Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Jamestown (2017–2019)
9/10
Jamestown is compelling & important.
7 December 2019
I rarely pen reviews of films etc on IMDb but there don't seem to be many regarding the PBS TV series Jamestown, or what reviews there are are pretty negative, and I think that's just unfortunate. I also don't like to write about topics I know very little about, the real history of Jamestown belonging firmly in that category. I don't want to write much here, but I would like to at least state that I thought the series was very good, and that it deserves more attention than it seems to have received. Well, now that it's been cancelled after only three seasons, it can at least claim fellowship with another TV show which went on to have an enormously successful afterlife: Star Trek!

Why do I think it is 'very good'? Well, for the record, I thought it was better than just very good, rising to brilliant on more than one occasion. Certainly, I would say that the level of drama, the cleverness of the intrigues, the acting, the use of the historical background, the production values, the script, the characterization, and more, were all excellent. Do I hear 'nay!'? Yes, I do. Do I hear: 'Soap-opera! Flimsy drama! Superficial depiction of history. Unrealistic! Not believable!' My response: it depends on what you expect a TV series in this era (now being 2019) to produce. Ratings depend on weekly intrigue and violence and romance and beautiful ladies in danger and mysterious happenings which need to be resolved within the 45 minute span. Such criticisms may well have their place, but they might also be superficial and unrealistic. What would you expect, for crying out loud? OK. So why does any of this matter? Well, because this drama was able to depict some extremely important aspects of that history, and in a manner which was shockingly real and relevant. That's why it matters.

Sure, the two lead black characters might not have acted and interacted with their white overlords quite in the way they are depicted as doing, but as viewers we should be able to accept certain superficially false aspects in the process of engaging with the deeper aspects of what their actions and situations tell us about slavery. And once we do that, we can see, if we have eyes to see, that this drama was exposing the reality of slavery in the most uncompromising way, a depiction which does nothing but add fuel to the accusation that America was built on the back of some pretty racist white supremacist attitudes.

Then, of course, there is the depiction of the interaction between the white settlers and the indigenous population. Here, also, Jamestown the TV series was able to articulate in a very sophisticated manner the way in which these two peoples acted toward each other. It is compelling. And the way things are slowed down to build up over the entire series is a measure of the artistic approach: not seeking to sensationalize things, but to lay out, step by step, the kinds of interaction there was, or might/must have been, and the difficulties in which people on both sides became embroiled. There is delicacy and insight and sensitivity in all of this, and it is delicacy and insight and sensitivity serving both the needs of historical accuracy and the needs of drama. I think that is a remarkable achievement. The build-up to tensions takes a long time, but a three season series can do this, whereas a film might condense everything and fail. And those inter-racial difficulties which occur are the stuff of great drama. As with the focus on the slave characters, the drama here lays bare the awfulness of the intruders' behaviour in coming to a land which was not theirs and imposing rule, and their racial condescension. Among the cast of characters there are many who appear to voice outrage as to the imperialist actions of the settlement's governors: that may just be a nod to modern sensibilities, easily judged unrealistic by those who know the history, but their outrage is part of the raison d'etre of the show. Jamestown shows the ugly reality of what it meant to come as an uninvited guest and then proceed to take over the land.

However, the series is not only about unremitting outrage and awfulness, or punishing the myth of foundation as a wonderful thing: the producers put in plenty of light amidst the dark, making the characters attractive and colourful. There is humour in the series and that humour derived from the intelligence of the holistic approach and the emphasis on humanity. As with Trek, while there is plenty of brutality and violence, often the conflicts in Jamestown are resolved by invoking humane solutions to human problems. This is a measure of its sophistication. Viewers, however, should be advised that sometimes shocking moments occur. They are never gratuitous.

I have to say Jamestown does a great many things, and deserves much more acclaim than it gets. It brings history to life, and it is simply unfortunate that it is now cancelled. Maybe it will revive, like that other show from the sixties. Or maybe it will just resonate.

Hurrah for the actors and writers and creators of Jamestown!
20 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Alas, what a waste
5 January 2018
I was amazed at how completely untouched I was by this film. I really wanted to like it. Kenneth Branagh is a talented fellow, and there was a vast array of talented actors here, and yet, it was strangely uninvolving. It was all so disjointed and pointless, the murder, the journey, the suspects, the raison d'etre of the story. And Branagh uttering these words, as Hercule Poirot: 'I am probably the greatest detective in the world' took things to a new level of banality. It's a great pity, though. I'm sure he started with a half-decent idea. If I damn it, it's also because it's a product of modern cinema, plagued by some very untalented artists, or those too easily swayed by the executives who call the shots. Drama is a very old principle. This film had no drama, no interesting interaction, a complete failure of dialogue. The makers should watch old films and take copious notes. And then use their imagination.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Some good aspects, some not so good.
20 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
MAJOR SPOILER ALERT

Well, I was one of the original fans of Blade Runner when it was released in 1982. I went to see it many times in the cinema and it remains a personal favourite. I wondered if they would be able to make a decent sequel, and was inclined to think they couldn't. Well, at times when I was watching this, I thought they almost did achieve a fitting continuance. It was on a grand scale and the detail was impressive. Yet, little by little I began to get the feeling that this might have been done a whole lot better. Admirable and valiant, at best, but no cigar. Possibly an important film... Then, things became even cloudier. The original film has some scenes of quite intense violence, but I never felt at any time that such were anything less than necessary. Shocking, but necessary. It was part of the immediacy of the film. Here, however, I felt it was gratuitous, and worse, meaningless. The scene where Jared Lareto approaches the just-born naked replicant woman and then slits her stomach made no sense whatsoever to me. It was just to show his evil, I think. Later, the scene in which the new Rachel gets shot graphically in the head struck me as just ugly and disturbing. It was not only that but also a kind of desecration of an iconic and beautiful image. From there on in the film lost my vote. The ponderous nature of the pacing and the -it sometimes felt like- fetishistic need to reference the original film began to add up, to an experience that was less than the sum of its various parts. I didn't feel so great about the film after a while. I applaud the attempt, but I thought it would have been better to make a different film. Perhaps one a little like the original BR, that is, a classy, edgy film noir thriller, with lots of Dashiell Hammet elements thrown in. Short and snappy rather than drawn out and deep... BR was a film with a fair amount of light in with the dark, characters who smiled and you could feel their humanity, replicant or not. This film went somewhere else. Maybe that's okay. It just wasn't my cup of tea. I came out of the original film fired up with passion and inspiration. I came out of this one scratching my head, and not feeling particularly good about the whole thing. I'm sorry to say. Maybe one day I will see it again, and feel entirely positive about it. A lot of work and no doubt passion, went into this. There were many impressive aspects to the film. Maybe it has nothing to do with BR. That might be the answer. Alas, still not my cup of cha.
3 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed