Published 2006
The first thing I look for in a TV tie-in novel is for the characters and feel of the series to be faithfully reproduced. Of the three Torchwood books released last December, I chose to home in on Andy Lane's story, because he has previously written some fantastic Dcotor Who and proven to be a very clever writer. He has not let me down here.
The recent Doctor Who novels, tied-in to the new TV series, have generally disappointed because they have to cater for a younger, easier audience and lack sufficiently advanced concepts. Torchwood, it would seem, has no such similar concerns, allowing Andy Lane to weave a much more involving 'adult' concept into his 'episode'. There may also be benefits from having several regular human characters to work with, rather than just one omnipotent time-travelling alien and a daft assistant.
After a shaky start, the vibe and humour of the show is rendered quite well against the backdrop of the drama, and there is even a very good sense of character development.
Lane takes good advantage of the opportunity to get inside everyone's heads and have a good look at what makes them tick. Backgrounds are subtley fleshed out in addition to the detail provide in the series, and there are even overlying story-arc hints dropped - all as if this genuinely were a 'missing episode' within the structure of the first season.
In some ways, it might be sucessfully argued that Torchwood gains from portrayed in novel form. Sci-fi concepts and personal storylines can be more deeply explored and noone is subjected to John Barrowman's acting!
Well-rounded and easily devourable, with little of the usual remorse associated such trash.
Thursday, 22 March 2007
Saturday, 17 March 2007
The House of Doctor Dee, by Peter Ackroyd
First published 1993.
OK. Having been passed through the hands of two other book-crossers whilst managing to not yet be completely read, I was determined to plough through this one.
How difficult a task had I set myself?
It was whilst trying to explain to my wife how I felt about this book that I think I hit upon a winner: Reading this novel was like watching a film by David Lynch. You know that what is going on is amazing, well-written stuff, but it is all so damn high-brow that it walks that very very fine line between 'brilliant' and 'extremely difficult to understand'.
I am on record for hating David Lynch. He is a talented Director that never seems to use his talents to create coherent stories.
Do I hate this novel? Not quite. The individual scenes - both in present-day London and the pre-scientific world of advanced philosopher John Dee - were sometimes vividly realised and most of time extrememly interesting. Yet it was a deep struggle to maintain enthusiasm for the overall book because of the obscure themes.
Without giving anything away, the final plot twists/revelations are of the kind that either make you re-evaluate the entire novel or shake your head in dismay. Personally, I like the type of questioning of the reality of narrative that the conclusion introduces, but it was too little too late to rescue the ungraspable, high-brow nature of the majority of rest of the book.
This may be an absolute gem for the right person. Perhaps a historian/scholar in early science/magic or someone really interested in philosophical thoughts on the identity of great cities like London over vaste expanses of time.
Give it a go, but don't hesitate to pass it on if you don't like the first three chapters. It doesn't "settle in" at any stage.
One of those deals where you suspect that the fancy ingredients are supposed to impress you, but they're not as good as more common fare. Chicken generally tastes better than pheasant.
OK. Having been passed through the hands of two other book-crossers whilst managing to not yet be completely read, I was determined to plough through this one.
How difficult a task had I set myself?
It was whilst trying to explain to my wife how I felt about this book that I think I hit upon a winner: Reading this novel was like watching a film by David Lynch. You know that what is going on is amazing, well-written stuff, but it is all so damn high-brow that it walks that very very fine line between 'brilliant' and 'extremely difficult to understand'.
I am on record for hating David Lynch. He is a talented Director that never seems to use his talents to create coherent stories.
Do I hate this novel? Not quite. The individual scenes - both in present-day London and the pre-scientific world of advanced philosopher John Dee - were sometimes vividly realised and most of time extrememly interesting. Yet it was a deep struggle to maintain enthusiasm for the overall book because of the obscure themes.
Without giving anything away, the final plot twists/revelations are of the kind that either make you re-evaluate the entire novel or shake your head in dismay. Personally, I like the type of questioning of the reality of narrative that the conclusion introduces, but it was too little too late to rescue the ungraspable, high-brow nature of the majority of rest of the book.
