Have Your Say

Television and Film

Talk about Christie TV and Film here

Postmodernist *** at IMDB revs

Lone_Wolf 21 Jun 10 at 10:12 a.m. GMT

Okay, I've just got all the Hickson Marples on DVD and watched some of them. Some stuff I find enjoyable, some needing improvement. But one IMDB reviers, the pretentious postmodernist one who constantly talks about "alternate realities in a detective story juggled by the author, the detective and the reader" and complains about the adaptions omitting it, finally got on my nerves. Are academics who like Christie even worse then those who despise her? Jeez. Dunno if good postmodernism actually exists, but one thing I know for sure: badly done postmodernist litcrit is the worst of all.

Anyone else found that guy annoying?

Login or register to add posts and reply

6 replies

Reverse order

MissQuin 24 Jun 10 at 5:33 p.m. GMT

I agree with you Tommy. Some people take things too seriously. I watch alot of costume dramas and you get reviews saying:

"I couldn't help noticing during the scene with Lady W, that the lace cuff on her sleeve was in a style not invented until the 1880's. This is set 1879. This spoilt the whole drama for me."

Nitpicking evertything, have these people nothing better to do? I'd like to see them produce a whole drama themselves and see how they do.

Joan Hickson is not obnoxious and what's all this alternate realities? He's watching Miss Marple, not Donnie Darko. I despair of some people. I wonder if he's reading this..  

Tommy_A_Jones 24 Jun 10 at 4:45 p.m. GMT

In my Exprerience all Academics are Pretentious and like the sound of their own voice or in this instance like people to know how "clever" they are, why can't people enjoy things and take from them what they want to or not as te case may be. btw What is Post modernism?

Lone_Wolf 22 Jun 10 at 12:22 p.m. GMT

"You can't isolate his tastes".

Well, some points are possible. He likes gay characters, plot changes - you'll never see him write that a major plot change is bizzare, arbitrary or betrays the mood of the original material - he only complains about "the loss of alternate realities", whatever that means), places an extreme amount of importance on filming/camera techniques. Adaptions with the above are likely to get his "alternate reality approval" card. Occasionally he obliquely complains about what I understand to be the lack of clues (actually a legitimate complaint against many Hickson films and even Marple books, IMO), but the above positive points are enough for him to praise even the most clueless mystery. He also thinks that Hickson isn't obnoxious enough to play miss Marple.

go_leafs_nation 22 Jun 10 at 11:14 a.m. GMT

Yes, I highly dislike the randomness of those reviews myself. But I truly hate postmodern criticism in general, especially when applied to the detective novel (and thus, subsequent adaptations). I don't give a hang if the detective is in an alternate reality or not. It's a mystery, so get on with the detection. This reviewer is particularly bad, though, because there's no rhyme or reason to his ratings. You can't isolate his tastes. ("Oh, he likes romantic subplots, but doesn't like last-minute shootouts...") He sometimes contradicts himself, like in the review of The Sittaford Mystery, in which he starts by saying that it's most faithful to Agatha Christie and beautifully adapted, and then ends basically by saying the adaptation is a failure.

If this were real life, I would emphatically roll my eyes at this point. But this is the Internet, so let's pretend you all can see me.

Lone_Wolf 22 Jun 10 at 4:43 a.m. GMT

Google any Hickson Marple on IMDB (though he made some comments on some McEwans/McKenzies and Poirots, too). You'll find a guy who at the end includes his "verdict" in form of 1/3, 2/3 or 3/3. His description of 1/3 - "you can do something better with that part of your life" is especially arrogant, since he presumes by default that the tastes of people reading the review are similar to his. If he just classified 1/3 as being "Bad or uninspired", or something, I'd have less problems with him. 

He rants about "TeeVee movies focusing on period, faces and character development instead of focusing on the alternate realities game and the nature of the detective narrative", which, in his option, "omits all the fun parts" and "is a crime". Jane Marple, according to him, is "obnoxious and annoying" in the books, and he criticises Hickson for not being obnoxious enough. He, however, is capable of praising an adaption, too. It's a bit random as to which adaption receives his praise, since he rarely uses concrete examples from adaptions to support his options, relying on blanket statements. Usually it's the adaptions which include a lot of plot alterations, though he did give good ratings to some Hicksons. At least "Five Little Pigs", which I consider to be the best of Suchets, received a 3/3 from him. Maybe it's because it includes a gay character (adaptions with gays seem to be the ones he gives the higher ratings), or maybe because it's, in his words, "Rashomon-like". Yeah, wtf.

GKCfan 22 Jun 10 at 3:13 a.m. GMT

I'm not familiar with that critic, but I'm negatively disposed towards him already.