Category Archives: miniseries

Darknet (s.01*, 2013)

Darknet is an anthology horror series. It comprises a multitude of stories, big and small, all united through the keynote of a website called Darknet, which is specifically dedicated to scary real-life communications, with CCTV videos of real murders, and something like a forum, where a killer can leave a message asking for advice on how to get rid of the body and actually get a response. The show resembles V/H/S movies a lot, only updated to reflect the internet era.

There is no direct relation between the episodes in terms of the stories; each of them is created by a different director, with different characters, etc. The website does work as a stem on which the stories are strung, but it’s not until the ending of the 6th episode when the common plot strarts to appear. Considering that there is no continuation, and probably won’t be, it’s a bummer.

Episodes’ quality level varies as much as their stories. The only perfect one is the first, done by Vincenzo Natali, all the others are flawed in one way or another: sometimes a piece would be based on an assumption too far-fetched to be taken seriously, sometimes the rythm would be wrong, and sometimes the acting would be not good enough. Episode #6 (done by Rodrigo Gudiño) is better than the others, and also contains an interesting cliffhanger, but it’s still not as great as Natali’s work.

All in all, there is a lot of really frightening stuff here, so as a horror this series works quite well. I hope there would be some sort of closure, even if only a short film – just to wrap things up. But even with the final path leading nowhere, it’s worth checking out; and better do it when the night is at its darkest. Works better that way.

Names and figures

Childhood’s End (m/s, 2015)

Childhood’s End is a 3-part miniseries about an alien invasion and consequent collaps of the humanity. Main storyline follows a man chosen by the visitors to be their agent on Earth – through his mediation all the significant problems like lack of drinking water, famine, war conflicts, crime, life-threatening medical conditions, etc. were succesfully solved, which brought the humanity into a sort of heaven on Earth. But then the aliens, who never showed themselves physically at first, turned out to look exactly like a devil looks in christian mythology (and some other cultures), and then they confessed to be working for some weird embodyment of god, who is into business of nurturing population of chosen planets in order to select species with certain qualities – every newborn children becomes a part of the batch, and at some point the ability to have children vanishes altogether. Then everybody dies.

I’m only retelling the story, because the series is shit, not worth watching at all. The concept (which, by the way, belongs to Arthur C. Clark) is actually quite good: one alien nation becomes subjugated by another, stronger one, and is forced to do certain work for their masters (because they proved to be good in doing it already), and that work is – destroying sapience species before they reach the ability to travel through space, and also – doing it quietly, without any weapons; and then this situation gets donned on Earth in its relatively current state. Pretty clever, but unfortunately, this execution, by Matthey Graham, is really, really bad. On 2 levels at the same time, and the most important ones at that, – the writing and the direction. (The acting is actually quite fine.)

The story is messy, very badly structured, with uneven time gaps, which guarantees the lack of rhythm; the dialogs are sometimes quite stupid; some techniques are manifestly manipulative, including those meant to influence viewer’s emotional state with stories about dying children or bad ecology, or whatever. A lot of the solutions are questionable, for example, why would anybody loose faith over the proof of aliens? why the hero never even for a second questions overlords’ good intentions? in hindsight it seems pretty stupid. Why does overlords look like a caricature on a devil? I suppose, the idea is that they showed themselves to people before, and this is how the image of the devil got established in our culture, blah-blah, probably for a reason; but that was surely a long time ago, and our means of safekeeping information were pretty bad most of the time, so when it comes to ancient sources we know there always can be errors and artifacts that appeared due to typos, adornings, political propaganda, etc., which means that the image of the devil we know and love today must be pretty different from the earlier accounts, i.e. the version that reached us gotta look a little bit like reality, but not quite. Besides, I’m not buying at all that a species with a body looking like that could have grown to become the dominating race. And that’s one of the miniseries problems right there: its authors do not bother with details, or even mere plausibility of their ideas, they do not think them through, ever. And this kind of superficiality is really dislike.

And don’t even get me started about religion. It’s disastrous. First of all – there is some. And second of all, it’s so unevenly distributed (most of it in episode 2), and so confused, messy, unclear – it simply looks pathetic. Every such scene has a facepalm quality in it, which was completely realized during my watching.

You know, it was hard – to sit through this talentless, feeble, flagitious spectacle. Before, when I was thinking about the amount of money wasted on something as awful as this, simply because somebody very much wanted to present to the world their own version of the “total comofort will totally ruin us, guys” idea, I sometimes got really frustrated. Now I think there are movies so good out there, their existense completely justifies and maybe even balances this little piece of injustice.