This may be an absolute gem for the right person. Perhaps a historian/scholar in early science/magic or someone really interested in philosophical thoughts on the identity of great cities like London over vaste expanses of time.
Give it a go, but don't hesitate to pass it on if you don't like the first three chapters. It doesn't "settle in" at any stage.
One of those deals where you suspect that the fancy ingredients are supposed to impress you, but they're not as good as more common fare. Chicken generally tastes better than pheasant.
This was a book-crossing book.
Labels:
2 'stars',
books,
contemporary fiction,
historical fiction
Thursday, 8 March 2007
I Capture The Castle (2003)
Thursday, 1 March 2007
Minority Report (2002)
Dir: Steven Spielberg
An old-fashioned recipe prepared for modern tastes. Classic science fiction gets the Super-Size treatment, but still grimly retains some of Philip K. Dick's secret herbs and spices.
An old-fashioned recipe prepared for modern tastes. Classic science fiction gets the Super-Size treatment, but still grimly retains some of Philip K. Dick's secret herbs and spices.
Monday, 26 February 2007
The Corporation (2003)
Saturday, 24 February 2007
Minority Report, by Philip K. Dick
Collection of short stories. Published 2002.
I have read a lot of historical-based fiction over the last few months and most of this has been hard work. Fun, but not easy. With this in mind, I needed to give myself a brief holiday and look into some classic sci-fi. I have been bouncing a few sci-fi ideas around in my head for a while now, so I was looking forward to wading through this popular collection of Philip K. Dick's shorts as a source of inspiration. What I found was a writer rife with challenging questions of humanity and identity, but not so solid on plot structure.
Minority Report and We Can Remember It For You Wholesale (movie adaptation: Total Recall) are, as expected, the stand out stories. Both exploring 'what-if?' ideas from which a person defines himself, Minority Report explores predeterminism (what if you are given forwarning that you will murder someone you've not yet met?) whilst memory is the subject of the latter (what if your memory was artificial? When it unravels, who do you become?).
In some cases - with particular reference to What The Dead Men Say - his lack of plot delivery might be considered a strength. The ambigiuous, unexpected lack of closure of What The Dead Men Say reeks of authorly laziness, yet can be closely compared to his famous novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? Plot and characters supposedly continue in their miserably uncertain indentities with questions unanswered and no neat resolution. As a writer, I admire the strength of conviction, as a reader, this can be frustrating.
Even though the science and plot twists have both forgivably dated, I was still left with a minor sense of awe that didn't require the usual 'put-yourself-in-their-era' sort of appreciation. Dick definitely belongs to the real school of Sci-Fi that makes you think, and I believe I have learned a thing or two about exploring a concept within a character.
I have read a lot of historical-based fiction over the last few months and most of this has been hard work. Fun, but not easy. With this in mind, I needed to give myself a brief holiday and look into some classic sci-fi. I have been bouncing a few sci-fi ideas around in my head for a while now, so I was looking forward to wading through this popular collection of Philip K. Dick's shorts as a source of inspiration. What I found was a writer rife with challenging questions of humanity and identity, but not so solid on plot structure.
Minority Report and We Can Remember It For You Wholesale (movie adaptation: Total Recall) are, as expected, the stand out stories. Both exploring 'what-if?' ideas from which a person defines himself, Minority Report explores predeterminism (what if you are given forwarning that you will murder someone you've not yet met?) whilst memory is the subject of the latter (what if your memory was artificial? When it unravels, who do you become?).
In some cases - with particular reference to What The Dead Men Say - his lack of plot delivery might be considered a strength. The ambigiuous, unexpected lack of closure of What The Dead Men Say reeks of authorly laziness, yet can be closely compared to his famous novel Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? Plot and characters supposedly continue in their miserably uncertain indentities with questions unanswered and no neat resolution. As a writer, I admire the strength of conviction, as a reader, this can be frustrating.
