TV REVIEW: Hustle, Series 8, Episodes 1 and 2

After a slightly shaky start, the final ever series (sob) of the cheeringly escapist con-artist drama, Hustle, appears to be very much back on top form.  

Episode 1, by comparison, wasn’t fantastic. It was a fair attempt at a series opener, there were plenty of twists and turns, a typically comic-strip villain, relatively good dialogue and slick editing. It wasn’t bad by any stretch. But we’d seen it all before. The ‘Robin Hood’ speech in particular, shoe-horned into many an episode over the past eight years, felt particularly contrived. You could almost hear the scratches of biro as the boxes of trademark Hustle features were ticked off in production.

The second episode did, admittedly, open with another tried and tested Hustle feature- the classic to-camera piece, but my god was it done well. The first thing we’re shown is the oddly pained looking face of Ash Morgan, the fixer, played fabulously over the years by Robert Glenister. Normal enough, apart from the pained expression. However, and I don’t want to spoil the episode here if anybody hasn’t caught up with it on Iplayer yet, he’s upside down. Suspended from the roof of a warehouse, talking directly to the camera about how, occasionally, as a con artist, you have to do business with people who are “for want of a better word…criminals”. This is Hustle at its very best.

The concept for the con itself is witty and self-referential, with the gang accidentally selling a forgery of a stolen painting back to the very mobster it was stolen from in the first place. It is at this point that the episode departs from the norm, and is all the better for it. Because here, we see gang leader and all round smooth guy ‘Mickey Bricks’, played by the wonderful Adrian Lester... well to be honest we don’t really see him at all- he’s locked in the boot of a car for the majority of it, used as ransom until the team return the painting. As well as giving the team a time scale to work to, a device which has historically produced both the best Hustle episodes, as well as some fantastic Spooks moments (also by Kudos Productions), the lack of Michael Stone meant a very much Ash-centric episode. This is not something we’ve seen before, and it allowed for some excellent character development, as well as some superb dialogue, the very best of which is in the last ten minutes or so.

Not only this, but, and I think for the first time in eight years, we do actually begin to wonder whether Mickey might actually be in some danger.  In danger of having parts of him chopped off. We being to wonder that everything might not work out perfectly for the gang as it normally does, that this time it might not all be all right after all. Of course it is, and we’re still happy in a James Bond can never die sort of way when it does, but we’re briefly taken into new territory with the show, and, as far as I’m concerned, anyway, it worked.

Both episodes clearly used the tick box method of including all the usual Hustle devices, but I think the crucial element here is that Episode 2 took them all further. That elusive, tiny little bit further. And it really has made all the difference to a format which was in serious danger of growing tired.

I wholeheartedly look forward to seeing what Kudos Productions have done with the rest of the series, although I will be very, very sad to see Hustle go.

-Jen

NEWS: Oscar Nominations Shocker! [Not Really]

It's that time of year again everyone! The Academy Award nominations have arrived and not without the usual grumbling from us movie fans. Following the usual recipe of a dash of snubbing, a heavy dose of predictability with just a pinch of spontaneity, the Oscar noms are always guaranteed to cause a stir. You can see the full list of nominations here.

Leading the way with 11 nominations is Martin Scorsese's Hugo while The Artist has received 10 nominations with more located in the bigger categories. Other nominees across the various awards include The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris.

First, let's take a look at the biggie, Best Picture. Last year, a new rule was introduced wherein ten films could be nominated for this award but this has changed again which means it could be any number. This year, we have nine Best Picture nominations but the big four have to be The Artist, The Descendants, Hugo and Moneyball seeing as they also placed in the Best Editing category. This may seem like an odd reason to pick these as the favourites but pretty much every Best Picture winner since around 1980 have all picked up a Best Editing nomination so you can almost guarantee it will be one of these four. My money's on The Artist.

In the Best Director category, we've got Woody Allen, Terence Malick and Martin Scorsese representing the usual big guns for Midnight in Paris, The Tree of Life and Hugo respectively. But it has to be Michel Hazanavicius with not only the best name but also the best chance having directed critic favourite The Artist. Rounding out the category is Alexander Payne for The Descendants. 

