Why you should be watching: “Quarry”

Cinemax has always been referred to in movies as “I get-to-see-a-lot-of-sex channel”, because it’s always focused on more artistic films and those that hail from all over the world. In the emergence of two channels of Cinemax, channel number one usually contains a more known program, such as blockbusters and TV series that they themselves produce, and then on channel two, you get to see the sex.

After the ending of the exciting and action-packed bloodbath that was “Banshee”, Cinemax produced and released a retrospective into the 1970s in the form of the series called “Quarry”, which was actually based on the novel of the same name, written by Max Allan Collins.
The main character is Mac Conway who returns from his 2nd tour in Vietnam and gets a bad reputation among the locals because of a scandal that happened during his service. Not just him, but his best pal Arthur Solomon too, has seen the hell of war and came home with a semi-calm head. This is just the beginning, and the plot can be seen in episode one already – Arthur is less than semi-calm, he’s barely 3/4 calm as he takes on a dirty job worth $30,000 (which can today equal to an amount from $132,000 to $420,000) and asks for Mac’s help.

Why is the show important? It deals with two major themes that were a big issue in the past and are a big issue now, too. The relevance of giving war veterans their space and understanding when they zone out, sleepwalk or don’t want to talk doesn’t ever seem to be clear to people, especially to the wives of the men who return in such programs; you’ve seen it in every war themed movie in some way. It’s difficult to cheer for someone who’s trying to push their way into a man’s head when he’s seen dead bodies and waken up next to them for two years in a row. Despite feeling left out and abandoned, Mac’s wife can’t seem to get the elementary, at least that’s how it seems in the first few episodes.
The narrative moves slowly but has incredible scenes which reveal to us how both sides feel at the same time. This was important during the Vietnamese war, and it is important for anyone going to the battlefield in the Middle East today; his wife elaborates why she felt left out and abandoned, while Mac does his best to mutter out why he did two tours in Vietnam and what it meant for him.
I’m sure that the era when there was a general pressure for men to prove themselves through military service made some people grow up sooner than they had anticipated to.

What makes the situation harder is the fact that Mac and Arthur can’t get any legitimate jobs that they very much qualify for; Arthur bags a physically demanding gig which is way below his abilities or education, just because he came back from the war and may or may have not been involved in a mass murder.
The hipocrisy of the country that honors the men who go to war and then rejects them when they wish to move on with their lives is shown strongly and without beautification.

The other matter that is so important in the show is the treatment and inequality of America’s African-American citizens. Nowadays, we’ve been hearing on the news how police keeps treating their nation and how Donald Trump invites rallies to expel “bad ombres” from the country (I am not American nor do I live there, so I can only get informed through the news and programs) which feels unrealistic in this day and age, to be such a man and think in such a way; the situation depicted in “Quarry” shows a time of early integration of African-American citizens into the community, and Arthur Solomon’s family, and Arthur himself, are black citizens.
The very depiction of the attempts of integration and mistreatment is painful to see, if you are a normal functioning human with a heart, that is. While we watch it and think: “No one ever deserves this”, this isn’t a fantasized situation – it was real and it was recent. When we look back, 1972 is only 44 years ago from today, so not even a round 50 to say things are different; not that the number 50 would make it somehow justifiable.

Overall, the performance of Logan Marshall-Green as Mac Conway has brought our long awaited attention to him. He played supporting roles for most of his career and never really stood out. “Quarry” has shown us that he is around for a reason – he plays his calmness and his anger with a subtle difference. We can tell when he’s relaxed and happy, but most of his life has been intertwined with some of the most stressful situations known to man, so whenever he gets a release, it’s rare and valuable; Marshall-Green takes us slowly and nicely through the pain and the discomfort.

