Posts Tagged ‘review’

First of all – why the hell is Stephen Dorff holding a gun on the cover. He never comes close to a gun and dies 25 minutes in. That in itself is total false advertising. Second, God this movie is terrible. How they can make a movie like this and have it not make sense is an actual achievement. When Dorff dies, the car rolls immediately and stays there. Then Tally finds his body and his daughter Jo. Soon after, the arms dealers come back and bury the body. Where the hell did they go? At first they make it seem that there was a chase or something, and the guys have followed the trail to Dorff’s car and body. Yet there is no chase. He dies immediately. Why didn’t the guys bury his body and burn the car then? Instead they wander off for reasons unbeknown to us, probably so the writer could somehow get Tally to Jo. Also, Dorff dies in the spot where a great big dead Rhino is. Where the hell did that Rhino go? It isn’t there when Tally gets there.

In general, the film is a total snore fest. The first part of the movie is totally unnecessary. We didn’t need scenes showing them talking about the trip. Why didn’t the film just start in Africa? The scenes in America don’t add anything to the movie. The rest of the film, when we actual start getting some sort of action, is poorly executed. How a woman that tiny managed to go toe to toe in hand to hand combat with that huge South African guy is beyond me. It is never hinted that she has any sort of training, yet we are just supposed to believe she magically managed to fight him. She jumps on his back and tries to strangle him with a rope. I doubt she’d have had the strength, especially with being so dehydrated. He then punches her twice in the face, stabs her and kicks her when she’s down. Yet she somehow manages physically turn the gun round in the guys hand and shoots him. What?!

The dynamic between Jo and Tally is cringe worthy and quickly turns into a lifetime movie. At the end they’re best buds but you never really get any sense of them bonding and neither has any chemistry with the other. Maisie Williams – who is usually so good in Game of Thrones – is terrible in this. The scene were Jo breaks down and Tally hugs her would have probably been more believable if there was actual tears coming out of her eyes instead of Maisie just scrunching up her face. On top of that, she doesn’t look sad – she just looks like there is the sun in her eyes or she has smelt something bad. And then there is the direction. The scene in the camp when Jo realises the guy is part of the arms dealers is shot like a high school play. The three guys stand in a line and sort of talk at each other rather than talking like an actual human being and facing each other. And the angle of the camera is so amateurish I laughed.

The chemistry between Dorff and his girlfriend is non-existent. Svetlana Metkina is a terrible actress judging her off of this performance. She says all her lines like she’s reading them off of a piece of paper and doesn’t seem at all interested. Her tone of voice doesn’t change for the entire movie. She sounds exactly the same when she is fighting for her life as she does when she’s talking about an Jo’s iPad. On top of that, the writer keeps having her talking to herself which is just lazy writing. Peter Stormare can actually do a lot better than this movie and he’s usually terrible too. And to top it all off – the finale is totally anti-climactic and wraps it up way too quickly considering we’ve all just sat through an hour and a half of the protagonists being chased. The final scene has the girls go back to where Dorff’s body is buried to lay flowers when in reality it surely would have been dug up by the authorities to confirm their story and do an autopsy. It is evidence. And while they are laying the flowers, a hyena looks on stoically in what can only be described as the best acting in the film. Seriously, this is honestly one of the worst films I’ve ever seen.

1/10

Advertisements

TV is a strange place. That little box (although it’s more like a piece of paper¬†these days…) in your living room brings you a cocktail with more ingredients in it than a long island ice tea – and just as much booze. Only on TV can you see a man make a gigantic fondant covered hogwarts cake, and then switch to a chick standing in a plastic cube while trying to blow a ball-bearing into a hole with a straw. Only on TV can¬†you have bad singing and then bad dancing, laced with bad sob stories… and then flick over to the other side and OH MY GOD there’s a man on a desert island giving himself an enema (seriously channel 4? We did not need to see that).¬†We have TV shows were we watch people watching TV, we have shows with dancing ‘celebrity’ dogs… we even have a show were we sexualize toddlers (?!) and make them compete with each other in order to vicariously fulfil some lady’s self esteem issues.