Best Actress is the most predictable category; Meryl Streep of course gets a nomination for The Iron Lady alongside Rooney Mara for her role in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. The most notable absence in this category is Tilda Swinton for her chilling performance in We Need To Talk About Kevin. Best Actor is perhaps the least expected; Gary Oldman representing the Brits for Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy with Jean Dujardin (The Artist), Demián Bichir (A Better Life), George Clooney (The Descendants) and Brad Pitt (Moneyball) completing the list.

Best Supporting Actress could be a battle between two co-stars with Octavia Spencer and Jessica Chastain both nominated for The Help but they face stiff competition from Bérénice Bejo (The Artist), Janet McTeer (Albert Nobbs) and there's even a nod for Bridesmaids' Melissa McCarthy, though let's hope she doesn't fall prey to the Oscar comedy curse. Best Supporting Actor has to be the most random collection of actors ever assembled with Jonah Hill (Moneyball), Kenneth Branagh (My Week With Marilyn), Max von Sydow (Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close), Nick Nolte (Warrior) and Christopher Plummer (Beginners) forming the nominations. 

The big upset in the major categories has to be the absence of Nicholas Winding Refn's Drive which picked up one nomination for Sound Editing. Many believed Refn and star Ryan Gosling to be shoe-ins for nominations. The same could be said of Steve McQueen and Michael Fassbender for their picture Shame.  Both films were critic and fan favourites, but it appears that the Academy aren't quite brave enough to celebrate a film that comes with a heavy dose of violence or sex addiction. They don't seem to mind films about giant robots though as Transformers: Dark of the Moon picked up three nominations, thankfully only in the technical categories.

The Academy Awards have always been fairly predictable and it seems that the 84th won't be an exception to the rule. The last big upset was probably Crash winning Best Picture in 2006 so maybe we can all be hopeful and expect another one? Not too hopeful though…

We'll find out when LA's Kodak Theatre hosts the big event on February 26th. Check back for some insightful commentary on the eventual winners, the hosting skills of Billy Crystal and the usual analysis of the horror frocks that people will inevitably choose!

- Becky

FEATURE: The Great Sherlock Conundrum

This time last week, everyone was preparing themselves for the finale of the BBC's Sherlock in which we eagerly awaited the showdown of the century, an epic battle of minds that we all knew would result in a fall of momentous proportions between Sherlock Holmes and Jim Moriarty. It did not disappoint. But was anyone really prepared for what happened at the end? For those of you who haven't seen it yet (if not, why not?!), you may want to look away now as this post contains spoilers of both the literal and theoretical nature.

Fans of the stories will know, of course, that the confrontation at the Reichenbach Falls ends with Sherlock and Moriarty falling to their deaths. Updated to the modern setting, the ending was nothing short of genius. But how did Sherlock fake his own death? Well we, like the rest of the show's audience, have our own ideas, which we present to you for your perusal. Please feel free to comment with your own theories or to continue with some of ours.

BECKY: 

           Having rewatched the end of The Reichenbach Fall, I now present to you my theory. Going from the point at which Sherlock calls John on his mobile as he gets out of the taxi, Sherlock places a huge amount of emphasis on where John is to stand, even stating at one point "Keep your eyes fixed on me". John is so emotionally wrapped up on Sherlock's 'suicide note' that plenty of other things could have happened in front of him without him noticing.

First of all, Sherlock's previous conversation with Molly is essential; as a pathologist she has access to both dead bodies and medical staff to aid her and Sherlock in convincing both John and the assassins waiting to kill his friends that Sherlock has actually fallen to his death. 

For the eagle-eyed among you, the first shot of Sherlock's 'body' on the floor also features a rubbish truck that is filled with bags and neatly parked in front of the landing. Sherlock actually jumps into the rubbish truck whilst Molly has placed a dead body, daubed in blood and in Sherlock's clothes on the pavement. When the rubbish truck drives away, as it does once pedestrians and John start to surround the body, it takes the very much alive Sherlock with it. Molly has organised the paramedics to take the body away and the people around aren't necessarily the wiser for what has happened (Another interesting theory that I have seen is that the people surrounding the body are members of Sherlock's Homeless Network, mentioned throughout the episode as having helped the investigation).