Names and figures

Seventeen Moments of Spring / 17 mgnoveniy vesny (m/s, 1973)

17 mgnoveniy vesny is the most famous soviet movie about spies of all times. It is the screen adaptation of Yulian Semyonov’s series of novels – a part of it, naturally, – following an officer of soviet intelligence Isaev who acts deeply undercover as SS-Standartenführer Max Otto von Stierlitz right in the heart of the nazi regime. It’s February of 1945, the nazi state apparatus lives out its last few months, and Stierlitz gets an assignment from the soviet headquarters to find out about a separate peace treaty negotiations supposedly being conducted by some high-ranking member of Hitler’s government.

I have mixed feelings about this series. On the upside: the development of the espionage intrigue is pretty well constructed and thought through; the music (and sound in general) is really great; and every single actor’s performance is totally amazing.

But the downside is heavier: a lot of dialogs are superfluous (although well written); some details of the story are completely ridiculous (like the fact that Isaev has a wife, or that Cat decided to have a baby in the midst of the war), while others are ignored on purpose (for example: how did Cat got into the manhole when it was extremely hard for her to get out of it?); the newsreel is nice, but there’s too much of it; carefully reading every single word that appears on the screen seems curious only for a couple of episodes; but worst of all – the reconstruction of the reality utterly sucks. I was unable to believe for a second that German military and officials would behave like that in 1945, that they would walk like that, and think like that, and talk like they do here, – it’s a glamorized version of reality. Now, to be fair, the ideology contaminates this story to a lesser degree than I expected, but that achievement is well compensated by the weakness and untenability of the created world. This is especially evident from the depiction of interrogations and torture: these scenes were so pathetic and unconvincing I almost cried a couple of times. But, of course, the dialogs, the system of relationships, the atmosphere, – all these components invest their share into trying to pass a plastic mould of the reality for reality itself.

The show is not exactly good because the director wasn’t really skilled on the one hand, and the writer didn’t really know what he writes about on the other. But it turns out that these 2 things are not as important as one might think – or, at least, not when you’re trying to create something in the state suppressing free creativity (with lack of entertainment as a result). This show formed its own stratum of soviet culture, it gave birth to countless jokes, anecdotes, imitations, continuations, and so on; Stierlitz became an inhabitant of the collective unconcious (within soviet group of nations) long time ago and continues to live there today, – the significance of Lioznova’s work is hard to overestimate. Which brings to the front an interesting question of correspondence between the quality and the impact, but that’s too large of a subject for UnnecessarilyBrief.

I thought I’d be regretting watching this, but I’m not. There are really a lot of good things here to enjoy; and the fact that the show is deeply imperfect only makes it more interesting for me.

Names and figures

The Write Environment (m/s, 2008)

The Write Environment is a series of interviews with several well-known writers and TV show-runners, where they share details about their respective paths, industry insights, but mostly trivia connected to their most famous works. I only found these 6, although according to wiki, there are more of them.

Because of the format, the original order of episodes does not matter at all. This is how I watched them:

Damon Lindelof

Famous for: Lost
According to Lindelof, what makes a good writer is the ability to translate ideas into stories. Storytelling and scripwriting are the same thing. Writing can be taught. First comes the story (which is also the most important thing), and then a character, one that can create the deepest conflict. Script is always written from the outline; at that, outlines for Lost were very detailed – 25-30 pages sometimes, while an episode on the average is 55-60 pages. It is extremely important to leave “outs”, and not restrict oneself to choices already made. Never say never. “You always have to start with an archetype.” He compares writing for a TV show to ever-boiling stew, with new ingredients being added from time to time, and if some of them do not improve the overall taste, they won’t be added again. New characters are necessary. Comic strips are harder to write than TV scripts. Deadlines on TV are very real. He believes writing block appear where there’s a fear of writing shitty. He fights them by forcing through. He has an impostor syndrome in a light form. His advice: do not write for somebody, always write for youself, for you know your work better than anybody.


Doug Ellin

Famous for: Entourage
Doug Elling procrastinates a lot. Story goes first, but really it’s the combination of story and character. External pressure is important: during 4 years on the show he wrote more than during 18 previous years of free-riding. 4-5 pages a day is a good pace. What makes a good writer is the unique voice. Practice is mostly important, it’s the only way to get better. It is important to figure out the story before writing an actual script. At that, he never operates from a master plan (“uber plan”); more than once he finished the story before the season was over, and had to come up with something else in addition. Entourage is a dramedy. There is no outline. Re-writes on the set are quite common. David Schwimmer is one of his best friends. Producing is easier than writing. One season of Entourage is about 400-500 pages. Some of the stories of which Entourage consists happened to Ellin himself, others were told to him by other industry players. He specializes in dialogs writing. Story is the key.


