Saturday, 19 January 2013

Review of New US House of Cards (1st 2 episodes)

Big shoes to fill

When I tweeted a few months ago that the late Ian Richardson was the greatest actor who ever lived by a comfortable margin, I was only being slightly hyperbolic. I had the pleasure of seeing this fine actor on stage on 2 occasions before his death in 2007, and he also had a sizeable number of film credits to his name (e.g. Man of La Mancha, Brazil and...er...102 Dalmatians).

But few would deny that Commander Richardson's finest work (he was given a CBE but, outrageously, never knighted) was on TV. His performance as Bill Haydon in the original Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy stood out as perhaps the best of an impressive roster of performances from some of the best actors in the UK at the time, and his portrayal of Dr Joseph Bell, the real life inspiration for Sherlock Holmes, in Murder Rooms in the early 2000s nicely bridged the gap between the demise of Jeremy Brett and the arrival on the scene of Benedict Cumberbatch, silly hair notwithstanding (although it was not the silliest hair he ever sported on screen, see here and here for definitive proof). 

Even these performances, however, pale next to the performance he will always be remembered for, that of the diabolically machiavellian politician Francis Urquhart ("FU" for short) in House of Cards, one of the greatest political shows ever made. The show would doubtless have become a classic whenever it was shown, but the first episode happened to screen just days after Margaret Thatcher was toppled from power after 11 years in Number 10, back in 1990. Given that the makers could not possibly have known this when filming it, there is no doubt that they got lucky - witness this opening scene!

The remake

When I heard that they were remaking the show for US audiences, in spite of my fascination with US politics (hell, my first official date with the lovely lady who is now my wife was spent watching the November midterm elections back in 2006), my heart sank. Why the US feels the need constantly to remake great shows from abroad I have no idea, but isn't it slightly insulting to their intelligence to assume that US audiences won't watch the original versions just because they might, for example, be in a foreign language? (I'm actually talking more about things like The Killing now...whilst I do occasionally have problems making myself understood across the pond, I acknowledge that we do share a common language with our American cousins, and any communication problems which may arise mainly stem from my being incredibly mumbly and incoherent!) 

After my initial feelings of "oh Lord, why don't they just leave it alone" had subsided, I set to thinking about how they would remake the show if they were going to do it properly. Of course the key thing to get right is the casting of the central character. That was what worried me most. After having a long think about who could possibly fill Ian Richardson's sizeable shoes, I managed to come up with a measly 2 names. And as Vincent Price is even "deader" than Richardson, my conclusion was that "if they can't get Spacey, they're stuffed". Having now attended a Q&A about the show, it transpires that the producers and David Fincher were thinking exactly the same thing. 

Luckily, they did get him, and a stuffing was narrowly avoided. In fact, the more I heard online about the show, the more I started to reconsider my original feelings of scepticism, and by the time I was alerted to the fact that tickets were on sale to a world premiere screening of the first two episodes in the Odeon, Leicester Square (seeing Lester Burnham in Leicester Square, no less) followed by a Q&A with stars Kevin Spacey, Robin Wright and Kate Mara, director David Fincher (sadly he only directed these two episodes), writer Beau Willimon (who is a genius, but looks about 12) and writer of the original novel, Lord Michael Dobbs - I was downright excited, and snapped them up! 

After all, it was my first premiere and thus my first opportunity to strut the red carpet like an overexcited peacock, although my companions and I were stalled by some beefy security guards in mid strut...for some reason the big stars didn't want us to invade their photo opportunities - to which all I can say is ha (please note that "me" is not me at all but my wife!):





I know that it looks as though Spacey is coming over to pull the red rug from under us by the way, but sadly we did not get a chance to have a chat with him, friendly or otherwise!

Musings on political drama generally

Essentially political dramas fall into four distinct categories:

1) Politicians are brilliant, super intelligent, hard working public servants with a nice line in very fast, witty banter - e.g. The West Wing.

2) Politicians are decent people who generally try to do the right thing, but politics is hard, there are no easy answers, and they often get it wrong and have to make messy compromises - e.g. Danish TV series Borgen.

3) Politicians are generally self serving and a bit crap, and are constantly being manipulated by their civil servants - e.g. Yes Minister, the Thick of It.

4) Politicians are TOTAL BASTARDS.

