Change Your Image
skutah
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againThe less developed the character, the more challenging the task - meaning if the impact was similar but one character was fleshed out less than the other by the script, the latter has been given preference as the achievement is bigger. Those not engaged in fight scenes rank in order of impact below those who had fight scenes and non-fight scenes.
This list is, of course, very subjective as "presence" and "impact" are hard to explain in a paragraph but my evaluation could probably be based on a more detailed analysis and might see some minor changes then.
Reviews
Vikings: Revenge (2017)
Where is Ivan Kaye's Emmy nomination for his King Aelle?!
'Revenge' starts somewhat too slowly as I was burning to FINALLY see how King Aelle would fare against the Ragnarssons and how their revenge would look (and I'm not alone). But Ivan Kaye, who played King Aelle, fully made up for all the episode's shortcomings by his truly breathtaking, award-worthy performance in every single one of his scenes.
As the title 'Revenge' suggests, the culmination point of this episode is the final confrontation of King Aelle with the Ragnarssons and their revenge on him for which this episode is remembered and has become famous amongst the fans.
Hence this was truly Ivan Kaye's episode in this season and the culmination towards which the first part of the show had been heading since the build-up for Ragnar's storyline with King Aelle in season 1. It is a pity that he wasn't given due space to show more of his brilliance, especially with regard to the intense process that must have taken place to push his forceful and proud character over his breaking point into the miserable state of his penultimate scene.
But even with very limited space and with script issues this incredible actor managed to display most vividly and convincingly a full range of emotions, moods, and states:
From subtle hints at King Aelle's major vulnerability in his restrained concern and seeking strength in religion through awe-inspiring and heroically belligerent determination followed by a whole battle taking place on his face between confidence with triumphant satisfaction, horror and composure, then rather abruptly changing to a defenceless and miserably intimidated state in total desperation and finally culminating in blood-curling suffering which in the end melts into an agony that unveils most touching fragility and thereby the character's bare humanity.
To sum it up: a standout performance par excellence by Ivan Kaye who deserved an Emmy nomination for this stunning performance and definitely a lot more attention. I found myself deeply shaken and impressed by his mastery which induced me to check more of his work.
There were some insults to the audience's intelligence in this episode and a harsh breach of continuity in King Aelle's character development which I can't describe further here in order to avoid spoilers. This is most probably due to the fact that they, unfortunately, decided to spend too much time on introducing the Ragnarssons and then went from this almost boringly slow start to a rushed pace towards the end. Thereby they didn't give King Aelle the careful writing and screentime for which the episode title 'Revenge' and the show's official teasing called and that the actor, the character and the audience deserved after such a long period of waiting for this final showdown.
I give this episode a rating of 10 nonetheless if only because Ivan Kaye really saved the day in my opinion by making even the most ridiculous turns look believable through his convincing portrayal that made all the various states of his character in this episode feel genuine.
Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves (1943)
Entertaining film with some issues that displays a surprising amount of historical knowledge
This movie is a colourful adventure movie that is greatly entertaining if you like this old technicolor style of Orientalist films. I mainly love it because of two things: fond childhood memories from a time when I even watched it on a black and white TV set in the mid-80s and [name=nm0700084]'s Prince Cassim.
This actor has played small parts in a couple of classic movies and often appeared alongside some of the big names of his days, but it is in this movie and a couple of later productions mainly that he got a chance to show more of his talent and skills. His expressions and his work with his voice are formidable and he is seriously underrated as his range of characters is pretty impressive. Not to speak about how he managed to make this villain character mean and miserable, contemptible and touching at the same time. His Prince Cassim to me has always been the character with the most depth in this film.
That said, the film is of course to be classified as strongly Orientalist and escapist, it never lets you forget that you're watching a piece of Hollywood fiction with main characters that are boringly one-sided (good or bad) and it avoids answering the most interesting question: What Ali would've done with Cassim if he had faced the decision as he was the father of Ali's beloved and future wife who - as a good daughter - still had a soft spot for her dad despite his awful misbehaviour. But all of this is part of the style of this sort of movies at the time and therefore I find it excusable.
On the other hand the interweaving of 13th century history with a tale from the 1001 nights is done in an amazingly apt manner as the fall of Baghdad to the Mongols is in fact attributed to the machinations of a treacherous vizier (along with an incompetent caliph) in some sources, the caliph was actually killed by the Mongols and there was indeed a fugitive who claimed to be a surviving member of the dynasty and subsequently continued the line of the Abbasid caliphs of Baghdad in Egypt. Therefore there might've been more knowledge at work than one would expect from this type of light entertainment and I'm wondering how they came to mix these ingredients with the Ali Baba story.