Phil Rosenthal

Famous for: Everybody Loves Raymond
First there is an idea, and then it’s a lot of thinking, which to Rosenathal equals to worrying. He procrastinates a lot, and only starts writing under the pressure of realization that it has to be done. Half a page a day is quite normal. Stories get born from incidents. The rule of 3 is “setup – setup – punchline”, and not that there should be 3 jokes on every page. Story is always #1 concern. Doing comedy as tragedy might be a good idea. “Disposable entertainment.” Warmedy (“like a large bath of warm crap”). Aspiration to be likable is the death of everyting. You want to be relatable instead. Comedy is written specifically for a particular actor. He decided to end the show out of fear to run out of fresh ideas. Food for the crew is extremely important. Basic structure is: 1) premise (“why is it interesting?”); 2) Act break (culmination, “we’re getting married!”); 3) conclusion (“was it worth it?”).


Sam Simon

Famous for: Taxi, Cheers, The Simpsons
Golden boy; was a child prodigy. Family Guy is a rip-off, although he heard Seth McFarlane is a nice guy. South Park is absolutely amazing and hilarious. He’s not really a writer as most of the story construction happens in the room full of people in a collaborative process. He can procrastinate for a long time, and then write everyting in a day or two. Treehous of Horror was his idea, and he had to stand up for it. Story is the #1 thing, and you also need to love the characters. George Carlin is wonderful. The funniest people in the world are: Jerry Belson, Norm McDonald, Glen Charles, Drew Carrey. Never sacrifice character for a joke, it’s not worth it.


Tim Kring

Famous for: Heroes
Good storytelling ability comes from being observant and having something to say. Kring is the only of these 6 who went to film school (and even then he wasn’t majoring in writing). He always writes from the outline. As it usually goes, a treatment gets more and more detailed with time, and eventually turns into a script. His pace is 6-7 pages a day, an episode is done in a week. When working in a team, it is very important to be able to mimic somebody else’s writing style. Sometimes characters come first, sometimes it’s the concept. He prefers not to have master plan for Heroes, to leave as much possibilities open as possible. Cross-pollination between the writers team and the audience is a curious thing. He has a light form of impostor syndrome. It is important not to be too attached to one’s ideas or characters. One of the best way to go for a beginning writer is to be a writer’s assistant. For the show to really happen and succeed, first an idea should come to the right mind at the right time, then the casting should be perfect, and then the audience should fall in love with the result.


Joss Whedon

Famous for: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Doll House, Firefly, Serenity, Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog
Whedon is 3GTV, third-generation of TV writers. He loves to have room for pacing. He writes up to 10 pages a day. He’s the ultimate geek (or, at least, was). His influences include: Monty Python, Masterpiece Theater. His father wrote for Golden Girls, The Electric Company. He always writes genre, because there are rules and structure. He loves to mix different genres, because gets bored otherwise. He doesn’t like “reset” kidn TV, and favoures serialized kind. 85 pages for an [episode] is not a lot. Movies is the “answer”, while TV is the “question”. You will be a writer only if you have an intrinsic need to write.


Generally speaking, these interviews are not so important as to how much you can learn from them about the profession, but can go a long way when it comes to encouragement of the beginning writers. Learning that successful and recognized authors suffer from the same fears as you do, that they procrastinate and stress out, but manage to overcome all of those things, can really make a difference, and this is the best thing about this series. And, of course, bits of information about industry’s behind the scenes scattered here and there, scarce as they are, help elaborate three-dimensional image of the American culture. All in all, it was pretty interesting – for me, anyway; I doubt that somebody not interested in becoming a writer would want to sit through 6 hours of basically just talking.

P.S.: I kept the files, and I’m willing to share, so if anybody’s interested, just contact me.

Names and figures

Diary of a Murderer / Dnevnik ubiytsi (m/s, 2002)

Dnevnik ubiytsi is a drama miniseries with notes of period drama, amateurish crime investigation and mysticism. It has 2 primary storylines, one of which is set in modern times (2002), and the other one – during Russian Revolution and subsequent Civil War. The cornerstone of the whole thing is a diary written by a man who happened to survive an execution at the hand of bolsheviks and paid a dear price for it, which made him believe in fate and destiny – for a long time he thought of himself as some sort of a hand of god. Almost a century later his notes are found by some students historians, one of whom took it way too seriously.

I usually don’t trust Russian television, because it’s whole system is the legacy of the Soviet Union and therefore is irreparably corrupt and incapable of producing anything good – there were exceptions, yes, but too few to make any difference. In this case, though, I thought – it’s Serebrennikov, it oughtta be good. Serebrennikov is a relatively famous and relatively young Russian director who started his career in theater (and still does most of his work there), but also made some movements in cinema – and they were pretty great (theater too). This show, however, is so beyond shit, it’s would’ve been extremely embarassing for me to even recall it if I were him.

Of course, many of its problems come from the lack of sufficient funding: the lighting is very bad, as well as the sound (music too, but that’s mostly on the director), and period details (clothing, scenery, stage props) are at absolute minimum, but the writing and the direction are still the main sources of the show’s cheesiness.