I suspect that the truth lies somewhere between (2) and (3), but why let truth get in the way of a good story? And in any event, which political shows work, and which ones don't, tends to depend on the political culture of the country in which they are shown. House of Cards, needless to say, nestles comfortably into the fourth category, and my impression is that the US public, increasingly frustrated by the relentless partisanship of Washington politics, is ready for a show of this nature. In fact my suspicion (guided mainly, as is so often the case, by "what my wife says") is that the one the US would struggle with is category (3), not category (4). 

In contrast, coming from the UK I can confidently say that a West Wing equivalent wouldn't work over here - the idea of British politicians being that brilliant would make us all laugh (having said that, there is a strong West Wing following in the UK, even though the majority of the show was on during the era of Bush 43, a president not known for his razor sharp intellect, so we are obviously more willing to give overseas politicians the benefit of the doubt). 

Review of the Show

So now, dear readers, that you have scrolled down past all that semi-tangential nonsense, what you are all waiting to hear is the answer to the key question "IS IT ANY GOOD?" Well, I have three answers for you - the short answer, the long answer, and the evasive answer.

Evasive Answer

You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Short Answer

Actually I could comment, in fact doing so was originally the whole point of this post, and the answer is yes.

Long Answer

They get it. They really do. I am already so hooked that I am going to have to get myself Netflix now, just so that I can download all 13 episodes of the first season and watch them over the course of a weekend. And I must have seen the original series five or six times, which means that I have a better idea of how it is likely to pan out than most people do (I am hoping that they might throw a few surprises in, but, without wanting to give away too many spoilers, I am also hoping they use the ending from the UK TV series, and not the book ending, which I suspect even Michael Dobbs would now admit is a bit of a cop out). 

The basic outline of the plot so far is very similar to the UK series. New Prime Minister/President has just been elected. Crafty Chief Whip/House Majority Whip Francis Urquhart/Frank Underwood is passed over for the job he wants in the new administration (in the new version he is denied the job of Secretary of State) and vows revenge, egged on by his even more ruthless wife, and starts undermining the administration and turning its members against each other whilst appearing scrupulously loyal to his boss. These episodes are focussing on the confirmation process of the new administration, so although the timing is not as impeccable as that of the original series was, President Obama's recent difficulties in this regard do make it at least somewhat timely. 

Meanwhile, of course, lots of people are having sex with each other, mostly extramarital. Episode 2 contains probably the worst declaration of love I have ever heard one person give another - you will enjoy it if your sense of humour is sufficiently scatological!

Most of the rest of the cast are essentially pawns in Urquhart/Underwood's cunning plan, including an idealistic and ambitious young female journalist (Samantha Harker as "Mattie Storin" in the original version, Kate Mara as "Zoe Barnes" in this version) and a loose cannon PR consultant/Congressman with problems with drugs and (in common with most of the characters) keeping his trousers fastened whilst in other people's bedrooms (Miles Anderson as "Roger O'Neill" in the original version, Corey Stoll as "Peter Russo" in this version). Having 26 episodes to really flesh things out will really help - the original ran for only 12 episodes in total, including the two inferior but still very watchable sequels To Play the King and The Final Cut (they won't be able to remake To Play The King, of course, one of the many unfortunate unintended consequences of our American cousins getting rid of the monarchy was that they have now senselessly deprived themselves of some damn good TV!)

So turning to the differences, then - it is already clear that Frank Underwood is a slightly different breed of monster than Richardson's Francis Urquhart was. Whilst Urquhart was smooth and serpentine, Spacey's Frank Underwood is slightly more of a brutish alligator. Whilst Urquhart was a superciluous "posh Scot", Underwood has a lovely South Carolina drawl, and is a bit more down to earth. For example he likes to get up and eat a rack of ribs at 7:30 in the morning, and he works out on a rowing machine (albeit after much henpecking from Mrs Underwood) - neither of which Francis Urquhart would have been seen dead doing. Sadly there is a shortage of the Shakespearian ad-libbing that Ian Richardson did so well (so far, at least), which is a shame, as Spacey, like Richardson, is an accomplished Shakespearian actor. I had the pleasure of seeing him as Richard III at the Old Vic in 2011 and it was one of the best performances I have ever seen, period. 

The politics are also very different. Whilst Urquhart was a traditional right wing conservative, Underwood is actually a Democrat this time round. This surprised me...in Hollywood, aren't Republicans always the bad guys? One wonders whether Spacey, himself a well known Democrat supporter, took the producers aside at one point and said "Look, I don't mind the blackmail, the adultery, the murder and suchlike fun and games, but I draw the line at playing a Republican!" 