Meanwhile, in John's trip from where he was standing to where the body is on the floor, he is crashed into, rather conveniently by a cyclist. The point of the cyclist is that he administers John with the fear-inducing hallucinogenic drug from the previous Baskerville episode. In the moments leading up to this event, John is told that his best friend is about to commit suicide right in front of him. Therefore, when John makes it over to the body, his worst fear will be seeing Sherlock dead on the pavement. So that is what he sees.

"But!" I hear you cry, "we see Sherlock's body for ourselves!" But do we?

The shots of Sherlock's body are mostly obscured; we see the back or side of his head. Before the facial shot we do see, the camera focuses on John looking at Sherlock's body, perhaps hinting that we are seeing things from his point of view. If he has been injected with the Baskerville drug, then the audience is seeing his hallucination, not the reality of the dead body.

Also, to keep the rumour alive that Sherlock is a fake, Moriarty is buried in Sherlock's coffin, thus destroying any evidence that he existed in the first place and proving that Sherlock made him up.

There you go, my nerdiness and attention to detail knows no bounds. Over to Jen.

JEN: 

        I don't think there can possibly be anything you've missed here...or can there? 
According to an interview with Steven Moffat in the Guardian (which I admittedly haven't actually read, just heard about), there is one crucial detail that all the online theorists are missing. Thanks a million Steven, like we weren't all going out of our minds enough. I would love to say that I am now able to reveal that detail to you, but that would be a cruel lie. The only thing I can think of which is not in this (lengthy) theory, is Sherlock's face. I'm totally with you that John being crashed into by the cyclist is very important, but I don't think that he only sees Sherlock as the dead body because of fear, drug induced or otherwise. Earlier in the episode, the little girl Moriarty kidnapped screams when Sherlock walks into the room. Why? Because, as Sherlock himself poins out, she has been conditioned to fear this face. This could have been done with photographs and video footage of Sherlock, yes, but to produce that kind of reaction it's likely that Moriarty would have needed far more than a photograph. He would have needed to make the little girl believe that Sherlock was in the room with her. And to do that, I think he had a mask. It is this mask that is the 'something of mine' Sherlock tells Moriarty he has, i.e he has his face, and it is this mask that we see on the dead body- the dead body of Moriarty.

I do agree with you that Sherlock jumped into some sort of truck and escaped. I seem to vaguely remember there being a market stall, although I could be getting it confused with the truck. Again, I agree that this obscured viewpoint has definitely got to be the reason John has to stand exactly where he is told.

Thoughts? Personally I think we should just kidnap the entire production team until they tell us the truth and be done with it!

BECKY: 

           Whilst kidnapping is both tempting and a perfectly good solution to our conundrum, let us continue to speculate. 

As you very correctly pointed out, I did not refer to the girl screaming at Sherlock and yes, this is a gap in the theory I have proposed. The mask is a pretty convincing idea actually but, there is a slight flaw in that the dead body is wearing Sherlock's clothes. We see him before he jumps, and indeed when he is in the air wearing the iconic coat that John so affectionately took the mickey out of in the previous episode. Ah yes, the previous episode... So how about this for an explanation?

In The Hounds of Baskerville, Dr Stapleton specifically mentions that cloning is something that is going on within the world of science. Moriarty has connections pretty much everywhere. SO (and stick with me on this), he not only has Sherlock's face, but his entire identity and the girl screams at Sherlock because his clone had kidnapped them. Sherlock realises this, tracks down the clone, kills him, throws the clone body off the roof and convinces everyone, including John, that he is dead.

Who ever said these theories needed to be realistic?

JEN: 

       Argh I didn't even think about the clothes! NOT a sentence I ever thought I would say/write.

But yes, now that you so eloquently mention it, we did most definitely see said iconic coat flapping most gloriously about as Sherlock jumped. It is plausible that he could have put the coat on Moriarty. However it is less plausible that he would have wanted to be parted from it. So it does cause us a problem.

Go with the clone theory?

BECKY: 

           Let's go with the clone. Or Moffat could do something entirely wacky; the whole death is never explained because just as it's all about to kick off with fancy graphics and mind-bending twists, someone's phone starts playing 'Stayin' Alive'. Oh wait...

JEN:

       I still say we kidnap him.

BECKY: 

          Agreed.