The story is seemingly consistent, but really is awfully chaotic and muddy. There are mystical allusions all over, and the idea of destiny runs through the narrative for the greater part of the show, but while the writers seemed to believe in it themselves, the ending sort of refutes it – or does it? It’s all so unclear; I think, the best word to describe the conceptual essense of the series would be unintelligibility. Romantic line is also indistinct. I don’t think, they even knew what they wanted to tell the world in the first place. Psychological development of characters is nearly inexistent, and even when there is some, it’s ungrounded and implausible. It is also pretty clear, that scripts were not unified properly, because there are disprepancies in the latter episodes to the solutions made in the first ones (like, how comrade Roza managed to live for 100 years if she had tuberculosis, for example, or why would the bolsheviks let the hero go if he didn’t actually kill those people). These are all indicators of a sloppy job – like nobody cared, like nobody even tried to create a decent product.

Directorial mistakes are even less forgivable. First of all, there was more han 1 case of miscasting (Galina Kashkovskaya as Polina’s friend is the worst one), and many, many cases of simple bad acting. Constant repetitions of the same phrases from the diary are very irritating. There’s too much music, and it’s not so good. Tragedy is often substituted with hysterics. At least 2 large scenes are wildly delirious (thus provoking a WTF reaction), like the one when they meet Peter, brother of the deceased, but actually it’s the whole thing that produces an impression of ravings – there’s just too much bullshit to enumerate it all.

The fact that this show once again proved my point about Russian TV did not make me happy, unfortunately, but rather very angry, and disappointed too. Of course, 15 years is a lot of time, and Serebrennikov did evolve since it was made, but television didn’t, and that makes me even sadder.

All in all, I do not recommend watching this, – its low quality is just too upsetting.

Names and figures

Olive Kitteridge (m/s, 2014)

Olive Kitteridge is a story about a bitter and unpleasant yet wholehearted woman and her journey through life. It is based on the novel of the same name written by Elizabeth Strout.

This is one of those cases when everything is so good, it’s actually hard to find any words to describe it. This miniseries is absolutely perfect, from beginning to end, in all possible respects. The acting of McDormand, Jenkins, Murrey and others is brilliant; the writing is impecable; the direction is flawless; special effects are beautiful and sufficient. The show received a great number of awards, including all the main Emmies, and it’s all well-merited.

The narrative is slow, melancholic at times, so that at first it feels sort of sturdy, tough, but as the story unfolds it becomes so powerful, it’s hard to tear oneself away from what’s going on on the screen. Scenes with the kid who almost used a shotgun, the assault in the hospital, the encounter with Jack – all these and others provide extremely powerful viewing experience, sometimes unexpectedly so.

This is a genuine piece of cinematic art, and also the best Cholodenko work I’ve seen so far.

Names and figures

Black Mirror (s.03)

In its 3d season Black Mirror expanded twice the size of any of the previous seasons (the initial expansion was planned even larger than that but was rethought later), and it underwent certain changes as a result of that. Nothing very significant so far, but it’s the tendency that counts.

First off, the essence of the show is not purely dark futurism anymore, it’s more like general science fiction, because many of the stories do not take place in the possible future, but rather in the alternative present (including the 1st episode). Also, one of the stories received a happy ending, which is not typical for the show at all.

Second, – although, I’m not entirely sure here, it’s just a tingling sensation of sorts, – there might have been weak points in 2 of the episodes: in the episode with the troll face in the end, the teenager watching that kind of porn seems like a stretch, or at least it doesn’t agree very much with my understanding of adolescence and American society. Of course, it doesn’t mean it’s false or anything, but some discomfort is definitely in place. Then again, the story wouldn’t have worked if the incentive was just a teenage embarrassment. My second complaint is about the final episode, the one with the artificial bees. It’s pretty obvious how those bees operate when being hijacked, and it’s clear that all they can do is find a hole and dig into it, so naturally one would at least think of protecting not the whole person, but just the body holes – the ears, the nostrills and the mouth, – and yet no one thought of that. Seems a little implausible, all I’m saying.

Having said all that, I should mention that the overall quality of the story, as well as of everything that comprises the narrative, is just as high as it was before. The acting, the direction, the dialogs, the characters, the sound, the music, the special effects – all these things and more are insanely powerful. There are not technical drawbacks whatsoever; watching the show is pure pleasuse, same as it always has been. Even with the aforementioned tendency (which is not carved in stone, by the way), the show demonstrates outstanding vital capacity, – an object of envy for any possible competitor.