Some supporting characters carry heavy roles on their shoulders but I won’t elaborate who they are in order not to spoil anything too much. The actor Damon Herriman who plays Buddy has a huge history in the TV series universe, and he is my personal highlight of the show. Buddy is another kind of reject among the rejects of war, but he displays his insecurities through flamboyance and jokes. He rarely ever feels well but somehow manages to see things could get better for him; his relationship with his mother helps him remain encouraged, despite the relationship’s ridiculous and sometimes strange qualities.
Peter Mullan plays The Broker, another very important supporting character in Mac’s life and Peter Mullan is already a veteran in acting; The Broker’s omnipresence makes us dread but when he appears, we all know what’s coming next. When we see a character and know what’s about to happen, without ever needing him to explain, we should know that that’s a mark of a good program.

“Quarry” is heavy, gritty, emotional, captivating and exciting.

‘Til next time.

Anja

Why you should be watching: “Black Mirror”

I binge watched season 3 of “Black Mirror” with my mum yesterday. We just thought we could take it one at a time, maybe watch two new episodes and see what it’s like, and we ended up watching all six episodes in one night.

If anyone is familiar with “Black Mirror”, they also know that its writer and creator is Charlie Brooker, a man whose satirical and dark reviews of domestic (UK, that is) policy shows how much the world needs people who can easily call ‘bullshit’ on certain events. Personally, I watched everything Brooker had created to date because I have immense respect for him and his creative genius but I can’t guarantee he wouldn’t call me a buffoon as well if I told him I was a fan of his work; I just have a feeling he might, I don’t know.

The first season of “Black Mirror” was something very new on the market, despite having stories about technological advancements and science fiction drama from the dawn of time (I should look that fact up, though). This season really showed how technological advancement can hurt humanity, since people will stay people no matter how many gadgets they have; Toby Kebbell perfectly played the jealous husband in a world where he can access his and others’ memories from a hard drive. The other two episodes focused on the society’s obsession over reality TV. It was exciting to see this, even the first episode, in which the PM of Britain is blackmailed into having sex with a pig on national television. Years after the premiere of that episode, David Cameron was enshrouded in the scandal of doing something similar back in his college days – Brooker saw right through everything and went, “well if this happens, the world will have gone mad by then!”. Or maybe he knew more than many of us.

Season 2 followed the same thematic path but it wasn’t as memorable as the first one. The issues of technological advancement were very emotionally approached in the first episode where Hayley Atwell’s character can’t quite cope with the loss of her husband and decides to sign up for a service that can recreate him and keep him in her head the entire time. This can be devastating for numbers of reasons, as love and loss are two incredibly powerful emotions that can affect us, at most times, permanently. This was the best episode of the series, although the slowest one in terms of pace. Other two episodes simply deal with societal issues of publicly (and violently in public) judging an individual, as well as the entire absurdity of elections, candidates, politics and political games.

But, the arrival of season 3 made everything different. The release of this season was a bit under the radar for me, since I wasn’t sure it would continue after the second one. I thought maybe Charlie Brooker had had enough of making up stories about broken ideals and society. I was terribly wrong, though, since he wrote 6 episodes (well, five, if we don’t count “Nosedive”, which was only his idea but not his screenplay) and they all combined the emotional aspect, alienation and general humanity with the technological advancements, replacements and larger-than-life inventions. Episode called “Nosedive” was really stunning in both visual and dynamic aspects; somehow, the pastels in which the world is tightly wrapped can’t lighten up the darkness of the loneliness behind chasing ratings and online popularity. Reality of us getting to that place in time kicks in when our main character, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, can or can’t use daily amenities because she’s judged by her ratings. Yikes.

Other episodes, like “Playtest” show the advancement of video games, and how much that universe has expanded and how dangerous it can get; it delved into facing one’s fears in a truly dangerous way. That can be done in a gentler and kinder way, definitely. The story about the army man who is programmed to see only what the government wants him to see (and kill) is probably the scariest. Actually, they’re all scary. Fascinating and scary at the same time.
The best part is, the final episode is as long as a feature film, almost 90 minutes.

