the next housemate to leave Big Brother for 2008 is..."...it just doesn't have the same catch as "it's time to go". Thank god Big Brother is back to saying "You have been evicted. It is time to leave the house."

But, while she lacked style in evicting, Jackie telling Kyle to "stop being sleazey..." was one of the more priceless moments of the episodes. Oddly, though, Jackie in fact seems to be getting worse as a host, while Kyle seems to be getting better, possibly because he is doing a lot more improvised speeches than having to read the autocue. That said, the pair of them should lose those bloody hand-held mikes; Kyle doesn't seem to know where to put it and Jackie O was stroking it!!! Bizarre.

One can't help but wonder if the producers of Big Brother haven't worked out that their are housemates are boring as bat shit. Truth be told, the group just had no personality, and the majority of them still don't. Celebrities have been going into the house left, right and center, and even more are planned for teh forthcoming weeks. In the first Big Brother, the housemates were stranded in that house by themselves, going mad, for three months. Eight years later, and being isolated is about the only thing the housemates aren't. Corey, Carson (who is returning...or more accurately, despite the rubbish Kyle said about him going back into the house...please, Kyle, we know he's already been in), the So You Think You Dance judges (and there is another tie-in to that coming up) have all put in an appearance, and apparently a hypnotist is to go in. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Big Brother should manipulate the house rather than the housemates, which is pretty much not what they are doing. This week, however, the housemates have started to come out and have some fights. The majority of the guys are still pretty boring - Nathan is clearly just trying to play up to each housemate; Rory...is...err...; Ben is...errr...the same, I guess; David escaped from a cult, of course, and that's apparently his personality (as opposed to something he's done); and then there's Travis who actually does have a personality and it's not having a high voice, which the producers believe is his personality. His naivete is actually very entertaining and the house appears to be something of a voyage of discovery for him.

As an aside, bringing Travis' mum into the studio to have a sparring match with Kyle - who, incidentally has gone back to simply slagging off the audience as he does in Australian Idol (although as I said previously this is actually an improvement on the norm) - although as usual Kyle is more than happy to slag people off on radio but backs down quite quickly when face to face with his target.

Meanwhile there are the women, and this week they all came out of their shell and behaved not unlike they probably would have in Year 12 (and for Bianca that was only last year, so no great change of pace for her then). Brigitte hates Dixie. Rebecca likes Dixie. Bianca hates Dixie (but like all girls pretends not to). Dixie hates Brigitte (but says she doesn't). Dixie hates Bianca (but is happy to lie, like Bianca, to her face). Brigitte tells Bianca that Dixie hates her. Bianca goes in to fight. Dixie lies and Bianca turns on Brigitte and Rebecca because the latter girls have decided to be swimsuit and lingerie models which Bianca thinks is just a little low to set your sights. Seriously I take umbridge to this (and I am being serious) because, let's face it, if that's what they want, power to them for it. Somone has to be a swimsuit model. Back to the story...Alice is jealous because Rebecca took Brigitte into the strategy room and not her. Rebecca is upset by this. Dixie abuses Brigitte. Rebecca is upset by this. The girls bitch like there's no tomorrow, which ironically, for Rebecca, there wasn't. Although, that said, as events transpired Rebecca actually voted herself out of the house. Clearly the producers didn't particularly want her in the house anymore because they let her do it, something they've never allowed in the past. Hmmm...

I give credit to the producers for learning from their mistakes and changing them. I give credit to Kyle for having the decency to apologise to Travis' mum. I give credit to Brigitte because she was wearing a skirt so short that Kyle & Jackie O had to make mention of her reviving the Basic Instinct moment. But seriously Big Brother - just let the housemates establish themselves without the continual interference. You might be surprised at how it goes.

"C+"

Doctor Who: The Unicorn And The Wasp (Series 4)

I'd just first like to note how interesting the ratings depend on the timeslot for Doctor Who. Two weeks ago, shown at 6.20 pm, the overnight ratings were only 5.9 million. This week, 7.00 pm and lo, the ratings are 7.7 million. When Russell T Davies decried the early timeslot, claiming that up to 1 million people will tune out, it looks like he was dead on the money. People like to give Davies a lot of crap for his production, but the fact is he clearly knows television very, very well. On to this week's episode.

Last year Gareth Roberts wrote an episode about his favourite author, playwright William Shakespeare and this year he writes about the accurately-described most successful novelist Agatha Christie. But Roberts goes one step further and not only writes about Agatha Christie, but attempts to write an Agatha Christie episode, with just a smidgen of Cluedo thrown in as well - the pretitle sequence sees Professor Peach murdered in the library with the lead piping.

