Thor: The Dark World {Film Review}

With Iron Man 3 and The Wolverine out of the way, it is now the God of Thunder’s turn to shine from Marvel. Set straight after the events from The Avengers, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is a prisoner of Asgard and Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is busy keeping order to the Nine Realms. Though this all comes after a (rather obligatory and unneeded) opening with Anthony Hopkins’ Odin providing a voice-over. We’re introduced to Malekith (Christopher Eccleston), leader of the dark elves who has been searching a dark force called the Aether. Though defeated by Odin’s father, he and his army have escape and wait while in hibernated suspension till the Aether has been recovered.

 

Thor isn’t an easy character to be taken seriously, he is also the least relatable character out of The Avengers (he is a God after all). Kenneth Branagh succeeded on bringing Thor to life in 2011 but also handling the character with such sophistication (having adapted William Shakespeare’s plays helps). Director Alan Taylor now takes rein of the sequel and it’s not surprising with his previous credits (The SopranosGame of Thrones etc.) that he was a fitting choice. Though the big question was where do you take the story after Thor and The Avengers? Quite simply, you amp up the scale!

Thor - The Dark World

 

Chris Hemsworth returns as Thor and he delivers such charismatic charm. As said before, he may not be relatable but being likeable makes a huge difference if we’re going to be rooting for him. He continues to grow valiant and noble, even taking huge risks that not only will cost lives but their loyalty to his father and to Asgard. Sif (Jaimie Alexander) and the Warriors Three (Fandral (Zachary Levi), Hogun (Tadanobu Asano) and Volstagg (Ray Stevenson)) all return to bring their support (even if they’re given little to do). Anthony Hopkins makes a commanding presence as Odin, though he also can’t help but camp it up at times. Frigga finally has more to do and say this time round, making up for her lack of presence in the first movie. Though the character of Jane Foster is the most frustrating, mainly because she’s such an uninteresting character and is, ultimately, a damsel-in-distress. As Darcy (Kat Dennings) mentions that she’s been constantly looking for Thor but also eating her feelings away with ice cream in her pyjamas. I understand you were swooned by a God and see him in New York battling aliens but she’s such a pathetic character to even remotely worry for her when she’s in peril (no wonder Natalie Portman doesn’t talk about her much because there’s not much to talk about). Stellan Skarsgård as Erik Selvig and Kat Dennings’ Darcy are the supplemental comedy reliefs, though their scenes does come across being desperate comedy.

 

Christopher Eccleston’s Malekith brings menace but he’s unfortunately another weak Marvel villain (along with Mandarin in Iron Man 3). His motive is simply to bring darkness to the universe, yet it isn’t as threatening as it should be and comes out being one-dimensional. At least with General Zod in Man of Steel, you understand the reason for his motives despite the extremes he will take to achieve them. Though the highlight is Tom Hiddleston as Loki, he absolutely takes this opportunity to go all out and have fun. The scene between Thor and Loki are very funny, exchanging witty comebacks and sarcastic remarks on each other. Though underneath this comedic bantering, there’s an emotional core and you become attached to these two. There are a few cameos that many will enjoy, though one in particular will have scratching their heads on who he is and what relevance has he to do with Marvel’s Cinematic Universe. Oh and Stan Lee makes his appearance of course.

 

This movie has certainly been given a huge make-over since the first movie. Marvel was keeping it safe by having the budget moderately low in the first movie, they now give Taylor an arsenal to expand the Thor universe. The majority of this movie takes place in Asgard or Svartalfheim and really brings the sci-fi/fantasy settings to great use. It does contain some beautiful imagery (Asgard looks alive and robust, even aerial shots of Malekith’s ship floating in space). With the mix of fantasy and sci-fi, the movie does give the audience a task to just roll with it but manages to pull it off. The final climactic battle between Thor and Malekith is short but not excessive enough to keep it from being exciting and creative (something Zack Snyder should have done with Man of Steel).

Overall: Thor’s second entry is great fun and Taylor has continued to bring sophistication but also confidence to the character. Doesn’t exceed to greatness but it does whet movie-goers appetites for Marvel’s next outing with Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy next year.

large_4

 

 

 

Has Hollywood Gone Potty for Limeys? How the Brits Conquered Hollywood.

