The Love Punch

Another one I liked the look of at the cinema but never got around to seeing until the DVD - The Love Punch. A light, bright, big-hearted caper film, bringing the unlikely but brilliant pairing of Pierce Brosnan and Emma Thompson together, backed by the equally brilliant Timothy Spall and Celia Imrie.

That is actually all one needs to know really. If you go too much into this one you'll see that yes, actually the plot is a bit shallow (even for a light-hearted crime caper) and that the narrative is more than a tad predictable. Yet it looks brilliant and the main feature is the chemistry between the stunningly talented cast.

Heading up things are Brosnan and Thompson. The former actually does dignified, elder gent rather well - knowing how to pull of classic Brit-style comedy with a modern edge, without losing that cheeky glint in his eye. The acting powerhouse that is Emma Thompson still exudes talent here whilst being able to indulge in her naughty side - she is a unique combo of approachable, watchable, hilarious, hapless, sassy, sexy and an utter joy to watch.

Equally as delightful we have another awesome twosome of Brit acting greats. Celia Imrie lends her trademark saucy cheek to this glamorous flick whilst still adding that touch more of quality that only she can. Finally we have the ever-wonderful Timothy Spall whose use of character is instantly wonderful and believable, and whose comedic charm and delivery is second to none.

The Love Punch is not a film that will change the world, but if you are looking for a fast-paced, funny, no nonsense flick to put a smile on your face...you could do much worse.

Peter & Wendy

Critics and public alike almost immediately started raving when ITV released the latest envisioning of the timeless classic that is the Peter Pan story on Boxing Day. It has been praised for its writing, acting performances and the heartbreaking, show-stopping moments it features (particularly the ending). However, whilst I admire the ambition and appreciate the essence of Peter Pan, I do feel Peter & Wendy to be lacking in numerous key areas, and at times it left me feeling cold; and I absolutely love Peter Pan!

I can see what they tried to do - interplay the classic story within a heart-wrenching tale of modern day times. I fully appreciate the Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital links. I feel it is only completely right and proper that such a remarkable institution is recognized well and truly, and actually the feeding of the hospital elements through the story themselves work very well (though the strange set mash ups between the likes of the Jolly Roger and a hospital ward are slightly odd to look at). However, the writing and cinematography that links these two major settings is very disjointed and disorientating in trying to be fast and free-flowing. The result is that more often than not as a viewer you don't have time to settle into the story at all and both the core, and charming elements of both the new family hospital drama, and more importantly of the Pan story are almost lost. Indeed, any Pan fan will recognize key moments of the tale, but that is all they are; moments disjointed with no real feeling, simply going through the motions as it were of the beloved story - the sublime Barrie narrative that should not be tested or fettled with too much is pretty much lost.

It is a noble effort to try and revamp Peter Pan, and as I say as a one off it just scrapes through, but that I am afraid in terms of overall story is about it.

Then there is the cast. It is often the case in new Pan adaptations that the actor behind Peter Pan himself is either overlooked and/or slated, and sadly this is no exception. Again in trying to be different - the ITV version had Peter Pan appear to be this, "edgy", chav-esque teenage northern  kid. No, just no. Only the most powerful of actors and performances would be able to even attempt to carry that off, and that is so not what we got in Zak Sutcliffe. Cold, expressionless, almost oblivious to anyone around him, and apparently only being able to portray obtuse arrogance or typically clichéd teenage nonchalance as an emotion. For me completely disappointing, bordering on infuriatingly hopeless as Pan.

Not all the cast were all bad for me though, and even some new young gems were found. The new interpretation of Tiger Lily was a bit lifeless, though the Lost Boys were a delight, as was Hazel Doupe who played the dual roles of Wendy and Lucy very well, if slightly stylized.

Yet for me there were two clear stand outs in an often otherwise good to mediocre cast list. Surprisingly Paloma Faith as Tinker Bell just worked so well. It sounds wrong, but the feisty singer captured Tink's unique attitude to a tee. 

