The Personal History Of David Copperfield Cert: PG / 119 mins / Dir. Armando Iannucci / Trailer
A disclaimer. I haven't read Charles Dickens' David Copperfield. Also, I haven't watched any television, film or stage adaptations of David Copperfield. There's no agenda behind that, it's just the way these things fall. I've heard of it obviously, but the only Dickens I'm reasonably familiar with is A Christmas Carol, and even then it's only because some new adaptation is filmed almost every year. And it's not like I employ the same level of reverse-snobbery for his work as I do with Shakespeare's material.
So when I went to see Armando Iannucci's The Personal History Of David Copperfield this evening, I did so because I like its cast, I like Armando Iannucci and I trust them all to make an entertaining retooling of a thing I'm not familiar with in the slightest. This review is of the thing I just watched, not the thing I was expecting or the thing I was necessarily wanting it to be. And with all that in mind, this will either be the exactly the viewpoint you're after or the last opinion you want to read. Either way, you're very welcome...
JOLLY And what a delight it turns out to be. By definition of the material alone it's a far more jolly ride than Iannucci's previous cinematic outing, as he works Dickens' classic into a sprawling comedy of manners with tight scripting and sharp performances to match. Opening with a theatrical framing device, the whole thing has an air of knowing artifice, yet never waivers in its conviction. The film is energetic without tipping over into the chaotic, stagey without being forced. sumptuous without feeling stuffy.
Although Iannucci runs a wide social gamut of Victorian England, the grime of that era (in this story's settings) is barely present. Yet there's a detailed richness to the production design letting the audience know this is an aesthetic choice rather than a time or cost-saving measure. David Copperfield looks, and feels, gorgeous.
CHIPS
The cast are as superb as you'd hope. Dev Patel shines as always in the eponymous role, as does Jairaj Varsani as the younger Copperfield. At the film's height (and especially with Tilda Swinton involved), there's an almost Coen-esque farce going on, and it even begins to approach the claustrophobia and nightmare-logic of Aronofsky's mother! as reality becomes blurred and we're once again reminded of the narrated performance structure.
David Copperfield is a whistle-stop tour of a big-old book, and the two-hour runtime feels optimistically cramped in some places, while there are entire sections of the hero's life that would clearly benefit from a full, serialised adaptation for a more emotional connection. I'm reliably informed that some key story-elements have been altered here, although as this is the director's re-imagining of the saga, that's absolutely permissible*1. That Iannucci keeps masterful control of the whole thing is a credit to his dedication and enthusiasm for the source-text.
YSCIENCETHEATER3000 This is a timely companion-piece with Greta Gerwig's Little Women, both stylised adaptations of stories from the mid 1800s which are just as engaging for audiences today. Gerwig's film has more to say of course, but both channel the stunning vision of their writer/directors.
David Copperfield is snappy, stylised and consistently funny. But it's also a bit of a confection, almost a curiosity, and despite its period-setting this version won't be for everybody. Which is probably a large part of why I enjoyed it so much.
.
If it's your bag, certainly.
It is.
This should certainly be near the top of everyone's CVs for the foreseeable future.
*1 More 'strict' adaptations of David Copperfield already exist and will no doubt be made in the future. Think of this as the Dickensian equivalent of Cumberbatch's 'accompaniment' Sherlock Holmes, rather than Jeremy Brett's more canonical interpretation (even though this version of Copperfield is still set in its original time period). [ BACK ]
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Disclaimer #1: I'm going to try and write about The Darkest Minds without comparing it to the X-Men franchise in every single paragraph, although you can rest assured that this would be an accurate representation of how it feels to watch the film.
So, in a move which can best be described as intriguing, 20th Century Fox appear to be releasing a cinematic rendition of The Darkest Minds as a way of ripping off 20th Century Fox's X-Men: The New Mutants before it's even landed. Perhaps they're hoping to get a new franchise off the ground before the Marvel property is wrested from their grasp? This film has been adapted from a pre-existing young-adult novel of course, but the point still stands. Perhaps even more firmly considering it was originally intended for a different medium.