The episode then kicks off with a the guests being questioned about their whereabouts and director Graeme Harper is clearly in on the same gag that Roberts is writing, using a screen swirl to indicate flashbacks (even going so far as to have one character flashback in his flashback before the Doctor has his own flashback). The great thing about this episode is that it's not just director and writer who are enjoying the gag; it's the audience. The characters themselves take it completely serious and as far as they are concerned everything is just fine, but the audience can see exactly what Roberts and Harper are trying to achieve and that adds immensely to the story.

Avid Christie fans (and I am a fan, though I have to admit not actually avid) can find additional entertainment in this episode with a game of "pick the Christie" titles. Some are extremely obvious - "She had an appointment with death", and some are slightly strained but funnier because of it - "they should have asked...heavens!!!". The other running gag in the show is Donna's revealing things that Christie is going to write in the future and pretending to copyright them.
I must confess I didn't pick who the killer was (I thought it was the butler :)) but it was nice to see that, as always, there was a neat Doctor Who spin on the whole idea, tying in nicely to the giant wasp. The Unicorn, on the other hand, seemed curiously pointless, especially when the person it turned out to be really had absolutely nothing to do in the entire episode except say hello, say what she was doing and then confess. I also liked the idea of tying the story into the true to life events of Christie's genuine disappearance. But, this is clearly the work of a writer who has done a fair bit of research into a topic that he likes a great deal.

Gareth Roberts is a good choice for writing Doctor Who - his novels proved that, but his episodes have shown that he can take that one step further and translate a good idea, not only into a brilliant novel, but also into an excellent screenplay. Add director Graeme Harper to that mix and the episode almost seems to be unable to fail. Plus, Agatha Christie got to put the occasionally-smug tenth Doctor in his place by reminding him that death is not something to joke about. A good lesson to learn...

"A+"

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit - Streetwise (Season 9)

After a couple of thought-provoking episodes, Special Victims Unit has fallen back on dialling in the script as we are given a girl who is murdered, possibly raped, but turns out she wasn't. Apparently breaking all the rules they don't bother to hand the case over to homicide (and this from Stabler who bitched last week when homicide wouldn't give information about his rape/murder case), but as events transpire the case ends up back in their hands when a little girl is murdered. Lucky they kept on investigating then.

I don't really have a lot to say about the episode - it was doing it's job and it provided us with a bit of entertainment, so thumbs up to that. However, I've noticed that since Adam Beach has joined the cast this year, virtually every episode has given Fin and Lake something to do, unlike previous years where Munch and Fin were often just not in episodes and when they were it was to answer the phone. Richard Belzer is still essentially sidelined this season, and yet Fin and Lake are out investigating every episode now, supporting Stabler and Benson. The question that then occurs is, was this part of the deal with Beach?

"Yeah, I'll join your show if I've got something to do. I ain't Belzer, you understand. I'm not just sitting around behind a desk."

"No problem, Adam, you'll have something to do, trust me."

And now we find out that Adam Beach is out next year. Curious that.

As is Diane Neal, which sucks balls, a) because she's a great actress and cuts up the courtroom, and b) because she's hot. Rumour has it that they are in talks with Stephanie March to get her to reprise Alex Cabot. Well, Rayfield will be happy, but I'm not.

I'm hoping that next week I have something more interesting to talk about, because at the end of the day, rich girls pretending they were raped by the boyfriends of their non-existant crack-whore mothers and becoming the mother of a street gang...must have sounded great on paper, but really...

"C"

Ultimate Avengers 2: Rise Of The Panther

OK, so I think I've managed to put my finger on why I'm unimpressed with Ultimate Avengers. It's Captain America. I spoke about how I wasn't happy with the vocal casting in the first movie, but it is America's voice that I find the most inaccurate, and it becomes clearer in the second movie where the cast really are quite well done with the exception of the ole Cap'. His voice is too light for my liking, and when he is not in uniform, he appears to be absurdly muscular and has a strange Futurama feel about him. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact he is the lead character.

The second movie deals with two stories - the return of Herr Kleiser, leader of the Chitauri from the first movie, and the introduction of T'Challa, the Black Panther. All the other Avengers appear, though Nick Fury seems to have very little to do except give a briefing at the beginning of the movie and then get knocked out at the end. When the Chitauri begin their world wide invasion, SHIELD appears leaderless, so it would have been nice to introduce, perhaps, Carol Danvers as Fury's second - or Dum-Dum Dugan. Anyone really, would have been appreciated.