There was also the ever-superb Stanley Tucci, a surprise but very welcome injection of quality into Peter & Wendy. As Mr. Darling and a Great Ormond Street surgeon he is great, but his third role of Captain Hook is sublime. Perfectly pitched, perfectly engaged and clearly performed by an actor who completely understands Jim Hook - every second of Tucci in the wig and wearing the hook is a delight to watch. If anything is to last about Peter & Wendy it is Stanley Tucci as Hook, who I feel deserves to go down as one of the all-time great classic interpretations of the legendary antagonist.

So yes, a valiant and worthy effort ITV, but next time try not to mess around too much with an already winning formula. I know its tempting, but please...its Peter Pan. 

Peter & Wendy was just good enough to hold my attention, and oddly it was the villain that saved the day, but I shall not be melting with tears at how lovely it all was. For me, if you're still searching for that perfect Neverland experience - then keep heading on to the second star on the right, straight on until morning...

We're Doomed! The Dad's Army Story

Don't panic! (Apologies, couldn't resist) Why would you in fact? It's the story of how Dad's Army was born! And it is sublime. A word or two if I may, on a wonderful piece of one-off BBC television drama surrounding the birth of one of the best examples of British sitcom of all time.

Focusing on how writers Jimmy Perry and David Croft, both struggling in their own ways within the realms of the BBC in the 60's, both came together and struggled to bring what became the infinitely successful and still charmingly funny Dad's Army into the world.

I love programmes like this, and I feel the BBC does them especially well. Heavily based on rather interesting historical incidents and entertainment archive trends, yet with the proviso and the exception that these events will be embellished and stylishly presented just enough to enhance their own considerable value to an audience. This is not the first time in recent memory the Beeb has produced this sort of thing (see my BLOG ARCHIVE for something similar about the early life of Sir Lenny Henry) but I am glad to say they have pulled it off again.

At its heart, the narrative is simple - the various ups and downs of the craft and release of Dad's Army series one. Yet the performances and the supreme moments of charm that adorn this narrative are joyous to behold. 

The ensemble cast is supremely delightful, and it is heavily populated with numerous gems. Richard Dormer and Paul Ritter have for many years been very successful character actors, and here they are again - the key roles of David Croft and Jimmy Perry respectively seem made for them.

The "gang", or cast of Dad's Army as presented in this programme themselves feature some great performances also. The casting of the likes of the legendary John Sessions as the equally so Arthur Lowe, Keith Allen as BBC One Director Paul Fox, Julian Sands as John Le Mesurier along with various others, are inspired. Each and every scene this results in brilliant moments of quality, drama and hilarity.

This may seem like something out of nothing, and at its heart it is just about the making of Dad's Army. Yet I urge you to iPlayer this one - as I am sure it will at the very least put a smile on your face.

Non-Stop

Ploughing steadily on through the realms of tough, gritty, hard-talking action roles, Liam Neeson takes to the skies in Non-Stop; another gritty tough action film - this time taking place on a plane.
Neeson plays alcoholic ex-cop turned air marshal Bill Marks who finds himself mixed up in an unfolding hijacking whereby his fellow passengers begin to be killed off one by one.
Things soon start to escalate, and whilst all the tension and action is there, the lunacy of the plot overtakes any sense of realism at some point along the way - resulting in you having to just go with the flow of the film or cast it aside as a bad job.

I've sort of gone for the middle ground. Make no mistake - I feel Liam Neeson is a tremendous actor and his performances in various films over the years have been first rate. By far and away his tone and quality is what saves this film. Although clichéd and predictable writing results in a stodgy, superficial and as said at times quite unbelievable narrative, Neeson still has enough grit and gravitas to just about see audiences through. His fellow cast seem to get caught up in the triviality of the intended effect some what, resulting in not many other stand out performances. Even the likes of Michelle Dockery and Lupita Nyong'o get lost in proceedings. If anyone manages to fight through the mire to stand alongside Liam Neeson above the chaos it is Julianne Moore. Her role seems to be quite shrunken down and diminutive for an actress of her quality, but she still manages to tease out something of a human and likable character.

