|
I just got the US dvd release of the UK "Life On Mars." I love Harvey Keitel so I watched a few episodes of the US version, but I was seriously underwhelmed. I thought the concept was so good and so clever, but it was really dumbed down and wasted in the US series. The UK one got terrific reviews from everywhere, though, and John Simm's a good actor in everything else I've seen him in, so I splashed out on the UK series during Deep Discount's 25% sale. I started watching this over the weekend and I am having the weirdest TV binge ever; I can't get past the first episode because I've re-watched it like four times. The writing is excellent, there is so much detail, so many possible explanations for what's happening to Sam (coma? nuts? dead and in some kind of polyester purgatory? time-traveled?), and the acting is fantastic. Sam's tears in the first episode, and the odd, tentative, tender little moment where he puts his hand on Annie's chest to feel her heartbeat (and she understands why) -- you don't see that kind of underplaying on US television very often. And on the opposite side of underplaying, Philip Glenister makes Gene Hunt into a character you can't take your eyes off whenever he's on the screen, a monstrous ball of vices and prejudices who is somehow also both a good cop and, on his own terms, a good man. I think I'm going to continue to ration out all the episodes of Series One so I can savor them, and keep my fingers crossed for Series Two also being released in the US on dvd. I haven't seen a television show this intelligent and intriguing in a long time. Why is network tv in the States never this good?
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2009 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 00:26 |
|
|
Burned through the second series of (UK version) Life on Mars in record time. It has a very different feel from the first series in some ways, but I still liked it. And that last episode had me in tears -- first of sadness, then happiness.  I've been trying to figure out why the US version failed so badly when for the first few episodes at least it was close to a shot-by-shot remake, and I think it comes down to a generally lower standard of acting (all of UK Mars' ensemble case is terrific, while only Harvey Keitel really pulled his weight in the US version) and a lack of chemistry between US Sam and US Gene. There was a discussion going on in the Asymmetrical Models thread in GBS about how UK television often uses actors who look like ordinary people, instead of genetically-engineered superattractive clones. I think it's less that than UK tv actors getting work based more on their talent and charisma than their looks. I mean, John Simm is short and skinny and has a weak chin, and Philip Glenister's got an epic beer belly and an unapologetically middle-aged figure; the difference is that they're both also tremendously skilled actors who project so much personality that they immediately become the most interesting thing in the room, and they have fantastic chemistry with each other. The role of Sam has to be one of the most demanding on a tv show ever (Simm is in every single shot of almost every episode) and it was just happy luck that it was taken on by an actor who was talented enough to be equal to the task; even someone as ordinarily good as Keeley Hawes, who I've loved in everything else I've seen her in, couldn't quite pull it off in her distaff turn on Ashes to Ashes. Jason O'Mara never had a prayer of making US Mars a success, he simply couldn't make Sam enough of a three-dimensional, believable person to hold the audience's interest. And the US versions of Annie, Chris, and Ray were textbook examples of casting with an eye to how people look in the publicity photos rather than how well they are going to be able to carry their parts and support the main actors.Also, Tony and Cherie Blair and their friend Gordon Brown. *snerk*
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2009 18:57
|
|