Helen by Euripides- adapted by Frank McGuinness (Shakespeare's Globe)

It was hot yesterday, really hot. You'd think an evening performance in an open-air theatre like the Globe would be nice. It wasn't, it was stuffy, uncomfortable and head-ache inducing. And that was just the play.

Lauren and I went to see Helen at the Globe for my birthday (day two of a three day birthday weekend; first a Friday night party, then Saturday London to see the Summer Exhibition at the Royal Academy, a fab dinner in a posh restaurant and a play with a handsome lead. Finally Sunday a long walk through the countryside and afternoon cream tea!) I'd seen a Greek classic adapted by Frank McGuinness at the National Theatre last year, Oedipus, one of the best one act plays I'd ever seen, horrifically terrifying and well acted by Ralph Fiennes. So I was hopeful, the Guardian only gave Helen two stars but lots of papers gave good reviews, so I wasn't worried.

Frank McGuinness cannot do comedy. It was the script that I think was ultimately awful, not the actors. I saw Pennie Downie in Hamlet last year and she was a great Gertrude, she wasn't irritating beyond belief like she was last night, it was the poorly written character who was irritating. And I know what to expect from the Globe, I saw The Merry Wives of Windsor last summer and it was one of the best Shakespeares I've ever seen, it was brilliantly staged and wonderfully funny- Andrew Havill in particular I still think of and giggle. Anyway, at the Globe you expect singing and dancing- the whole 16th Century experience- but in moderation!!! And when appropriate!

Also there was too much going on visually in Helen (a horrible set and confusing troupe of slaves prancing about at all times), but mainly I had problems with the lack of story and the fact that it didn't seem to know if it was a comedy or not- it switched from bawdy crude jokey shite to serious woe-is-me stuff, make your mind up! Lots of people were laughing, but I wasn't. It wasn't funny. It was really embarrassing.

Here's a quote from Lauren to finish off, who by the way didn't mind that it was awful so much because at least Paul McGann is some sweet eye-candy.

"Poorly written, poorly acted, poorly staged, Pauly McGann."

Dark City (1998)

It looked and felt like Brazil(1985) except more polished, unfortunately there was not one joke in the whole film. Keifer Sutherland was doing a camp impression of Peter Lorre so that was sort of funny, but not really... I felt as though I'd seen the story a hundred times, though at first it was ridiculously confusing. But I hadn't read a description so I had no idea what it was about- I had no idea what it was about for a whole hour!

I like Rufus Sewell and he was definitely handsome in this film and Jennifer Connelly was gorgeous, remember she used to be so lovely and pale and not-anorexic!

But in the end you can sort of tell the caliber of a film when the bad guys walk in and they're Richard O'Brien and Ian Richardson.

Ho hum.

Bronson (2009)

Tom Hardy is a bloody good actor. I really liked this film but if it had been anyone else it I don't think it would have worked.

The Rivals (Abbey Theatre- Dublin, playing until the end of September)

Ok, so I don't know how useful this review will be to anyone because the only people I know in Ireland were sitting next to me in the audience on Wednesday. Anna and I went to visit Sarah in Dublin, we had a non-stop chock-a-block three days of Irish-fun. Though somehow I managed not to drink any whiskey. On the first day Anna and I were tourists, we did the open top bus, the W.B. Yeats exhibit, Trinity College Library and the Writers Museum.

local boy R.B. Sheridan wrote The Rivals in London. Oscar Wilde wrote in Oxford, Bram Stoker wrote Dracula in Whitby, James Joyce wrote in Dublin and his work is damn confusing!! Anyway, The Rivals is the third Restoration Comedy I have seen, I saw Etherege's Man of Mode at the National Theatre starring Tom Hardy and Rory Kinnear, and that was effing brilliant. Wycherly's The Country Wife with Toby Stephens was less memorable, though the sets were psychedelic. Yes, Man of Mode was extremely good, with lavish revolving sets, modern dress and music, it was inventive and spectacular. The Rivals at the Abbey Theatre (founded by Yeats and Lady Augusta) was done with much less expense, with less set and props! But it was perfect.

The company was so good. These actors were fabulously funny (maybe the clown was a bit grating, but hey ho, the American kids in front of us loved him!) everyone was wonderful. Especially Nick Dunning as the father, he had perfect comic timing and Marion O'Dwyer as Mrs Malaprop, a brilliant character to play. Of course Sheridan is really behind it all, the scenes that worked best were the ones when just two actors were on stage speaking at each other- a different battle of wits every ten minutes. Jesus, it was only a preview but they were bringing the house down. It was by far the best production I've seen for ages. Oh, and the costumes were amazing.