There are many lapses of "authenticity" and logic in Non-Stop, and as I said there is always such a whirlwind of hyped up emotion and action that one rarely gets time to stop and think. Yet there is entertainment to be had when watching this one. It wont blow your mind, nor will it make you think that much about bigger issues and things beyond the 106 minutes of 30,000 feet madness, but if you trust in the lunacy of it all, and let the likes of Neeson and Moore lead you through it, then this isn't that bad of an action romp to watch.

Food by Breda Murphy

I had heard for some time of the little secluded eatery in a little corner of the Ribble Valley town of Whalley, yet I had never been. Happily however I did today for lunch and I was pleasantly surprised.

Underneath the simple exterior lies a truly warming and welcoming little establishment. Calming, exceedingly pleasant atmosphere, with a good blend of traditional value and modern, 21st century overtones. Add to that lovely staff and an impressive menu and what more could you want?

Despite being a tad cramped and claustrophobic in feel, Breda Murphy's eatery really was a very nice place to be.
And as said, the food on offer was certainly original, pleasant to read on a menu, pleasant to the eye and delicious to taste. I sampled a very different but very tasty potato, truffle and artichoke crisp soup alongside a superb open ham and cheese sandwich (it sounds simple - soup and a sandwich but trust me their version of each was superb) followed by a very moreish pecan, maple and ginger tart.


Truly, if you want a different, well thought out, brilliantly executed establishment that offers delicious food - you could do a lot worse than to pay those at Breda Murphy's a visit.

The Book Thief: Page vs. Screen

THE BOOK

OK, I admit this may be unorthodox - but it is a well known fact that the film industry is constantly inundated with pictures that have been directly adapted, based on or inspired by novels. This often has mixed results. Personally - I say have at it. Why not? It's a solid theory - a captivating popular book can surely have the potential to be a smash box office hit, or else a deeply moving cinematic experience. There have been numerous occasions where this has been the case for me; I have enjoyed many a good, even great film which itself was based on a book. Here though, I choose to speak about such a parallel where the relationship between page and screen isn't so smooth.

Markus Zusak's The Book Thief swept through the literary world and captivated for a number of years following its 2006 release, and it can even be said that it is still garnering die-hard and deeply emotive responses from readers today. The story of a young girl thrust into war-torn Germany, Hitler's uprising, Jewish persecution, the yearning for family and the adventure of reading, all narrated by Death himself certainly makes for a unique story.

I enjoyed it. Yes I feel that the author has a tendency to smother readers in endless self-obsessive descriptive showing off (as opposed to description that adds to the narrative) and that the characterization is occasionally dissected and examined to within an inch of any character's life, but these, whilst noticeable for me are passable too in what is a deeply moving and powerful tale. 

There are a great many WWII novels out there spanning several genres, but not many have that certain quintessential charm, and also jagged ragged edge that the Book Thief has. 

THE MOVIE

Transfer The Book Thief onto film and...oh dear. Almost all the plus points I found and enjoyed when  reading the book went out the window and were submerged under a mire of clichés, poor casting, poor adaptation, poor performances and the negative aspects of the book intensified.

Far, far too much whimsical wide shots and apparently "dramatic" sequences that actually just come across as a cameraman and a director trying to boost their own egos. The tragedy, personable horror and mesmerizingly morbid mayhem of the war is all but completely lost - resulting in a look at one of the most horrific tragedies in human history viewed through the eyes of a wholly inept and pompous ingrate.

