Doctor Who "The Magician's Apprentice" Review

You know, i've really been needing to go back and rewatch all of Doctor Who because one: i need to see if it still holds up and two: i don't remember a damn thing that happened in the last few series. Nevertheless, here we are with series 9, and what a way to kick off the show. In this episode we find out that The Doctor is potentially going to die soon, causing Missy and Clara to team up to find him, once they do, they discover that Davros, the creator of the Daleks is still alive and seeks an audience with The Doctor.

So before I get to talking about the actual episode, i want to talk about my opinion on the characters, mainly The Doctor. Peter Capaldi's portrayal i have found enjoyable but lacking a presence the same way that the other Doctors did, the most noticeable way being that he never got a badass entrance like the others...well this episode rectifies that by having The Doctor ride into a medieval battle arena while shredding the electric guitar while riding a tank. That. Is. A. Fucking. ENTRANCE!!! Then there is Clara, a character who i initially wasn't fond of because she had no grounded personality or family, was too perfect and was far too similar to Matt Smith to be interesting. However, ever since she's been working opposite Capaldi, i found her to be much more enjoyable, they solved by biggest problems by giving her a lifestyle outside of The Doctor, making the two polar opposites to make the relationship more interesting and giving her a purpose to be in the Tardis. Finally Missy, who is so damn enjoyable in how sadistic and cartoonish she is, she's like a mixture between Lex Luthor and Harley Quinn (Oh god that image is terrifying). She doesn't really consider herself The Doctor's enemy, in fact, she's his best friend, she knows more about him than anyone else, the two have known each other since childhood and are frankly obsessed with one another. Of course she puts even more dysfunctionality (I know that's not a word) into it by stating that they've been friends longer than humanity have even existed, so of course that would add a little...complexity to their friendship. So the idea of The Doctor and The Master travelling together, i dig it, it's a new twist, it makes sense with this new context and it's damn enjoyable to watch the two play off each other.

But enough of that, let's get to the actual plot of the episode...or atleast we would if i knew what the hell was going on. Yeah that's one of my biggest problems with modern day Doctor Who, the episodes are way too confusing, in this episodes' case, they jump about from planet to planet as if they've already been established before and are well known locations and constant changing times and even then the story isn't told in chronological order of events, then there's the idea that The Doctor might be dying, where did that come from and haven't we already done that a million times before? And the fact that it's all a two parter doesn't help in the slightest. But from what I could gather is that The Doctor ended up on Skaro years ago and helped save a little boys life, as it would turn out that little boy would grow up to be Davros, the Doctor's arch-Nemesis (Missy has a great line about this). Then in present day, Davros is dying and seeks an audience with The Doctor, but it's all a trap and Davros kills Missy and Clara, i think, The Doctor certainly seemed distressed by this and then it all ends with the Doctor going back to child Davros and getting ready to kill him--hang on a minute, how did he end up their? He was just Davros' prisoner in the last scene, or is this The Doctor at a different point? Timey-Wimey!

Half the time in this episode I had no idea what was going on, especially with Davros, don't get be wrong, it's an ingenious set-up, The Doctor accidentally saving the life of his greatest enemy as a child, especially when they played that clip of the 4th Doctor hypothesising this very scenario, that is insanely clever. But I have too many questions and i'm very confused about what's going on, what is Davros' big plan here, how did The Doctor get back to child Davros, why is The Doctor dying, what the hell is all this leading up to? This is the first episode of a new series and I have so many questions, not because the show is setting up clever mysteries but because I have no idea what the hell is going on.

Overall, I liked this episode, mostly for the character interactions which were interesting, memorable and above all else, hilarious, and again, that tank scene is instantly my new favourite 12th Doctor moment ever, but goddamn I am so confused by everything going on. 7/10. It's a high 7 but i just couldn't get it to an 8.

-Danny

An Update On Whiplash

In my initial review for Whiplash i said that my biggest problem with it is that i can't see myself rewatching the entire film, if i were to ever rewatch it then i would probably skip over a large chunk of it. I was wrong. A few weeks back i rewatched the movie and it only got better, the film felt like it ran at a better pace, i was able to pay more attention to the crisp editing and the lines are even funnier the second time round. Basically everything about the movie just got better on a second watch, so i'm updating my score from an 8/10 to a 9/10.

-Danny

My TV Schedule This Fall

The Fall TV Season is fast approaching and that means a lot of reviews. Earlier this year I started reviewing television shows starting with The Flash on Wednesdays and Arrow on Thursdays and I will be continuing that this year...except there will also be even more shows that i want to watch and review including Gravity Falls, Star Wars Rebels, Doctor Who, Steven Universe, Rick & Morty, The Muppets, Supergirl and Bob's Burgers...So clearly i can't review all of those shows. Two things that I am sure of is that i don't want this blog to just be about reviewing the latest episodes of television shows and also that i'm only going to post once a day. So with that being said, some of these shows are going to be cut. I've narrowed this list down to only 6 shows, Arrow, Flash, Supergirl, Gravity Falls, Doctor Who and Star Wars Rebels So here's the schedule that i'll be reviewing stuff.

Monday is a freebie day, this is when i'll be doing a random blog post on anything I want.

Tuesday is Gravity Falls for now, this show has a very irregular schedule so i'll be reviewing Supergirl (Oct 27th) on the alternate weeks seeing as i still don't know if i'll like that yet.

Wednesday still belongs to The Flash (Oct 7th).

Thursday is going to be Arrow still (Oct 8th).

Friday I will review Star Wars Rebels (Oct 16th).

Saturday is another freebie day.

Sunday is when I will review Doctor Who (Sep 20th)

Keep in mind this schedule can change depending on if the schedule for any of these shows changes or if one of the other shows has a major episode that I desperately want to talk about.

-Danny

Rick & Morty: Best & Worst Episodes

Okay, i'm all caught up on Rick & Morty, overall, I like it. It has funny writing, some clever concepts, the animation is...interesting. But it does like to reuse concepts and sometimes the unpredictable nature of the show ironically makes it predictable. And no, i don't think it's better than Futurama like some claim it to be, it's nowhere near that good. Nevertheless, let's go into some more detail by talking about the best episode and the worst episode (so far).

Best Episode: Total Rickall

This was the most like something from Dan Harmon, mostly because it has a very similar presentation to an episode of Community "Paradigms of Human Memory". I say presentation because in Community's case they were having fake flashbacks to events that didn't happen to satirise the clip show trope in sitcoms, for Rick & Morty they were fake flashbacks to events to allow a parasite to alter their memories and pretend they were real family members. Different plots, similar in execution. But hey, I love Community and the episode here was different enough that it didn't feel like a cheap clone of Paradigms. The episode has some of most creative character designs of the show and the clip show format allowed the show to better pace out it's jokes and just go from funny set up to funny set up. But of course still maintaining the show's trademark mean-spirited hilarity with it's climax. Overall i feel like this episode had more jokes to offer than the others with a creative set-up that allows the writers to get even more creative than usual.

Worst Episode: Get Schwifty

Yes i know it's strange how the best and worst episodes aired back to back, but that's just how things worked out. This episode sees the Earth forced to take part in a galactic reality show where the contestants have to sing their hearts out and the losers get their planet blown up. So what's my biggest problem with this episode? Jimmy Neutron did it first. Yeah, in one of the made for TV movies for Jimmy Neutron, Jimmy and his friends and to take part in a galactic reality show where the losers' planets would get blown up. Okay i doubt this is an intentional rip-off, in fact i doubt this crew has even seen Jimmy Neutron, and for JN it was a Survivor parody, in this case it's an American Idol parody, but that's all i could think of was Jimmy Neutron, and you know something else? Jimmy Neutron did it better. It was more creative and had better jokes, here, the jokes aren't that funny, Ice-T is the only surviving musician and he's an alien who's actually made of ice...what? Then there's a strange B-Plot where they satirise religious extremists, wait, what do these two things have in common? Why is Summer so easily swede by them? Even the music of the episode sucks, at the very least they could give us some generic and soulless yet equally catchy and upbeat pop music to listen to, it is an American Idol parody after all. Overall, this just wasn't a good episode, it was the least creative, it was the least funny and the songs suck.


-Danny

Naughty Dog's Definition of an "Accident"

"Did Naughty Dog Just Accidentally Announce The Last of Us 2?" - You know, you reach a point where you see this headline so often that it can't actually be considered an accident at this point. For the past few months there have been these "accidental" leaks of Naughty Dog doing a Last of Us 2, some of these leaks include someone posting on their LinkedIn profile that they did early character models for The Last of Us 2, Nolan North talking about future Naughty Dog projects and slipping in "I know they're planning a Last of Us 2" even though he doubts he'll be in that game, and now most recently a designer for Naughty Dog discussing the Uncharted Collection and made a comparison between this and "The first Last of Us". All of these are subtle hints towards the potential of a Last of Us to.

Now, there are a few things to talk about when it comes to this, are Naughty Dog planning on doing a Last of Us 2? Probably. After all, considering the last game was a HUGE success and is considered by many to be one of, if not, the greatest game of all time, it would make sense for them to do a Last of Us 2. But a lot of people have been saying "God, they're very clearly doing another one! Why don't they already announce it!" Because none of this means that they're very clearly doing another one. Let's say Naughty Dog isn't planning on doing a Last of Us 2, they would at the very least have talked about it, they would have had multiple meetings, they would have worked on some rough drafts of stories and character designs and all that stuff. Right now they're most likely in the very early stages of pre-production for the game seeing as most of their focus is on Uncharted 4, so what that means is, they could very easily can the whole project, they might not be able to come up with a good enough story, or be able to agree on what the next game should be or any other problem. The reason why they haven't announced the project even though they are clearly working on it is because there is still plenty of time for them to realise that making another game might not work and it might not be worth it. So what would be the point in announcing a Last of Us 2 and in 3 months from now they say "actually we couldn't get what we wanted so we're not gonna do it" they would get everyone's hopes up and have them crushed, all because they announced it too early.

But then let's say that they have worked out a story and art design and have the whole game figured out, why wouldn't they announce it? Because of Uncharted. Their next game is the Uncharted Collection coming out to PS4 and then after that it's Uncharted 4, that is what they're focusing on and that's what they want their audience to focus on. They don't want people to be asking "How are things coming along with Last of Us 2?" because that's currently on their back-burner, they don't want to have spent months and months putting their hardest efforts into a game and have people say "I wish The Last of Us 2 would be out already". Once Uncharted 4 has been released, i guarantee you we will get a Last of Us 2 announcement, even though everyone will be like "Well duh, we know that" they don't want that to be at the front of your mind when it comes to Naughty Dog games, because even now when we know it's coming, the fact that it's not officially been announced means we all have that little part in our brain that says "maybe it won't happen".

-Danny

Why I Have Faith In Channing Tatum As Gambit

It's funny, back when it was first announced that Channing Tatum was going to play Gambit my first reaction was "ehhhhhhhhhh, i don't know..." but then when it was rumoured that he was leaving i was legitimately upset by it, and was releaved when those rumours were dispelled. So why is that? Well thing is, when Tatum was first announced, not a whole lot of people were into it, people seem to be in this 2010 mindset of it all, you know, back when all of us saw him as nothing more than walking muscle and couldn't act to save his life. Since then, he's really gone on to prove himself. First he did the Jump Street movies and Magic Mike movies to prove he's a likeable actor; then he did Foxcatcher to prove he's a good actor and not to mention the enthusiasm and effort he's putting into just the pre-production of the movie goes to show how passionate he is in getting this film right. But the final seal for me on me having faith in him is how Fox handles the casting of their movies. Just look at the X-Men, Patrick Stewart as Professor X, Ian McKellen as Magneto, Ellen Page as Kitty, Nicholas Hoult as Beast, Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique, Hugh-Freaking-Jackman as Wolverine. They don't just go for household names, they go for the people who were right for these roles. Yes most of these people are big stars now, but these are the movies that made them stars (Patrick and Ian aside). Not to mention James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender leading the charge now, two oscar worthy actors who are committed to their roles.

Now you might be saying that Marvel always gets a great cast for their movies, just look at what the core Marvel films are doing. Yes the Marvel Cinematic Universe does have a large roster of A-Listers for their films but rarely do they have to put that much effort into it. You think Robert Redford was giving his A-Game for Winter Soldier? You think Jeff Bridges spent months prepping for Iron Man? SIDE NOTE: who even remembers that Jeff Bridges was in Iron Man? Now that's not to say these actors are giving bad performances, but they rarely have to go the extra mile. Fox on the other hand is always challenging their actors, putting the characters into new situations, making them emote and try something new. Just think about any of the big emotional scenes from X-Men, can you think of a time when any of the MCU actors had to put that much effort into their performances? Again, not to call them bad, most of them do a great job, but nothing out of their wheelhouse. This is going to be a new type of role for Tatum, but that's what Fox does best, challenging their actors and almost always getting results.

But the biggest actor in Tatum's favour is Ryan Reynolds, who's in a very similar situation as Tatum. They've both done a ton of crap in the past and at one point people thought they didn't think they could act worth a damn. Yet they both have so much passion and are putting so much effort into these roles, what's the difference? We've seen Reynolds as Deadpool, we know he's going to be great in the part. That's all Tatum needs, to show the world what he's got, and everything so far for him is promising. We've seen him act well in roles before, he's passionate about the role and like all the actors at Fox it's still going to be something new for him. That is why I have faith in Channing Tatum as Gambit.

-Danny

Frankenstein (1931) - Cheap Thoughts

When it comes to reviewing adaptations, there are two ways you should look at it, how does it stand on its own, and how does it stand as an adaptation? Naturally the more important aspect is how does it stand on its own. Judging a movie simply because it differs from the source material isn't inherently a flaw, and any actual flaws in the film that can be explained by reading to book fails to stand on its own merits. With that being said, Frankenstein is one of the most iconic films of all time, not only did it revolutionise the genre of Horror (Horror wasn't even considered a genre at this point in history) but it's become part of pop-culture history, everyone knows the phrase "it's alive! it's alive! it's alive" and the mear imagery of Frankenstein's monster is identifiable in an instant. But with that being said, i don't think the film is all that good.

Again, looking at it on it's own first, the film has a fairly bare boned story, mad scientist creates a monster and it begins to cause havok. Even back then i can only assume it wasn't revolutionary in terms of plot. There are moments here and there that work, mostly in the scenes where we are meant to sympathise with the beast, but for the most part, i don't think it's a good story. I don't understand why Henry Frankenstein (we'll get to the name change in a bit) is supposed to be a sympathetic character, i don't understand why he has a fiancee, especially when he's more interested in his work than his future wife and i don't see why people keep trying to help him. Not to mention, for a scientist so brilliant that he literally reversed death, he makes a lot of dumb decisions and is quite ignorant to his own creation's reactions. And it's not just because he's mad, but even his mentor Dr Waldman helps him out in his poorly thought out decisions. For example, at one point they try to drug the monster, so their plan is to use Frankenstein as bate and have Waldman sneak up on him, this is an incredibly poorly thought out plan that could have a million things go wrong.

Then there's the ending of the movie where it just sort of...stops. They never give us a definitive answer on whether or not the monster lives, and it's not a scenario where it's up to interpretation of they wanted to leave an element of mystery, it's more of like they just forgot. He's trapped in a burning windmill and then it just fades to the next scene where Frankenstein's father says in just one sentence that Frankenstein and his wife lived and are going to have a child. But wait a minute, last we saw them Frankenstein was near death and his wife was in shock, don't we atleast get them to tell us that they're okay, this is just a sloppily written epilogue, and it's not like the movie was running over time, it's only 70 minutes long. Also the concept of a "criminal brain" being the reason the monster was rampant never comes into play and doesn't logically make sense. The monster doesn't act like a criminal, he acts more like Lenny from Mice & Men, giant and powerful yet dumb as a rock. If they want us to sympathise with the monster (which they clearly do) then why tell us he has the mind of a criminal? That doesn't make sense for the plot or the audience.

But then we look at it as an adaptation...it's not good. In fact, this is the bare bones of the book, as if someone just read the blurb of the book and thought that was enough. The book goes into far more detail and takes place over the course of years, showing the torture and growth of both Frankenstein and his monster. Yes, the monster can talk in the book, and think, and emote, and has more character than just Zombie Hodor. The same can be said for Victor Frankenstein, yes they for some reason changed his name in the movie and he has a friend called Victor...that's just confusing. In the book he was a mad man but also showed hope to live an ordinary life that would be stricken with tragedy by his own doing. You care about both Frankenstein and his creation and question who is the real monster and who is the man?

As a standalone movie, it's fine, it's short and simple to understand and has some nice make-up effects as well as the fact that the popularity of the movie lead to more people reading the book, i can't hate it. But as an adaptation, it simplifies the material of the original book to an irritating degree. You want my recommendation for a good Frankenstein story? Read the book. 4/10.

SIDE NOTE: Why is it so hard to get a good adaptation of Frankenstein? It's had a million opportunities, none of which good.

-Danny