Some of the threads that were in the original Ultimates comics were lost in the last movie, but a few are used for the second movie, particularly the turbulent relationship between the Pyms, though unlike the comic, where it ends in violence and a nasty breakup, in the movie they get back together again and cry in each other's arms, which is a bit crap, to be frank. Captain America finally gets it on with the Black Widow, but his obsession with his past in the opening of the movie is well handled. Tony Stark gets some great moments, particularly when he decides to use his War Machine costume to fight at the end because it has "some big guns". Curiously he appears to be leading Janet Pym and Betty Ross off for a threesome at the end of the movie - one can only wonder about that ending; given Stark's character its hard to believe anyone would think any different.

Also moody and miserable in this movie is poor old Bruce Banner who has been incarcerated and charged for his crimes as the Hulk, getting no sympathy from anyone, and only the odd visit from Betty Ross. I'm not sure about whether I was happy or not with him surviving the lethal gas and turning into the Hulk - his "death" is a surprisingly moving moment which is a little undermined by the Hulk's appearance later.

And of course, there's new Avenger the Black Panther - king of the fictional country of Wakanda since his father has been murdered by Kleiser who appears to have been hiding in Africa for sixty years just waiting to launch an attack on Wakanda to get a massive meteorite that is buried beneath the main city, or something to that effect. The plot of this movie was a lot looser than the original and I'd hate to suggest that was because it wasn't based on one of the comics, but it is certainly a lot more convuluted than the original.

The movie is essentially on par with its predecessor, with the same kind of character interaction and a surprise at the end (though not one that was particularly noteworthy - indeed it was almost a relief), and as such I'm giving it the same rating, but I'd suggest that they go back to the comics if they want to do a third.

"B+"

You Only Live Twice

Well, if I thought Guy Hamilton's take on James Bond was very different to Terence Young's, I had no idea what Lewis Gilbert would do to the series.

What this film has done is to take the title of Ian Fleming's novel, a couple of the characters that were present and then to toss away the entire script and do something different. Admittedly it was always going to be difficult to do a movie based on You Only Live Twice as it is, essentially, a sequel to On Her Majesty's Secret Service - Bond attempting, badly, to recover from the death of his wife and being sent on a mission to try to snap him out of his misery (can't quite see the film producers marrying Bond off, let alone killing the poor dear, but we have to wait to the next movie - which is OHMSS - before we will find out).

So having thrown away the plot of suicide castles in Japan, we now have a plot about SPECTRE capturing different countries' spaceshuttles in order to start the next world war. Quite why they are stealing the shuttles is a little curious - after all, destroying them would presumably have the same effect, and be a whole lot easier. Perhaps Blofeld had a greater plan that we never found out about because Bond ended the first part before the next could get underway.
Oh, and interestingly, the screenplay is by Roald Dahl. Which would explain why the film is easily the most outlandish the series has had to date. Dahl claimed that writing a Bond script was easy - you have three girls who fall in love with Bond, one who is good and dies, one who is bad and then changes sides...and dies, and one who ends up with Bond. We'll get back to this point later.

The film actually has a great pretitle sequence which is surprisingly tense and revolves around an American shuttle being captured. It's directed beautifully and when the moment when the astronaut's communication line is cut and all sound is just stopped is very, very effective. I'll get back on to sound, direction and photography later. What's quite funny about the pretitle sequence is the suggestion that the British think that the Russians and the Americans are both idiots. We have "our best man on it", says the British representative in the strange geodesic dome, before we cut to Bond making out with a woman in Hong Kong. Funny, yes, but is Bond actually there investigating? His apparent death is quite shocking (there's a blink-and-you'll-miss-it appearance by Doctor Who's 1980's Master, Anthony Ainley) and goes into a rather stunning title sequence (no nudity this time round), with Donald Pleasance getting the first "And" credit of a Bond movie (outside of Bernard Lee as "M" of course).

