|
Post by valdemar on Oct 27, 2017 2:43:25 GMT
Doctor Strange - Peter Grant in the 'Rivers Of London' books, is nothing like Harry Potter. It is explicitly stated that magic is nothing like 'riding a bike'. In the early books, his enthusiasm causes catastrophic damage. The head collapsing possession of the first book is far nastier and more inventive than anything JKR could come up with. Likewise, having the lost rivers of London appear personified as capricious, sometimes terrifying women, is a masterstroke. The fact that Grant has to keep practising his magic, and it doesn't always do what it should when needed, is a million miles from the 'got it first time, Harry!' scenarios of the Potter world. Peter Grant's world is a gritty, dirty place, where shocking things happen to ordinary people, and there's a mountain of paperwork to do afterwards.
I never considered 'Buffy' to be for kids - the sexual references, sarcasm, and thousands of pop culture references, bolstered by Joss Whedon's Anglophilia probably went right over the heads of any viewer under the age of 18 or so.
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Oct 27, 2017 8:31:11 GMT
Doctor Strange - Peter Grant in the 'Rivers Of London' books, is nothing like Harry Potter. It is explicitly stated that magic is nothing like 'riding a bike'. In the early books, his enthusiasm causes catastrophic damage. The head collapsing possession of the first book is far nastier and more inventive than anything JKR could come up with. Likewise, having the lost rivers of London appear personified as capricious, sometimes terrifying women, is a masterstroke. The fact that Grant has to keep practising his magic, and it doesn't always do what it should when needed, is a million miles from the 'got it first time, Harry!' scenarios of the Potter world. Peter Grant's world is a gritty, dirty place, where shocking things happen to ordinary people, and there's a mountain of paperwork to do afterwards. I never considered 'Buffy' to be for kids - the sexual references, sarcasm, and thousands of pop culture references, bolstered by Joss Whedon's Anglophilia probably went right over the heads of any viewer under the age of 18 or so. I'm totally with you on both points. Buffy was absolutely not intended for kids.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 27, 2017 10:12:02 GMT
I never read one of Fowler's 'Bryant&May' novels, but was tempted. I always thought these had supernatural elements. So these are just normal crime stories, only against a London background? Not that there is anything wrong with this, Fowler is a terrific writer. I'd put them firmly in the tradition of the locked room / impossible crime stories from the "golden age" of detectives. The possibility of some supernatural explanation is often raised, but it always turns out to have (probably) been something else. I'd recommend them to anyone who likes those sorts of detective stories - they are also often very funny.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 27, 2017 10:36:29 GMT
Doctor Strange - Peter Grant in the 'Rivers Of London' books, is nothing like Harry Potter. It is explicitly stated that magic is nothing like 'riding a bike'. In the early books, his enthusiasm causes catastrophic damage. The head collapsing possession of the first book is far nastier and more inventive than anything JKR could come up with. Likewise, having the lost rivers of London appear personified as capricious, sometimes terrifying women, is a masterstroke. The fact that Grant has to keep practising his magic, and it doesn't always do what it should when needed, is a million miles from the 'got it first time, Harry!' scenarios of the Potter world. Peter Grant's world is a gritty, dirty place, where shocking things happen to ordinary people, and there's a mountain of paperwork to do afterwards. I never considered 'Buffy' to be for kids - the sexual references, sarcasm, and thousands of pop culture references, bolstered by Joss Whedon's Anglophilia probably went right over the heads of any viewer under the age of 18 or so. You might want to take a look at the blurbs on the book covers for the Rivers of London series - they say things like "What would happen if Harry Potter grew up and joined the fuzz" and "The perfect blend of CSI and Harry Potter"! So, I'm not the only one who sees that similarity - and the publishers/author seem happy enough with the comparison. As for Buffy, I suppose it depends of your definition of "kids" but I meant teenagers. It's set in a high school after all, and it was shown in the early evening in the UK (I think about 7pm?), and the DVDs are rated 15 - so it's hardly "adult" material. Wasn't Angel supposed to be the (slightly) more "adult" spin-off? And I think you vastly underestimate what people under 18 might actually know about (at least as far as sex, sarcasm, and pop culture are concerned).