A few weeks ago I attended a fantastic industry networking event in Manchester. Among the exhibitors was Industry Hollywood, a company whose sole aim is to help British actors to grow their exposure across the pond. They told me that UK talent is in real demand over in the “Land of the Free”.

So this got me thinking; is this actually true and, if so, why?

Take a gander at the casts of some of the most popular shows on American network TV and you’re sure to come across a fair few Brits. Archie Panjabi in The Good Wife, Linus Richie in Law and Order, Louise Lombard in CSI – this is just a small selection of Brits to “crack” the US drama scene.

The same can be said of many Hollywood movies, with the re-jigged Batman franchise, the upcoming Man of Steel, The Amazing Spider-Man and recent Oscar contenders such as The Social Network all featuring British performers taking roles that could easily be played by Americans.

So, on the surface at least, Hollywood has indeed gone potty for the “Limeys”. But why?

Could it be a cultural thing? In the UK, we have a long and noble theatre tradition, with actors cutting their teeth on stages across the nation before making the move to TV and onto film. In the US this tradition is often reversed. Might this create a different “style” of performance that is now “in vogue”?

In a 2007 interview for the Radio Times, Stephen Fry talked about the difference between American and British actors; “[Take] the supreme relaxed authenticity of a James Stewart or a George Clooney compared with the brittle contrivances of a Laurence Olivier or a Kenneth Branagh, marvellous as they are”

I would certainly agree that you can, at times, see a distinct difference in style when a British actor is dropped into an American TV drama. Take Christopher Eccleston’s short stint in Heroes – he sticks out like a sore thumb. There’s nothing wrong with his performance but it’s certainly different to those around him; he’s performing a role (brilliantly) while those around him are “inhabiting” their characters in a far more comfortable fashion. I’d say the same about the wonderful Hugh Laurie in House.

Now I’m a firm believer that good acting is good acting and I’m wary of the notion that we Brits are in any way “better” than our American cousins. But does our different tradition and altered style make us more attractive to US casting executives? Is there a fashion for “Brit style” acting at the moment?

Maybe not.

In an interview for the Caledonian Mercury, Scottish TV producer Andrea Calderwood, who now works in the US TV Industry, gives another theory; Cost.

“,… Producers are always on the look out for new talent which won’t break the budget. Enter stage right all those eager and ambitious British actors hungry for that Hollywood breakthrough.”

Are we really just “White Mexicans”, a phrase that is apparently doing the rounds in LA?

Toby Hemmingway, a British actor making huge strides in his career over in America, might have a few words to say about that. In a recent interview for the Guardian, he claimed that British actors benefitted from being more resilient.

“It’s the natural pessimism. Being a good loser. Americans think 15 minutes of fame and it’s all over or it’ll make you. Brits are more dogged and realistic”

It’s an interesting idea; that Brits are more tenacious in their attempts to find work. But is it true?

And, indeed, should we be complaining if we’re simply “cheaper” as long as it get us the work?

Let me know what you think in the comments below0.

This article was originally published at www.tim-austin.co.uk

Christopher Eccleston: I've Been Hacked, I'm Suing Murdoch & Why I Left Dr Who

FROST EXCLUSIVE

Christopher Eccleston said today (Wednesday) that he found out he was hacked yesterday and plans to sue Rupert Murdoch. Eccleston added he was looking forward to sticking the boot into Murdoch.

The actor also disclosed that he didn’t work for three years after he left drama school in 1986 and that he left Dr Who because of politics, saying that he didn’t like the culture.

He said:

“I left Doctor Who because I could not get along with the senior people. I left because of politics. I did not see eye-to-eye with them. I didn’t agree with the way things were being run. I didn’t like the culture that had grown up, around the series. So I left, I felt, over a principle.

“I thought to remain, which would have made me a lot of money and given me huge visibility, the price I would have had to pay was to eat a lot of shit. I’m not being funny about that. I didn’t want to do that and it comes to the art of it, in a way. I feel that if you run your career and– we are vulnerable as actors and we are constantly humiliating ourselves auditioning. But if you allow that to go on, on a grand scale you will lose whatever it is about you and it will be present in your work.

