Review of Being Human U.K. Season One, Episode One

 

As I mentioned in my review of the pilot, by the time this episode airs quite a bit of recasting had been done.  Mitchell is now being played by Aiden Turner, Annie is being played by Lenora Crichlow and Herrick is being portrayed by Jason Wakins.  This change added to people of colour to the recurring cast, and Herrick is now being played by a White man.  I think this change made for a diversity that was lacking in the pilot.  The chemistry between the actors remains good and I find Turner to be far less brooding.

In this episode we were treated to quite a bit of back story. Mitchell is actually quite young in vampire terms because he was called on the battlefield during WWI by Herrick.  He claims that he made the sacrifice to save his men but Herrick points out that what he sees as a sacrifice granted him immortal life, while his friends were left to either die on the field, or later in life forgotten in an old folks home. 

The tension between Herrick and Mitchell is still quite strong.  When Mitchell finds Seth in the hospital threatening to feed off of the sick and helpless he sends him away to tell Herrick that the hospital is off limits as a feeding ground.  When Mitchell finds Herrick doing magic tricks for the nurses he is clearly upset that the message he sent via Seth is being ignored.  Herrick makes it clear that he wants Mitchell to join him on whatever nefarious plot he has to over throw humans but Mitchell declines.  Herrick warns him that he is going against his nature and points out that Mitchell is already showing signs of deprivation.  Throughout the episode, we see that Mitchell is shaking from the lack of blood as well zoning in on the sound of the heartbeat of those around him.

This episode we are introduced to Owen, Annie's ex boyfriend.  It seems that now that he has returned from Saudi Arabia he wants to see how Mitchell and George are taking care of the place.  Annie is very excited to see him and even gives Mitchell a list of questions she wants him to ask, but she promises to hide when he comes over.  Owen's visit is actually very awkward while George is in the room because George has zero social skills.  I have to say that the way that Russell Tovey plays geeky awkward is so damn adorable. 

Review of Being Human UK Season One, Episode One: Pilot

 

According to IMBD many of the roles and actors that appeared in the pilot episode of Being Human UK, were changed.  

The episode opens with George changing into a werewolf and John Mitchell having sex and biting Lauren.  In the morning George is forced to steal women's clothing from a close line and call Mitchel to pick him up.  They return to the hospital where they both work and George discovers that his former girlfriend has been admitted.  As George who has the cutest bum, cleans up from his night of being a werewolf, Mitchell suggests to him that the real curse is leading a life filled with the shadows.  He claims that he wants to stop drinking blood and lead a more human existence.  Mitchell suggests that they get a place together and make a go of it.

When George goes to see his girlfriend Julia, she is stunned to find that he is alive and working as an attendant considering his IQ.  She tells him that his family mourned for him because they thought that he was dead. Julia then goes on to inform George that she has moved on and has a new boyfriend. George tries to tell her that it would never have worked out between the two of them and that he was just a pit stop on the way to a better life, but it is clear that Julia is not convinced and clearly wants closure.

When George and Mitchell do find a place, Mitchell is concerned because the rent is so cheap.  The real estate agent tells him that they have attempted to rent it several times but that people invariably felt uncomfortable there and moved on.  When she starts to press about them renting the place, Mitchell stalls saying that it depends on what George thinks because he is picky. Moments later, George bursts into the room, clearly excited about the apartment. He babbles about growing a garden in the back.  The real estate agent assumes that they are gay, saying that she is just like them because she likes cock.  So from this we are to understand that a man excited about laying down roots is gay.  Of course she let's us know that she has no problem with this after George denies that he is gay.  Seizing the moment to tease George Mitchell tells her that he is still closeted and has not told his family yet.  When they agree to rent the place the real estate agent leaves and a perplexed George asks why she thought they were gay, to which Mitchell tells him that it is unimportant because he is out of his league.  

I understand that was meant to be comic relief but it is a tired trope that comes up far too often. On supernatural which involves two brothers, they are consistently assumed to be gay and it is meant to break up the darkness of the supernatural forces that they are dealing with.  Turning someone's identity into a joke is simply not right and in this case specifically referencing the closet, which we know to be harmful is indeed homophobic.

Review: Dances with the Devil, by Sherrilyn Kenyon. Book 3 of the Dark Hunter Series.

Zarek is a Dark hunter – who has been alone for 2,000 years. And as a human before that  he only wished he was alone rather than ciosntantly abused and tortured as a slave of cruel Roman masters. Living in Alaska for the last 600 years has been hard and lonely and only further hardened  him and made him crueller

Until, in the last book, he went to New Orleans and apparently screwed up. One time too many for Artemis who is tired of him as a liability (and she’s looking for an excuse) who dispatches Thanatos to have him annihilated once and for all. Except Acheron, the Dark Hunter leader, believes Zarek is redeemable, that there is still hope for him. Striking a deal with Artemis, Astrid, daughter of Themis and immortal judge who has never found a man innocent is sent to decide whether Zarek is guilty or innocent.