With the Hunger Games and Maze Runner series having run their course (and Divergent not even reaching the finish line), I thought the whole "you're special because you're a teenager" sub-genre of movies had petered out. I guess there are some stragglers which were still in pre-production when the market reached saturation point. Because that's definitely a more palatable thought than another wave of these coming through. You know a movie is aimed at the aspirational adolescent demographic when it's partially soundtracked by actual songs, whose bland, breathy lyrics are laid directly over scenes with character dialogue. Apparently, The Youth don't mind this, since it happens so fucking often that there must have been some manner of research or testing to support its repeated occurrence.
Anyway, the plot: Something something, mysterious virus. Something something, only affects teenagers and any which are left alive develop extraordinary powers. Something something, totalitarian government of The Nasty Adults then proceeds to lock up teenagers as a precaution. Something something, but one of them might just be the special one who can turn this crazy bus around! Despite being assembled from cast-offs of all other YA-inclined cinema (indeed, assembled from former cast members in places), The Darkest Minds owes so much to the X-Men that it's had to take out a loan from the Jedi Council just to keep up the repayments*1.
The film is simultaneously over-scripted and under-written, racing to its finish-line with poorly introduced characters (who are then abandoned with equal carelessness) and feeling like it's three movies edited down to one. Demographically, it's good to see that that the protagonist is a black female teenager, and Amandla Stenberg certainly does the best with what she's given. But a performer who's clearly this capable deserves better. The whole cast do. Hopefully The Darkest Minds will sit on their collective CVs as a springboard rather than a paperweight.
And then the final moments of the movie have the utter fucking gall to nod towards a sequel which, given the absolute self-indulgence of what we've not even finished watching yet, could charitably be described as "optimistic".
Five years ago, The Darkest Minds would have disappeared into the crowd as a forgettable, formulaic, teen adventure. In 2018, it stands out by feeling like a very dated version of the same thing…
Hahahahahaha, you are funny.
No.
Whatever.
Without having seen most of the cast elsewhere before, I'm going to say no.
This shouldn't be anybody's best work.
Unlikely, given the film's general reception.
There isn't.
Level 1: Well, early on there's a hospital called "New Hope", but Captain Phasma's in this.
*1 Let's take a quick look through the infringement charge-sheet…
1) A girl too scared to touch the person she cares about in case her uncontrollable power hurts them (Rogue from X-Men)
2) Another girl who wears rubber gloves so that her power doesn't accidentally spang anything-or-one she touches (also Rogue from X-Men)
3) Legally-backed persecution and institutionalised research / euthanisation of gifted youngsters headed by a government official who's terrified of his own mutant son (Stryker from X2, Worthington from X3: The Last Stand)
4) The instruction from a psychic to her pursuer that they should turn around and 'walk, keep walking and do not stop, ever' (Silver Fox to Stryker from Origins: Wolverine)
5) Teenagers are being rounded up since any who weren't killed by the outbreak were left with scary powers, so it really is The Evil Adults against misunderstood kids (pretty much any YA-fiction you'd care to name)
6) Our heroes in Act III fending off a squadron of orange-glowing psychopaths, brainwashed to be battlefield beserkers by the authorities trying to control the mutation for their own ends (the Extremis soldiers from Iron Man 3)
7) Ruby's main Force, err… Mutant, err enhanced power is mind-manipulation, ie extreme suggestibility. At one point she tells an armed guard who's stopped the car that he's not looking for them and they should be allowed to leave. He replies with an affirmative "…move along" in a way which suggests that the screenwriters thought this would be a "subtle" Mos Eisley reference rather than a straight photocopy.
8) The bad guys have a black-clad boss who walks around barking orders and kills his own subordinates as a reward for substandard performance. He's not the main, top-level boss though, just a powerful underling. Luckily, this version doesn't need a respirator.
9) Oh, and at one point Ruby and her dramatic counterpart start discussing the character-structure of the Harry Potter series, somehow unaware that Ruby had inadvertently done the 'forgetticus' spell on her own parents. Remember, like Hermione did in Harry Potter (albeit deliberately but still with the same level of post-trauma). But that's not the aspect of Harry Potter which is referenced in the characters' conversation. I mean for fuck's sake, which way do they want it? She'd remember the Hermione thing as soon as 'Harry Potter' plopped out of her mouth, wouldn't she? Has she read the books or not? I haven't even read them and I know about it.
10) And let's not even mention the Infinity-War-disintegration thing they've got going on with the poster, there. It's used fleetingly in the film too, but it's not a super-power, more a dramatic device. But still.