“If you allow your desire to be successful and visible and financially secure – if you allow that to make you throw shades on your parents, on your upbringing, then you’re knackered. You’ve got to keep something back, for yourself, because it’ll be present in your work. A purity or an idealism is essential or you’ll become– you’ve got to have standards, no matter how hard work that is. So it makes it a hard road, really.

“You know, it’s easy to find a job when you’ve got no morals, you’ve got nothing to be compromised, you can go, ‘Yeah, yeah. That doesn’t matter. That director can bully that prop man and I won’t say anything about it’. But then when that director comes to you and says ‘I think you should play it like this’ you’ve surely got to go ‘How can I respect you, when you behave like that?’

“So, that’s why I left. My face didn’t fit and I’m sure they were glad to see the back of me. The important thing is that I succeeded. It was a great part. I loved playing him. I loved connecting with that audience. Because I’ve always acted for adults and then suddenly you’re acting for children, who are far more tasteful; they will not be bullshitted. It’s either good, or it’s bad. They don’t schmooze at after-show parties, with cocktails.”

Eccleston also revealed that he should have resisted making Gone in 60 Seconds and that he would have made more money on British TV, He also called GI Joe a “terrible movie.” The star added that he only makes bad movies in Hollywood for the money and would never “shit on his own doorstep.”

He also said that he didn’t want to be remembered, but if he was, it would be for Hamlet.

In The Pink – How Doctor Who Turned Gay

Before Matt Smith became the 11th incarnation of Doctor Who, there was the usual excited comment in the media. Would – or could – the new Doctor be black, a woman, or gay?

Seeing as Time Lords seemingly don’t have the habit or ability of changing sex or race, the talk is always irrelevant and frankly, redundant. But that doesn’t stop the lively debate every time there’s a change of face.

As it turned out, Smith’s Doctor is, like all the others, male, white and seemingly straight, but William Hartnell’s irascible first Doctor from 1963 aside, Doctor Who has always bordered on camp with more than a degree of innuendo.

With the advent of the Swinging Sixties later in the decade, more overt sexuality crept in with mini-skirted female companions – and mini-skirted males, if you care to count Frazer Hines’ kilted highlander, Jamie McCrimmon.

Wendy Padbury’s Zoe Herriot often crops up in Whovian conversations thanks pretty much to a spangly, tight purple zip-up jump suit she once wore while scrambling on to the Tardis console. But it was probably Katy Manning’s character of Jo Grant who is most fondly remembered as the girl who first put the sex into Doctor Who.

Jo, apart from being a good screamer as the role frequently required, had a tendency to flash her knickers courtesy of her early 1970’s outfit of short skirt and plastic boots. Not only did Manning thus cement her role as the first crush of small boys and the lust object of dads everywhere, ratings went through the roof.

After Manning left the series, she capitalised by posing nude with a Dalek, but it was really only as Doctor Who began its decline in the mid-1980s that Nicola Bryant’s Peri Brown briefly stirred the watching public again by appearing in a much-commented upon – and criticised – skimpy bikini.

Peter Davison has also frequently mentioned how his intense death scene as the fifth Doctor was completely upstaged by Bryant’s cleavage as she knelt beside him, but even the Doctors’ famed regenerations eventually proved no match for the BBC hierarchy. Where numerous enemies had tried and failed, poor stories and a poor time slot brought the Time Lord’s career to a close in December 1989.

Enter Russell T Davies. The TV Producer and Screenwriter had a number of hits on his CV before he tackled the resurrection of Doctor Who in 2005, including Queer as Folk, a controversial series about the Manchester gay scene, drawn loosely on Davies’ own experiences.

Despite initial scepticism, under Davies’ stewardship the ninth Doctor – portrayed by Christopher Eccleston along with Billie Piper’s superb Rose Tyler – was a huge hit. When Eccleston left, David Tennant’s Time Lord took the ratings even higher.

It would take an extremely brave move to make such an iconic figure as the Doctor into a gay man. And chances are that if anyone could have done it, Davies is the one, but that’s always likely to be a step too far for the BBC.

