citizen-caveman
Joined Apr 2013
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings20
citizen-caveman's rating
Reviews18
citizen-caveman's rating
Losing a battle ain't the same as losing a war.
Dependence on fossil fuels comes at a very high social and enivornmental cost, for some at least, as this documentary proves.
No evidence means no case.
This documentary is very credible evidence against the case for dependence on fossil fuels.
Given the rise of the alternatives, the cost for fossil fuels has become unacceptably high.
Look at the bigger picture. Someone wasn't just fighting for their way of life, albeit inadvertently, they were also fighting for everyone else's future.
Maybe someone lost a battle; they didn't lose the war.
Dependence on fossil fuels comes at a very high social and enivornmental cost, for some at least, as this documentary proves.
No evidence means no case.
This documentary is very credible evidence against the case for dependence on fossil fuels.
Given the rise of the alternatives, the cost for fossil fuels has become unacceptably high.
Look at the bigger picture. Someone wasn't just fighting for their way of life, albeit inadvertently, they were also fighting for everyone else's future.
Maybe someone lost a battle; they didn't lose the war.
The Reckoning is as serious as drama gets. It examines the culture that allowed Jimmy Saville to get away with so much depravity - depressing, but relevant.
An un-sceptical public believed the guy they saw on television was great. Ambitious careerists turned a blind eye, if they had eyes - as ratings rocketed, so did their careers. Countless vulnerable victims knew nobody would want to believe them.
Saville wasn't a one off. Other powerful predators have been exposed since. Same story, different predator. The Reckoning is universal.
Saville dodged justice the hard way in 2011 and ITV broadcast an expose the following year. Why the BBC waited until a decade had passed to make this drama is anyone's guess.
Steve Coogan really does a polished job of portraying a tedious character. His Saville is irksome. You want to punch him in the face.
If The Reckoning was fiction, nobody would believe it or want to watch it. A fictional Jimmy Saville would have been an implausible predator - getting away with so much witnessed by so many. Maybe that implausibility is partly what gave him opportunities? Truth is stranger and nastier than fiction.
The take away from all of this is don't believe what's on TV. Don't believe anyone's charisma.
An un-sceptical public believed the guy they saw on television was great. Ambitious careerists turned a blind eye, if they had eyes - as ratings rocketed, so did their careers. Countless vulnerable victims knew nobody would want to believe them.
Saville wasn't a one off. Other powerful predators have been exposed since. Same story, different predator. The Reckoning is universal.
Saville dodged justice the hard way in 2011 and ITV broadcast an expose the following year. Why the BBC waited until a decade had passed to make this drama is anyone's guess.
Steve Coogan really does a polished job of portraying a tedious character. His Saville is irksome. You want to punch him in the face.
If The Reckoning was fiction, nobody would believe it or want to watch it. A fictional Jimmy Saville would have been an implausible predator - getting away with so much witnessed by so many. Maybe that implausibility is partly what gave him opportunities? Truth is stranger and nastier than fiction.
The take away from all of this is don't believe what's on TV. Don't believe anyone's charisma.
In the main, cardboard characters collide with wooden acting.
That said, Henry Rollins demonstrates that he can overcome the obstacle of ropey material and still deliver a decent performance. What a shame he don't recognise ropey material in the first instance. Dressed like an undertaker, he does a capable job of playing the creepy, serial killer. Giving the best performance of all he elevates himself above cliché.
The story doesn't really hold together. In places, purpose-wise some of the characters' actions don't make any sense. They place themselves in harm's way to achieve no, apparently, useful goal. Both the good guys and the bad guys seem to be trying to trip themselves up in places.
A good heist, in the movies at least, should be tight and methodical, think Heat (1995). They get in, get rich and get away. Most robbbers don't want to run into the police and get caught. Presumably. These guys take all day. There is no sense of impending deadline, so there's no tension.
Conflict be shouldn't delivered in a way that makes characters unsympathetic. The robbers swear and gesticulate at one other too often to seem mature enough to be professional. Acting like juvenile delinquents makes them even more unsympathetic. This carry-on produces a sense of conflict but an irksome one.
I could go on but it's too depressing.
Overall, this lacks sympathetic characters and, because you cannot care about any of the characters, any real tension. It's slow, clumsy and clichéd. Television does it better.
That said, Henry Rollins demonstrates that he can overcome the obstacle of ropey material and still deliver a decent performance. What a shame he don't recognise ropey material in the first instance. Dressed like an undertaker, he does a capable job of playing the creepy, serial killer. Giving the best performance of all he elevates himself above cliché.
The story doesn't really hold together. In places, purpose-wise some of the characters' actions don't make any sense. They place themselves in harm's way to achieve no, apparently, useful goal. Both the good guys and the bad guys seem to be trying to trip themselves up in places.
A good heist, in the movies at least, should be tight and methodical, think Heat (1995). They get in, get rich and get away. Most robbbers don't want to run into the police and get caught. Presumably. These guys take all day. There is no sense of impending deadline, so there's no tension.
Conflict be shouldn't delivered in a way that makes characters unsympathetic. The robbers swear and gesticulate at one other too often to seem mature enough to be professional. Acting like juvenile delinquents makes them even more unsympathetic. This carry-on produces a sense of conflict but an irksome one.
I could go on but it's too depressing.
Overall, this lacks sympathetic characters and, because you cannot care about any of the characters, any real tension. It's slow, clumsy and clichéd. Television does it better.