Names and figures

Angels in America (m/s)

Angels in America is a miniseries which story is set in the mid 1980s and follows several people in New York during a very weird and powerful period in their lives; it has a lot to do with early years of AIDS terror. First thing to know is that in 2 respects the film is perfect: the direction and the acting. Mike Nichols by 2003 is heavily experienced, sophisticated filmmaker, he absolutely knows what he’s doing, and can totally balance certain pathos of the narrative with pinpoint injections of humor now and again. His work is lively and energetic; there are a lot of interesting solutions all over the place. The cast is exceptionally strong, and they’re doing very nice jobs, all of them: from Kirk, Shenkman, Wilson and Parker, who are central characters, to Thompson, Writgh, Pacino and Streep, who are more like secondaries, – partially that’s director’s contribution, too, because he was the one to choose them in the first place. The story provides all of them with complex challenges, and they deliver 100%, they totally and completely comply with what they claim to be capable of.

However, not everything is so great. There’s a 3d thing, no less important, – the writing. And here’s where we encounter a problem. The conception goes that in the early 1900s god abandoned the world created by him, angels and humanity both, and has never been seen since. During that time the humanity suffered through all the devastating adventures of the XX century, and angels in their turn grew to be worried about where people are headed with all the technological progress and all. So, in order to prevent the disaster, they decided to send a prophet, which is where the actual story begins, because for some reason they chose a guy dying of AIDS with no hope of recovery. (by the way, this does mean that he is not god’s messenger, but only heaven’s messenger, right?)

I kinda like the idea, the way powers are arranged, but the angels, the heaven, the whole afterlife, supernatural thing is very badly thought-through. For one thing, would the angels really be so stupid as to assume that the progress can be stopped, and with the aid of a prophet at that? There are a lot of curious, funny details, like the flaming ladder, and the wings, and the blabbering, – really, lots of them, – but they are just furnishings, their totality don’t constitute an integral phenomenon, probably because the angel-heaven concept is so ridiculous and impossible that even Tony Kushner doesn’t really believe it.

Human level stories I liked: the one about the guy who is not strong enough is the best, but I loved the one roughly based on Emanuel Hirsch Bloch, too, and Mary-Louise Parker is just my all-time favourite. Maybe the way how everything suddenly resumed its normal course (well, almost everything) – that seemed a little strained to me, – only slightly, though. But the angels, they almost suck – and if not for Emma Thompson, who was amazing with wings, they could’ve drowned the whole series. Another thing: the dialogs are too well written. It’s high literature right there, and though I highly appreciate how smart and refined it all sounds, I can’t help but think that people don’t actually talk like that.

So, to summarize, Angels in America is a good show, and only several quite avoidable drawbacks separate it from being great. Alas, it’s far from perfect.

Names and figures

Black Mirror (s.02 + White Christmas)

In season 2 of the anthology series Charlie Brooker continues to picture frightening possiblities waiting for humanity just round the corner. His stories are not always scary, but always disturbing – all because they present not very distant extrapolation of our world’s current line of development, and therefore seem extremely real.

Be Right Back is about one of the ways of weak AI development, kinda the same that led to the rise of strong AI in Caprica, only here the transition did not happen. Which is interesting, really, because makes you think what can actually trigger such transition. But Brooker decided not to touch upon that – for the time being, at least. He was more concerned with human emotional reaction to the re-incarnation, and that was reproduces brilliantly.

White Bear is about cruel & unusual punishment turned into entertainment. It causes the viewer to collide with insoluble dilemma: on the one hand, the punishment was totally merited and very precisely measured in order to fit the crime; but on the other – the whole attraction is built around the vindictiveness of human character, which is not a nice trait, so what does it say about the participants? I have no idea.

The Waldo Moment, was the least interesting novella for me, because it deals with politics and the worst kind of humor there can be, but I realize how extremely subjective that is. This story might be more important than the other 2 as it demonstrantes another highly important issue of our times: we have the widest possibilities now for self-development and independent thinking formation, and at the same time, we have more ways to distract minds from important things then ever. In the clash of these oppositely directed tendencies (uncovered in this film with straightforwadness and severity) the importance of strong will and consciousness rises to a whole new level.

White Christmas, the christmas special, is an anthology in itself: it consists of 3 small stories united with a horizontal one – like 3 branches of a plant are united via the stem. Although, each of them can be percieved on its own, their conbination forms quite an integral and consistent picture. There were strikingly interesting technology ideas, the most vivid being the real-life ban-hammer and means of creating a copy of personality, as well as using such copies for different purposes. Here arises the hardest moral issue of all: is a copy equal to the original, considering that there is no difference subjectively? is cruelty allowed towards a copy? would empath work in such a case? Difficult questions without a possibility of definitive answers.

Just like in season 1, everything is implemented on the highest level: the acting, the direction, the photography, all the technical aspects are pretty much perfect, or, at least, I didn’t notice anything faulty there.

The next season was ordered by Netflix, and will consist of 12 episodes, which is a little disquieting, because usually quantity increases at the expense of quality. Hopefully, Brooker would have enough mojo to beat this probability, but nothing is certain.

Names and figures

Killing Time (m/s)

Killing Time is a Australian miniseries based on real events (but literary licensed). It provides some interesting insights into the specifics of the region as well as concrete events and personalities. The overall structure, acting, etc. – all can be roughly put into story well told formula.