Unfortunately, when Atremis calls Thanatos back, he doesn’t want to heel. Instead he returns to his people, the daimons as their chosen one, the Day Slayer. And what does he want to slay? Why, the Dark Hunters of course. And being a nearly invincible killing machine, that’s somewhat of a problem
Even more of a problem is the fact that Acheron, who is most definitely an invincible killing machine, is currently stuck in Artemis’ temple and unable to return to Earth and swat Thanatos down like the petty annoyance he is.

What should be a simple judging ends up being a desperate fight for survival  against a force that has raised armies and killed cities before

I think the Dark Hunters are badly in need of some therapists. I get that they’ve had tragic pasts (all of them) but after 2,000 years? Time to move on guys. And yes, that “all of them” is relevant. Because of the way Artemis works (approaching people who have been horrendously betrayed to induct them into service in return for a last act of revenge) the Dark Hunters are almost guaranteed to have a horrendous, traumatic past. And, as I’ve mentioned before, the sheer prevalence of traumatic pasts in the genre – and the series – makes it really hard for me to appropriately engage their hurt and pain because it’s so over done.

I also think the beginning interactions between Zarek and Astrid didn’t feel very real. Yes, Zarek has had a terrible past, but his utter inability to even attempt anything resembling civil conduct is ridiculous to the point of caricature. He is found wounded and unconscious in the snow by Astrid who takes him in to help heal him – I can’t imagine that in 2,000 years Zarek hasn’t learned to be at least borderline stand-offish in this situation rather than outright rude.

Similarly, since Astrid is aware of the Dark Hunters, their pasts etc her shock and horror that Zarek had a terribad upbringing and her failure to recognise basic defence mechanisms. She’s supposed to have judged thousands and she can’t recognise this?

Oh, and yes, they did meet each other for 5 seconds  and lo there is throbbing engorged wetness and zomg this serial killer I’m judging is so hawwwwwt and this complete stranger I’ve met while desperately running for my life is so hawwwt. Oh the hawwwwt.

I also question the wisdom of judging a dangerous supernatural murdering criminal by putting them in isolation with a woman who apparently lacks any real defensive capabilities. She repeatedly expresses her fear of him.

Review of American Horror Story Season One, Episode Nine: Spooky Little Girl

 

I actually dread sitting down to watch this show each week, because of its tendency to overwhelm the viewers with isms.  This is the first episode in some time that I didn't walk away feeling absolutely disgusted.  It began with one of its every famous flashbacks to the year 1947.

It begins with Elizabeth Shore visiting Dr. Curan in the now famous murder house.  She says that she is an actress and is desperately in need of a filling. but does not have the money to pay for the procedure.  Elizabeth makes it clear that while she does not have money, she can pay for it in other ways, after affirming that Dr. Curan does not indeed have a wife.

In the present day, Moira is up to her old tricks.  Ben approaches her to get her to make a sandwich for Violet.  This of course is the beginning of the flirtation.  She tells him that his secret is safe, the way he looks at her and fantasizes about her.  Ben answers, "I think you must have pretty low self-esteem to keep throwing yourself at a man that does not want you.I don't want this, I love my wife. I love my wife and I want her to get better, to come home, so that I can take care of her".  Moira replies "It's just a matter of time Ben, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." I suspect she is right about this because even though Ben rejected her, he fantasized about her.

Constance is painting and clearly drunk when her boy toy Travis shows up.  When he tracks in mud along with a new dog, she tells him to clean up his mess.  This however does not make Travis feel manly enough and he says, "I already have a job and when I come over here, I don't want to have to work more."  This is one Constance pays her trump card and answers, "You gotta job, reading a script down at a call center for two hours a day. Oh my, let me rub your feet.  And how did those head shots that I paid for work out for you?"  It is clear that Candace's power in this relationship is based on her wealth, because she is not afraid to remind Travis who has the money in the relationship.  Travis starts to walk out after she accuses him of abusing Adelaide, but Constance stops him saying, "Why don't you run down to the Koreans and get us another pack of ciggies (cigarettes), take that dog with you and don't come back until it does its business"  Well I suppose Constance wouldn't be Constance if she didn't say something offensive continually.  I will however say that this is yet another example of a White character something offensive about a historically marginalized group that goes unchallenged.