NEWS: Being Human Trailer

A cult hit both here and across the pond, BBC Three's Being Human is returning for a fourth series and the trailer for it has just been released.

As regular viewers know, the last series' finale saw the death of Mitchell the vampire thanks to both the redemptive end to his plotline and the fact that Aidan Turner was about to jet off for New Zealand to film The Hobbit. Since then, us fans have discovered that Russell Tovey, who plays neurotic werewolf George, and his on-screen other half Sinead Keenan's Nina will both be leaving the show.

That just leaves ghostly Annie (Lenora Critchlow) behind, werewolf Tom (Michael Socha) being bumped up to cast regular and newcomer Damien Maloney as Hal, filling the vampire quota. George appears in the trailer and so we can probably expect his exit to come fairly early on in the series. This will leave the remaining trio to take care of his and Nina's child who appears to be the focus for series four.

Head over to the Being Human page on the BBC website to view the trailer and if, like me, you're craving more information, check out the individual character trailers too. Being Human is set to return in February.

- Becky

NEWS: The BAFTA Nominations

With the Golden Globes last week, the awards season is officially underway and just after we had the Hollywood Foreign Press Association winners, this year's BAFTA nominations were announced. The highlight of our film industry year, the British Academy Film Awards are often the big indicator for the Oscars themselves but usually come with a focus on more homegrown talent.

This year though, it is the French film The Artist that is leading the way with 12 nominations, closely followed by the film that stars seemingly every British actor bar Alan Rickman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy with 11. Martin Scorsese's Hugo has 9 while My Week With Marilyn has 6 nominations and then there is War Horse and The Help each with 5. The jewel in the crown of recent British cinema, Harry Potter's final installment, The Deathly Hallows - Part 2, is tying with Margaret 'The Iron Lady' Thatcher and Ryan Gosling's hammer-wielding wheelman in Drive with 4 nominations each. While going with the usual artsy awards-bait films, it's refreshing to see that hits like Kristen Wiig's Bridesmaids and more indie fare like John McDonaugh's The Guard have received screenplay nominations while Paddy Considine's directing debut Tyrannosaur also gets a look in.

The only award voted for by the public, the Orange Wednesday Rising Star BAFTA is looking like it's going to be the most hotly contested of the acting awards this year (let's face it, if Meryl Streep doesn't walk away with the Leading Actress gong, reality will likely fall in on itself). Previously won by such luminaries as Bond girl Eva Green, upcoming Batman baddie Tom Hardy and Professor X himself, James McAvoy, you can usually expect the Rising Star to also be The Next Big Thing. 

The two major names in the nominations are Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston, replaying the brotherly battle of this year's Thor in which Hemsworth's Nordic superhero defeated Hiddleston's Loki. Chris O'Dowd has always impressed in the IT Crowd and has gone on to do so with Bridesmaids while Eddie Redmayne's profile is slowly increasing after My Week With Marilyn and television work such as the upcoming Birdsong. Adam Deacon is probably the lesser known name on the list but has given excellent performances in previous Rising Star Noel Clarke's Kidulthood and its follow-up Adulthood.

The British Academy Film Awards will be held at the Royal Opera House in London on February 12. If you're a film awards nut like me, you can view the full list of nominations here. 

Whilst I sadly won't be attending the awards ceremony (I'm assured the Assorted Buffery invitation was lost in the post…), I'll be writing up my review of the night and bringing you all the glitz, glamour, and extraordinarily lengthy thank-you speeches after the event itself!

- Becky

FILM REVIEW: The Iron Lady

Phyllida Law’s new biopic opens on an old lady buying milk, unable to believe how much prices have risen. An old lady in a headscarf, not walking particularly well and looking a bit lost. In fact, the film opens on an old lady in a headscarf who really could be just about any old lady in a headscarf. This is strangely in-keeping with the rest of the film, however, as from start to finish you get the impression that this is not a film about Margaret Thatcher. An Iron Lady, maybe, but not The.

True, it does track the life of the first ever female Prime Minster of Great Britain, played magnificently by Meryl Streep, greatly deserving of her Golden Globe, as she rises to power from the life of a humble grocer’s daughter.  We see how she first becomes a local MP, then Education Secretary and finally the leader of both her Party and the country she obsessively adores. We see key events in her personal and political life via flashback, as the elderly Baroness Thatcher is jolted back to the moment in question by various items of strategically placed memorabilia.