Roald Dahl's script has a huge amount of plotholes and a lot of things happen just for the sake of them happening. For instance, when "M" informs Bond he has to contact Henderson, he gets up and goes to a side table, and in a drawer takes out a small slip of paper with Henderson's address on it. So, does "M" write all the contacts down on post-it notes and then stick them in a nearby draw on the off chance he needs them, then? Later, when Bond gets to Japan (and he's back to being a know-it-all again in this movie) he goes to a sumo match to meet with his Japanese contact. However, rather than having tickets supplied, or going to buy tickets, Bond goes into the area where the wrestlers are, and a wrestler gives him tickets. Why? After meeting with Osato and Helga at their office (SPECTRE appears to only prefer having redheads on their staff), Osato orders Helga to kill Bond. Bond then walks out of the building only for a guy in a parked car to start shooting a machine gun at him. Wouldn't it make more sense to kill Bond in the privacy of the building, rather than letting it get to a car chase outside? And more, Aki contacts Tiger Tanaka and requests "the usual reception", which turns out to be a helicopter with a giant magnet. How often does this sort of thing happen for them to have an "usual reception"? Clearly a fair bit if they can have a helicopter with a giant magnet on standby.

And that's the things that just "happen". Indeed it seems that the majority of the Japanese part of the movie is just fights and chase scenes. But Dahl's logic also leaves a fair bit to be desired.

Who is SPECTRE working with? They are Asian, but not the Japanese, and they certainly don't sound Chinese.

According to Blofeld Bond is the only person they know that uses a Walther PPK - yet in Dr No the Americans swore by it.

Bond claims he's never been to Japan, but in From Russia, With Love he tells a story about him and "M" in Tokyo.

SPECTRE might be a lot better off if they stopped killing random nobodies. They shoot at Kissy swimming in the ocean...for what reason exactly?

The secret ninja training camp is not so secret, clearly, as no less than two people infiltrate it without anyone else noticing.

Most impressively of all though, Bond is lead out of Blofeld's control room via a back entry and is then rescued. He says to Tanaka they need to get into the control room, but Tanaka says that it is impregnable. Bond is puzzled, but notices technicians escaping. "There must be a back way in," he declares. Ya think? It didn't occur to you to just go in the way Blofeld took you out?

OK, so you're thinking, he hated this movie. Actually, I didn't. I loved it. Because, of all the faults above, there is so much more to recommend this movie it's not funny. In fact, I only have one more little gripe, and I'll say it now to get it out of the way. I didn't mention in my review of Thunderball that one problem I had was the actress who dubbed Domino was the same actress who dubbed Honey in Doctor No, and it was very obvious. The same problem happens here as Robert Rietty, who dubbed Largo in Thunderball, dubs Tiger Tanaka here, and you can tell. Worse, though, at one point Tiger speaks a Japanese sentence, and it is obviously Tetsuro Tamba rather than Reitty who says the line. The difference is pretty obvious.

But, let's talk about all the great stuff in this film. I want to start with Gilbert's direction, which is fantastic. The movie really moves along at a great pace, and the entire film is shot with a great deal of care. There is a fabulous shot, just before Bond's massage, where Bond can be seen through the legs of the girl about to massage him. It is very unusual and works really well. This is all helped by the photography of the movie which is nothing short of glorious. Although it's always been good, for the first time I was struck by how beautiful and important Japan was to the storyline. Tokyo, particularly at night, really comes to life, and the restoration of the film really shows us the quality of Freddie Young's work.

The two other 'shout outs to the production team' I'd like to give are to John Barry and (and it would be criminal if I didn't mention it) Ken Adam. Barry's music is particularly notable in this movie, not least for the lush and beautiful title song (sung by Nancy Sinatra), the 007 theme (showing up regularly it seems) and, of course, the brilliant use of the James Bond theme, but also for two pieces of music which really set the tone of the movie for me - the Space Walk theme used whenever the SPECTRE rocket eats up a government one, and the gorgeous marriage theme that accompanies one of the most beautiful sequences in the whole movie - Bond marrying Kissy.

Meanwhile, Ken Adam's sets are just amazing. There is the "standard Adam" in the form of Tiger's office in Tokyo, that strange, sparse metal world that Adam likes to design, with futuristic chairs and stairs that have no rails, but that is nothing compared to Blofeld's hollowed-out volcano lair. It is simply massive. Helicopters take off and land - hell, rockets do the same!! - and monorails take people to and fro. Why Adam didn't recieve an Academy Award for production design on this movie is beyond me. And what's more, at the end we get the fight sequence in said hollowed-out volcano! It's the most amazing fight sequence in the Bond movies to date, and it shames the underwater battle in Thunderball completely. Lewis just seems to let havok take over and it falls into place spectacularly.

Onto the casting side of things, because there are a few mentions that need to be made (and I'm not even talking about Bert Kwok and the fat colonel from 'Allo 'Allo). Connery, Lee and Maxwell all return as Bond, Moneypenny and "M", but to be fair none of them are really putting an awful lot of effort into this one. Bond, as I said, has returned to being a know-all, but his sexism has really reached new lows. Here he seems to show an almost callous disregard for women - after Aki dies (and that is quite a shocking and unexpected death), the next day Bond seems more concerned about what is faux-wife is going to look like. Equally, once he meets Kissy Suzuki his first thought is how to get her into bed.

But, on the regular side of things, Desmond Llewellyn is going from strength to strength as "Q", and makes his cameo appearance the most memorable yet. Of course, it helps that he has a mini-helicopter to unveil, which makes for another great chase sequence in Japan.

But onto the guest cast, and let's start with the women. Akiko Wakayabashi and Mie Hama are the two Bond girls, and isn't it nice that we get two Eastern girls? It makes a refreshing change, although it is interesting that Hama's Kissy Suzuki is dressed almost identically to Honey from Dr No at the end of the film, in the white bikini, and then the white shirt over the top. I actually prefer Hama to Wakayabashi, and although I was saddened by her death, Wakayabashi doesn't have the same innocence that Hama does. Indeed, on her second meeting with Bond she is snogging him, having had a sum total of one conversation with him. Slut! That said, the Japanese as a race are handled very well in the movie and not really protrayed stereotypically (this was made in the 60's remember - their culture has changed a little). The only time the production falters is when one of the Japanese secreties inform Bond he is three and a half minutes late...

Although only on screen for about five minutes, Charles Gray is just fantastic as Henderson. It really is a shame he doesn't get more screen time, because he has an instant appeal that is helped a lot when, after Bond slams him in the leg with a cane, he replies that he's glad Bond got the right leg. Indeed, Connery seems to come alive opposite Gray, as there is some nice repartee between the pair, and Connery has a delighful moment when Henderson gives him a martini that is stirred not shaken. Despite being polite, the look Bond gives shows the truth.

But, of course, it is Donald Pleasance that creates the biggest impression in the movie. After four movies, Blofeld is finally revealed to us and what a sight the scarred, bald-headed man is. The reveal of Blofeld is executed perfectly, and it is one of the top moments in cinema history, let alone the Bond series. Again, Connery seems to be a little more than bored in his scenes with Pleasance (who has all the best lines in the movie) and Pleasance just oozes the right amount of camp evil that is required for the part. Watch his hand as he strokes the cat while Helga is devoured by piranhas. Mike Myers obviously did...

Yes, the final thing I might mention is that, though Thunderball inpsired much of Austin Powers, the rest clearly came from You Only Live Twice. Dr Evil is Ernst Stavro Blofeld, with his white cat and scarred face, but a lot of the other jokes are here to: a hollowed-out volcano lair; instructions being given, and then repeated by someone into the communications system; even a piece of dialogue is lifted!

You Only Live Twice is a massive departure for the Bond series, leaving the realms of the gritty spy Terence Young created, moving through Hamilton's 60's television spy idea and going to an outlandish world where only a superspy can save the day. It's different, but strangely...I like it.

"A-"

Favourite movie order:

1. Dr No

2. Thunderball

3. From Russia, With Love

4. Goldfinger

5. You Only Live Twice
Favourite Bond girl:

1. Claudine Auger/Dominio

2. Mie Hama/Kissy

3. Daniela Bianchi/Tanya

4. Ursula Andress/Honey

5. Honor Blackman/Pussy
Favourite Bond villain:

1. Donald Pleasance/Blofeld

2. Gert Frobe/Goldfinger

3. Adolfo Celi/Largo

4. Joseph Wiseman/Dr No

5. Lotte Lenya/Klebb

House MD: No More Mr Nice Guy (Season 4)

The big problem with having a television show centered around, and you'll forgive me for using the word, a prick, is that after a while you begin to wonder why people can stand him. For dramatic effect he has to occasionally face situations where his world view is challenged, but when these situations crop up if he changes people will get sick of it (they watch the programme because he's a prick), and if he doesn't you wonder how people put up with him. After three years of watching Cameron, Chase and Foreman bitch and moan about House it was almost blessed relief when they all left him, and certainly believable. I would have kicked the television in if they had returned - although the return of Foreman was handled quite well, so that was fine.