TV can be messed up. But it is the purest form of social commentary and can occasionally be the greatest form of entertainment the world has ever seen. Sometimes though, it takes a lot of delving through the mud and sludge to find those rare tiny gems that are worth switching on the box and delving in.

This is three of the most underrated, underwritten or unknown show’s you’ve never watched – that you definitely should. And with netflix you have no excuse not to.

1) Nikita 

Nikita is unusual in that it isn’t unknown – it is just totally written off. From pretty much the pilot, Nikita got a bad rep. Being on the CW network meant it was never taken seriously by anybody, and totally missed it’s target audience – and likewise, as it wasn’t a teen TV show, no one who ever watched the CW ever gave it a look in. Marketing for the show also ruined its chances, the network wanted us to think this was a show about sexy women wearing revealing outfits yet being super spies and kicking butt. People said¬†it was shallow and against feminism. When in reality, Nikita couldn’t be further away from that. Three of the lead characters are strong, complex women with dark, traumatic pasts. There is no skimpy outfits or overtly sexual scenes unless they have to for a mission, and even then it is rare. Nikita’s bad rep is totally and utterly unfounded, and here’s why.

nikita gifFirstly, it takes a hell of a lot to make an action show. Especially an action show with a full weekly roster of hand to hand combat like Nikita. I don’t think people appreciate just how difficult it is to choreograph it, get the actors to learn it – as well as their lines – and then bring in the explosions, gun work and stunts. Hell – Maggie Q did all her own stunts. And she got hurt¬†a lot¬†because of that. But Nikita never faltered, from start to finish the action scenes, especially the fight scenes, were always impressive and as good as any you would see in an action movie.¬†I guess that’s what happens when you hire an action star.¬†

alex cage gifSecondly, the strength of the characters meant that it transcended being just an action show. It wasn’t just about a fight against Division, it was about these characters and their lives before, and then after, Division. It was about learning what made them who they are, and what got them on the dark path that led them to end up in prison. Each major character was deeply complex. And in a way, we were probing them all just as Amanda obsessively did over the four seasons. For me, Alex’s story was most interesting. When do we ever have a lead character of a TV show who has a past that involves drug addiction, abduction and sex trafficking? We don’t. These issues are skirted around on a lot of shows, and maybe looked at in depth for an episode or two, but never do we see the soul of a character like we saw Alex. We knew her, and we saw her pain and then we saw her evolve past it and even, in the end, use it. Nikita similarly had a dark past with drugs and abuse, and interestingly we saw how she was moulded by Division into this person who was now so fiercely trying to tear them down. Throughout the series, Amanda goads Nikita by saying Division made her – and in truth they did.

And finally, the writing. It is really tough to write any serial drama, but spy shows have to be complex and they have to keep surprising you. Most of all, the spine of the show has to be the series ark – for a show like Nikita, a mission of the week premise was never going to work without a boatload of story development. Nikita, despite the occasional¬†derailment, did¬†that. The dialogue was great and to cap that, the cast had a great chemistry. Lyndsy Fonsecca – despite her parents having spelt her name wrong – is going to have a long and fruitful career ahead of her. Maggie Q – well, she’s already an action star, but I think she proved she can do drama as well. And that she actually doesn’t need to be wielding her fists to delve some killer blows. Melinda Clarke, as always, plays the slightly odd and manipulative villain fantastically. She’s almost pantomime, and it works. Xander Berkley actually manages to get me to hate him as Percy, even though my heart still aches a little after his (spoiler!)¬†martyrdom in season 2 of 24. Shane West is Nikita’s Romeo, but he also has a painful past and does the tortured soul well. And finally massive kudos goes to Aaron Stanford as Birkhoff who provides some brilliant one liners and at times, some much needed comic relief.

amanda gif

Nikita ran for three seasons, with six farewell episodes added on after it was cancelled to wrap things up. So we thankfully got some closure, and thanks to the great writing you couldn’t tell there was any kind of rushed ending. While it sort of went out without a whimper, with not a lot of people discussing it, and no real fuss – it was sort of fitting. Nikita did the spy thing – pulled off an impossible feat in that it brought three years of possibly the greatest spy show ever on a network usually dominated with teen angst, and with that brought all that badassery (not a word – should be)¬†and then faded into the background. Unseen. Unheard. Untraceable. Sound familiar?