|
|
|
Post by Michael Connolly on Oct 27, 2017 13:07:28 GMT
I'm sorry to put a damper on this, but for indefinable reasons the Bryant & May books just don't work for me.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 27, 2017 15:05:16 GMT
I'm sorry to put a damper on this, but for indefinable reasons the Bryant & May books just don't work for me. You are forgiven.
|
|
|
Post by valdemar on Oct 27, 2017 22:07:12 GMT
Never believe blurb writers. They like using phrases like: "It's like 'The Archers' on acid!". And I'm not underestimating kids. I have, several times, had to explain pop culture references that originated maybe 40 years ago, to younger people at work, my brother, who's only seven years younger than me, and to his 21 year old daughter. In an episode of Buffy, Spike and Faith have sex together. Afterwards, Spike makes a remark about being 'Ridden like a horse'. Go on, explain that to an average 12 year old. Giles and Spike, going out to fight something particularly nasty. Giles says:"We happy few.", to which Spike replies: "We band of buggered." Misquoting the Bard for comic effect.
|
|
|
Post by mcannon on Oct 28, 2017 6:54:48 GMT
Never believe blurb writers. They like using phrases like: "It's like 'The Archers' on acid!". . Indeed; and that teeth-gritting blurb on the "Rivers of London" books actually put me off reading them for quite a while. When I finally tried the first one, I found that (1) It was quite enjoyable; and (2) It was nothing at all like "Harry Potter" (based on my reading of 1.25 books in that series), apart from both featuring characters who utilised some form of "magic". Which is a bit like saying that "Black Beauty" is a bit like "True Grit" because both involve people sitting on horses. One reason that I've enjoyed both the "Rivers of London" and "Bryant & May" series - along with Paul Cornell's "Shadow Police" novels - is their use of London's history and mythology. As well as being interesting in themselves, they help to give the books something of a feeling of "authenticity" that I find lacking in series set in posh magic boarding schools. Mark
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 28, 2017 10:32:19 GMT
Well, it's all just individual taste and opinion at the end of the day. I didn't mean that Rivers of London isn't a lot darker and more horrific than Harry Potter (though I've never read them either - and I could only take about 30 mins of the first film on TV before switching over), it's just that Rivers of London did seem (to me) to be like Harry Potter for an older generation, and probably aimed very much at those adults who had read the Harry Potter books. I don't remember a lot of the details now, but I do remember the central character chucking around "magic fireballs" and the like after only having had a couple of "lessons", and also complaining about having to do his "Latin homework". As for Buffy, the consensus seems to be "suitable for 13 years and over" - there are various websites giving guidance on the age appropriateness of TV shows for concerned parents, and "13 and over" is what most quote for Buffy, e.g. www.commonsensemedia.org/tv-reviews/buffy-the-vampire-slayer/user-reviews/adult and www.imdb.com/title/tt0118276/parentalguide. Again, I don't remember much of it, but I did see a fair bit of the earlier seasons - maybe it gradually got more "adult" as the characters did, but those early seasons seemed no more risqué to me than any other US high school / teen TV series of the time, like Beverly Hills 90210 or Dawson's Creek.
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Oct 28, 2017 16:53:57 GMT
Even if I have never been to London (or the UK) myself, I find those London stories fascinating. Sometimes it seems that every worthwhile writer of the last decades have tried this topic. From comics like Hellblazer (back then before it was ruined by DC), especially in the short Warren Ellis run or the Mike Carey run, to writers like Paul McAuley, whose mini-series in the Stephen Jones anthologies I) really liked.
Insofar I thank all for their recommendations. I really must try the Fowler.
Buffy and Angel. When you see the mayhem and gore on tv-series like Supernatural, Buffy and Angel seem to be from another age. Remember the fuss about Highlander, where the beheadings always were off-stage? Nowadays you can watch beheadings by barb wire on Supernatural, rolling vampire heads included. Supernatural is admittedly a 16 years according to the IMDB, still it is network tv.