As you can see I was a little over Cameron, Chase and Foreman and so when this season started by giving us forty new interns I was quite intrigued to see where the series was going to go. By the time they had narrowed it down to the three we ultimately got - Kutner, Taub and "Thirteen", I was just a little disappointed that we weren't also going to get Amber as well, but given she has returned to date Wilson (and seemingly now works at the hospital) I was happy enough.

I like the three new characters. I like them a lot. I've read reviews about people who try to pigeonhole them as carbon copies of the originals, but the fact is they are not. Kutner is not Chase. Kutner is more submissive than the other two, that's true, but he also has a slightly suspicious quality to him. Chase was a jerk, but Kutner seems to hiding something. Taub and Foreman may both be cynical, but Taub isn't bullied around by House in the way that Foreman was, and I doubt that he would allow it to happen. And for those who think Cameron and "Thirteen" are clones...are we actually watching the same programme? Is it because they are both women? Cameron spent her days moping over patients, or moping over House. "Thirteen" gives the impression that she doesn't really care if House is in the same room as her. She is teflon - everything House throws at her just goes right off. And the one time that it didn't - House's investigation into her medical history - had more effect because of that. We know virtually nothing about "Thirteen" - hell, we don't even know her name.

To back up what I say, note this week House calls her 31 saying he thought she didn't care which way it went - a reference to her apparent bisexuality. Thirteen doesn't even give a disgusted look. His comments just wash off him and she keeps everything to herself.

That said I read a review which suggested that if they were going to get rid of the three new ones they should, or they should get rid of the characters no longer necessary. I do agree with that statement - Chase and Cameron no longer have anything to contribute to the series, so it wouldn't be a bad idea to move them on. After all, the show really only needs Hugh Laurie...

This week's episode is the first of the episodes filmed after the writers' strike and funnily enough it kicks off with a nurses' strike in which someone rams their moving trolley into one of the nurses on strike (a sly dig at the person who ran his car into the Law & Order's executive producer Rene Balcer?).

Although the credited star of the show, Hugh Laurie does actually earn his position as he steals every scene he is in, making the already witty dialogue sparkle. It's amazing to me that when I see House I don't think of Blackadder's Prince George informing us that he is as thick as a whale omelette. House's arbitrary decision to treat a patient based purely on the fact that he is too nice is great, but, of course, the real thing that makes the episode (and is surely the thing that must annoy Foreman the most) is that House is write. The niceness is indeed a sympton of what he has, though impressively, this week House isn't the one that has the realisation of what is genuinely making the man ill.

Yes it's Kutner who, thanks to a trick pulled by House, manages to work out what is wrong the patient, though he still stands by the fact that the patient may be nice just because he is a nice person. However as we watch the final scene we discover, of course that it is House who is right and the guy is not so great after all.

Meanwhile, as Foreman, Kutner, Taub and "Thirteen" set to work to discover what is wrong with the patient, and inadvertantly fall into House's trap by testing his blood and discovering he has syphallis (sorry TEN, that wasn't the actual plot line for this week), we get to look a little further into the bizarre Amber-Wilson-House triangle that has developed, this week seeing House and Amber organising times they can spend with Wilson, and ultimately having to have Cuddy make a ruling because Wilson refuses to. The relationship between House and Wilson is curiously close, and House does seem almost jealous of Amber, though Amber's reactions to House also always seem ever so slightly flirtatious. It will be interesting to see in what direction this storyline goes.

Nice to have him back on tv though.

"A-"

NCIS: Designated Target (Season 5)

I think I may have missed the point of this week's episode of NCIS, and I'm not quite sure why. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this week's episode, not least because of the entertaining development of McGee having a girlfriend who steals his credit card and spends his money (ahh, but he obviously still has feelings for Abby because when she said "I love you and that's all that you should need" he becomes very thoughtful). McGee and Abby's on-off relationship has been a source of endless entertainment ever since the series started and McGee made his first appearance.

Another thing that made me chuckle this week was DiNozzo's pointed comments about the way that Ziva speaks (ie not using contractions or still failing to understand a lot of the lingo they use) which, after three years one would begin to get the hang of it.

The storyline itself was a bit wishy-washy (and certainly the reason NCIS were investigating was extremely tenuous - once Ducky determined that the Admiral wasn't the target of the assassination, surely it should have become a police matter, but we've already established that Gibbs isn't particularly keen on letting go of cases that he has started) with the actual villain turning up for no reason whatsoever at the beginning and then disappearing for the rest of the episode; but then, in all fairness, this is a common fault in NCIS storylines.