All things considered I rate this 8 out of 10 because my 21st century adult self is unable to overlook the issues listed above.
The Revenger: An Unromantic Comedy (2019)
Thoroughly enjoyable comedy with Ivan Kaye standing out as unrivalled highlight
British independent film 'For Love or Money' has been produced on a tight budget, but does convince with its beautiful photography, a pleasant atmosphere, plenty of funny scenes and with a great cast:
Tony Way (best man Tim) is extremely funny, the leads Samantha Barks and Robert Kazinsky portray the slowly growing human sensitiveness of their characters convincingly and Ivan Kaye stands out as the unrivalled highlight as Connie's father Patrick.
Always a scene-stealer, in this film Kaye shows his genius to impress even smaller characters on the audience by deploying an enormous range of acting skills within limited space. He masterfully switches back and forth between the promiscuous and bizarre touch of his character and its traditional and patriarchal qualities within seconds. Kaye's brilliance dominates every single one of his scenes making him the main focus in most unexpected moments. Even when he is positioned in the background, that is where the main fun is happening. As Ivan Kaye makes his first appearance towards the last third of the film, it is certainly true in this case that they saved the best for last.
It's just a pity that the happenings at the house of Connie's parents haven't been given more space as in my opinion the Failed Critics review correctly states that the film "jumps to a completely different level" once Ivan Kaye and Anna Chancellor (as Connie's mother Carol) appear on the scene.
Rachel Hurd-Wood as Connie's old friend Kendra has several great moments and although Ed Speleers sometimes overacts given the more restricted style of his castmates, his facial expressions are hilarious.
Some marginal, but recurring characters evoke extra laughs, not least David Hargreaves' somewhat quirky priest with his dry style.
All in all, this is a thoroughly enjoyable comedy film with an endearingly human undercurrent that results in an interesting turn at the end. Highly recommended to everybody who is looking for a slightly different type of "romantic comedy" and wants to laugh a lot.
Troy (2004)
Not bad, but why didn't they name it "Achilles"?
I watched this movie when it came to the cinemas in Germany and once again in television some weeks ago. Though I liked it in a way, because I'm fond of the optical experience of this kind of movies, there were some disappointing elements.
But first, I want to mention something positive: I was impressed by the demonstration of how Achilles' fighting works to make him nearly invincible. It was an extraordinarily good idea to explain his power in war by his acting and reacting faster than others and employing a better and more precise method. But I don't think - like at least one of the former reviewers - the idea is correct that Greeks at that time did believe in the existence and power of their gods as little as we do. This may fit in our contemporary world view, but I think it would be a much better interpretation of the time and place depicted if one had introduced serious doubts about why the god protecting Troy, Apollo, didn't help his town. On the other hand, they depicted Agamemnon and his real aims in waging war against Troy in a very convincing way and the choice of actors for Agamemnon and Menelaos - who are brothers - was definitely fitting. Furthermore, the scene depicting Priamos who comes to Achilles to get the body of his dead son back is as near to the story of the Iliad as it is impressing.
Yet, I was a bit disappointed by the following points: I didn't understand the reason, why they made it appear as if Priamos, the king of Troy, who is famous to have had about fifty sons and a number of daughters, only had two sons, Hector and Paris. Surely, the others are less important, but it would have been sufficient to place a number of people hanging around - they employed enough people in other scenes - and to mention that there are more than two sons. I also don't know why it was necessary to put an end to this famous ten-year-lasting war this quickly - just to save some aging make-up? Finally, the thing most annoying to me all over the film was the overemphasized stress on Achilles (though I can imagine this has to do with Hollywood art styling Brad Pitt as THE hero of the film). Achilles may have been one of the best heroes of the Greeks fighting in the war against Troy, but he definitely was not the only one nor did he in any way participate in the capture of the city (for he was dead by then). There could also have been made more out of the problematic character of Achilles, who surely is acting in an extremely bad manner when treating Hectors dead body as he does. Anyway, there was a much greater number of interesting personalities and heroes in the original story (e.g. Ajax 1 and 2, Ulysses, Diomedes, Nestor) who are not shown in a way illustrating their importance (perhaps to the exception of Ulysses). The Iliad is surely not at all a story mainly concerned with Achilles and Hector. It should be stated, at least, that although Achilles had killed Hector before, Troy perhaps would not have been conquered for some more years if there hadn't been the trick of Ulysses which made its way into common language (even of todays PC world). In omitting the element of the gods, however, there is also lost a whole dimension of the story - and the one most appropriate for introducing a comic element, by the way.
So, on the whole, it's not a bad film and surely good entertainment, but they could have done more in doing into a movie a story of the potential the Iliad is offering.