ian_harris
Joined Feb 2002
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews123
ian_harris's rating
This piece seems to have divided the audience and critics. We have seen and heard more negative reviews than positive ones.
We thought it was a very interesting and enjoyable piece. As so often with Poliakoff, he creates characters who don't behave as you expect them to. They infuriate and they surprise you.
In this epic piece, spanning some 20 years (early eighties to early naughties)Poliakoff examines themes of business, friendships and survival in a fast-changing world.
Crocodiles are an interesting metaphor for survival and coping with change/trauma.
So are friends, both the loyal and the relatively fair-weather variety. Both types are on display here.
Drama about business is usually horribly infuriating because the playwright has little or no insight into how business really works. Similarly technology. Poliakoff understands business and technology far better than most writers.
Of course the piece simplifies and takes positions on these issues - who wants a 20 parter on such subjects - but the piece works excellently well as a sub 2 hour film for TV.
Several critics said that they "just don't get it" with this piece. I feel sorry for them if that is really the case. Perhaps most critics, like most writers, have little understanding of business and/or technology.
The acting is excellent - Damien Lewis (everywhere these days) and Jodhi May predictably good. A few cameos for old favourites too.
The cinematography is just stunning - Poliakoff is probably now at the very top of his game in this aspect of his work.
It's big canvas stuff, it is truly beautiful to look at and it leaves you plenty to think about and talk about afterwards.
We need more of this quality of stuff on TV and cinema please!! And this piece will last. Some of those who "don't get it" just now will, in a few years time, be hailing it as a classic and repeating it for decades to come. It's that sort of piece.
We thought it was a very interesting and enjoyable piece. As so often with Poliakoff, he creates characters who don't behave as you expect them to. They infuriate and they surprise you.
In this epic piece, spanning some 20 years (early eighties to early naughties)Poliakoff examines themes of business, friendships and survival in a fast-changing world.
Crocodiles are an interesting metaphor for survival and coping with change/trauma.
So are friends, both the loyal and the relatively fair-weather variety. Both types are on display here.
Drama about business is usually horribly infuriating because the playwright has little or no insight into how business really works. Similarly technology. Poliakoff understands business and technology far better than most writers.
Of course the piece simplifies and takes positions on these issues - who wants a 20 parter on such subjects - but the piece works excellently well as a sub 2 hour film for TV.
Several critics said that they "just don't get it" with this piece. I feel sorry for them if that is really the case. Perhaps most critics, like most writers, have little understanding of business and/or technology.
The acting is excellent - Damien Lewis (everywhere these days) and Jodhi May predictably good. A few cameos for old favourites too.
The cinematography is just stunning - Poliakoff is probably now at the very top of his game in this aspect of his work.
It's big canvas stuff, it is truly beautiful to look at and it leaves you plenty to think about and talk about afterwards.
We need more of this quality of stuff on TV and cinema please!! And this piece will last. Some of those who "don't get it" just now will, in a few years time, be hailing it as a classic and repeating it for decades to come. It's that sort of piece.
Like so many superb Bergman films, this movie is strongly theatrical in form - indeed it could be adapted for the stage with minimal revision. Nevertheless, it benefits from the movie form, as it enables so many of us all over the world to see four superb acting performances.
I saw Scenes From a Marriage years ago and it was interesting to see those characters reprised. However, I think this film would be perfectly enjoyable and understandable to a viewer who had not seen Scenes From a Marriage. It might even be a good idea for the "Bergman Newbie" to see Saraband first.
I love the multi-layered ways that music plays an important part in this movie, both plot-wise and symbolically. A Saraband is a slow, mournful dance. The film is basically 10 oral duets, sandwiched between a solo prologue and epilogue. The characters are to some extent represented by their musical taste - Henrik with his glorious Bach organ works (and the Saraband he loves), Johann by the booming Bruckner scherzo he is playing before and after a pivotal conversation with Karin.
The cinematography lacks some of the exceptional qualities of Bergman's earlier work - I suspect that has to do with the TV format and his advancing years - the great man is probably unable to get quite so involved in camera-work these days. But no matter. The script, the acting and the direction are absolutely top class.
87 years old and Bergman's still got what it takes. Can we please all try and persuade him to "Sinatra" (i.e. make several more final appearances?)
I saw Scenes From a Marriage years ago and it was interesting to see those characters reprised. However, I think this film would be perfectly enjoyable and understandable to a viewer who had not seen Scenes From a Marriage. It might even be a good idea for the "Bergman Newbie" to see Saraband first.
I love the multi-layered ways that music plays an important part in this movie, both plot-wise and symbolically. A Saraband is a slow, mournful dance. The film is basically 10 oral duets, sandwiched between a solo prologue and epilogue. The characters are to some extent represented by their musical taste - Henrik with his glorious Bach organ works (and the Saraband he loves), Johann by the booming Bruckner scherzo he is playing before and after a pivotal conversation with Karin.
The cinematography lacks some of the exceptional qualities of Bergman's earlier work - I suspect that has to do with the TV format and his advancing years - the great man is probably unable to get quite so involved in camera-work these days. But no matter. The script, the acting and the direction are absolutely top class.
87 years old and Bergman's still got what it takes. Can we please all try and persuade him to "Sinatra" (i.e. make several more final appearances?)
Wallace and Gromit are a phenomenon. How many stop motion animation films win Oscars, top the US and UK box office charts etc. But all that came later.
A Grand Day Out was the first Wallace and Gromit film. Low budget. More or less a graduation piece. Of course the animation is less sophisticated than in the later films. Of course the plot is a little shallow. The entire story is designed to minimise the need for sophisticated animation and to maximise the excuse for shortcomings (perhaps dogs and people would move a bit like that on a cheese moon).
Yet it is extraordinary to see how much of the Aardman genius is already there in this short film. Hilarious and clever references to other films. Mice in shades for take off. The rocket handbrake gag. Coin-operated machine gags (brilliantly recycled in Were-Rabbit BTW). And a machine (is it an Aga?) that daydreams about skiing when it sees Wallace's holiday magazines.
Of course TWT, ACS and Were-Rabbit are better movies, but this film is so worth seeing as a sign of early genius and indeed in its own right as a crude but wonderful animated film.
A Grand Day Out was the first Wallace and Gromit film. Low budget. More or less a graduation piece. Of course the animation is less sophisticated than in the later films. Of course the plot is a little shallow. The entire story is designed to minimise the need for sophisticated animation and to maximise the excuse for shortcomings (perhaps dogs and people would move a bit like that on a cheese moon).
Yet it is extraordinary to see how much of the Aardman genius is already there in this short film. Hilarious and clever references to other films. Mice in shades for take off. The rocket handbrake gag. Coin-operated machine gags (brilliantly recycled in Were-Rabbit BTW). And a machine (is it an Aga?) that daydreams about skiing when it sees Wallace's holiday magazines.
Of course TWT, ACS and Were-Rabbit are better movies, but this film is so worth seeing as a sign of early genius and indeed in its own right as a crude but wonderful animated film.