What it ultimately boils down to is a yet another story of a person who failed to estimate adequately his ability to preserve control over addiction, because he based his judgement solely on his success as a professional, while completely missing on all the accompanying negative signs; and as a result, not only ruined his own life, but heavily impacted life of those around him. There’s hardly anything more to it; the story provides a genuinely concerned view on the subject, but does not offer anything more, nor adds anything new, other than regional peculiarities.

Names and figures

Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog (m/s)

An absolutely brilliant tiny miniseries. Very professionally done: screenplay, acting, direction, – not a single flaw anywhere. Great songs and wonderful singing. Especially I love act III, in which an adorable parody reaches new level and acquires some serious traits – the transfomation of dr. Horrible is shown with great precision and power. Highly recommended for viewing multiple times.

Names and figures

Wet Hot American Summer: First Day of Camp (m/s)

This is much better than the original movie, although wouldn’t have been possible without it. The writers sometimes walk along the edge of good taste, but they do not get carried away to the land of weird. This miniseries is less parody and more situantional comedy; the writing in general seems wiser and less sloppy, which also makes it funnier.

There are a lot of wonderful, familiar faces, some of whom were in the movie, and some weren’t, but all of whom did wonderful jobs. Notwithstanding the time passed, there was no disrepancy between claimed age of the characters and their appearances. All the storylines were quite perfectly tapped in to the state they supposed to be as of the time the movie begins (the series is a sort of prequel).

On the whole, this is funny and enjoyable show that can be appreciated without any knowledge of the film (and its story), but makes a better impression if watched after it.

Names and figures

Flesh and Bone (m/s)

Every time when the film declares a genius (or an exceptionally gifted person) as its primary character there is a danger of disrepancy between such claim and its implementation, – in other words, more often than not a claimed talent is far from being good enough to correspond to that pretension. And it makes me all the more happy to admit that this show is not the case at all. Every character, including all the primary ones, are exactly what the writers have put into them. When the dancing should be perfect, it really is, and even that hardly perceptible difference between aging prima and rising star is sustained 100%, even though both are pretty great. And if consider the fact that they not only danced wonderfully, but also acted without any drawbacks, the level of implementation becomes mind-boggling.

As for the story, I had some concerns about the relationship between Clair and her brother: this is because at first she was presented as a pure victim, and he – as a pervert and a rapist; so when it turned out that the picture is a bit more complicated, there was certain resistance. After giving it some thought, I decided that there is nothing unrealistic about such complexity, – even more so: it’s life integral atribute; in reality things might be even more tangled than that (however, usually they are not as interesting). Everything else is perfect: a brilliant director, tyrant and incapable of trust; rough, severe ambience within the group; a beautiful girl with terrible desease; Romeo, a holy fool, and his weird ways; Russian criminals (very believable, unlike that bullshit in Banshee) and their teenage sex slaves; strip dancing, etc.

The show is an absolutely fascinating performance, all throughout. I enjoyed it big time.

Names and figures

Happy People / Schastlivyye lyudi (m/s)

This is a documentary telling about lives of true siberians, the ones that live in unison with nature and don’t care much for the fruits of modern civilization. To tell the truth, I was expecting the film to be way more meditative than it really was; instead I got extremely substantial and very dense story full of interesting and quite useful information. Of course, there are no manuals here per se, but even simply demonstrating various kinds of devices, traps and snares would definetely give a smart mind a way to understand and implement them in case of need.

Most of the people who got into the shot and shared those pieces of wisdom they have were quite cinematic and produces nice impression. Nobody was trying to bullshit anybody, and even it they did, it wasn’t in the movie. This full version is composed of 4 episodes, each dedicated to a season of the year, – probably just a reminder that the ties with nature are exceptionally important here; and it’s true – people are really dependant on the nature cycles. That comminity that was in the center of the narrative has also some dependancy on the civilization, but I think in case of some world-scale disaster they stand a better chance of survival than anybody else on the planet.

The implementation is great: the voiceover text is pretty smart and nicely worded, the reader’s voice doesn’t hinder undestanding in any way, also there camera work is amazing, especially shooting from the aeroplane and underwater.

It also should be mentioned that there is a shorter version of this film re-edited by Werner Herzog, who cut out about 2 hours out of 3.5, – I haven’t seen it, but I really have no idea how the length can be reduced that much without hurting the structure and/or missing something important.

All in all I highly recommend this miniseries – if Russian cinema is good for anything, it should be documentaries, no doubt.

Names and figures

The Take (m/s)

An interesting story, and smartly divided into episodes at that. Very hard, even brutal, difficult to watch at certain places. And cruel – as the life is.

