Children of the Stones
May. 15th, 2007 07:54 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kerravonsenI had bought this a while back, when it came out, but hadn't watched it until now. (Those with memories like an elephant may have noticed me mentioning the first episode last week). I finished watching it yesterday. Overall, it was better than I'd thought it would be from my impressions of the first episode.
Plot:
GT described it in the "Special Features" interview as "a cracking good script", and it was, by the time it got to the end. There were some things that seemed rather clunky and obvious, particularly at the beginning, but by the time we got to the last three episodes, things were moving well. Mind you, maybe I thought them clunky and obvious because I'm a longtime SF fan and therefore I know what conclusions to jump to when I'm watching something that's supposed to be a paranormal science-fantasy...
The explanations given for things didn't really make sense -- well, they made half-sense -- but the actual events (ignoring the mumbo-jumbo) fit together well enough. And the last episode, there were two things especially that I really liked:
(a) the clever way that Our Heroes managed to save themselves from doom
(b) the ambiguity of the very end, that topped off the escape with a haunting uncertainty.
Character:
Gareth Thomas was very good (no surprise), Ian Cuthbertson and the guy playing the poacher were having great fun (especially the scenery-chewing by the poacher...)
I liked Gareth Thomas's character, though I'm not sure whether I would say it was written unevenly, or whether it was rather realistic for him to be flipping back and forth between scepticism and belief. GT said in the interview that almost everything coming out of his mouth was "plot plot plot" but it was also true that it didn't feel like that. It seemed natural that he'd be thinking aloud about the problem, or discussing things with his son or with the other intelligent adult he was allied with (the museum curator).
The lass playing the daughter of the museum curator was very good.
The boy playing the Scientist's son wasn't the best actor, though he did seem to even out a bit by the end.
Style:
The spooky acapella theme was really spooky, but...
Look, I know you're really pleased with your spooky acapella theme, but, c'mon, it was overdone. Those folk who complain about Murray Gold's music in New Who obviously have never seen this show -- talk about overdone obvious "here is a dramatic moment, therefore we will turn the music REAL LOUD, so you know that this is Important".
Also the title sequence was long and boring, even the first time through. Thank goodness for fast forward.
But there were a lot of things that were very effective. The "Happy Day" greeting, the calm smiles that became so unnerving as they continued. The stones themselves. The painting that we kept on returning to. The feeling of things moving under the surface, especially with conversations with Hendricks, and the way that people knew things they weren't supposed to. The repeated theme of people turning to stone.
Other musings:
I don't think Gareth Thomas realizes that half the appeal of Children of the Stones for Blake's 7 fans is that HE is in it. Mind you, I think that's what gets us to watch, and then we enjoy it as we do.
Plot:
GT described it in the "Special Features" interview as "a cracking good script", and it was, by the time it got to the end. There were some things that seemed rather clunky and obvious, particularly at the beginning, but by the time we got to the last three episodes, things were moving well. Mind you, maybe I thought them clunky and obvious because I'm a longtime SF fan and therefore I know what conclusions to jump to when I'm watching something that's supposed to be a paranormal science-fantasy...
The explanations given for things didn't really make sense -- well, they made half-sense -- but the actual events (ignoring the mumbo-jumbo) fit together well enough. And the last episode, there were two things especially that I really liked:
(a) the clever way that Our Heroes managed to save themselves from doom
(b) the ambiguity of the very end, that topped off the escape with a haunting uncertainty.
Character:
Gareth Thomas was very good (no surprise), Ian Cuthbertson and the guy playing the poacher were having great fun (especially the scenery-chewing by the poacher...)
I liked Gareth Thomas's character, though I'm not sure whether I would say it was written unevenly, or whether it was rather realistic for him to be flipping back and forth between scepticism and belief. GT said in the interview that almost everything coming out of his mouth was "plot plot plot" but it was also true that it didn't feel like that. It seemed natural that he'd be thinking aloud about the problem, or discussing things with his son or with the other intelligent adult he was allied with (the museum curator).
The lass playing the daughter of the museum curator was very good.
The boy playing the Scientist's son wasn't the best actor, though he did seem to even out a bit by the end.
Style:
The spooky acapella theme was really spooky, but...
Look, I know you're really pleased with your spooky acapella theme, but, c'mon, it was overdone. Those folk who complain about Murray Gold's music in New Who obviously have never seen this show -- talk about overdone obvious "here is a dramatic moment, therefore we will turn the music REAL LOUD, so you know that this is Important".
Also the title sequence was long and boring, even the first time through. Thank goodness for fast forward.
But there were a lot of things that were very effective. The "Happy Day" greeting, the calm smiles that became so unnerving as they continued. The stones themselves. The painting that we kept on returning to. The feeling of things moving under the surface, especially with conversations with Hendricks, and the way that people knew things they weren't supposed to. The repeated theme of people turning to stone.
Other musings:
I don't think Gareth Thomas realizes that half the appeal of Children of the Stones for Blake's 7 fans is that HE is in it. Mind you, I think that's what gets us to watch, and then we enjoy it as we do.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 11:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 11:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 05:28 pm (UTC)