I fell in love with “Black Mirror” again. I keep thinking about the episodes all day today and I envy the people who still haven’t seen it. Whatever could possibly go wrong with society was depicted in the series and despite it being truly depressing, it’s actually riveting and exciting – the dialogues are exquisite, the visuals are impeccable and the universe of each episode can pull us in and make us think about it for hours after watching it.
Someone more adept would say it lacked something, they’d criticize it more objectively but I love Brooker’s vision and I love that his thinking takes us to some very possible outcomes; I also love that, however dark, he’s also a bit of a romantic. He understands how far someone would go for love, for success and for simple, pure happiness. He also understands that people are still people once released from the gadgets, and that our inner workings will always need care.

‘Til next time.

Anja

5 Novels That Would Make Great Movies

So, the other day I wrote a big post about developing novels into on-screen features and I said that they shouldn’t be expected to be the same.

That doesn’t stop me from imagining some of my favorite books into films, though, and very often while I read I am able to imagine certain actors in certain roles.
Even while I write screenplays, I can’t help but imagine someone famous as one of my characters.
Of course, that’s all just wishful thinking a lot of times and it won’t always suit the writer’s wishes or imagination, but that’s something I went through already.

I am a huge fan of fiction, especially detective novels and mysteries; my favorite writers of all time are Agatha Christie, Dan Simmons and Stephen King. It’s pretty limited but I feel comfortable in this genre.

Here are 5 novels that I believe would be huge hits in cinemas, and I’ll briefly explain why as well.

1. “DROOD” by Dan Simmons (2009)
   

   Dan Simmons is an exceptional writer because of his skill to incorporate fiction into real historical events and make people wonder which aspect was an actual event, and which is just a product of his mind. Any book by Simmons would be a great film, but “Drood” and “The Terror” in number two are very special.

   “Drood” is a two-novel tale about Charles Dickens’ friendship with Wilkie Collins, or much better, Collins’ friendship and mental rivalry with Dickens, since Collins’ is set as the narrator; it was also based on the events of Charles Dickens’ actual book “The Mystery of Edwin Drood” which remained unfinished.
   Wilkie Collins gets dragged into an underground scene of drugs, the occult and paranormal, but his biggest rival is (ta-da!) himself. The occult and paranormal take Wilkie Collins to other levels of emotional and physical plains.
   This story would be a great TV series (although there is talk that Guillermo del Toro wants to tackle this giant and turn it into a movie), since it’s a two novel story and has many encounters that are captivating and eerie; these would possibly have to be omitted from the movie because of length, which would thus create a dull story about a writer facing difficulties, with scares here and there.
   That is not what this book is – it is in fact a carefully thought out story that will drag you in so hard that you’ll beg for season 2 (wink wink).

2. “THE TERROR” by Dan Simmons (2007)
   

   I put this mega-incredible novel (due to current lack of sleep and thus a lack of adjectives, I can’t think of saying anything else that’s more true) under number two because its story is very different from “Drood”, but because of the same writer, it tampers skillfully with history just like “Drood” does.

   “The Terror” is a story about an expedition to the Arctic that happened mid 19th century, when Captain Sir John Franklin oversaw the travelling of two ships “HMS Erebus” and “HMS Terror”. These two ships were never found and to this day, it’s unknown what really happened to them.
   In comes Dan Simmons and gives his own account of the events; his narrator is a young doctor who joins “HMS Terror”, and he added a strange supernatural force that tampers with the ships’ crews. It’s even better than it sounds here.

3. THE SNOWMAN (original name: “Snømannen”) by Jo Nesbø (2007)
   

   One more writer whose books can forever be contracted to be made into movies. The awesome thing about Jo Nesbo’s writing is the thrill that can be equally visual and readable – when Stephen King steps into the psyche and gives us the whole internal struggle of a character, we are dragged into his mind more than the environment. Jo Nesbo is a bit more pragmatic and creates visually shocking and tense scenes that would easily make people a bit sick. However, he doesn’t exaggerate this; the gore has meaning, it is purposeful and actually quite elegant.