But I’m not sure if it would’ve been as great without Tom Hardy. I mean, I have no complaints about the actors – they were just wonderful, but Hardy totally took it to the next level. He created a character whom you’re bound to hate – an unbelivable low-life creature, so slick and ugly, you just can’t help wondering why would nobody spare this world from this thing. Such work requires a lot of skill, so I can say for sure: Hardy truly is a master of transformation, and he helps this miniseries a great deal. The story would stay the same, of course, no matter who’s acting, but different actor for this part won’t be able to make it as bright and memorable as Hardy did.

Each episode includes a lot of events, so the internal density is quite high. All in all, the show is totally worth the time.

Names and figures

Generation Kill

Democracy is extremely adaptable, and that’s why it will eventually win. Situation that made this project possible, – a reporter accompanying a battle unit thoughout the whole campaign with no restrictions or cencorship whatsoever, – is competely impossible for authoritarian systems, like the russian one, for example. Irresistible urge for keeping mistakes a secret leads to not correcting them, not learning from them, which in its turn leads to the system decay. Maybe, the time will come someday when the vicious circle of bad systems being reborn into no better ones will be broken. But for this to become true people would have to become much smarter than they are now. Which might be plain impossible.

Anyway. Generation Kill is approximately 8 hours of high-quality feature with actual participants of the original story in the cast (not much of them, though), as well as such great actors as Alexander Skarsgård, Lee Tergesen (he was barely present for the most of it, but he’s character is the observer after all), Billy Lush, Owain Yeoman and many others. All in all, people’s behaviour and the way of being in general is very authentic, – just like every aspect of this film, to tell the truth.

It is about the war, and it shows the war perfectly, – both things that are common for all the wars in human history, and those that are characteristic of the modern warfare in particular. I read once that today’s war is way more dangerous for the civilians than for the military, and here I observed the confirmation of this thought: almost nobody from among alien americans was killed, quite few were injured, while the population of Iraq had been decreasing by hundreds every single day. Notwithstanding the technical development (and the army usually craves for new technology), a lot of  things still depend on the human discretion, and this won’t probably change until the AI is in our lives. Nepotism can happen even in the best army in the world, and it’s rarely a good thing. Psychopaths are not that common for the military, but killing people influences everybody, no matter what the circumstances are. And so on. This film contains plenty of senses.

The general style feels a lot like The Wire, which can be easily explained, as both projects share creator and headwirter – David Simon.

Generation Kill is one of the best portrayals of the ugliness of war. Because of this it’s kinda hard to watch. But watching stuff like this is necessary. War should never be romanticized. This is a pill for that.

Names and figures

The Corner

The Corner is obviously the forerunner of The Wire, another show also created by David Simon few years later. Both shows share the inherent element – the street, which is a marker by which Simon’s work can be distinguished almost undoubtedly. However, the Corner is inferior in some important respects. First of all, it lacks investigative note; second, the story is too heavily concentrated, there are almost no space between different pieces, and that makes the time stretch terribly – ten minutes would seem like half an hour. Finally, the story brackets, – pieces at the beginning and end of each episode, when the director would interview one character or another, – those were weird. Some – because they were basically really good theater, and not real life; others – because of the obvious director’s aspiration to come up with a very certain answer, very certain conclusion, i.e. he was leading the subject, and always to an extremely trivial idea about drugs destroying people’s lives. That didactisism was completely unnecessary. But the quality of drama is as just as good as that of the Wire. So it’s still pretty interesting to follow.

Names and figures

Battlestar Galactica (s.4) + The Face of the Enemy (w)

I have disrepant impressions about this season. On the one hand, it’s full to the top with brilliant stories, ideas and solutions, and the quality of development and storytelling is mindblowing. On the other… the second part is an absolutely terrifying picture of complete disintegration, when the point (as illusive as it was) vanishes and takes along the meaning of life and every other important matter assosiated with it. Starting with the intermission (the webisodes), which by the way is essential for understanding of the story (unlike Razor Flashbacks, for example), it is the way down to the very bottom of darkness that doesn’t have a bottom, and it’s really hard to take easy what’s going on. So much death, so much suffering, and all in vain. If it wasn’t for amazing writing (and acting too), the show would’ve been too depressing to watch.

Relative happy-end doesn’t make the bitterness go away, as it clearly projects the idea that the story is bound to repeat itself: the efforts to break the vicious circle were outstanding, but the message might have come too late. Besides, nobody’s listening. Not the people that matter anyway.

I was somewhat disappointed by the fact that no expalation was offered for the Kara Thrace’s mystery other than the god’s plan. But the device in general (deus ex machina) is appropriate here, because the plot is way too complex to solve it without one; also it’s too deeply rooted to rid the story of it without destroying it as a whole.