In this way the film does try, very, painfully hard to be a film about Margaret Thatcher- but it still isn’t. The social reality of her politics is cut short precisely as Lady Thatcher’s housekeeper turns off the television when a news piece about her employer becomes too negative. We learn nothing from this film about the effects of the nationwide strikes, political motives, the bombing of the Tory Party conference, the Irish Republican Army, controversial tax laws or the Falklands War. Well, we do, but it is two dimensional at best, portraying the PM as unquestionably and unwaveringly in the right throughout. Even get classic lines such as the now infamous ‘The Lady’s not for turning’ have been left out.

What we do get as a result of this, though, be it intentional or otherwise, is a touching and surprisingly moving film about the effects of a lifetime of public service.  We get a story about one woman’s sense of duty- an ambitious loyalty she refuses to give up for anyone. We also get a brave re-imagining of dementia through Lady Thatcher’s interactions with her late husband, Dennis (Jim Broadbent), and through this we get a film about a couple. Mesmerizing as Streep is in the role of Mrs Thatcther, and she is mesmerizing, this remains a film about the two of them. About Dennis’ valued support, her care for him and her anguish that he is no longer there. In fact, one of the most poignant moments in the film is Lady Thatcher, with characteristic defiance, shouting ‘I will not go mad’ at the imaginary Dennis.  

Again, though, Dennis could be the loyal husband of any successful woman, not necessarily The Iron Lady herself. The inability of the film to truly engage with its’ subject matter is also screamingly obvious in its presentation of women. It desperately wanted to be a Feminist revision of Thatcher’s legend, but it could never have achieved this. For one thing, Thatcher herself preferred ‘the company of men’, cooked Dennis’ dinner for him and famously denounced the Feminist Movement.

It does try, though. We have scenes of a younger Margaret setting off for Parliament, leaving behind her crying children, but these are never fully explored. We have the very same younger Margaret claiming she ‘will never die washing out a teacup’, yet the final scene sees… her washing out a teacup. This may be both visually and dramatically poignant, but it is too confusing when put next to any attempt at a Feminist discourse.  The same is true of the focus upon clothes. The inclusion of The Iron Lady’s real-life claim that her pearls were ‘non-negotiable’ is intended to show both her love for the family they represent but also her obstinate nature. Its use in the film, though, coupled with the use of shoes from start to finish as a symbol of ‘not fitting in’, perpetuates an atmosphere of ‘silly women and their accessories’. This does nothing for the film or the woman herself.  And again, this is a film about Margaret Thatcher which does not want to be about Margaret Thatcher.

All in all, though, The Iron Lady is worth seeing. It does lack focus and can be two dimensional in places, but its’ decision to focus on the relationship between Lady Thatcher and her husband was a wise one.  It is a good film as far as it is the story of one woman’s sheer determination to succeed, and the man who loved her for it. A good film about her politics, and her place in political history, and what really went on, it probably isn’t.

***

3 stars- one for Meryl Streep, one for Jim Broadbent and one for my involuntary tears in Dennis’ final scene.

- Jen

Take A Seat

Hello there - you made it! Grab yourself a biscuit and put your feet up. 

We’re really glad you could make it over to our beloved blog of Assorted Buffery. Which is not a word. We should know - we’re buffs. In as many ways as we can be anyway. We love nothing better than a good book, film, TV programme or play. 

Well, that’s not strictly true. There is one thing we love better than a good book, film, TV programme or play, and that’s talking about those very things. At great length. In pernickety, in-depth glorious detail. We may even throw in juicy little titbits like the odd bit of hot gossip, an amusing video or even just that latest on set picture from that thing everyone likes. 

If that sounds like your cup of tea - the sort you’d merrily dip your hobnob into - do feel free to visit us as often as you like and join in- comment to your heart’s content; we love a good chin wag. Not as much as we love to be nerdy about the things we love, true - but it comes very close. 

So without much more ado, we shall potter off and begin writing all these buffery-related discussions that we just know you're waiting to read.

Enjoy that biscuit!

- Jen and Becky