But the worst thing for me is the characters of this film. Often lovingly and patiently crafted in the book (if a tad over-embellished) most of them are reduced to mere echoes of their potential on screen. The glorious Emily Watson as Rosa Hubermann could have been inspired casting, but sadly depressingly limited writing and lack of resonating screen time stifled even her brilliance. The characters of Rudy Steiner and Ilsa Hermann were not only also given a poor slice of screen time but were also reduced to near-caricatures of 1940s Germany. Max was never a character I liked or appreciated much in the book anyhow, but the supremely arrogant and self-absorbed performance Ben Schnetzer gives did not redeem him for me in the slightest.

The lead character of Liesel is possibly the one I despair of most of all - reduced to a wide-eyed simpering girl with the almost second-nature ability to annoy with nearly every move and gesture she makes. None of the attitude, none of the lust for life and none of the charm that Zusak gave her. The results had me despairing and seething.

There were two, and only two saving graces of the film version of The Book Thief - and they were two casting choices and the performances that which followed. Roger Allam and his dulcet tones were so suited to the narration of Death, that not even drastically scaled down and clichéd moments could stop his glory popping in and out of proceedings. Also alongside him is the superb Geoffrey Rush, an acting legend who again is perfectly suited for Liesel's adopted-father Hans (and even if he wasn't he would probably give a fine performance anyway). Again criminally scaled back role, dialogue and screen time but nonetheless Geoffrey Rush shone.

So in conclusion, all I can simply say is that in my opinion if you want to pursue the story that is The Book Thief - on this occasion I'd stick to the book.

Haworth at Christmas 2015

Yes it's my first (and probably slightly overdue) festive post of the season, and it is one that continues a trend. For the past few years now, readers of this blog will note that I am rather fond of the Yorkshire village of Haworth, particularly at Christmas (for previous festive reports – see my BLOG ARCHIVE). Once again I was eager to return this year for the now traditional (for the village and for me) Christmas carol procession up the main street by candlelight, and for the carol service in St. Michael's Church. What follows are just a few words on what I have deemed for years now to be a fantastically festive occasion. 

The stoic stalwarts of Haworth remain the same – still picturesque and charming (in all weathers), still incredibly atmospheric, still full of wonderfully hospitable and endearing folk, and the place still leaves you with a unique blend of feeling truly ensconced in a frozen, bygone era yet still ploughing relentlessly on into the present. I have never been anywhere in the world, where one feels perfectly balanced amongst these two extremes; it is quite something to behold. 

An added bonus for me was being able to see quite noticeable economic developments within the village. Again, most core aspects remain as ever they were, yet sadly a few notable and favourite establishments of mine have passed into nothing. However on the other hand, it was refreshing also to see that other stalwarts of the village, such as the famous Apothecary, not only seem to be thriving but have noticeably expanded. Just how much of this is to do with local trade and/or tourism I do not know, but it was comforting to see most of the village is still going strong throughout the year, as well as being to appreciate it at Christmas.

So once again it only remains for me to say to all concerned – thank you Haworth! Thank you for sharing your slice of Christmas with me and many others, and hopefully I shall be returning soon.  

The Judge

Since his career revival a little over a decade ago (which, lets face it was given quite the kick off with a certain armoured Avenger) the supreme talent that is Robert Downey Jr. has not only gone from strength to strength in the realms of big, epic and often action-packed franchise films, including roles such as Tony Stark and a duly deft turn as Sherlock Holmes, but as an evolving and powerful actor generally. For me, along with legions globally, it has been a joy to see the resurgence of the great acting powerhouse, and also very likable chap that is Robert Downey Jr. What's more as a result of this we get to see him leave Victorian England and Stark tower behind every now and then, and expand his repertoire even further and dazzle us again in new solo outings, often supported by a great story and cast. Such is the case in The Judge.