However, NCIS always tends to redeem itself in some way by the end of the episode, usually with the teams interaction, and although that was a high point this week, the redemption actually came in the form of a somewhat interesting dilemma at the end. Our illegal immigrant who left Africa to escape execution and was then informed that his wife had been murdered, then went ahead and married another woman and had children to this new wife. So when the original wife turns up, we are presented with an interesting dilemma, because really, no one in this situation acted maliciously. I really wouldn't know how this situation should pan out because neither woman has done anything wrong and certainly even the husband acted the way he did because he was certain his first wife had died. A real dilemma.

That said, I still think I may have missed the point somewhere. Ziva spent a lot of time accusing Tony of being a racist, but he argues against this pointing out that his own family were immigrants who built themselves up from nothing. At the end, when we finally found out the dilemma above, Tony gives Ziva a significant look and she looks down ashamed. Did I misinterpret this? And if I didn't then...what was the point of the look? What point was DiNozzo trying to make? I really missed something...

"B+"

Big Brother 08

Well, the fallout from the eviction has produced some rather impressive results which have really spiced up the house. After mixing it with "the kids" Dave has fallen back on the "I'm ten years older than Saxon so I've been around the block a bit longer." Terri - who is really pissing me off - has described Brigitte as a spoilt kid because the girl is crying over having lost her all things, due to Saxon's "hand grenade". What's interesting is that Terri then went on to say that it was a horrible thing to happen to anyone. I have a soft spot for Brigitte - sure she has all the intelligence of my cat Parker as he rolls over to look cute, not realising he's on the bed and promptly falls off, but similarly to Parker, she's cute and isn't a malicious person. Well, she wasn't until she decided she wanted to leave the house to bash Saxon. Actually, to be fair, Brigitte's problem isn't that she's thick, because I don't really think she is - her problem is that she doesn't have the vocabulary or wit to express herself clearly. Saxon was actually fairly on the money when he suggested she should read more.

Still how hot is she in that eviction outfit? Love that short skirt. And the black underwear. I'M SORRY!!! I'm still a guy...
Meanwhile, the Nob takes the moral high ground about Brigitte being upset at having lost her clothes, despite the fact he spent hours bitching firstly about being sent to the Kombi van, and then later when Terri reentered the house. It's oh so wonderful to be living in that glass house and throwing stones. Dixie continues to get more and more bizarre, attacking Ben for gossiping about her behind her back, and when Ben explained everything, Dixie suggested he talk about her only behind her back. Ben, on the other hand, proved how useless he was as he was then unable to defend himself from Dixie's attack. Honestly they are the weakest group of housemates ever.
Entertainingly Big Brother seems to be losing his temper with the housemates, kicking Brigitte out of the Diary Room, and even funnier, yesterday, cutting off Nobbi's "Can I just say that these are the wor.." with a curt "No." I've always enjoyed Big Brother's lack of patience with the housemates, but this year he seems to be far more tolerant of them. Enough of this, I say! Abuse them! Put them in their place!

Nobbi imparts his wordly knowledge to Brigitte (which would make me want to punch the git in the face) as David, Renee, Rory and Alice are presented with a prize to fly overseas. The fact that the four honestly believe it is going to happen without passports is astonishing enough, but more impressive is Corey's question when told they are leaving the country "You mean Australia?". Oh dear lord...Oh I take it back. They appear to have realised that it is more likely to be a flight simulator.

Quite why the four of them have been awarded this prize is a little unclear. Big Brother seems to have run into a problem with Brigitte refusing to accept her situation by going on a hunger strike, and is determined to leave tomorrow, which Big Brother refuses to directly answer. Corey, meanwhile is trying to be sympathetic and doing quite well, but this brings me to an interesting point. Corey is a dick when he puts his mind to it and is enormously disrespectful to Terri, but it's interesting to note how astonishingly disrespectful Terri is to Corey in return. After claiming that respect has to be earned, she never really stops to question if she has done anything to earn Corey's respect. Having formed the opinion of him that she has never changed, it's extremely difficult to be sympathetic to the stupid woman. Personally I feel that both Corey and Terri deserve each other.

Big Brother finds it difficult to wake the housemates which is wildly hilarious, but I still can't quite grasp the point of the four people going to "Bali" for no reason. It amazes me that everyone likes Rebecca. I think it's obviously because she has big boobs. Other than that, struggling to actually find any character to the girl. Although to be fair, no character is better than the fucking-annoying-character that Dixie has.