Yes, Alex is drinking milk.

Yes, Alex is drinking milk.

2) American Gothic

The 90s was a revolutionary period in terms of TV. We were gifted with strongly written feminist shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Xena. The face of procedural and medical dramas changed forever with the beginning of Law and Order and the brilliant ER. Comedy got two of the greats with Friends and Frasier, and science fiction changed forever when Captain Janeway took the bridge and Mulder and Scully opened their first X File. But one revolution that never took off was in the horror genre with the highly underrated American Gothic.

Before there was American Horror Story – the 90s gave us American Gothic. Sam Raimi – before he made us all hate him with Spiderman 3 – had quite the repertoire. Evil Dead, Darkman and this extremely underrated series. CBS are the idiots in this story, after cancelling American Gothic after one season. Ahead of its time, and therefore still watchable now, American Gothic revolves around Caleb Temple (Lucas Black) and the town’s corrupt sheriff, Lucas Buck (Gary Cole). Though appearing affable and charismatic, Sheriff Buck is a murderous rapist whose powerbase is backed by apparent supernatural powers, which he generally uses to manipulate people to “fulfill their potential” and make life-changing choices (usually for evil). Gary Cole plays a villain so well in this show that he literally ruined himself for me in anything else he is in.¬†A very young Lucas Black is fantastic as Caleb, making himself the anchor for this wierd, anything goes series.

American Gothic was basically American Horror Story, but it was the 90’s and the world wasn’t ready for it yet. Hell – it even had Sarah Paulson in it to boot just in case you weren’t sure. The show was the epitome of strange, dark and disturbing all rolled into one. Had CBS had a backbone, no doubt it would have become a cult classic like the X-Files.

Despite its short run, it is still worth a look, and it really is a timeless hidden classic. I first saw this show when I was a teenager, about ten years after it first aired. And I remember being astounded when I discovered it was made in 1996. You really couldn’t tell.

If you get a chance, give this one a look.

3) Vikings

Vikings may be an Emmy nominated show, but I don’t know anyone but me who watches it. Where did this show come from? I didn’t even realise the History Channel made dramas, never mind dramas so breathtakingly shot, wonderfully acted and superbly written that it makes you want to sell all your worldly possessions, grow a beard (I’m a chick and I want one that includes a rather dashing mohawk), live off the land and kill a bunch of English people – a problem when you are actually English.

Vikings follows Ragnor Lothbrok (Travis Fimmel) an actual 9th century notorious Viking famous for exploring the west and visiting all parts of Europe and fathering some very famous Viking sons. More notable however, at least in my eyes, is Lagertha (Katheryn Winnick), Ragnor’s shield maden wife who strides into battle even more fiercely than her husband, and is by far the strongest female lead on any TV, in any country at this current time. Winnick, who had a part in the hit show Bones, was otherwise a relatively unknown actress before getting this part. However, she shines as Lagertha, really bringing the character to life and managing to portray a character both ferocious and fragile at the same time. The supporting cast is also flawless. Special mentions go to Gustaf Skarsgard¬†– another Skarsgard, just what the hell was Stellan feeding these kids? What ever it was, keep doing it! –¬†who plays the eccentric Floki, and Jessalyn Gilsig who plays the manipulative Siggy.¬†Fimmel, meanwhile, leads from the front. He gives a solid performance as Ragnor, bringing a light shade to a character that could potentially have been all dark. He does the misunderstood, persecuted farmer well, while always eluding to an arrogance that eventually leads him to lead.
But it isn’t that acting or the weaving storylines that makes Vikings a stand out show. Instead, it is just how breathtaking the show is visually. Week in, week out, we the viewers are treated to shots that surely belong in a photography exhibit or on the big screen. But it isn’t just the lovely scenery gifted to us by it’s Irish location, it’s the vision created by the cast and crew, and the impeccable direction and care given to each and every episode. It makes Game of Thrones look visually unstimulating, and when you can say that about a show as fantastic as Game of Thrones, you know Vikings is bringing something very special to the screen.