   The novel is one in a series of many novels about a loner detective named Harry Hole, but if references to old cases could be extracted from the dialogues, “The Snowman” and its story wouldn’t be hurt and would make a great standalone film.
   It was difficult to imagine an actor in the role of Harry Hole; he is described as a tall, blonde Norwegian cop who’s a bit ugly but in a super handsome manner, so I’d also love to see who would be chosen. This choice can actually make or break the movie.
   The story of “The Snowman” follows Hole chasing a serial killer whose trademark is making a snowman in front of his victims’ houses right before he kills.
   The book is exciting, on edge and the action is constant – there is always one direction for it to go, but it also has a quality of a “tellable” story because it incorporates the few failures before a final success, which is a must in every detective story told in Hollywood.

4. “THE MURDER OF ROGER ACKROYD” by Agatha Christie (1926)
   

   This is also known as the novel which was in 2013 proclaimed as the ‘best crime novel of all time‘ by the British Crime Writers’ Association (they must love detective stories more than I do), and also known in my own circle as one of the most amazing and surprising detective stories I’ve ever read.
   It was named the best ever in part because it has one of undoubtedly greatest endings of all time (which I will never ever reveal to you, but I’d love to make you read it in order to see for yourself), but we can’t ignore that the entire story makes compelling statements, leads us in different ways and makes us believe in one thing very firmly by leaning on our own sense of judgment and character.

   This novel was already adapted into a TV movie in the UK because Agatha Christie is a hugely popular writer there and David Suchel is a great Hercule Poirot, so why not. However, I think it deserves another attempt with a refreshed cast and a modern take, much like it was done with “And Then There Were None” recently, which was more eerie than I expected; it was really good.

5. “THE TRUTH” by Michael Palin (2012)
   

   I went with this one for last to ease the atmosphere of all the terror novels, murders and mysteries, by presenting to you a different kind of terror story; this novel is about an environmental journalist named Keith Mabbut who travels to India to research on the topic of environment and work forces in the depths of Indian nature. Mabbut meets one of his heroes there, a man who’s been an adventurist and a truth seeker much like Mabbut always wanted to be.

   It’s a nice story to turn into a movie because of its relevance. The environment is (and should be) a huge topic in the past years, but I can’t help and see this novel turned into a feature film of medium proportions. Any movie that wants to be a blockbuster and deal with environmental issues should probably be full of CGI and cliches.
   This story definitely can’t be all that, full of CGI, a blockbuster nor a cliche, but it can be an inspiring visual experience.
   Plus, Michael Palin is, like, the greatest Monty Python member ever. Just sayin’.

 

There are so many more to be put on this list, but these novels are the ones I anticipate and think about the most. Do you want to see a novel turned into a movie? Which one is it, and why?

‘Til next time

Anja

The case of the TV series

My last post was two days ago, despite saying that I’ll write every day.
It was difficult to promise that because I am super busy every day, but I am also trying to give this blog some direction.
After my top ten movies, I considered making more lists, but I find it very sudden to enter the universe of specified lists, such as ‘My favorite Robert de Niro roles’ or ‘My favorite German movies’, for example.
There’s nothing wrong with being specific, I just feel like I should explore myself and my possibilities before entering such an unforgiving, detail-oriented territory. And I don’t have a list of favorite German movies, either.

I wanted to talk about television dramas, instead, since I feel I should mention that the blog will be about that, too.

It’s no secret that even the most hardcore moviegoers have been letting themselves have some (guilty) pleasure in watching television dramas.
Who could blame them, since TV dramas have become very eloquent, detailed and attention-drawing.