Well, the long winded Monday show has ended with the chaps in "Bali" hearing the other housemates playing cricket for the weekly task. Gonna be a long week...

Short note on Big Mouth, in which Chrissy and Tim want to immasculate Saxon while the muched talked about John Howard interview turns out to consist of nothing more than a reporter shouting questions at Howard as he turns the corner - nice one Ten, thought for a moment you'd actually achieved something there.

One of the big problems with losing Gretel - and in some ways its not a problem - is that the new hosts of the show no longer really challenge the Big Brother contestents on things that they do. After a big talky session between Saxon and Jackie O & Kyle, all that we seemed to get from that was that as kids, Kyle and Saxon were both bigger losers than Corey. Gretel would have taken him to town, and although she was big on the man-hating passive-aggressive interviews, at least it was interesting to watch.

Happily it looks as though both Chrissy and Tim are up for it in Big Mouth as the two took him to task for hating fat people and defending the Cronulla riots. Of all the things Big Mouth has failed to do (and let's face it, the interview with the woman from the...what, Australian Family...whatever it was, was an absolute joke because - and if I may digress here - she was making an interesting point. In most situations somebody does something stupid, they are punished and then they move on, learning from the experience. Corey has done something stupid, but thanks to both the media and Big Brother he is not being allowed to move on from the experience and so he is learning nothing from it. Good old Tony and Rebecca weren't keen on hearing that argument and they talked over her very quickly, with Tim joining in - is the guy looking for a host job? He said he played the game in the house to win...perhaps he's playing the game to get a better job. Back to the story) it is that it has consistently not faced the tough questions in the house. Big Brother is slammed in the press, and the panel slag off the press (which Kyle is already doing in the weekly shows). I think the new eviction idea is great, but why not mention the fact that the tension was completely lost when Big Brother announced the wrong name for the person who left the revolving door? Obviously it was Saxon who lost. But happily Chrissy and Tim took Saxon to task for his attitude and beliefs and it was great to see.

"C"

The Invincible Iron Man

I find it a little difficult to review The Invincible Iron Man, primarily because I've just seen the movie which was absolutely brilliant. Given that I have already watched The Ultimate Avengers and the voice of Tony Stark did not particularly impress me I was going into this movie with a slight caution...

First up, the villain of this movie is the Mandarin, which is a tough character to get across well in this modern age. The Marvel Encyclopedia gives his occupation as "criminal mastermind" and informs us he is currently residing in his castle "thinking up new plans for world conquest" - nice gig if you can get it. He was great when he was a super villain with ten alien rings (that shot blasts of ice and fire and...god only knows what the other eight do) that didn't need to actually obey the rules of the physical world, but in today's modern age there has to be a dash of reality thrown into the mix. The movie accomplished this by making him the head of a terrorist organisation called the Ten Rings, linking nicely to the character. This animated movie recognises the same limitations and as such limits the Mandarin to having only five rings. That said the Mandarin still doesn't have to obey the physical world. In actual fact the Mandarin is now a historical figure that legend has it will return when his five elementals (fire, water, wind and earth...and dragon apparently) obtain the five rings. Legend also has it that he will fight an iron knight, which is not a terrible set up to our hero's arrival.

Unlike most versions of Iron Man, in this movie Tony Stark is not the head of Stark International - that is in fact a board with Howard Stark as the chair of the board. Tony has a division that investigates new technology but it is shut down for a variety of reasons including the fact that Tony is working on his own secret project...wonder what that could be. When James Rhodes' team get taken by the Jade Dragons, Tony goes after him in tanks and the rest is history. What's nice is that on their return to America, Rhodey finds out that Stark has been working on Iron Man for some time, and we get to see a large variety of Iron Man suits, all based on designs from the past, present and Ultimate.
One thing that is interesting, and mirrors the live action movie, is that Iron Man himself doesn't actually save the day. In the movie it is Tony and Pepper activating a veritable EMP that saves the day, and the same happens here (though Pepper is arrested and so doesn't actually make it). Here, Iron Man destroys the five elementals, but it is Tony who manages to defeat the reincarnated Mandarin (oh big surprise, he did get resurrected, like you didn't see that coming), by talking his new vessal into remembering herself. Sadly Tony ends up all alone as his new love dies in his arms after defeating the Mandarin.

I enjoyed this a lot more than I thought I would but I still don't think this quite hits the movie heights.

"B+"