It should be noted however, this is a show about Vikings, so expect a lot of violence and sex, tons of Norse mythology and a general distaste for morals. The Viking women were strong, merciless and often rode into battle alongside their male counterparts. They were still looked down upon, but were seen as much fiercer individuals that could earn respect on the battlefield. In their own way, the Vikings were more advanced than any of their Western counterparts – and despite being reviled as bloodthirsty barbarians, it took the rest of us a thousand years to catch up (and in a lot of places in terms of combat – we still haven’t).

Overall, Vikings is brilliant and refreshing and needs to be your newest show.

What is your most underrated show?

Five minutes into this movie, and I was struck by something – not the saliva dripping lollipop that the guy behind me had just chucked – but rather that, in order to truly enjoy this film – you need a brain. I’m not saying that any grey matter will do, monkeys for example – probably not a fan. But if you go into this film with¬†misconceptions¬†about what to expect, then you are already destined to fail. Zero Dark Thirty charters the years spent after 9/11 by various CIA operatives to track down¬†Osama¬†Bin Laden. Before this film even hit theatres, people were calling it nothing but ‘Liberal propaganda’ and ‘biased junk’. I can see why people would assume that was what Zero Dark Thirty is, but on closer inspection you can clearly see that neither the Bush regime, nor Obama’s time in office is particularly looked upon well.

Firstly, we’re shown the darker side of the USA’s war on terror… the side that made the papers and outraged millions – torture. Watching the prisoners suffer made me uncomfortable – and after all, what kind of world would we live in if it didn’t. They may be terrorists, or at least suspected terrorists, but seeing anyone scream in pain, especially when based on real events, made me uneasy. After Obama came in, the torture went out and was replaced with a slow moving system – that possibly cost lives. Maya, played by Jessica Chastain, pushed and pushed to get the intelligence she’d gathered taken seriously. But the people above her were often more worried about looking bad politically if it was the wrong call. And so yes, the torture portrayed did make Bush look bad. But at the same time, throughout the movie they make the point that they¬†wouldn’t have the lead which led to Osama without it.

Now, with all the controversy out of the way, let’s get to the actual film. Zero Dark Thirty is at times hard to follow, but so it should be. If the average¬†Joe could understand the plot easily, well then it wouldn’t be a true representation of the¬†obstacles overcome by these extraordinary individuals. The film basically follows Maya, as she is dropped into Pakistan having been recruited to the agency straight from High School. She’s committed, and you see that from day one. Unsurprisingly she gets ridiculed for her age and her looks, and finds it difficult for people to take her seriously. This toughens her up and by the end of the film she is very much a woman I wouldn’t want to mess with. The sass she had at the beginning of the film, very much morphs into a hardened shell. Chastain is probably at her best. While I haven’t always rated her highly, I definitely feel she stepped up to the plate in what must have been a huge daunting task. Her performance as Maya is likeable but not enough to deter you from the main premise of the movie – the hunt for Osama. Kathryn Bigelow allows just enough of Maya’s personality to shine through to endear her, but doesn’t allow the movie to become all about ‘Maya’s hunt for Osama’; because it is very much a team effort.

Director Kathryn Bigelow also managed to bring home the reality that these are real people. We live in a society glamorised by Hollywood, and it is easy to forget sometimes that the CIA aren’t the really like ‘Borne’ or ‘Bond’. They are real people, with real families who are trying to keep the world safe. I found that a little unsettling. It was a dim reality that showed how vulnerable we are, that there isn’t some great power out there to save us. Because, they don’t¬†always succeed.

But Zero Dark Thirty is ultimately about when they did succeed. And by the end of the film, we are shown the assault on Osama’s compound in Pakistan. The use of night vision goggles, interchanging with the dark made the whole scenario seem more unsettling. And while the men who went into that compound seemed ultimately bad ass, you also had the same sense of realism. They weren’t superheroes. They were just doing a job.

Overall, there is a good performances all round for the ensemble cast. I was particularly impressed with Jason Clarke and Jessica Chastain. And I think, with all things considered Рand how wrong this movie could have easily gone Рthis is a solid film that fairly and accurately portrays the hunt for Osama. An engrossing watch.