On his way to the store he is stopped by Hayden with a whistle.  Travis asks, "do you want me to get you some candy little girl?"  Really? Is that the best the writers could do?  After a few minutes, Hayden and Travis end up in bed together.  When he orgasms he tells her, "I came inside," but she eases his worries saying, "It's cool, I can't get pregnant."  Yeah after you cum is the perfect time to worry about protection. Just sayin. Travis tells her that he hopes that Constance gets pissed but then makes the point of saying that he is not going to tell her.  Picking up on the illogical nature of his actions Hayden responds, "Then what's the point? Sex is the only weapon you have against her. She's treating you like shit because she is afraid of losing you. Prove to her that she's right and she'll be blowing rainbows up your ass again."  It seems that Travis' willingness to upset Constance only goes so far because he loves her.  When he asks what Hayden's story is she replies, "I don't live here yet but I'm moving in soon. Dr.Harmon and I are in love. When Travis asked why she rocked it out with him she says, "to see if I could do it with a guy who is alive."  Well it seems that Hayden has some plans for Ben.  This is not going to end well for him I suspect.  He still thinks that she is alive, though he watched as Terry killed and buried her in the backyard.

Detective Jack Colquitt and Marla McClaine (Hayden's Sister) show up at the door.  It seems that Marla has filed a missing persons report in the belief that Ben has something to do with the disappearance of her sister. When he denies it, she tell him, "you're a liar, Hayden's pregnant with your baby and she comes here with that crazy idea that somehow you are going to leave your wife, support her and lead a life together. So what did you do Ben? Where is she in a hole somewhere?"  The Detective points out that the last time he was here he saw Hayden leaving his house and that he was also working on a hole in the backyard.  Hayden then saves Ben's ass by walking into the room asking, "What's with all of the drama?"  She tells them, "you were wrong about Ben. I've decided to say here in lala land. This is my home now."  As soon as they leave Ben threatens her for her actions on Halloween but she calms him by apologizing saying that she was pregnant and scared. "I deserve whatever punishment you think is right. Ben this whole thing has been so ugly. It's not me, it's not how I want you to think of me. I don't know if we have a future together but I've always been there for you, from the beginning. I just want you to remember that. By the way, I had the abortion. You don't have to worry about it anymore."

Urban Fantasy's Guide to an Authentic British Vampire

Deep within our lexicon is the trope Dick Van Spike. And it amuses me muchly it does, oh yes it does. I often read passages aloud to see how many people I can get giggling

The sexy British vampire isn’t the most common in the genre (Scandanavians seem to becoming more popular thank to True Blood - but the portrayals include far less accent mocking - but it’s coming! Don’t you get comfy, Swedes!), but it certainly has its place and in the interest of ensuring the integrity of these characters I feel we need a guide on how to write a truly authentic Urban Fantasy British Vampire

First of all, you need profanity. Nothing says authentically British like a character who can’t stop bloody swearing every sodding sentence. Specifically it must be special British profanity. Now, if you go to Britain today, you'll probably find that “fuck” and “shit” etc are pretty common. This will not stand! Such generic cussin’ completely ruins the mood. No, find some truly British cussin' – “bugger”, “sod,” and of course the holy grail “bloody”. Yes, nothing says British like a good “bloody hell”.

But if you really want to go for gold, try to find some anachronisms. “Bloody” is good, but “Bleedin'” and “Bloomin'” (the missing gs are important! We’ll come back to that!) are jackpots. In fact, you might want to check out some Shakespeare – sure your by our lady protag may sound like a concussed, time travelling renfair reject, but at least he's an authentically British, concussed time travelling renfair reject!

Secondly, you must use that profanity everywhere and all the time. In front of a truckload of nuns? His mother? Small children? Never mind that – bring on the profanity! Nothing breaks the ice like a foul mouthed tirade in front of your aged granny. Not only that but squeeze it in everywhere. If a sentence doesn't have at least 3 of them in, you're slipping. You can't ask for a cup of tea (and it better be tea! British people cannot drink anything else, it is known. In fact, what you don’t know is because of our unique British constitution, tea is actually crack to us. Heroin addicts have an easier time of going cold turkey than british people have doing without the Earl Grey, it is known). He needs to “Sodding ask for a buggering cup of bloody hell tea.”

Which brings us neatly to the next point. Any of these profanities can be used anywhere in any context. Yes “that buggering thing” is hardly in common usage and “bloody hell” isn't really an adjective, but don't let little details like that get in the way of authenticity!