Essentially this film from last year sees Downey Jr. take on the role of Hank Palmer, the brilliant city-slick lawyer who returns to confront his country roots, his past and his respected court judge of a father (played by Robert Duvall) who has been charged with murder.That in terms of plot, is all you really need to know. Yes there are some added embellishments of the friends and family Palmer left behind that he bonds with again, along with the added dimension of the loving woman and potential child he must re-connect with. All of which are nice touches, if a little over-embellished. Yet the real appeal to me of The Judge is the way it is shot, the way it is performed and the way in which it all comes together as a highly enjoyable package.

Sometimes I leave the best star performance until last, but not today. There is no denying it - Robert Downey Jr. is superb as Hank Palmer. Perfectly poised and and presented at the beginning and so too at the end, where his character certainly has something of a different outlook on life. And in the middle we get a wonderful plethora of perfectly pitched moments of sorrow, love, laughter, joy, darkness and light that Downey Jr. is masterful at delivering, both to whomever he is playing opposite in any one scene and to the audience as a whole. In some ways some of these great moments are completely expected in the narrative of the film but that just does not matter - it does not detract at all from the pleasure one gets in watching them play out.
Opposite him we have Robert Duvall who, whilst not as openly expressive and perhaps full-on as Downey, certainly matches him in term of gravitas and powerful performance. Though I wager Duvall is often sick nowadays of having to play characters at a certain time of life who have some sort of fatal or crippling ailment (in this film for example "the Judge" has terminal cancer) I  can see in this instance why the writers did it and it does fit well into the story. However this is the one area where I feel Duvall and co. didn't quite live up. Yes this aspect of his character is deeply touching and resonating and it makes for some remarkable moments between him and Downey, yet I never really felt that Duvall put much thought in how this was coming across on screen. Nor really did anyone else around him seem to punch through that particular shroud. It simply felt that he was "going through the motions"; not in terms of playing a man who has cancer (which is naturally very difficult and harrowing) but in how he envisioned how such would effect those around him. It seemed to be something of a background shadow, which Duvall's character never really seemed to acknowledge at all apart from absolutely necessary. This may be down to a combination of writing, directing and acting choices, but I feel at some point a wrong decision was made there. Regardless, Duvall is mostly masterful, and as said more than matches Downey Jr. scene for scene which makes for some great chemistry between the two.

Other notable performances - well the ensemble supporting cast was quite something here, and unlike some cases most of them truly delivered. I for one was overjoyed to see the likes of Billy Bob Thornton, Leighton Meester, Vincent D'Onofrio, Jeremy Strong, and less-well known talents such as Vera Farmiga all come spectacularly good. Truly, each cast member and each character is brilliant to watch on screen.

It's true, The Judge may not be a future classic, in terms of overall film or massively memorable performances, and its also true that there are numerous moments that you can see were done to play to a cliché and to appeal to the awards season montage. And I just do not care. It is an emotional roller-coaster, but a sublime, subtle and supreme one that for the most part knows exactly what and how to pitch to an audience, and the result in my view is a great film.

Spectre

Behold...Bond is back! Yes, three years after the epically awesome landmark Skyfall, Daniel Craig returns as 007 in the eponymously titled Spectre.
As the name suggests,  this film hones in on Bond facing a modern take on a classic organisation of evil (which we first saw referenced way back in Dr.No). As the antagonistic side of the film seems to be harking back to classic Bond, so too I feel does Daniel Craig take the whole tone back to basics, and not only that but succeeds in embracing and embellishing the basics of what a good Bond film should be.
After all the fuss that was made of Craig as the new Bond and how he really shook up the franchise, and rightly so, here he seems to be treading through more familiar territory.
Casino Royale saw Craig and James Bond almost totally revamped and stripped down to raw essentials. Quantum of Solace saw Craig's transition from one-Bond wonder to consistent action hero begin and take shape. Skyfall went all out to mold the past and future of James Bond the man and the franchise together in one barn-storming adventure. And now, Spectre sees the relative calm after the Skyfall storm, but plants Daniel Craig's James Bond firmly where he should be, delivering pretty much all we expect from a Bond flick.