8/10

James Bond – arguably the most famous franchise ever. You say Bond – people say James Bond. That’s just how it works. Over here in the UK, we love ourselves a bit of Bond. Of course we do, what’s not to love? He’s British, he’s tough, handsome, charming, and he fights for Queen and country. A lot has changed over the last fifty years – but Bond’s appeal certainly hasn’t wavered.

That being said, don’t underestimate how much Sam Mendes¬†Skyfall¬†has done for the franchise. Daniel Craig’s films had been lack lustre up until now. True Bond fans were not impressed that the hero they knew and loved, was morphing into an uncharming, grumpy, gadgetless Bourne wannabe. The die hard fans longed for the days of Pierce, with his cheesy one liners and his¬†irresistible¬†charm. And so when¬†Skyfall¬† was announced, I’m guessing I wasn’t the only one who was¬†sceptical. I was pretty much about ready to give up on Bond. As far as I was concerned, there hadn’t really been a good proper Bond film since Pierce Brosnan’s¬†Die Another Day.¬†But there were hopeful signs – Adelle signed on to record the infamous Bond song – meaning we were back to having Diva’s with big voices instead of ageing pop stars – something even Pierce’s movies often lacked. Then we were treated to some even more promising signs. Not only was the classic DB-5 returning to the screen, but along with it was Daniel Craig actually making a witty retort. Thing’s started to up…

When¬†Skyfall¬†eventually came out, for me it was everything I’d hoped for and more. From the get go it felt like a Bond film. There was laughs, just the right level of cheesiness and action from start to finish. But more importantly, there was M.

Dame Judi Dench has for a long time now been a redeeming factor. Dench often steels every scene she is in, and as a character, M’s relationship with OO7 is one that has been intriguing from the get go. Choosing to have a Bond film that had as much M as it did James was always going to be a risk, but with Dench at the helm it was a calculated one. Dench gave a thrilling performance, which, in turn brought out the true essence of Bond in Daniel Craig. There was a grumpy love to their relationship, and despite the quips and arguments, you got a real sense of who the front line of defence for our country was – the rule breakers and the renegades like OO7 and M.

Also, for the first time in a long time, every aspect of the Bond film was tied up. The plot made sense, there was links to the past and foreshadowing for the future of Bond. We re-met characters old and new, and had a truly disturbing Bond villain, played so effortlessly by Javier Bardem. If you were still in doubt of the films authenticity, you were treated to explosions on the Tube, James running down London Streets, and explosions that rippled the London skyline. Even the finale took place deep in the highlands of Scotland, instead of the usual backdrop of some Russian base, or a fortified island. The whole film is quintessentially British. And while it may not appeal to the foreign fans of Bond as much as it could have, I think Sam Mendes was determined to bring back everything that he felt made Bond Bond.

And I think it was essentially that aspect that makes Skyfall¬†not only a great Bond movie, but one of the best. If your a true Bond fan, and like me grew up watching the worlds favourite spy and all that came after him, you will love¬†Skyfall.¬†And for the first time in a long time, I’m no longer worried about the future of Bond. Instead, I’m certain he will be a feature in cinema’s everywhere for another at least another 20 years, if not another 50.

 

Teeth is one of those movies that comes around from time to time, and you see the trailer – and there is only really one appropriate response –¬†What the fuck?!¬†

But the concept is just so God damn strange, and so bizarre that you just¬†have¬†to watch it. Teeth is about a young and pure woman, who discovers she has an unusual adaptation that sets her apart… Her vagina has teeth. I know. It’s ridiculous. And disgusting. “They based a whole movie around that?!”¬†I hear ya… it’s bizarre. Yet somehow intriguing. And if you get passed the gross factor, Teeth is a lot more than it seems. Not only is it darkly funny, but it is probably the most memorable black comedy of the last five years.

Jess Weixler plays Dawn, the dentally endowed teen who has chosen to take a vow of purity and chastity. Dawn is passionate about her promise, and speaks out to persuade others to take the vow. However, when she meets the boy of her dreams she begins to question herself. It is soon after then that she learns of her ‘gift’ and how handy it can actually be.