Desperate Romantics (BBC2-Tuesdays 9pm)

Oh, so another thing I'm desperately obsessed with is the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (I'm so cool) though I've never been that fond of Rosetti- who seems to be the leader of the boyband in the new television series. The show is written by Blackpool creator Peter Bowker, who has dropped some clangers in his time so we weren't really sure what might happen- judging from the amazing trailer it was going to be great; Rafe Spall as Holman Hunt, Posner (Sam Barnett) of the History Boys playing Millais and some pretty boy playing Rosetti, David Bowie singing in the background, yeah! But how was it going to be done, surely not with Bowie singing all the time? (this is what Anna hoped for) No, thank god, no modern songs playing over the top, but thank god it is not too serious either! It is very good and very funny.

Rafe is a fantastic actor and does comedy very well (I hope he doesn't turn ham one day, remember when Timothy Spall was so good in Auf Wiedersehen Pet, and then he got famous and now he's a total luvvie? sigh, the good old days) Sam Barnett is super-duper cute as Millais and even though it's sort of a Posner-role at least he's finally getting a chance to play someone who's not gay! I can't wait to see him and Effie being all cute together- Tom Hollander is fantastically serious as Ruskin, this is also a great change for him, his memorable roles are always so typecast creepy little slime-buckets, he is the straight man and he does it with surprising depth! It's only episode one so I don't know, maybe Aiden Turner as Rosetti (formerly seen in that BBC3 Vampire/Ghost/Werewolf flat-mate show) will grow on me, but I found him sort of wooden and very over the top- it is possible to play a drunken reprebate without going into caricature you know...

Of course another joy for me watching this show is the feeling I reckon my whole family get when we sit down to watch University Challenge and they get twenty or so and I only get the music and picture rounds... I know what they're painting! I can guess what masterpiece they are suddenly being inspired to paint! I am smug.

Catch up on the iPlayer! http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00lvyq2

Alberto Zago- The Perfect Shoes

Well, I've been on Italian designer Alberto Zago's website and I have to say I hate ALL the shoes, they are equally as hideous as English shoes. BUT today on the walk from the parked car to the door of the Harrogate Gift Fair I found the most perfect pair of shoes; classic design, black suede, not too high a heel, very soft. They are what I have been searching for my whole life, they are the shoes I draw on ladies' feet- half price from the Harrogate branch of Shubert's, reduced from £99 to, well, you do the maths.

Review OVER.

Perfect shoe is photographed on posh box on hideous mismatched bed sheets.

PS Don't worry, there were two of them.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

We (all six of us) went to see HP6 yesterday afternoon, Anna and I are seeing it again tomorrow morning before the schools break up. The reason we have to see it again is because as well as being quite exhausted from the non-stop entertaining, dinner-making and day-tripping we've been doing this week while we had guests (not to mention me sleeping on "the brown" for four nights), the film was so damn exciting and full of "good bits" that I really don't think I took them all in in one viewing!!

Yes, those who know me (which I assume is all who read this blog) know that Harry Potter is high up on the list of Amy's interests, if she was to go on Mastermind then Harry Potter would probably be at least second choice for specialist subject- if not first. Harry Potter is my life. Harry Potter has been my life for ten years. Sure, I might also say that Drop the Dead Donkey is my life- and I frequently dream entirely new episodes and wake up convinced that they resurrected it, and I watched it. Anyway, every time I go on the internet I check (a)my emails, (b)the Jonathan Pryce Appreciation Society message board and (c)The Leaky Cauldron- ie Harry Potter News. So in short, I've been looking forward to this film for AGES.

And oh my god, everyone, almost EVERYONE has suddenly learned how to act!! Even Alan Rickman has learned how to act!! I was so happy! I say I'm a fan of Harry Potter, that doesn't mean I think the films are great- I do think they're great, but I think there's tons of things wrong with them; I can't stand Emma Watson's eyebrow-acting, I didn't like Daniel Radcliffe, I hate how everyone is cast around the mis-casting of Alan Rickman as the 60-year-old Snape, I don't like how certain characters and certain actors are given less screen time than everyone else, and I obviously hate the appalling CGI. BUT I love changes that have been made for the better plot-wise, I love certain kid-actors in them (Neville, Draco, Luna, etc.) I adore Michael Gambon's Dumbledore, I love most of the casting- the mad British ensemble, and I love the running commentaries that me and Kirandeep or me and Anna have developed over the years. The films are fun, but I don't expect good acting or good adaptations after all these years.