The Darkest Minds is like watching a bad covers-band play a greatest hits set of pop culture references from the last 40 years, to an audience they hope aren't recognising the tunes...[ BACK ]
OTHER (regular) DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Well, we did it*1, we made double figures. And as it turns out, my tenth viewing for The Last Jedi appears to have been the final screening at my local cinema. Ending the run this early feels unusually eager on the part of the programme selection team, since a five-week stint for a film of this size is hardly excessive*2, and even I was surprised that there was a fair old audience amassed to watch it. But hey, I don't set up the schedule, and I have to admit to finding something faintly poetic in being there for the first and last showings of a movie I love.
But examinations of the numbers aside, we did it*3. I've watched, absorbed and ruminated upon The Last Jedi enough now for it to no longer be 'the new Star Wars movie. By this point, Rian Johnson's feature is the same familiar, comfort-blanket of other-wordly adventure that I get from all (all) the other entries in the series. I'm still not sold on the Rey From Nowhere idea, and still not exactly a fan of that one particular scene, but I accept their presence and, for the time-being at least, their pertinence to the respective character-arcs. Which is my way of saying that a perfect movie can still contain things which you personally find imperfect. I haven't, and will not be, signing any online petitions to expel the offending toys from my pram.
So, short of me catching the film at some other cinema before it disappears completely (I believe it's still playing in the larger venues in London), this will probably be the last time you'll have me banging on about Episode VIII until the inevitable triple-bill screening before Episode IX. And now I can go back to grumbling about how unexciting all the normal flicks are.
My own internal digestion of The Last Jedi will continue as I read various tie-in publications, and with the bonus material included on the Blu-ray release in March/April*4. Although by then of course, I'll be getting super-hyped for the Han Solo movie which we still (at time of writing) haven't had a trailer for. But I digress...
In closing, all I can really say is that you haven't seen Star Wars: The Last Jedi until you've seen Star Wars: The Last Jedi ten times.
Discuss.
The Star Wars's.
It is.
For me, it's a buyer (already pre-ordered, obvs).
It's high.
It's very high.
Over some points, possibly.
There is.
Level 0: It is Star Wars.
*1 I say 'we', I mean 'I'. Obviously. I'd be very surprised if you'd been to see TLJ ten times. Impressed, but surprised. [ BACK ]
*2Taken 2 played for six weeks as I recall, although that seemed to be more because they couldn't find anything else to take up the screens. [ BACK ]
*4 Although as it's already been flash-stickered as "over two hours" worth, that sounds like it'll be about as in-depth as the Rogue One extras. Which is to say, 'fleeting, at best'. For the record, the Phantom Menace DVD in 2001 arrived with 6 hours of bonus material, and the 2011's saga Blu-ray set had over 40. Just saying. [ BACK ]
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
One of the neatest things about A New Star Wars Film is its ability to change your outlook on the previous entries. Whether it's set before or after other episodes in the saga, there are often props, snippets of dialogue and background aliens on a previously unvisited planet which can shed new light on old stories. It's the Galaxy Far, Far Away's ability to continue unfolding as the years go by which keeps bringing audiences back for more.
Now, I like language. I'm a fan of good writing in general and while I make no claims to be perfect, I have a general fascination with (and unduly harsh criticism of other people's) grammar and punctuation. Sure, I'll begin a sentence with the words 'and' or 'but', as well as using the semicolon and Oxford comma like they're going out of fashion, but the grocer's apostrophe and erroneous use of there/their/they're can get right out. There's no excuse for those. Even more troublesome (from a certain point of view) are the 'grey areas', the more informal ticks which people use, but which aren't routinely reinforced during school-years.
As regular readers of this blog will know, I'm a big fan of the ellipsis. That's the '…' or three full stops used to imply that while the sentence itself has finished, the ideas or suggestions within have not. That there's still more to be said on the subject, often eliciting the response from the reader. A punctuational shorthand for 'to be continued'. I love an ellipsis almost as much as I love a footnote*1.
The standard, generally accepted, form of the ellipsis is, as noted above, three dots. If you use two, it just looks like you've accidentally hit the full stop key twice. Four feels needlessly long, and five or more is generally reserved for informal memos on the noticeboard in the office, organising leaving drinks and the like, typed by people who also use multiple exclamation marks without a single ounce of shame.