Thirdly - the accent. Those missing g’s. So we can have bleedin’ and bloomin’. And advanced classes can skip some hs too - bloody ‘ell. Remember, while you’re making the effort to type the accent, there’s no rule saying ti has to be consistent! In fact, often you can get away with just using your authentic accent on the authentic cussin’! If you truly want to go the whole hog you can have “loves” (or even luv’s!) and “duckies” and even the odd “pet”: now these terms of endearment tend to come from different parts of the UK, but let’s not complicate things. Remember there is only one accent in the UK; usually a London one - which is, of course, the only place in the UK as well. There’s London and the hot guys in kilts and nothing in between.

And we need a brief insert for Scotland here. They will wear kilts and tartan, they will belong to some kind of clan and they will live in a castle. Even if the story is contemporary, the whole land will resemble the 14th century (I think these authors think Edinburgh is a series of mud huts around many many castles) and there will be a big, brawny, bare chested red haired Scotsman seducing a fiery lassie! On the plus side, there are very few Scottish vampires out there; but werewolves? Scottish werewolves abound! I think it’s something about the hairiness for some reason

Ahem, back to the English vampires.. Fourthly - idiom! It doesn’t matter how convoluted the the sentences, how tortured the conversation, you simply must squeeze in some genuine British idiom! Never mind that no-one has used the phrase “sound as a pound” since the 50s, you simply must squeeze it in somewhere! And of course we need to use the word “pound” and “quid” even if your vampire has lived in the US for 50 years and is surely familiar with dollars. The British vampire simply must deal in sterling!

Fifthly - remember, there is exactly one period in British history, the 80s. Specifically, the punk movement. Now, you may think this was just a passing subculture embraced by a relatively tiny minority of British people - but not, not in Urban Fantasy. Clearly it became Britain’s new official religion - and there was an vicious inquisition ensuring everyone had appropriate mohawks. even musty, fusty Bill Compton in True Blood had to go punk when he went to the UK.

The punk inquisition also assigned the proper ration of peroxide hair dye. Speaking of - could any foreigners out there please send us some peroxide? We use so much ensuring everyone has bleached hair that our levels are dangerously low. We simply cannot be seen in public without bleached white hair!

The difference between a Negative and a Bad Review.

The thorny debate of reviewing - and negative reviews - has raised its ugly head again. Many an author has spoken forcefully on the subject with the most recent being this blog post on reviews and amazon reviews in particular

While the post has been edited repeatedly showing the author has listened to some objections, the original problematic nature remains (albeit watered down) and we feel, as reviewers, that we need to address the suggestion that reviews should provide positive reviews - and the very idea that 20 words constitutes a review

Firstly, we want to challenge the idea that a negative review is a bad review. These terms should not be confused. A review that says “ZOMG SO AWESOME YAAAY BUY IT!” is a bad review. It’s awful. Why is this book awesome? Why should I buy it? This tells me as a reader absolutely nothing. I don’t know if my tastes match the reviewers, I don’t know what parts they like and why and for all I know it could be written by the author’s mother.

Similarly a negative review that explains in detail the many reasons why the reviewer didn’t like the book and all the problems within it? That is a good review. It’s a great review - and it can even recommend the book. If I read a review that says “there wasn’t nearly enough focus on the relationship development and far too much distraction when X, Y and Z happen in the plot” then to me that is a recommendation to me - because plot focus rather than relationship focus is what II prefer. Similarly if you read our review of a paranormal romance and see that we didn’t like it because there’s too much focus on the sex and relationship angst - or we didn’t like a YA because there was too much highschool drama and you want to read that - then our review recommends it.

A good review isn’t a positive review, it’s a detailed review. It’s a review that truly gives the reader an insight into the book and what problems it may have - and whether they are enough to put the reader off - or recommend it to them.

There is a lot of concern here for the impact of a negative review on an author - but what about the impact of a false positive review on authors who have written genuinely great work? To take Amazon reviews as an example - if the mediocre (or outright awful!) books are given 4 or 5 stars (especially with short, scrappy “reviews” accompanying them) then how do we find the actual gems that are worth the 4 or 5 stars? If we, on Fangs, decide to give trope laden, boring, outright offensive or just plain awful books 4 fangs or more then how can you find which books we truly fanpoodle?

There are no more book clerks to give you recommendations on books - but what value would even their recommendations have been if they were lying? If anything this creates a greater onus on the reviewer to be honest - even brutally so when called for.