From what I have seen so far, as far as Underwood appears to have any ideological beliefs at all, he seems to a be fairly centrist moderate, and is certainly contemptuous of the impractical left wing of the party, but even there, his contempt seems to spring from the fact that he knows what they are trying to do can't actually be done, rather than from anything more ideological. You get the impression that he doesn't really believe in anything at all except that he should be in charge. 

In my view this is actually a good choice. The problems I had with the two "sequels" to the British version was that the makers, no doubt riding the anti-Tory wave of sentiment in the mid nineties, seemed to be giving the impression that Urquhart was actually a bad Prime Minister as well as a bad man, whereas what made the first series so interesting was that although he was clearly a "bad egg", he was clearly so much more capable (and charming) than his peers, and patently the best man for the job. By taking the character's ideology out of the equation, the US version will hopefully be able to avoid alienating its likely audience and can potentially push the "evil guy but great politician" angle more easily (I don't know if that is the road they will go down, but I do hope so). 

Having said that, the essence of the character is, of course, the same: both incarnations are clever, ruthless, charming and willing to do absolutely anything and screw over anyone on their path to power. The asides to the camera are still in place - we, the audience, are his co-conspirators, and whilst we are appalled by his actions, once again we find ourselves enjoying the consequences of those actions at the same time and "rooting for the bad guy". 

In this version, even more than in the original, whilst Underwood is clearly a villain, there are no real heroes. The President and the members of his administration are so obviously shallow and out of their depth that we find ourselves enjoying their discomfort even though objectively they are not really bad enough to deserve to suffer the way they do. 

Even journalist Zoe Barnes, played brilliantly by Kate Mara, who is the nearest the show has to a heroine is, quite frankly, a bit of a bitch (she casually tells a fellow journalist who is lusting after her at one point that "If I wanted to f*** you, you'd know!") Interestingly enough, she already has enough information after the two episodes I saw to know what Underwood is up to (although he is still shamelessly manipulating her). This is quite a big shift from the original, where Mattie Storin was unaware of Urquhart's true nature until the very end - it will be interesting to see how that pans out and what she finds out in subsequent episodes (and when). 

Robin Wright as Claire Underwood is a revelation. While Diane Fletcher was great as her equivalent number in the original version, she was very much a background figure - Wright is getting more of a chance to really shine. Let's just say that she is no Princess Buttercup here, but a full blown Lady Macbeth - put in charge of a charity! With predictably scary consequences. Another interesting thing about the show is that while Mrs Urquhart/Underwood is clearly Lady Macbeth, her husband is not Macbeth at all, he's Richard III. Which makes much more sense as a pairing, if you think about it... no wonder Lady M went mad, being married to a man who needs half an hour of soliloquising even to psych himself up into committing a straightforward murder! As I mentioned above, Spacey has recently played Richard III, and, like Richardson, he clearly understands the parallels between the two characters, as there were some striking similarities between his two performances (in particular his wry looks of frustration at the audience every once in a while). 

The script is really excellent. The famous line "You might very well think that, I couldn't possibly comment" does feature in both episodes - I can't say I was overwhelmed by Spacey's delivery of that particular line, but to be honest that's because Ian Richardson so owns the line that anyone else saying it just feels wrong  (just as Alan Rickman is a marvellous actor, but it just felt wrong to cast him as Marvin the Paranoid Android in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie simply because he wasn't original Marvin Stephen Moore!) But who cares, when there are plenty of other fabulous lines peppered throughout the script that Spacey really relishes (did I mention how fantastic his South Carolina drawl is?), for example "I love my wife more than a shark loves blood!" Or, more accurately: "bluuuurd"! Having heard Spacey pronounce the "h" in the word "whale" I will never again say the word any other way!

The Q&A

Sadly the wider audience were not allowed to ask questions - Michael Dobbs himself acted as David Dimbleby, but he carried it off with aplomb and much (well deserved) backslapping all round. Spacey was dominant, of course, and in his element - very interesting but very sweary, dropping the f bomb as if there was no tomorrow (so much so that I was half expecting him to conclude his opening speech with "You might think that but I don't give a f***" rather than quoting the actual line). 

Robin Wright announced that she was "not really political" (meaning that being married to the ultimate political windbag Sean Penn must have been even more appalling for her than I had previously supposed)! Comparative newcomer Kate Mara was very sweet and seemed a little overwhelmed by the proceedings. And Sir George Young, the real Chief Whip (Urquhart's job in the original series), turned out to be in the audience, and briefly muscled in on the Q&A, protesting that the Whips are really a very mild mannered bunch of tea-totallers who would blanch at dropping the "drat" bomb, let alone anything stronger. This probably explains why the current government keeps getting itself into so much trouble!