|
|
|
Post by valdemar on Oct 29, 2017 0:30:34 GMT
One of the most unpleasant 'kills' in an episode of Buffy, was when she garotted a demon with a length of razor-wire. Oh, and when a vengeful and completely out of control Willow (ah, sweet little shy Willow, of the fluffy jumpers and shy nature) catches, and flays a guy called Warren, who killed the love of her life, her girlfriend Tara, and leaves his gently steaming corpse for Buffy to find. Lovely. Admittedly, I did shout 'justified' when she did it, as Warren was very unpleasant, but you suddenly think: 'What just happened there?' Buffy did get darker and nastier in tone as it went on, although, bar a couple of episodes, it was never less than superb. Likewise, Angel, although that started dark... And got progressively darker. The appearance of Spike, in the second or third episode showed just how dark Whedon could push a TV show, starting with Spike's hilarious monologue at the start, and ending with Angel's torture, pinned to a wall with rebars,and having more inserted, agonizingly slowly, until he resembled a pinned butterfly. Unsurprisingly, this wasn't shown on it's normal early evening time slot, but very late one night. Early episodes of Angel featured the half-demon, Doyle, who helped Angel get established in L.A. A phrase Doyle used to refer to Cordelia, was the charming "She's a stiffener.". There was also mention of Angel's friend 'Charlie Tripod', about whom Cordelia asked, and was told that no, he wasn't a photographer, he was just quite large in a certain part of his anatomy. Kid friendly TV, right there.😄
|
|
|
Post by ropardoe on Oct 29, 2017 9:38:39 GMT
One of the most unpleasant 'kills' in an episode of Buffy, was when she garotted a demon with a length of razor-wire. Oh, and when a vengeful and completely out of control Willow (ah, sweet little shy Willow, of the fluffy jumpers and shy nature) catches, and flays a guy called Warren, who killed the love of her life, her girlfriend Tara, and leaves his gently steaming corpse for Buffy to find. Lovely. Admittedly, I did shout 'justified' when she did it, as Warren was very unpleasant, but you suddenly think: 'What just happened there?' Buffy did get darker and nastier in tone as it went on, although, bar a couple of episodes, it was never less than superb. Likewise, Angel, although that started dark... And got progressively darker. The appearance of Spike, in the second or third episode showed just how dark Whedon could push a TV show, starting with Spike's hilarious monologue at the start, and ending with Angel's torture, pinned to a wall with rebars,and having more inserted, agonizingly slowly, until he resembled a pinned butterfly. Unsurprisingly, this wasn't shown on it's normal early evening time slot, but very late one night. Early episodes of Angel featured the half-demon, Doyle, who helped Angel get established in L.A. A phrase Doyle used to refer to Cordelia, was the charming "She's a stiffener.". There was also mention of Angel's friend 'Charlie Tripod', about whom Cordelia asked, and was told that no, he wasn't a photographer, he was just quite large in a certain part of his anatomy. Kid friendly TV, right there.😄 Has it been pointed out yet that when Buffy was shown on the BBC at some time around 6.30pm, almost every episode was severely censored? There was so much grumpiness about this that eventually the uncut versions were shown late at night. The gore on Supernatural (a great show originally but, like Buffy, it should have stopped after season five) is hilarious, especially its trademark 'blood spurt on the wall/car window, etc., etc.'. (For sheer gross-out gore and yuckiness, however, we need to go off-genre to Bones.)
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 29, 2017 10:09:39 GMT
Angel was definitely more adult in tone. And regardless of any cuts to Buffy in the UK to allow it to be shown in the teatime slot, it did win "Teen Choice Awards" in the US in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003 (which would be the last five seasons), and it was also regularly nominated for the "Kids Choice Awards" (run by the Nickelodeon pre-teen kids channel). I'm not sure what timeslot it was in over there, but the US regulators are much tougher on what can be shown on TV than they are in the UK (apart from subscription cable channels like HBO), and their "safe harbour" (i.e. watershed) for "adult" TV starts at 10pm.
I'm still coming to terms with the fact that DVDs of old Hammer films like Plague of The Zombies are often given 12 Certs now.
|
|
|
Post by valdemar on Oct 29, 2017 20:47:22 GMT
It's quite amusing that a lot of the Hammer movies that so disgusted the critics upon release, are now rated '12' or '15'. The only one that I have in my collection that is '18', is the beautiful to look at, but turgid, 'Demons Of The Mind'. It has a couple of nasty deaths, but I can only think that the '18' is for the film's rather 'incesty' plot.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Oct 30, 2017 10:21:33 GMT
Yeah, I think there may be a few other Hammers that still get the 18 Cert, but not many. Another thing I've often been struck by when buying DVDs is the differences between the age certs given in the UK and Ireland - I've quite often seen a 15 (or 12) for the UK that has an 18 (or 15) for Ireland, though I can't remember any specific example just now.
|
|