The whole premise of the film is absurd, but the comedy is so understated it works. Mitchell Lichtenstein, the director, knows entirely the kind of film he is making, resulting in a black comedy that doesn’t take itself too seriously and keeps the audience drawn into the plot. There are good performances all round, particularly from Weixler and John Hensley – who plays Dawn’s idiot and infatuated step brother.

By the end of the film, Dawn has transcended from innocent and terrified teen to a complicit and conniving scorned woman. But it is the dark laughs that make this a film worth watching, and it is that which sets it apart from anything remotely similar.

Overall, a pretty fascinating movie that is difficult to take your eyes off, no matter how much you may want to. I¬†guarantee¬†that, by the last act, if you’re male – you will be holding your special place; and if you’re female – you’ll be googling vagina dentata just to see if this shit is possible…¬†Scarily, it¬†is¬†by the way.¬†

A 6/10. Check out the trailer below.

If you haven’t spent the last five years in a coma, you will probably be familiar with the urban legend of the Slender Man. There is much debate about where the myth actually comes from… Trolls spend hours upon hours trying to convince the internet of their theory – but the general premise is that there is a man, with no face who sort of looks like the Silence from Doctor Who – except you remember them – and well, you get the gist; he’s terrifying.

Not TODAY slenderman!

However, contrary to what is suggested by the misleading trailer, and the Snakes on a Plane-esque title, The Tall Man has absolutely nothing to do with Slenderman. Not a pickle. Those sneaky people over at the production company surely saw all those over superstitious teens coming. So if you going into The Tall Man, expecting a Slenderman movie, move along. This is not that film (although, I hear they are working on that).

Source: examiner.com

The Tall Man isn’t even really a horror movie, as much as the trailer tries to convince you otherwise. It is so much more than that. In truth, it is really a story of two halves, and two genres. The first half of the movie is your typical horror/thriller story with the strong female protagonist in the form of Jessica Biel. What follows in the latter half, is much more in the mystery genre. Everything we thought was true in the first half of the movie is turned on its head, and what we are left with is a smart film that even leaves you pondering a moral dilemma.

That is why The Tall Man is unlike all your average popcorn fright films. It has a conscience as much as the characters do, and Pascal Laugier has managed to craft a concept that could have been predictable and uninteresting on its own, into one of intrigue. To boot, there is a few jumpy moments on the way, and Jessica Biel gives possibly the best performance I’ve seen from her. Especially considering the undulating moral viewpoints we see of her throughout the film. But it is Jodelle Ferland who steels the show as the mute neighbourhood kid who seems lost in plain sight. Still in her teens, Ferland is already a pretty large acting force, and I forsee a bright Oscar coloured career in her future.

Overall, the Tall Man will have you asking questions hours after, and it impresses in how much it delivers itself as a solid little thriller. My only down points are that the plot was a little slow towards the end, meaning the end climax wasn’t really a climax at all. But other than that, a good solid mystery thriller.

A respectable 6/10.

 

Lafayette: Do something!
Pam: I am doing something… laughing!

Oh Pam. You spent last season single handedly holding the series together with your quippy remarks. I’m glad to see she carried on were she left off, with both this weeks scorcher and the very memorable line from last week…

I’m wearing a Walmart sweatsuit for ya’ll. If that’s not a demonstration of team spirit I don’t know what is.

Haha! Brill. Kristin Bauer van Straten’s delivery of every single line is so flawless, she is a credit to the show. Anyway, to the episode!

I started with Pam, so I will continue. She’s having a tough time dealing with this rift between her and Eric. And it isn’t helping that the she doesn’t know the Authority has him so she clearly thinks he’s ignoring her. We saw a little of Pam when she was human, and honestly, if it wasn’t for all the eating and the drinking – I could have sworn she was exactly the same. I think that was why Eric turned her eventually. He saw who she was, and liked it. She interested him. I know if I was going to spend an eternity with someone, I’d definitely want to make sure they had a sense of humor as razor sharp as Pam’s.