No spoilers were dished out about the remainder of the series (apart from the obvious revelation that the relationship with Underwood and Zoe Barnes was unlikely to remain strictly platonic for long). But in less than 2 weeks, Netflix will have all the answers. Can't wait!

Sunday, 6 January 2013

What to do when you meet a politician

It appears from looking at my blog stats that my US audience is almost as large as my UK one, so to my American readers I am going to make an admission. It is true - Britain really IS a small island!

The scene in the Simpsons in which the then Prime Minister Tony Blair was found greeting all UK visitors at the airport (to which Homer responds "Wow - I can't believe we just met Mr Bean!") might just be a slight exaggeration. However, if we take a celebrity at random....say, Hugh Grant:


  • my sister and her friends once mobbed him on a golf course in St Andrews (she is still the proud possessor of a photo of three very excited eighteen year old girls beaming delightedly while a distinctly middle aged looking Hugh grins sheepishly in the background like their slightly overfriendly uncle, equipped with a suitably pervy baseball cap);
  • one of my friends is regularly overtaken by him whilst jogging near her home; and
  • another of my friends once attended a "surprise birthday party" for him despite never having met him before (maybe he was the surprise). Said birthday party consisted of watching three episodes of the In Betweeners in a tiny cinema in Soho. A better way to celebrate turning fifty two (yes...he really is that old) I cannot imagine. 
The upshot of this is that in the UK, especially in London, it is not uncommon to come across famous people on a regular basis, and this also extends to the realm of politics. Whilst in America even lesser presidential primary candidates get their own security teams (forcing Rick Santorum to use protection for the first time at the age of 54), here in the UK they tend to just wander round looking rather ordinary. 

Dave

I can report, for example, that I am at least half an inch taller than David Cameron, our current prime minister, who I was studiously ignored by when I made my first (and, hopefully for the British public's sake, my last) visit to 10 Downing Street a month or so ago for a reception in honour of the Spirit of London Awards, which is an annual ceremony at which awards are presented to young people for their talent in the arts, media, sport, campaigning and education. I was invited along in my capacity as a charitable trustee with some connection to this event.

Big Dave breezed into the room about halfway through the reception, fresh from having addressed the House of Commons about the Leveson Report (and looking surprisingly composed under the circumstances - however my plot to steal his copy of the Report just so that I could spend the next two weeks watching him squirm whilst pretending he had read it was sadly unsuccessful). As he entered, pretty much everyone else in the room suddenly cut off the conversations they had been having with dull fellows like me, and started circling The Big Man like vultures circling a freshly bloodied corpse (not a bad analogy, actually). 

My talons were sadly not sharp enough to allow me to get to the front of the queue, and before I managed to get in so much as an "All right, Dave" in the style of Trigger from Only Fools and Horses, he had already smoothly small talked his way through the room and across to the podium where he made a short speech, which, despite lacking any Winnie the Pooh references (please see below), which means that he will only, at best, ever be the second coolest PM I have seen in person, was quite well received, apart from a gratuitous reference to the Big Society which received the silent chorus of eye rolling it so richly deserved. 

Vince

But to be honest it is probably for the best that I did not get a chance to speak to Mr Cameron, as I had neglected to prepare any particularly pithy or witty conversation openers for the great man to respond to, and I fear that it would have come off as an unfortunate reprise of the occasion on which my friend Eddie and I had a somewhat awkward meeting with Business Secretary Vince Cable, then the Liberal Democrats' Treasury spokesman, in the bar of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, in 2006. 

Vince had just given a pretty interesting address to the Trinity Hall Politics Society and had obviously decided that it would be good to follow it up with a quiet pint, a notion that was quickly spoiled by two slightly star struck students (yes...I was star struck by Vince Cable, I do indeed need to get out more) loping up to him and saying "Hello Dr Cable". His face rapidly went from: 

  • incredulity (how can they have recognised me. I don't understand...I'm wearing my hat! My hat makes me invisible! Damn these crafty Cambridge students, they have penetrated my cunning disguise);
  • terror (this is it...I'm going to die, aren't I!);
  • relief (OK, maybe I might get out of this alive, maybe they're just two students wanting to congratulate me on my speech);
  • panic (I have nothing to say to them...why won't they leave me alone?);
  • more panic (the bar lady is scowling at me); and
  • more relief (phew, she scowls at everyone...she seems to particularly hate that ginger bloke, I wonder why).
We quickly realised that neither of us could think of anything more to say to him (intelligent or otherwise) at that point and we moved on, leaving him whimpering into his pint and clutching his hat tightly around his ears.
 