And yet, the reborn Doctor Who embraces numerous gay references, all the more remarkable in a top-rated, worldwide, prime time TV show aimed at the family. In fact, it is probably the gayest, non-gay programme anywhere in the TV schedules.

Davies is responsible for writing many of the episodes, but it was the Steven Moffat-penned ‘The Empty Child’, which introduces John Barrowman’s Captain Jack Harkness, with Barrowman’s character the obvious crutch – pun intended – for what soon becomes a running theme throughout the entire series.

There are no holds barred when the viewing public is first introduced to Harkness. He caresses a fellow airman’s backside at a party before it’s revealed the two are having a relationship. Which, let’s face it, is pretty bold of them considering the law and public opinion of homosexuality in the 1940s.

And in the second of the two-parter, ‘The Doctor Dances’, the character of Nancy stops a black-marketeer from threatening her with the police by telling him she knows he’s ‘messing around’ with the male butcher. Although it takes a couple of more episodes before, following much innuendo, Captain Jack kisses the Doctor in what’s believed to be the series’ first same-sex kiss.

Davies himself took the opportunity to take a sly dig at gay stereotyping in werewolf episode ‘Tooth and Claw’.

When Tennant’s Doctor is asked why he failed to notice anything odd about the servants of a manor house, he replies: “Well, they were bald, athletic, your wife’s away. I just thought you were happy.”

Meanwhile, in ‘The Age of Steel’, a deleted scene from the DVD reveals Noel Clarke’s alternate Earth counterpart, Ricky, is the boyfriend of friend Jake.

Continuing the gay theme, Catherine Tate’s debut in ‘The Runaway Bride’ shows two men dancing together at her wedding reception, while in ‘The Shakespeare Code’ the Bard responds to Tennant’s comment about future flirting with: “Is that a promise Doctor?”

In ‘Gridlock’, the pensionable Cassini sisters are clearly married lesbians, while the Doctor’s sexuality is again called into question in ‘Daleks in Manhattan’ by New Yorker Tallulah who asks if Tennant prefers ‘musical theatre’.

Tennant’s Doctor is again involved in some mild male ‘bromance’, offering another New Yorker, Frank, the chance of a kiss, while John Simm’s Master asks Tennant if he is “asking me out on a date?” after the Doctor reveals they are the last of the Time Lords.

Tate’s character of Donna Noble returns in the fourth series, and after announcing a previous boyfriend ran off with another man, it’s all about the girls.

‘The Doctor’s Daughter’ reveals two of Donna’s friends are a lesbian couple who had a child with IVF, while in ‘Midnight’, the character of Sky Silvestry is on holiday to get over a relationship with another woman. Even the return of Piper’s Rose Tyler in ‘Turn Left’ is greeted by Noble with a heartfelt: “Blonde hair might work on men, but not on me!”

Meanwhile, in the series finale ‘Journey’s End’, Davies and Barrowman’s Captain Jack up the ante big time by hinting at a possible threesome with Tennant’s two identical Doctors.

Davies left Doctor Who at the same time as Tennant in 2009 after the two-parter, ‘End of Time’, but couldn’t resist a final scene involving Barrowman.

In a homage to the Star Wars cantina scene, Captain Jack sits alone at a bar next to Being Human’s Russell Tovey – Midshipman Alonso Frame from ‘Voyage of the Damned’. The Doctor passes Jack a note giving Frame’s name. A quick suggestive chat-up between Harkness and Frame follows before Frame asks Harkness if he can guess what he’s thinking.

Well, yes. I think we get the gist.

Since replacing Davies at the helm for 2010, Moffat has largely reined in the gay references. Indeed, Smith’s 11th Doctor remains asexual while Karen Gillan’s companion, Amy Pond, is the flirt.

However, Gillan has had some viewers and newspapers frothing and complaining over her short skirts. Which is odd, considering she has showed considerably less than Manning did, despite it being almost 40 years later in a time of a much more liberal media.

And there’s the irony.

Put against the usual right wing hysteria about traditional family values, Doctor Who has done much to open the doors to more liberal views about homosexuality at prime time and Davies should be applauded for having the guts to do so.

Too bad that the complaints about Ms Pond shows that tolerance of heterosexual sex appeal still has some way to go.