Even though the science and plot twists have both forgivably dated, I was still left with a minor sense of awe that didn't require the usual 'put-yourself-in-their-era' sort of appreciation. Dick definitely belongs to the real school of Sci-Fi that makes you think, and I believe I have learned a thing or two about exploring a concept within a character.
Sunday, 18 February 2007
The Best of 2006
To create a "Best of" list is a well recognised affectation of anyone who is hardcore enough to monitor their reading and viewing habits. I am certainly no different, however it is new to me to able to construct a list so definitively, as I have only in the last year started keeping such rigid records of my consumptions.
The following lists are inspired by a very good film critic friend of mine who can probably be blamed for my eventually deciding that I wanted to keep this diary. His annual "best of" movies are an event anticipated by many, I'm sure, and his 2006 choices can be found here.
And, without any further ado, my own following list are to be qualified as such:
1) I do not read quickly, nor do I watch half as many films as I believe that I should. These are in no way compiled from a comprehensive survey of what the year had to offer.
2) The list is drawn from those movies and books that I personally read - for the first time - during 2006. It is not restricted to 2006 releases only.
My Top Ten first time reads for 2006
1. The Time Travellers Wife - by Audrey Niffenegger
2. The Mary-Sue Extrusion – by Dave Stone
3. The Penguin History of Europe – by J.M.Roberts
4. Doctor Who: Fallen Gods – by Jonathon Blum & Kate Orman
5. The Big Ask – by Shane Maloney
6. Doctor Who: Camera Obscura – by Lloyd Rose
7. Be Cool – by Elmore Leonard
8. Girl With A Pearl Earring – by Tracy Chevalier
9. Pompeii – by Robert Harris
10. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything – by Steve D. Levitt & Stephen J. Dubner
My Top Ten first time views for 2006
1. Downfall (2005) [DVD]
2. Wolf Creek (2005) [DVD]
3. Sense and Sensibility (1995) [TV]
4. The Devil Wears Prada (2006) [Cinema]
5. School of Rock (2003) [in-flight]
6. Broken Flowers (2005) [Cinema]
7. Jarhead (2005) [Cinema]
8. Hogfather (2006) [TV]
9. Napoleon Dynamite (2004) [TV]
10. The Perfect Parents (2006) [TV]
The following lists are inspired by a very good film critic friend of mine who can probably be blamed for my eventually deciding that I wanted to keep this diary. His annual "best of" movies are an event anticipated by many, I'm sure, and his 2006 choices can be found here.
And, without any further ado, my own following list are to be qualified as such:
1) I do not read quickly, nor do I watch half as many films as I believe that I should. These are in no way compiled from a comprehensive survey of what the year had to offer.
2) The list is drawn from those movies and books that I personally read - for the first time - during 2006. It is not restricted to 2006 releases only.
My Top Ten first time reads for 2006
1. The Time Travellers Wife - by Audrey Niffenegger
2. The Mary-Sue Extrusion – by Dave Stone
3. The Penguin History of Europe – by J.M.Roberts
4. Doctor Who: Fallen Gods – by Jonathon Blum & Kate Orman
5. The Big Ask – by Shane Maloney
6. Doctor Who: Camera Obscura – by Lloyd Rose
7. Be Cool – by Elmore Leonard
8. Girl With A Pearl Earring – by Tracy Chevalier
9. Pompeii – by Robert Harris
10. Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything – by Steve D. Levitt & Stephen J. Dubner
My Top Ten first time views for 2006
1. Downfall (2005) [DVD]
2. Wolf Creek (2005) [DVD]
3. Sense and Sensibility (1995) [TV]
4. The Devil Wears Prada (2006) [Cinema]
5. School of Rock (2003) [in-flight]
6. Broken Flowers (2005) [Cinema]
7. Jarhead (2005) [Cinema]
8. Hogfather (2006) [TV]
9. Napoleon Dynamite (2004) [TV]
10. The Perfect Parents (2006) [TV]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)