By and large, no Bond fan can have many complaints with this one. Sure it is not mind-blowing, life-altering cinema; but for a non-stop, action-packed, stylish, swaggering, thrill-seeking belter that puts a smile on your face in oh so true Bond style - look no further.
Like all Craig's Bond films, Spectre follows a loose narrative from the last outing, dealing with the aftermath of the fallen (but sill formidably fabulous) Judi Dench as M, the resplendent Ralph Fiennes as her replacement, and we even get a direct link to the awesome climax of Skyfall as a lead in to the new plot. What I loved though was that in the re-emergence of Spectre into this new 21st century Bond, and a new Blofeld in the form of the ever-brilliant Christoph Waltz  we also get an apparent puppeteer-esque saga, throughout all of the last three big Bond villains, and thus the action-packed (and often for Bond painful) plot developments.

In actuality, this link, whilst powerful to see played out, is when you look at it closely quite tenuous, and in another's hands might have fallen flat. Thankfully, in an inspired bit of casting the delightfully talented Christoph Waltz steps into the shoes of Ernest Stavro Blofeld to utterly superb effect. Waltz brings his uncanny ability of being supremely horrible and wonderfully charming simultaneously to this iconic Bond character to perfection - he was a joy to watch and very nearly stole the show in every scene he was in.
Playing off him and fighting against him of course, we have Bond himself in the form of Daniel Craig. There can by now be no real doubt - James Bond is a role Craig was made for and by and large he delivers again in Spectre. Still rough around the edges, still has that broken edge to him and still delivers on all the action. Yet there were a couple of moments, where we saw his Bond fall into the more conventional moments of plot that we have come to expect from Bond films (such as romancing the women, ordering the vodka martini or using the gadgets) that I detected a hint of the dejected. I am not for one moment saying he seems tired in the role, far from it. It is an odd thing to find and to say, yet it just seemed that in certain shots and small sequences, Craig's Bond just faded into the backdrop somewhat a tad too much. Nevertheless, Craig is more than capable of taking the lead in a Bond film, and indeed with regards to the whole franchise, and I for one think he has one or two more in him yet.

Other casting high notes included the return of the superb of Ben Whishaw as the new Q, and likewise the delicious Naomi Harris as Moneypenny. Rory Kinnear as Tanner is always nice to see too in the MI6 lineup.
It was actually  Spectre's own Bond women that  had me most dissapointed actually. Monica Belluci's age and Bond woman status was made a meal of in the press pre-release, and whilst I do not think this is an issue at all I do feel that, despite her relatively short period of screen time, she did not do nearly enough to stay in our minds. Yes she had style and sex appeal but relatively little substance, and in the end I was sad to see her as quite a minor plot device.
Bond's main love interest is Dr. Madeline Swann, played by Léa Seydoux. Again she has the charisma, the beauty and the sex appeal but she does not have much in the way of character for me. Yes her performance is just enough to see her through to the end of the film, but I thought in terms of being a memorable match for Bond, she doesn't fair too well by journey's end.

Regardless, I always rejoice when a new Bond film is released, and Spectre holds no exception. You really have to look hard to find fault and, despite there being a few foibles I did really enjoy Spectre and I feel it still does justice to the legacy of 007.

Albert's

A quick word about a new eating establishment experience I had tonight. Albert's in Salford is a sister operation to the very popular Albert's Shed in Manchester, albeit slightly shinier and glitzier.
Whilst I recognized that the place had clear potential, with attractive modern decor, nice peripheral touches and a menu that reads very well, there were just far far too many fundamental errors for me to give it anywhere near a clean bill of hell.

The staff were many and busy, but far too disorganized. Far too much rushing, not enough thinking about the customer experience; even to the point where I for one felt like cattle at times. Having young, energetic and modern staff may be good on one hand and may be in-keeping with the feel of the place, but the lack of care and experience did show drastically in places.
One staffing highlight, was the maitre d'-ess, who was very polite, attentive and professional; but only in response to a lot going wrong.
Lack of staff organisation also meant that a lot of tables were left in a void for long periods. Various tables you could see were waiting for over forty minutes between being seated and being served.