This week we finally got to meet Christopher Meloni’s new character – Roman. And when he began speaking, I found it uber weird. I can’t help but see Elliot. He looks the same, he sounds the same. He even has the same cockiness about him, a fact I always loved in Stabler. But, myself, like many, need to let it go. Stabler is gone, and unless the world starts reversing on it’s axis, he’s never coming back. He’s all about the fangs now… And I need to get used to it!

Chris Meloni as Roman. Source: Small screen scoop.

So did he do a good job?

Honestly, I think it is too tough to tell. You don’t just shake off a character you have played for 12 years. And so I think that will take time. But I enjoyed the religious aspect he brought. The fact that Vampires, or Vampyres as they kept referring to them, are as culpable as humans are when it comes to believing in some sort of omnipotent creator. His feeding of his disciples with his blood had obvious similarities to the Christian mass, and Meloni delivered each line in such a way that you really believed Roman meant every word. I’m looking forward to seeing more of him as the season progresses, and I think his character is likely to lose his cool way more than he did in last nights episode. And, even more than that, I want to learn more about this guy – how old is he, for instance?

Tara is now even more crazy…!

In other news, Tara is a messed up, crazy, violent, epileptic Vampire. And she’s pissed. Unsurprisingly. Really Sook? Really? You thought, “Oh I know, we’ll turn her?” Neither you or Lafayette got Pam to turn Tara for her own good, it was for selfish reasons. She was hardly likely to be happy about the fact, given the fact she was kidnapped, raped and almost murdered by a Vampire – several times. She hates them. She spent the whole of the last season trying to bring them all to an end. Yet you think she’d rather be a Vampire than dead. It is down right selfish of them. And in all honesty, I would have been happier if Tara had have died. Last season we had Eric on the rampage, unable to control himself. Before that we had Jessica adjusting to life. And now Tara? This could get old fast. I hope the writers do their best to keep it upbeat, and turn Tara back into the “La la la la” character from Season 1.

We were treated to several Vampire torture scenes this week. The authority were intent on interrogating Eric and Bill. I found it interesting that they felt keeping Nora’s secret worthy of such a fate. Yes she and Eric share Godric as their maker. But if she has already betrayed the Authority, them knowing that can’t do more harm if she’s already facing the true death. If anything they would understand that bond. The bromance twins – Bill and Eric – also revealed the fate they gave Russell Edgington in order to prevent their own demise. It was a risky move. A more reckless leader no doubt would have killed them there and then, and for a moment, I thought Roman would. But it looks like we make get some more delightful scenes between Russell and Eric when the pair go and track him down – I hope.

Source: Stephenmoyer.net

There was some stuff going on with Terry this week. Honestly, I won’t lie, it doesn’t interest me. Something about fires and what happened in Iraq. So I found it hard to follow that. Jason got in a little bit of hot water for splitting up a boy’s parents this week, and he also found Debbie’s car. I reckon we’ll be hearing more about that real soon. Sam fell out with Nula over her little girl possibly being wolf. It turns out she is… bummer. How cute though! Alcide renounced any association with the pack. I don’t know for how long however, as they don’t really seem the kind of people you walk away from…

And Jessica got bored with playing teenage girl, finally throwing out her groupies. But now before a visit from the newly Vampiric and gay Rev.

Child vamp needs a nap. Like his suit though…

Newland. I enjoy him a lot more now he’s gay and a Vampire. I really do. I know Jessica is older than him, but I do worry she will end up underestimating him. He was a slimy and slippery, and sometimes dangerous little critter before he became a Vampire. I can only see him getting worse now he’s stronger. That being said, I loved Jessica’s teasing of him, when she was all talk about Jason’s butt etc. And her defense of him was as cute as ever. I do think she has feelings for him. But like what happened with Hoyt, she’s not ready for that. She wants to be just Jessica for a while. I guess she’s more like a teenager than she realises.

Finally, one more point. Children vampires? We’ve seen them before on Buffy. But that was because he was the annointed one. You have to wonder what qualities you see in a child that would make them a good Vampire… Also he was quite snappy. I think he needs a nap.

Overall, a solid second episode. Slightly below par compared to last week, but I have a feeling we’re just beginning to set up the many threads this season has to offer.

Let me know your thoughts on this weeks True Blood below.