Marvel has explored its possibilities greatly by joining forces with Netflix, with the presentation of “Marvel’s Daredevil” being my favorite one, although “Marvel’s Jessica Jones” and “Marvel’s Luke Cage” are chasing after it rapidly with, lesser but still stirring, success.
HBO have been at it for years – let’s talk “The Wire”, “The Sopranos”, “Game of Thrones” and my personal favorite, “Boardwalk Empire”; they love it all gritty, hands-on and with shock value at the core of some, if not all of them.
And Netflix made everything into a binge by releasing all its series in full.

I thought I could explore this case of the TV series through the drama series “Narcos”.

I put a picture of Wagner Moura portraying Pablo Escobar in “Narcos” above; this dramatic series has taken over a lot of minds and even hearts, but why is it so great?
For me, it’s the authenticity of the cast, the chance for Latin American actors to shine (and how darn well they all do) and most dialogues being spoken in Spanish. I talked about my special appreciation of authenticity in my number 9 movie on the Top 10 list, “Apocalypto”, but I know it’s not only me. The factor of many Latin American names is pretty great, but how many binge watching fans can name more than ‘that guy from Game of Thrones who got his head smashed in’ in “Narcos”? Doesn’t matter! It still works for everyone, because the actors are good, the show was filmed in its original location of Medellin, Columbia, ‘the guy from GoT’ (actually named Pedro Pascal, a brilliant human and talent)  and Boyd Holbrook actually met the men they’re playing, and Wagner Moura had to gain 20 kilograms to be the best Pablo there ever was.

“Narcos” doesn’t just work on Wagner Moura’s weight gain, but its fuel is his talent. I was extremely happy to see Moura in there, because I loved him in a few Brazilian movies and also because a few years ago I had a dream that he played a narco in a movie (I really, really did).
Most importantly, he did a job so well that people who never knew who Escobar was now imagine him as the guy. Despite a few mistakes in the historical and character accuracy, everything tailored to them worked out really well for the series.
I LOVE the aforementioned fact that there aren’t many faces that we can see so often; Boyd Holbrook has a big career in film without many people even knowing it, and so does Wagner Moura, but otherwise, they are only two out of a sea of characters (there are a few more Latin American actors who have very long careers behind them, but I am not IMDB *sorry*)

Writing is really, really important, especially in a long-running series; if it waivers even for a moment, it can make the watchful eye of the binge watchers open their paranoid notebooks and start to analyze what exactly happened there.
Writing in “Narcos” stayed pretty consistent and gave every occurring character some meaning that led to him meeting his or her fate in the end  – whether it was somewhat good or bad.
So a screenplay is the backbone of the television drama.

Look what happened to “Downton Abbey” – although the show was quite good all over, I couldn’t get over Fellowes’ need to write up highly unlikely stories for characters just because the people, or even he, wanted them back. As a writer, I love all my characters, but when one needs an ending – they will get it no matter what. A detached love is the key phrase, despite it being kind of ironic.
“Narcos” could never ever end with Pablo Escobar fleeing and staying alive, because it was based on a real drug kingpin’s life, so that was the difference between these two series. But, even if Escobar was fictional and beloved, his ending needed to come. All that rises must fall.

The special case of writing in the TV series is important; a long-running series can explore the dark and light parts of many characters, while a movie can’t; there’s more room for authenticity and improvement in writing. “Breaking Bad” got better in time, “Marvel’s Daredevil” flourished in its 2nd season, and it was all because of the inevitable passage of time.
While a great movie usually focuses on one single message (get the main guy to get the girl, get Max to break free, get Frodo to Mordor), a series focuses on a character, and more episodes give us freedom to understand a character. Movie can be a character analysis, but a movie almost always requires action in the form of at least three acts.

I can’t really say which one is better – my personal preference is a movie because I don’t need to take out hours or days to be impressed but I love a good TV series, too, especially if it explores something human and full of both error and success.
Which series do you like? Do you like “Narcos”? Let me know!

‘Til tomorrow (I guess)

Anja