The Half-Blood Prince was obviously as good an adaptation as any other Potter film, nice little changes, and big ones!- burning down a significant building to get out of the fact they omitted certain characters that were extremely important to the final book's opening! No building- no wedding! Changing Ginny's character to adapt to Bonnie Wright's flat and uninspired performance, ho hum, it had to be done. She can't be feisty and passionate when the actress is so blah (This pains me to say btw, I've always liked Bonnie's face and was convinced that she'd be great as soon as they let her have some lines, turns out she's the worst and I desperately missed Neville and Luna who were practically cameos). The only thing I really missed from this one is that Uncy Morphin was omitted, he was comedy gold, surely?!

I'm too excited about seeing it again to even try and review this properly, so I'm concentrating on performances- the film as a story was jam-packed and the kids' romances were most entertaining, hilarious, excellent and heartwarming (Ron's and Hermione's anyway) the only criticism I have of the Half-Blood Prince was that when the HBP's identity was revealed I forgot I was supposed to care, because in the book it's all you want to know! Who is he? What is this mystery?! But in the film because so many other exciting things were happening I forgot I was supposed to be wondering who the Half-Blood Prince was. Could have done with a couple more scenes: one of Harry sprouting theories like "maybe it's my mum!" "maybe it's Voldemort!" "Maybe it's Sirius!" whoever, and later a scene of Hermione saying: "Yeah Snape's mum's maiden name," so that people don't leave the cinema thinking, "Snape is royalty!?"

I don't like Emma Watson in any of the film, over acting eyebrows spring to mind, so I wasn't expecting much, but I adored her!! I couldn't believe it! I had tears in my eyes! I felt so bad for Hermione! She was so cute and funny and not stuck-up or anything that Hermione usually is!! They gave her scenes where she wasn't up-herself and in control, she was normal and vulnerable and sad! I thought she was great! Much more like book-Hermione!

Rupert Grint was as usual great, my favourite line after the first viewing was when Harry asks what Ginny sees in Dean and Ron says as though it's obvious: "He's brilliant!" Not enough Luna, though good that they changed some things so she got more screen-time. Fuck-all Neville! Good comic relief though, they'll make sure he's great in the last film. Jessie Cave's Lav-lav was super cute, I loved her scenes but Cormac McClaggen was the fucking BOMB, that guy was brilliant, never before has quidditch been exciting or funny, but he was genius (so was Ron) on a broom, and genius in all his skin-crawling slimy scenes pursuing Hermione.

Draco, who has been my favourite since it began- best child actor, well, I was disappointed that he didn't get more lines, but at least he was there. At least he was always acting in the background, and when he did get to do some acting it was excellent. I didn't like it when he was crying, it made me sad, some girls in the front row laughed and I wanted to shout "Shut up!" it's a shame they didn't keep in Moaning Myrtle, didn't show enough of Draco's human side that he was always on his own crying. The boys playing young Mr Riddle were fab, both really creepy, the little one was scary and the middle-sized one was terrifying!

Now to Radcliffe. There's no doubt he has improved in every film, and no doubt that off-screen he is a charming (though intense and mad) young man, well, suddenly Harry was a charming young man. In fact, when Radcliffe does comedy he is at his best (which is a shame considering all the bad shit that happens to Harry) lots of scenes with Ron- and the scenes with Slughorn when Harry is "high" were fucking hilarious. He was much more Daniel Radcliffe than Harry Potter and I loved it. Luckily though Radcliffe is also good at "pain" and the action scenes were great.

Slughorn may look the complete opposite of his on-page description but it didn't matter, Jim Broadbent played Jim Broadbent as always and was just fine. Helen McCrory wasn't in it enough for me to care about how awful her hair was, Tonks and Remus were cute but not in it enough. As per usual it is down to Rickers to ruin the film with his dramatic pauses and inappropriate hamming.

Will update tomorrow. It was great, but especially if you know the book (and so understand everything they don't explain)- and if you don't know the book by now, why the hell are you going to see the film?!