Battlestar Galactica is a prominent phenomenon of science fiction and cinema both. I believe, Babylon 5 is a great show, but this one excels it big time. Only the time will show the depth of its cultural impact, but even now I can say, it will be huge.
Names and figures

Battlestar Galactica (s.3) + The Resistance (w)

At times this thing is genious, – no more, no less. Like episode 9, for example, the one with all the boxing, – it’s not so much a work of science fiction already, but rather that of tragedy, and the standard reached here by the writers is totally stunning. The beginning is not much worse, that cluster of episodes that ends with the Exodus, is filled to the top with unexpected and fresh situations, characters, actions, consequences. And, of course, season’s finale, which is as powerful as it can get, –  thanks to both primary storylines that remained by that time: internal relations (Baltar’s trial) and search for Earth (completely insane ending).

Obviously, most of the time Ronald D. Moore’s writers know what they’re doing. Sometimes, very rarely, they do allow blunders, but this season is almost free of them (especially in comparison with the 2nd one), at least, I can think of just one thing I don’t really buy: Athena, in order to retrieve Hera, had to kill herself (with the hands of Helo) so that she can get to the baseship; so how would Hera recognize her against other #6s considering that Athena came to her in a brand new body and not the body that actually nurtured the girl; and while we’re at it: isn’t it weird that the biggest miracle in cylon history (they are not capable of bearing children, as we know) is killed and pushed away just like that, and no one even thinks about it? I think, it’s a Moore’s oversight. Of course, it’s just a tiny little thing and doesn’t influence much the final result.

The Resistance webisodes throw some light on the events of the 3d season (some details might be incomprehensible without them), but on the whole they can be quite easily omitted.
Names and figures

Battlestar Galactica (s.2)

Although, generally the season is quite excellent, the sudden extension to 20 full episodes played malicious trick on the show by allowing several not very good episodes. Specifically, I’m talking about #14, that pile of crap about black market, and one or two after that; all of them belong to the story gap, when the mission with Apollo Arrow was completed, and Admiral Cane was already dead, but New Caprica has not yet been found. The mere fact that those episodes exist diminishes the show a little, – it no longer feels perfect. Still extremely good (in general), but a little less than perfect.
Miraculous recovery of the president is 100% Deus ex Machina, – nicely executed, but still. Love triangle between Duala, Billy and Lee feels weird and wrong. But Billy’s exit was perfect. The whole election thing (including the throw-in attempt) is great, as well as all the other great stories, as well as the finale, which I totally did not expect. All in all, notwithstanding aforementioned flaws, second season is just as captivating and powerful as the first one.

Names and figures

Battlestar Galactica (s.1)

The foundation of the show – the premise, – is stunningly strong, from which it follows that there is a wide range of possibilities the writers of the show can explore, and it’s no surprise that they choose the best ones. They also know how to develop a story, because the job they did is one of the finest I’ve seen in some while. Hate to say that, but it’s perfect. All those stories, all that strugle, both internal and outward, all those wonders and deaths… I almost devoured the season, barely able to restrain myselft. And now I can’t wait to see what’s next. (Hate when it happens!)

Names and figures

Battlestar Galactica (m/s)

The universe created in this miniseries is exceptionally full-fledged, – it does not yield to the real one in no respect at all. It is amazingly complex and beautiful, the network of cause-effect relations covers the whole scene in great plenty; so much, in fact, it’s mind-blowing. All in all, the story feels very intense, and because the tension increases gradually, it captivates really fast. The main idea is frightening and fascinating at the same time. The development of events seems to be rather pessimistic, and that almost bodily fear that the characters has to live in, that’s what keeps the blood pumping.

P.S.: Subtitles might be a good idea, because most of the actors speak quite softly and sometimes overall noise muffles the voices.

Names and figures

Fallout: Nuka Break (Zack Finfrock, Vincent Talenti, 2011)

It was only after I watched the movie when I found out that they actually developed it into a mini-series, which by now finished its second season. Well, I intend to see it as well, but in the mean time, I’ve got a couple of words for this short film that turned into a pilot. It is quite good. Several signs of amatourishness can be encountered, but general level of implementation is very high, including actors, who only messed up little things, nothing serious. Special effects and animation are extremely nice. Quite an interesting thing it is.

Names and figures

The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff

I do not care for this kind of comedy. Parody is usually crude, and this one – especially, there is no subtlety whatsoever. It rather irritates me than amuses. But I admit, the actors were pretty good, mr. Stephen Fry and mr. Tim McInnerny in particular; and quality of filming in general is quite high. All in all, I don’t really want to come back to this show or any of its kind, even mentally. Just not my thing, I suppose.

Names and figures

A True Story of the Scarlet Sails / Pravdivaya istoriya ob alykh parusakh (Aleksandr Stekolenko)

This is a fairy-tale, a stupid kind, the one where good defeats evil and every good character lives happily ever after, and every bad one either vanishes or turnes to good. Such movies may be helpful for children (it’s a debatable issue, though), but definetely not for adults. Real life is way more interesting than that.

Names and figures

%d bloggers like this: