Change Your Image
ubercommando-591-650498
Reviews
Mission: Eureka (1989)
As stodgy as the workings of the EU itself
Mission Eureka was a European (but mainly German) co-production from the late 80s which held the promise of drama concerning the European Space Agency. It seemed like it was going to be the European version of the American NASA drama, The Cape, and the first few episodes had our protagonists trying to sort out problems with satellites, manned space missions and rockets.
But after the first episode, it became all too clear that this show was going to be a dull and boardroom antics kind of show, with affairs and trysts more than drama about space flight. If the soap opera melodrama was at least interesting, the show could have been watchable, but it wasn't. Sterile characters in equally sterile offices and laboratories talking about strained relationships and the need to meet deadlines.
And after about 4 episodes the space exploration angle was dropped. Now the Euro-scientists were going to invest all that money planned for space missions on improving everyday technology on Earth. So the show lost its plausible space drama angle and just became the dull, multi-lingual version of Howard's Way but without boats. It was a wasted opportunity of a show.
Sorry! (1981)
The Prisoner re-imagined as a British suburban sitcom
The premise of Sorry shares a lot of ground with The Prisoner: A man is kept, against his will, by forces who want to monitor and control his every move and all aspects of his life. Except that instead of a British government agent, it's a downtrodden librarian and instead of a cabal of shadowy extra-government forces, it's his mum.
In one episode,the bars crashing shut motif from The Prisoner is referenced in Sorry so the writers definitely drew a lot of inspiration from the Sixties show. Overall, an amusing sitcom that benefits from terrific central performances and not a creepy weather balloon in sight.
The Glam Metal Detectives (1995)
10/10 for concept....and yet.....
Back in 1995 this show looked like it had cult classic written all over it. It had a concept ahead of its time: A disjointed channel surf through cable TV as if you're stuck watching the box with a friend who has a very short attention span and they've got the remote control. You'd be watching one segment of the show and before it reached a conclusion, or even a punchline, it would suddenly switch to a completely different sketch or quickie.
This was ahead of something like The Fast Show but that programme has endured and is remembered fondly and yet GMD isn't. Even when GMD was first broadcast, it wasn't met with the kind of reception other unconventional British comedies of the early '90s were; such as Vic Reeves Big Night Out, Absolutely, Bottom, The Day Today, Harry Enfield and his Chums or even The Fast Show. It was met with a rather lukewarm response despite there being a Marvel comic tie-in and a title song written and performed by Trevor Horn, Godley & Crème and Jeff Beck. The show came and went and is dimly remembered by those who were around at the time.
Looking back on it I think the reason for it just failing (and only just) was that the concept was top notch but the material was just not laugh out loud or memorable. The quickie mock ads, quick clips of something random or very brief links between the bigger sketches were often better than the centrepiece ones. Things such as Betty's Mad Dash and Happy Hour were one joke premises but instead of working towards a punchline they'd come in, do the set up from the previous episode and just end without there having been a build up to something. Colin Corleone required the viewer to have knowledge of the Godfather films to work and GMD itself was kitsch and fun but, again, not many jokes to it. As for the other main strand, Bloodsports, it was something done better by Alan Partridge and The Fast Show.
That's not to say GMD is bad or unwatchable, it isn't. It's so well made, going from the glossy production of the title sketch and Betty's Mad Dash to the horrid looking U-matic VHS video public TV material which made up a lot of the quickies. Some of the brief inserts are triumphs of random and surreal humour. And the cast does well, particularly Doon McKichan, Phil Cornwell and Mark Caven. Shortly after GMD aired, Gary Beadle and Sara Stockbridge went on to Eastenders. Doon and Cornwell have gone on to bigger success but the others haven't reached the same heights. But GMD is very much from the mind of Peter Richardson, who has always been great at concepts and understanding genre, but sometimes struggles with getting jokes into a comedy script.
Bodyline (1984)
Subversively pro-English? Just Maybe...
I remember when this series debuted in Australia and at the time I thought it was a bit of Aussie flag waving jingoism; another of their rose-tinted historical spectacles which abounded in the 1980s...the kind where the British are the unfair toffs or moustache twirling villains and the Australians are the brave underdogs or larrikins. But viewing this again recently, I'm not so sure that's true. In fact, it might be more on the side of Douglas Jardine's England! Jardine (Hugo Weaving in his first major role) absolutely dominates the series. He's a far more interesting and complex character than the way the series depicts Don Bradman. But he's not the baddie: Jardine is charged with winning the Ashes for England, Bradman is the batsman supreme, almost invincible so he sets about working out if he has a weakness. The way Jardine does this is with intelligence and reason, asking his colleagues for feedback whilst applying his mind to the situation. In any other movie, this would be the act of the hero. He finds his answer in a quintet of fast bowlers, all of whom are honest, decent sportsmen who want to play for their country and win. To balance Jardine's methodical approach is Plum Warner, a former cricket great and, here, depicted as an honest upholder of decency and fair play. He worries that Jardine is being too analytical and single minded.
By contrast, the Australian cricket team are beset by nit-picking officials who prevent Bradman from playing in the early matches and who carry an air of smugness about them; as if the Ashes are theirs by right. The England team are greeted by an angry Australian "fan" who hurls abuse at them from a rowing boat. Is he a cheeky larrikin or is he a vile nutter? I mean, is hurling abuse at a visiting sports team either normal or virtuous in the context of positive movie or TV portrayals? Warner thinks he's a harmless local character but Jardine sees something more base and sinister in the man. Later events show that Jardine's view might be right. This character hovers over the Australian team, being privy to meetings between English and Australian cricket officials, saying rude and abusive things when he hears something he doesn't like. Later on, he leads the crowds in yelling "bastards" at the England team and burning the Union flag. His mind and his actions have not been shaped by Bodyline (a term Australians coin, not the English)...he held angry and aggressive opinions about England before a ball had been bowled. In short, he's an agitator, not a true fan and Jardine knows this.
There's also another scene where English cricketer turned journalist, Percy Fender, shows up in the Australian press box and he's all smiles, friendliness and earnestness as he sets about doing the best job he can whilst slobbish Australian journalists roll their eyes and shake their heads at him. Again, are we meant to side with the slobs over the dedicated and friendly? Jardine pushes his team hard, but he's always fair with them. When they demand to know the tactics, he gives in and tells them. He pushes Eddie Paynter to play when the man should be in hospital, but Paynter scores a century and Jardine is generous afterwards, in an unpretentious and unshowy way. Jardine pays tribute to the talents of his team and while the depiction of Australian cricketers has them smiling at one another and being matey to the point of insular, the director shows the English batsmen in graceful slow motion as captions tell of their exploits and Jardine's voice over extols their talents.
Whilst Jardine increasingly becomes single minded to the point of obsessive, the rest of the England team behave well. Even Bob Wyatt, who was a very serious and taciturn person, comes across in this series as jolly and affable. Some refuse to bowl Bodyline but all back the captain. None of them mock the Australians or twirl moustaches or behave in a villainous way. Australia lodge a complaint, it gets out of control, there's a diplomatic outrage and basically England agree to all of Australia's demands after they win.
But tellingly, the final moments of Bodyline tell of Jardine's life after cricket; as a war hero risking his life behind enemy lines. Bradman gets a line about going on to captain Australia. So, an Aussie hatchet job against England or a sneaky appreciation of sports professionalism and dedication....maybe even a sly tribute to Douglas Jardine? I'm tending to think it's the latter.