But one of the key no no areas for me by a mile was the state of the food. On the menu it read very well, but in practice when it did arrive it was badly prepared, poorly cooked and lukewarm at best. My starter of scallops were almost cold (apparently this was the idea according to the waiter but I am sorry that is total nonsense) and one half of my main of venison was near-raw and the other was near-burnt. At least the kitchen staff were consistent in their lack of conviction and ability as I certainly wasn't the only one (check Trip Adviser if you don't believe me). We were fobbed off at the end that the head chef had to go early because his wife was in labour, yet even if that is true such shocking products coming out of that kitchen was almost unacceptable.
It is a shame more than anything because I could see the potential in the menu, but it is a long way from being realized at that rate.

The Dresser

There are moments when you just have to sit back and simply enjoy seasoned and sensational performances. Moments where you just go - "yes - that is right, that will be wonderful!" When I heard Sirs Ian McKellen and Anthony Hopkins were coming together for the first time in a BBC televised production of the classic Ronald Harwood play The Dresser...well...that was certainly one of those moments.

Even before watching it, I yearned to because to put it quite simply, I knew it would be good. Verily, I was more than half expecting to be blown away by this one-off TV version, and indeed I was. Directed by another legend, Sir Richard Eyre, The Dresser came to life for a new generation and it was beautiful to behold.

Set in a war-torn London theatre, in the space of one showing of King Lear during the blitz, The Dresser sees Sir Anthony Hopkins as Sir, an ageing actor who whilst seasoned in experience and talent, is losing his grip on life and reality. He is aided by Norman, played by Sir Ian McKellen as his dresser backstage, who as well as being his constant source of support and guidance, is equal to him in sheer character. As if that wasn't enough, we are also treated to great appearences of further acting royalty in the form of Emily Watson and Sarah Lancashire, plus an extended cameo from Edward Fox.

The cast is of course great, but the performance level each one of them delivers throughout is nothing short of phenomenal. The whole thing is shot beautifully, with perfectly pitched music and cinematography; but you cannot deny the stellar, powerhouse performances as the main thrust of the whole affair.

Sir Anthony Hopkins is instantly formidable yet terribly fragile as Sir, moving from heart-wrenching tender embers to booming bursts of power instantly. His every look, his every sound and every gesture as Sir once again proves (as if we needed any more proof) that he is one of the finest acting talents of all time. And we also get another, often standing right beside him. Sir Ian McKellen as Norman is delightfully perfect. A lovely mix of hilarious humour, cracking northern wit (it was a joy to see McKellen hark back to his roots!) steely determination, loveable charm and tragic despair, all rolled up, intertwined and presented into the marvel that McKellen is as Norman.

Individually the two great stars are amazing; together they are sublime. Instant rapport, instant play off each other and instant chemistry that (despite this being the first time in their long careers that they have acted together) feels like it has lasted a lifetime.

Supporting them is the serenely majestic and tragically beautiful Emily Watson who is equally delightful to watch as Her Ladyship to Hopkins' Sir. She too fits supremely and effortlessly into the perfect pool of chemistry that the characters provide. Potently punching into this every so often in the plot, we also have the gem that is Sarah Lancashire. On paper hers is the character who may be seen to be the most supporting, but the presence she offers and the delicate serenity she gives to match Hopkins, McKellen and Watson scene-by-scene means she is certainly not overshadowed.

Together this cast takes on a majestically understated journey through one performance of King Lear that is earth-shattering - to the characters and to us the audience.
I cannot be more supportive of the BBC for giving us the likes of this, nor can I be more praising of The Dresser, and I urge you to watch it. Not just for the great names featured - but to simply watch and enjoy as they do what they do best.