For the record, the four-dot-ellipsis is a thing. It's just not applicable in the context of the Star Wars opening. If your word-processing application of choice automatically converts three typed dots into an ellipsis character, you can easily end up with what appears to be four dots by having the ellipsis plus a full stop afterward. It still looks awful and wrong.
So anyway, I'm sitting the other week happily watching The Last Jedi, concentrating on the opening-crawl now that I'm familiar with the events of the movie, when I notice that it ends with a four-dot-ellipsis. Star Wars, my thing, my Star Wars, has used non-standard punctuation in the famous yellow-on-starfield introductory text. Then the next time I watch the movie, I notice that it uses a four-dot-ellipsis in the 'A Long Time Ago' text as well. WHAT KIND OF FRESH HELL IS THIS? Now, for obvious reasons, I am unable to share screenshots of this unexpected anomaly*2. I thought I was just going to have to ramble about this with you on-trust until March/April when the DVD lands.
As it goes, I'm able to illustrate the issue more easily than I'd feared. Like any sensible audit enthusiast, I though it would be a good idea to look at the precedent set by other entries in the series. To gauge the level of the bar set by the other Star Wars movies, at least one of which I've been lucky enough to love since I was four years old and still grappling with the very basics of literacy. My first port of call was to look at the last-available versions of the films (so the 2011 blu-ray cuts in with Episodes I to VI, and the standard domestic releases for The Force Awakens and Rogue One).
This is what I found...
SERIOUSLY THOUGH, WHY HAVE I NEVER NOTICED THIS BEFORE? I mean fine, it's not like the logo comes on and says "STAR WAR'S", but still. And it's not even used consistently; Return of the Jedi goes for the standard (CORRECT) three-dot-ellipsis at the end of its crawl. What the actual shit is all this about? And the 'Long time ago' card has always been like that, too.
But then I figured maybe that's to do with the films (at least the Original Trilogy) being remastered and tidied-up over the years. So without wading into the territory of screen-capping my VHS collection, here are stills from the 1995 'THX' laserdisc versions of the Original Trilogy, the set with minimal touch-ups.
Nope, it's always been wrong.
Insane.
I'm not exaggerating when I say that Star Wars was a huge formative influence in my early life and reading progression. My fascination with typography can be traced back to sitting in my bedroom as a six year-old, looking at the classic logo on a poster adorning my wall and drawing it freehand on a pad in front of me; learning the shapes not so much of the letters, but of that particular logotype; the inside and outside lines of each, their interaction with crossbars, baselines etc. And when I took a reading-test in school for children two years older than me at around the age of eight, my teacher visibly raised an eyebrow in surprise when I skimmed through the word "fatigue". How did I know that? Because of Luke Skywalker® (Bespin™ Fatigues)", that's how.
Star Wars didn't exactly teach me to read, but it's been a constant sounding-board and reference point as I grew up. Culturally, morally and creatively, it continues to be so. Then I find out that the cack-handed intern has been doing the typesetting all these years. I'm not so much astounded at my favourite, life-defining, film series using sloppy punctuation, more that it's slipped by me on every single occasion before January 2018. I'm not angry, just really disappointed*3.
So it's not like I'm going to start using the four-dot-epilsis now with the justification that 'hey, it's good enough for Lucasfilm'. I'm going to take away the lesson that sometimes we just have to be better than the examples presented to us...
"We are what they grow beyond. That is the true burden of all masters." ~Yoda, Ahch-to, 2017.
The Star Wars's.
It is.
For me, it's a buyer (already pre-ordered, obvs).
It's high.
It's very high.
Over some points, possibly.
There is.
Level 0: It is Star Wars.
*1 See? In fact, there are few things I enjoy more than using both... [ BACK ]
*2 Not least because I hate bootleg movies even more than I hate erratic punctuation. [ BACK ]
*3 With myself, as much as with Lucasfilm. I can't state that emphatically enough. [ BACK ]
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
A disclaimer. I haven't read Charles Dickens' David Copperfield. Also, I haven't watched any television, film or stage adaptations of David Copperfield. There's no agenda behind that, it's just the way these things fall. I've heard of it obviously, but the only Dickens I'm reasonably familiar with is A Christmas Carol, and even then it's only because some new adaptation is filmed almost every year. And it's not like I employ the same level of reverse-snobbery for his work as I do with Shakespeare's material.