Let us be clear here - we are reviewers. We give honest opinions on the books (and films and tv series) we’ve read. We are not the author’s marketing or advertisers. That is not the role of reviewers nor what we should be considering when we write reviews - our reviews are not based on what will make the book sell; our reviews are based on the quality of the book. Why does this have to be said? Any other critic is expected to be honest - harsh in fact. We don’t expect the Michelin Star judge to considera restaurants sales; we expect him to consider the food quality

Also, while authors are concerned about their reputation their good name and whether people think they can produce a good product, what about reviewers? What about our reputation and name? What about the trust of our readers? If we sugarcoat reviews - or write outright deceptive reviews, then no-one will trust us. It is our name, our product, our reputation that is flushed down the tubes. And just as a bad (or, should I say UNFLATTERING) review remains on the Internet to haunt the author forever, so does a bad (as in INACCURATE) review remain for the reviewer.

Which brings us to the all important role of integrity. As reviewers (and bloggers in general) we build a relationship with our readers - and in doing so we encourage them to trust our opinions and analysis. We violate that trust when we lie - and destroy that relationship and that trust.

From our specific point of view, sugarcoating a review is problematic. Fangs for the Fantasy is a site that analyses the genre (and occasionally outside of it) from a social justice point of view and we do this because we think it is important. We can’t ignore or downplay prejudice/stereotype/erasure without defeating our purpose. And every book we read, every series we watch, will contain criticism. No matter how much we love it or how tempted we are to fanpoodle, nothing is perfect, there’s always something wrong. And everything is a product of our prejudiced and generally problematic society – and will be stained by that. It’s a matter of “how much” more than “whether it is or not.”

And most online reviewers have comment sections. If you think we’ve not given a book justice then come, comment, debate (try not to fanpoodle mindlessly though, we will mock you rather cruelly and do recall that, as a social justice space if you come in carrying a load of prejudice foolery we will treat it accordingly) tell us what you thought or what we missed or even if we made a mistake or you have an entirely new perspective – let your comments add to the review. That is the joy of the Internet - you don’t have statements, you have discussions

Review of Rajmund by D.B Reynolds Book Three of Vampires in America Series

To be absolutely fair to D.B. Reynolds, I am going to say upfront that I am not a fan of paranormal romance.  In terms of the Vampires in America Series, we have reviewed, Raphael and Jabril.  In Rajmond, the protagonist changes from Cynthia to her friend Sarah.  I wish I could tell you that this improved the already disastrous series.

Sarah is haunted by her past.  As a young girl, when she began dreaming about women being abused and trying to help the police, her parents thought that she was crazy, and so they had her institutionalized. After reaching the age of 18, she created a new identity, and worked two jobs to get an education to put her past behind her.  When she finally achieves her dream and becomes a professor Cuny in Buffalo, the dreams return, turning her peaceful life into a nightmare.  Sensing that something is not quite right with her friend, Cyn invites Sarah to meet in her in Manhattan for a weekend of fun and shopping, after getting Raphael's permission, 'cause of course, grown women property cannot travel without supervision.

"I too have a place," he chided her gently. "With far more suitable accommodations than your father's.

where Sarah meets the vampire Rajmond, or Raj as he likes to be called. But it is not a simple matter for me or my mate to travel to another's territory." He drew a long breath, thinking about Cyn's request and how it might serve a purpose of his own. "One weekend, lubimaya, no more." (pg 17 -18)

Aww isn't Raphael sweet? Of course this controlling shit is justified, because he is a master vampire after all. I suppose we should be thankful, because without his permission, there would have been no way to create a situation in which Cyn, introduces her friend Sarah to Raj.

While the trip to New York, is social for Cyn, for Raphael it's business, and so he sends the little women away so that he can confer with Raj.  They come straight to the point, and Raj tells Raphael that his master, who just happens to reside in Buffalo (nope, not contrived its supposedly happenstance), no longer has the strength to take care of the vampires in his territory, and that he is considering challenging him for leadership. When their business is concluded, Raj and Sarah hit the dance floor, where she gets lost in the pheromones and begins fantasizing about sex right on the spot.  We learn later that Sarah is highly susceptible to vamp pheromones.  This fact alone should make Sarah question her ongoing attraction to Raj, given that he is patronizing from the moment that he meets her, referring to her as "little one" and is arrogant beyond belief, but that would have invested Sarah with agency, and we simply cannot have that unless she is setting herself up to be saved or planning a beautiful night time wedding.

Cover Snark: The Sideways View: T&A for Everyone!

The cover of a book is very important because other than the name of the writer itself, publishers count on the image on the front to attract a reader enough to pick up the book and read the synopsis.  

One of the reoccurring tropes is the repeated display of women’s bodies exemplified by the oft use side view.

 And what are the advantages of the side-view? Why, tits and ass in one picture! Also let’s not forget the ever so popular arch.  Women must be sure to arch their bodies in such a way that both their breasts and buttocks are jutting outwards.  That this may cause back pain is no concern because that’s why chiropractors exist.