Trish

Distressing though this encounter unquestionably was, I can still happily say that Vince is not the politician I have terrified most. I was holidaying with my wife Julie in Cornwall a few years ago, and on our first night in Penzance we found a nice looking restaurant for dinner. At one of the other tables was sitting a middle aged lady who seemed oddly familiar to me, but I couldn't quite place her. She looked as though she might be one of my friends' mums, but I couldn't think of whose mum she would be. 

So I did what any sensible person would do in those circumstances. I decided to stare at her like a beady eyed hawk until I could work out who she was. I tried to do it as surreptitiously as possible, but my idea of surreptitious was clearly not the same as hers, as she quickly started to look more and more agitated for reasons which I could not fathom. It was only when I was about to leave the restaurant, having enjoyed my dinner far more than she probably did, that it struck me that she looked uncannily like Patricia Hewitt, the former Labour Health Secretary, who I had in fact seen in person once before, at a recording of Question Time. 

I don't suppose she recognised me, although Charles Kennedy (former Lib Dem leader who seems to have done the job more effectively despite apparently having been drunk for most of his seven years as leader than any of his successors has managed sober) who had also been on the Question Time panel, and who had leered at me cheerfully when he saw me kissing Julie, might have done (never let it be said that I don't know how to show a girl a good time...mind you, this is coming from a man who chose Borat as our first "date movie")! But poor Patricia had ruffled a fair few feathers as Health Secretary and she obviously thought I was a disgruntled doctor out for revenge. To this day she is probably still having nightmares about being hunted by a ginger Dr Shipman with a Cornish accent.

Jack

I am usually much better at politician spotting than I was that night. Indeed this skill does not desert me even when I am abroad. For example when I was in Rome in 2007 I spotted former Tory leadership contender and cabinet minister Michael Portillo walking past me, clearly also on holiday. Sadly he rounded a corner before I could point him out to Julie, much to her frustration. However, later that afternoon she got her chance to demonstrate that she was able to find her own politicians, thank you very much, when she saw a familiar face at a Metro station, turned to me triumphantly, and announced loudly "that's Jack Straw". 

Unfortunately (a) it turned out his face was not as familiar as all that, and (b) "Jack" was the only other person who heard her apart from me. Evidently a bit of a politics geek himself (or perhaps excited at the thought of finally having found his long lost twin brother), the bogus Jack started frantically looking around to see if he could spot the real Jack, only to find that the only Demon Headmaster lookalike on the platform was himself.   

John

Big Dave was not the first Prime Minister I have had the pleasure of sharing a room with. Another of my more exciting early dates with Julie involved going to the recording of a BBC Radio 4 programme which invited celebrities to come in and read out some of their favourite poetry. The two celebrities for this edition were John Major and sitcom legend Richard Briers. Julie, having grown up with some awareness of British politics but somewhat removed from it on the other side of the Atlantic, seems as a girl to have got the idea into her head that Mr Major was some sort of sinister bogeyman who probably lived under the bed, ate children and dressed up as grandma in his spare time. In fairness, my awareness of US politics at that stage of my development was significantly weaker (for some reason as a boy I had got it into my head that Ronald Reagan looked a bit like a bearded elderly tramp, an image which it took some years and several history lessons to shake off).

Because of Julie's misconceptions, she was somewhat surprised to be greeted by the sight of a tall, grey, amiable looking (and surprisingly imposing) middle aged man who proceeded to charm his audience with his  gentle voiced delivery of various poems, most of which incidentally appear to have come from Winnie the Pooh. No doubt these charming stories involving "a bear of very little brain" brought back fond memories of some of the people he came across during his illustrious(ish) political career. Ironically Richard Briers turned out to be a thoroughly malevolent psychopath ("listen to my poems or I'll break your f***ing legs, you got me?")

Conclusion

So, to sum up, if you do have an encounter with a politician, what is the best way to respond? Here are a few hints:

  1. If they are at a restaurant, they probably don't want to talk to you, so it's best to leave them alone.
  2. If they are at a bar, they might be eager to chat (I had a very pleasant conversation with former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind at the Cambridge Union, and remember coming away thinking that he would probably make quite a good Prime Minister but would never make it because of the dandruff). However if they are wearing a hat, again, it is best to avoid them like the plague.
  3. If lost for a conversation starter, in my experience politicians tend to have surprisingly good taste in poetry.
Happy New Year!